Best response to the NYT article...

[StatTiger 3,188]

From ITAT...

OK, I read the NYTimes article, and many of the posts on here, as well as the AU press release. This is my opinion, fwiw, as a faculty member of a big 10 university (msu), and AU grad.

First, Petree was giving too many independent study hours, in my opionion. I think that these were more "readings" courses than "independent study" courses - meaning that students had assigned readings, rather than desiging their own independent study courses. I usually give zero or one or two ind studies a semester. I have given more than that in a given semester if students were doing work on a research project, because they were basically doing hands-on research. I think that one semester I had 9 undergrads working on a research project. It does take time to supervise ind. study students. Having 150 seems crazy to me. Like any class, though, I'm sure you can get it "down to a science." Many of us teach in-class classes of 150 or 200 and even 400 students. So depending on how you set it up, it would be possible to run that many students in a readings course. I don't think it is a good idea though, and I sure wouldn't ever want to do it. It looks like he was using the internet a lot to support it and that it is a good tool for including more students. I did notice one comment that this was done to accomodate growth in student enrollment and student demand, so it seems likely to me that this department may not have had the teaching resources that were necessary to meet demand and this professor was doing the best he could.

I have given independent study courses for students in special circumstances - they need a certain course to graduate on-time and it won't be offered, they need one hour of credit to be enrolled at full-time status, and so on. That's a pretty common thing to happen. I've had academic advisors (NON-athletes) steer students my way to ask for an independent study credit because, for example, the advisor knew that I was taking students to work on research. I think that goes on really commonly. I don't think I've ever had an athlete in an independent study, but I have several times in traditional classes. They are followed closely by the athletics dept. advisors - they request feedback every few weeks for how the students are doing, if they are on time, anything they need to work on, etc.

My belief is that this is an example of a nice guy who was trying to help out students (not just athletes clearly) and it got away from him and he really grossly over-extended. It looks like there was also some departmental politics and jeolousy going on here.

Let me say something. To take an independent study course the professor, department chair, and dean sign off on it. Usually, the thinking is that students should work three hours for each hour of credit per week. But there are independent study courses offered at all universities with a multitude of formats, requirements, etc. This is why it is "INDEPENDENT STUDY." That's sort of what it is. How grades are assigned, what is required is up to the professor (with sign-off of the chair and Dean). You have the obligation as the professor to uphold integrity and the academic standards of the university. I don't know what these courses consisted of, but it isn't my call anyway, and it certainly isn't the NYTimes' or some internet board's. It is the professor's, the department's, the college's, and then the university's decision.

Despite what some folks in the world probably want to believe, it is not the NCAA's decision. They do not come in and tell me what constitutes an independent study course. Or what I should be teaching in the classroom or how I should assign grades, for that matter. The NCAA could be involved in a situation in which student athletes received preferential treatment, but that is clearly not the case here. Clearly non-athletes took these courses as well. It looks like a lot of AU students knew that at best, this professor was willing to put time in to helping students who needed to take an IS credit, and, at worst, here was a professor that was an easy A. I could also see NCAA involvement if there was some sort of collusion between the athletic department and the faculty, or if the ahtletic department somehow pressured the faculty. Again, no evidence of any such thing. Also, SACS will not be concerned with this; again, this is the perogative of the individual professor, the department, the college, and the university. The professor, department, and college signed off on it, and now the university has established a committee to check on that. That is appropriate.

Now, the indivdual faculty member's integrity has suffered here. Basically, he just made the new york time's as being an easy professor to take classes from. Not the kind of press I'd want! By extension, it hurts the department's, the college's, and the university's reputation. Some people will read this and not think it is an individual faculty, but the entire Department or even the University, and that is unfortunate. It also seems to me - and this is probably because I understand academia - that the sociology department at AU doesn't have adequate resources to serve the students as they should.

Auburn has the responsibility to investigate the rigor of the courses and the grades and respond as appropriate. Maintaining academic standards is the issue here. You have to be concerned about grade inflation. It doesn't look good, it looks sloppy. It needs to be taken care of, and it is clear that the AU provost is doing just that. That is entirely the correct response by the appropriate body.

Having said that, the NYTimes article was pretty much a hatchet-job. To me, it really looks like they tried hard to frame everything as negatively as it possibly could be. Basically, it is a story that a professor at Auburn offered easy independent study classes that were taken by a number of students, including student athletes, and that this was addressed some time ago, and the university provost is taking the necessary steps to investigate. Not really that big of a story, until you add in the names of some NFL players and throw in a few lines about past NCAA investigations, etc., to try to make it seem shocking. Basically, big whoop. Shame on this reporter for tabloidism.

This is just my opinion of the printed material I've had access to, which is just that on the web.

[DKW 86 7,438]

From ITAT...

OK, I read the NYTimes article, and many of the posts on here, as well as the AU press release. This is my opinion, fwiw, as a faculty member of a big 10 university (msu), and AU grad.

First, Petree was giving too many independent study hours, in my opionion. I think that these were more "readings" courses than "independent study" courses - meaning that students had assigned readings, rather than desiging their own independent study courses. I usually give zero or one or two ind studies a semester. I have given more than that in a given semester if students were doing work on a research project, because they were basically doing hands-on research. I think that one semester I had 9 undergrads working on a research project. It does take time to supervise ind. study students. Having 150 seems crazy to me. Like any class, though, I'm sure you can get it "down to a science." Many of us teach in-class classes of 150 or 200 and even 400 students. So depending on how you set it up, it would be possible to run that many students in a readings course. I don't think it is a good idea though, and I sure wouldn't ever want to do it. It looks like he was using the internet a lot to support it and that it is a good tool for including more students. I did notice one comment that this was done to accomodate growth in student enrollment and student demand, so it seems likely to me that this department may not have had the teaching resources that were necessary to meet demand and this professor was doing the best he could.

I have given independent study courses for students in special circumstances - they need a certain course to graduate on-time and it won't be offered, they need one hour of credit to be enrolled at full-time status, and so on. That's a pretty common thing to happen. I've had academic advisors (NON-athletes) steer students my way to ask for an independent study credit because, for example, the advisor knew that I was taking students to work on research. I think that goes on really commonly. I don't think I've ever had an athlete in an independent study, but I have several times in traditional classes. They are followed closely by the athletics dept. advisors - they request feedback every few weeks for how the students are doing, if they are on time, anything they need to work on, etc.

My belief is that this is an example of a nice guy who was trying to help out students (not just athletes clearly) and it got away from him and he really grossly over-extended. It looks like there was also some departmental politics and jeolousy going on here.

Let me say something. To take an independent study course the professor, department chair, and dean sign off on it. Usually, the thinking is that students should work three hours for each hour of credit per week. But there are independent study courses offered at all universities with a multitude of formats, requirements, etc. This is why it is "INDEPENDENT STUDY." That's sort of what it is. How grades are assigned, what is required is up to the professor (with sign-off of the chair and Dean). You have the obligation as the professor to uphold integrity and the academic standards of the university. I don't know what these courses consisted of, but it isn't my call anyway, and it certainly isn't the NYTimes' or some internet board's. It is the professor's, the department's, the college's, and then the university's decision.

Despite what some folks in the world probably want to believe, it is not the NCAA's decision. They do not come in and tell me what constitutes an independent study course. Or what I should be teaching in the classroom or how I should assign grades, for that matter. The NCAA could be involved in a situation in which student athletes received preferential treatment, but that is clearly not the case here. Clearly non-athletes took these courