Wall Street Journal

[juscAUse 1]

The fact that this is even a story in the WSJ smells of a smear job. OF COURSE the athletic administration is going to speak up if a large number of student athletes are majoring in a curriculum that's about to be terminated. This story never states that public administration is a lemon degree, nor does it even address the difficulty of the curriculum. Instead, it's full of innuendo and weak/faulty references to the academic scandal at North Carolina. How do you even make the comparison to an athletic department standing up to an administration and being a voice for their athletes that will be affected in their degree pursuit with a scandal of utter impropriety and not come off smelling of an agenda?

Think about it - "Hey Coach, they're doing away with my degree! Me and half the team are going to have to choose another major. Can you do something?" This should not be a story at all. What's embarrassing is that this kind of "story" meant to hint and insinuate impropriety finds a voice in the wall street journal. Journalism is dead.

I seriously doubt that the Wall Street Journal has some sort of plot to smear Auburn. I really don't get the persecution complex some folks on this board seem to have. I'll admit there are certain journalists who are obviously biased against Auburn, but most of them are doing it to get reads from rival fan bases. The next week, they turn around and do it to another school and we flock to the articles. Again though, I don't think that's what's going on here.

Also, even if the major had been shut down, I'm 99% sure they would've let any current majors finish their degrees. That's how these things work; it's not like all of those players would've been hung out to dry with a bunch of useless credits. The issue here is that athletics wants to keep up a specific major that a large amount of athletes tend to major in. Are we really going to say it's coincidence that all of these athletes are just interested in public administration? Does no one here remember what was going on with sociology under Tuberville when we nearly lost our accreditation? Let's take off the orange and blue glasses and hold our school accountable for its mistakes. Not because we want to hurt it, but because we want it to be as great as possible.

Academic integrity ought to always come first.

This guy gets it. I'm really not sure how so many of you can quickly dismiss this as a "nonstory". Athletics should not be influencing academics. ATHLETICS.SHOULD.NOT.BE.INFLUENCING.ACADEMICS. The fact that so many academic review boards voted to do away with PA and the football team basically stepped in and said "Not gonna happen" is troubling. Auburn University is about educating people first. This is troubling whether y'all are willing to admit it or not.

With friends like these, who needs bammers? 80% of the people on al.com agree with you, sir.

Woe is me, right?

I was simply saying you might be right, but I saw nothing in the article to support your concern. As AU64 says, this article rubbed some of us old guys the wrong way. I am sure all the bammers that could read supported the decision to kill the journalism school. And my son played football and graduated from a DIII non scholly school down the road a piece. He majored in Political Science and got a masters in.....Public Administration. So yeah, I might have been a bit testy.

[aucanucktiger 1,794]

Media-created controversy over AU football has gone like this since our last football sanctions (1992):

> Public Admin at AU is taken by many football players. AU athletic dept requested PA be retained. Therefore AU is just like Carolina's two decades of president-down academic fraud & coverups.

> Miss State offered Cam's dad money. Cam signed with AU. Therefore AU paid for Cam.

> Bobby Lowder is on the AU BOT. Bobby Lowder runs a bank. There's money in banks. Therefore AU pays players.

[WinForAuburn 128]

Breaking News: WSJ thinks African Americans should be denied favorite area of study.

Some of you will get it; others..meh.

[keesler 5,924]

This article is littered with comments/statements and detailed and dated emails regarding this subject. How long has the WSJ been investigating this at AU? They interviewed AU faculty members...I mean Micheal Stern (the chairman of AU's economics dept said, "athletics is so powerful at Auburn that it operates like a "second university"..... That statement alone is a hit on Auburn University IMO.

Then the WSJ went on to state that they had documents from 2012 and memos from the Provost along with the results of voting to remove the major.

All this sounds like the WSJ has been on this case for a long time, and they've been very intimate with the AU employees while gathering memo's, emails, documents, dates, etc.

[chimesAU 89]

The fact that this is even a story in the WSJ smells of a smear job. OF COURSE the athletic administration is going to speak up if a large number of student athletes are majoring in a curriculum that's about to be terminated. This story never states that public administration is a lemon degree, nor does it even address the difficulty of the curriculum. Instead, it's full of innuendo and weak/faulty references to the academic scandal at North Carolina. How do you even make the comparison to an athletic department standing up to an administration and being a voice for their athletes that will be affected in their degree pursuit with a scandal of utter impropriety and not come off smelling of an agenda?

Think about it - "Hey Coach, they're doing away with my degree! Me and half the team are going to have to choose another major. Can you do something?" This should not be a story at all. What's embarrassing is that this kind of "story" meant to hint and insinuate impropriety finds a voice in the wall street journal. Journalism is dead.

I seriously doubt that the Wall Street Journal has some sort of plot to smear Auburn. I really don't get the persecution complex some folks on this board seem to have. I'll admit there are certain journalists who are obviously biased against Auburn, but most of them are doing it to get reads from rival fan bases. The next week, they turn around and do it to another school and we flock to the articles. Again though, I don't think that's what's going on here.

Also, even if the major had been shut down, I'm 99% sure they would've let any current majors finish their degrees. That's how these things work; it's not like all of those players would've been hung out to dry with a bunch of useless credits. The issue here is that athletics wants to keep up a specific major that a large amount of athletes tend to major in. Are we really going to say it's coincidence that all of these athletes are just interested in public administration? Does no one here remember what was going on with sociology under Tuberville when we nearly lost our accreditation? Let's take off the orange and blue glasses and hold our school accountable for its mistakes. Not because we want to hurt it, but because we want it to be as great as possible.

Academic integrity ought to always come first.

This guy gets it. I'm really not sure how so many of you can quickly dismiss this as a "nonstory". Athletics should not be influencing academics. ATHLETICS.SHOULD.NOT.BE.INFLUENCING.ACADEMICS. The fact that so many academic review boards voted to do away with PA and the football team basically stepped in and said "Not gonna happen" is troubling. Auburn University is about educating people first. This is troubling whether y'all are willing to admit it or not.

Gotta disagree.....unless someone can show that this is a "non-degree" solely meant to provide an easy path to eligibility. This is what some schools call poli-sci....... see the curriculum....it's real college despite what is implied by the WSJ and some people posting here.

http://bulletin.auburn.edu/undergraduate/collegeofliberalarts/departmentofpoliticalsciencepoli/publicadministration_major/

As for the Athletic Dept "stepping in and saying it's not going to happen".....show me it happened that way? AU and most universities tinker with their offerings from time to time and it's not surprising that those affected by the change would protest. Generally those in the affected major just have to accept whereas in this case the athletes had a "representative" to speak for them.....gee, almost sounds like a union.

I've complained about athletics creating image issues for AU over the years but I think this is a made up crisis....just sayin'

I have never said that PA is a "nondegree". PA is not Poli Sci though... They're related but still different fields of study. I'm a Poli Sci major and absolutely cannot stand PA classes. I understand that universities tinker with their offerings and that those affected usually protest but it's usually through the Dean of the department...not the football coaches. I'm not saying that this is anywhere near the level of the UNC issue( or our own Sociology debacle) but if the athletic department is sticking it's nose into the affairs of academia, I do find that somewhat unsettling and unscrupulous.

[AURex 2,006]

All this sounds like the WSJ has been on this case for a long time, and they've been very intimate with the AU employees while gathering memo's, emails, documents, dates, etc.

No, what it sounds like is one or two people in the PA department (or maybe another department) have been gathering information over time and just sent it to several newspapers, and the WSJ bit.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

I'm a professor at another institution. PhD, Vandy. Played small college football and sat on the faculty academics committee at a mid-major. One of my former college teammates, Virgil Starks, worked in academic support for Auburn athletes.

All that to say, I love Auburn, and this smells bad.

On the OK side, I would expect sports to direct students toward majors they can complete. It's hard to play football and be pre-med, with all the labs and so forth. Frankly, some students lack the academic background to do heavy statistics and the like.

On the bad side, Auburn athletics has no business intervening in the university's internal academic policies unless there's some injustice happening to players. Throwing money to influence academic policy is just out of bounds. That's what smells. GIven our history in sociology, there's also a need to look into the academic rigor of these courses. If Auburn winds up in trouble, that's where it'll happen.

On the threatening side, during the Chizik era, Auburn had a football graduation rate of 100% for white players and 44% for black players. Don't know where that stands now. I'm sure someone will try to defend that. Such a person should not be allowed to go outside without a chaperone. At any rate, someone is gonna look into whether race factors into this issue, and it could reflect very badly on the university if the results haven't changed. Auburn has to address the intersection of race, academics, and athletics.

[OnthePlains 2,014]

I'm a professor at another institution. PhD, Vandy. Played small college football and sat on the faculty academics committee at a mid-major. One of my former college teammates, Virgil Starks, worked in academic support for Auburn athletes.

All that to say, I love Auburn, and this smells bad.

On the OK side, I would expect sports to direct students toward majors they can complete. It's hard to play football and be pre-med, with all the labs and so forth. Frankly, some students lack the academic background to do heavy statistics and the like.

On the bad side, Auburn athletics has no business intervening in the university's internal academic policies unless there's some injustice happening to players. Throwing money to influence academic policy is just out of bounds. That's what smells. GIven our history in sociology, there's also a need to look into the academic rigor of these courses. If Auburn winds up in trouble, that's where it'll happen.

On the threatening side, during the Chizik era, Auburn had a football graduation rate of 100% for white players and 44% for black players. Don't know where that stands now. I'm sure someone will try to defend that. Such a person should not be allowed to go outside without a chaperone. At any rate, someone is gonna look into whether race factors into this issue, and it could reflect very badly on the university if the results haven't changed.

I agree with this as much as I don't want to.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

I'll add. I think the moderators missed the call on this one. This is a football thread, and it shouldn't be marginalized. (Good thing it still appears on that board, though.)

[AUfan_UAgrad 230]

So this only goes on at Auburn and North Carolina? I don't mind the reporting of things that need to be reported, good or bad. It just seems like Auburn continually is singled out and or tied to programs that are under heavy fire like North Carolina, especially by WSJ. Why not do research and an article from 1 university out of the 5 major programs? Then at least you would have a larger picture nation wide, bring focus to the problem, and not seem like you have a vendetta against Auburn. I do agree that there is a problem with ALL major universities that have a heavy focus on athletics and steering players toward "easier" and less time consuming majors, that should have been the story. Just another WSJ article singling out Auburn IMO. Wonder who his boss is? From his LinkedIn profile he's a graduate of Duke in 2010 with only a 118 connections, must have been his first major sports article published.

[chimesAU 89]

I'll add. I think the moderators missed the call on this one. This is a football thread, and it shouldn't be marginalized. (Good thing it still appears on that board, though.)

I fully agree with this as well as your first post on the matter. This shouldn't be marginalized.

[WarEagle84 0]

Media-created controversy over AU football has gone like this since our last football sanctions (1992):

> Public Admin at AU is taken by many football players. AU athletic dept requested PA be retained. Therefore AU is just like Carolina's two decades of president-down academic fraud & coverups.

> Miss State offered Cam's dad money. Cam signed with AU. Therefore AU paid for Cam.

> Bobby Lowder is on the AU BOT. Bobby Lowder runs a bank. There's money in banks. Therefore AU pays players.

[WarEagle84 0]

Academic integrity ought to always come first.

I wholeheartedly agree. And I see no evidence in that article that it has not.

Everybody knows that athletes at every school take easy courses. The only hint of a scandal here is that the Athletic Department asked a faculty committee to reconsider their decision to cancel a major, which they then reversed. The assumption on the part of most is that the athletic department strong-armed the faculty into their decision. (Just as with Cam, "everybody knows" we paid him, despite the lack of evidence.) This will damage our reputation in the eyes of many, but it is not nearly UNC level academic fraud.

(And I agree, this is very much football related and belongs back in the main football forum.)

[OnthePlains 2,014]

Academic integrity ought to always come first.

I wholeheartedly agree. And I see no evidence in that article that it has not.

Everybody knows that athletes at every school take easy courses. The only hint of a scandal here is that the Athletic Department asked a faculty committee to reconsider their decision to cancel a major, which they then reversed. The assumption on the part of most is that the athletic department strong-armed the faculty into their decision. (Just as with Cam, "everybody knows" we paid him, despite the lack of evidence.) This will damage our reputation in the eyes of many, but it is not nearly UNC level academic fraud.

(And I agree, this is very much football related and belongs back in the main football forum.)

"The assumption on the part of most is that the athletic department strong-armed the faculty into their decision"

To me that is the crux of the matter, to what extent did the athletic dept influence this. I can tell you the main issue I am hearing from folks is the statement that the athletic dept offered to subsidize the program through athletic funds if necessary. That is what has the people on local radio talkin this morning.

[AU64 10,122]

As noted above, WSJ has spent some time on this and probably gotten information from AU staff ...which is no surprise....there have always been faculty and staff at AU who won't miss a chance to hurt the Athletic Department....hope folks don't think Selena managed to get all her information by herself.

Meanwhile, I never even hinted that PA was not a real degree...it was WSJ that floated that innuendo with the comparison to UNC's problems. In fact for those who bothered to check the link I posted, the course requirements are not atypical for an AU degree. My contention is that this is a political battle inside the university and I suspect some of those who wish to do away with PA (and divide the spoils) are trying to embarrass the university because they apparently did not get their way.

As for athletic departments getting involved in academics.....I think that is not unique to AU....I recall reading in years past about coaches asking their schools to include some athlete friendly majors in the the offering.....which some have done and many have ignored.

This is only going to be a big problem for AU if WE make it one....JMO.

PS As for "strong arming".....I understand that Athletic Dept offered money to the department to subsidize the program....MONEY.....this is probably what this was all about in the first place.

[AUfan_UAgrad 230]

Guess the REC will do anything to get the topic off of who their starting QB will be.

[WinForAuburn 128]

It's a slant piece, pure and simple. It's written to sway opinion and form impressions.

This is not an NCAA issue. Not even close. Perhaps, SACS may have a few questions but that's it.

I don't know how the relations between academics and athletics work at major universities but I would imagine they are or at least should be very close. That's all I see happening here. If I remember correctly, the athletic department gave an enormous sum to the university to assist in the building of the library.

This is not fraud. It's not strong arming and it's not even close to what was going on at UNC.

When the athletic dept. starts creating degrees, hiring the staff, administering the exams, then let me know. Asking the school to maintain a program the school itself created is hardly the same damn thing.

[AUfan_UAgrad 230]

As noted above, WSJ has spent some time on this and probably gotten information from AU staff ...which is no surprise....there have always been faculty and staff at AU who won't miss a chance to hurt the Athletic Department....hope folks don't think Selena managed to get all her information by herself.

Meanwhile, I never even hinted that PA was not a real degree...it was WSJ that floated that innuendo with the comparison to UNC's problems. In fact for those who bothered to check the link I posted, the course requirements are not atypical for an AU degree. My contention is that this is a political battle inside the university and I suspect some of those who wish to do away with PA (and divide the spoils) are trying to embarrass the university because they apparently did not get their way.

As for athletic departments getting involved in academics.....I think that is not unique to AU....I recall reading in years past about coaches asking their schools to include some athlete friendly majors in the the offering.....which some have done and many have ignored.

This is only going to be a big problem for AU if WE make it one....JMO.

PS As for "strong arming".....I understand that Athletic Dept offered money to the department to subsidize the program....MONEY.....this is probably what this was all about in the first place.

To add to some of this. As having parents that worked at Alabama, one in a very high level position, all departments at universities don't like and support the athletic department. I saw this first hand growing up in enemy territory. You can get people in positions that even though they work for the university don't agree with having high profile athletics and will try and bring light to things, some things that should have the light on it others not so much, to further their cause(s). Again my only issue with the article is that it is really singling out Auburn, where to me this is a Nation Wide problem in which athletics steer kids toward majors and I would imagine Auburn is not the only university to help fund a major that is going under. Not saying that any of that is right, it is not, it is completely wrong and putting athletics above the education of the kid. Not a topic to make it sound like it's only a problem at Auburn IMO.

[PatBoCamRob 30]

I do not think the story has legs to last very long.

I think you are right.

Public Admin is a worthwhile major. The government is one of the largest employers in the state of Alabama, if not the largest. In fact, 4 of the top 5 are military or hospitals.

http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/which-alabama-employers-have/2015/02/23/id/625346/

That article didn't include state employees. This article shows that in 2011 Alabama employed about 40,000 people, not including school employees. That's more than #1, Redstone Arsenal http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/10/number_of_alabama_state_employ.html

The author of the WSJ hack job ought to understand that people need PA degrees in order to know how to respond to public information requests, like the one he filed to get interoffice communications from a state university. (boom)

[keesler 5,924]

All this sounds like the WSJ has been on this case for a long time, and they've been very intimate with the AU employees while gathering memo's, emails, documents, dates, etc.

No, what it sounds like is one or two people in the PA department (or maybe another department) have been gathering information over time and just sent it to several newspapers, and the WSJ bit.

Well if that is the case, no one at AU has learned a lesson from the past and it appears AU once again tries to destroy from within.

I just find it strange that our own faculty and staff would agree to be interviewed for what is obviously a hit piece on their employer.

Did Jay Jacobs really get in Provost Boosigers ear about the continuation of a major that the academic department had previously voted down? And did Jacobs go so far as to back his position with money to subsidize the program which resulted in the continuation of the program? Do we really have rats in AU that would leak out information to the public like this?

[Tiger 8,827]

I'm sure there are plenty of faculty and staff that resent the special treatment the revenue generating sports athletes get. I understand they are there to learn. But until the professors start generating multi-millions of dollars for the school the athletes are just worth more to the school. So the school will go above and beyond to protect them and ensure they are able to do what they were brought to the school to do. This happens at almost all schools IMO and this story just happens to be about AU IMO. However, I have seen the perception of the validity of UNC degrees has taken a hit publicly and I hope that same reputation does not follow Auburn. I personally think this story will get larger and larger at this day moves forward. Lets hope that is not the case.

[AU64 10,122]

All this sounds like the WSJ has been on this case for a long time, and they've been very intimate with the AU employees while gathering memo's, emails, documents, dates, etc.

No, what it sounds like is one or two people in the PA department (or maybe another department) have been gathering information over time and just sent it to several newspapers, and the WSJ bit.

Well if that is the case, no one at AU has learned a lesson from the past and it appears AU once again tries to destroy from within.

I just find it strange that our own faculty and staff would agree to be interviewed for what is obviously a hit piece on their employer.

Did Jay Jacobs really get in Provost Boosigers ear about the continuation of a major that the academic department had previously voted down? And did Jacobs go so far as to back his position with money to subsidize the program which resulted in the continuation of the program? Do we really have rats in AU that would leak out information to the public like this?

I trust this is a rhetorical question....or did you forget to include the yellow text? :-\

[AUTigerCT 0]

What do you do if your are a Junior or Senior and they cancel the degree? Why not ask Harvard cancel all degrees other than Economics and Engineering for Football? No athletic program has ever contacted an academic department? Academic departments never speak to Athletics? WTH!

[keesler 5,924]

What do you do if your are a Junior or Senior and they cancel the degree? Why not ask Harvard cancel all degrees other than Economics and Engineering for Football? No athletic program has ever contacted an academic department? Academic departments never speak to Athletics? WTH!

They'd finish their degree - eliminating the program from the curriculum would have been for all future students. But the students already vested in the major would be able to finish their degree.

Apparently the atletic department felt that if the program was eliminated the graduation success numbers for AU's student-athletes would decline. Apparently the AD was very concerned that the major needed to remain active or they wouldn't have offered to subsidize the program.

[Piketiger1990 173]

Only 26 players were majoring in public admin in 2014. Is it probably an "easier" degree to achieve? Probably so, but student athletes tend to funnel to a few fields. (Public Admin, Criminal Justice, Sport Nutrition) Non story in my opinion, every university has a majority of athletes in a couple of degree fields. Starting to feel like 2010 again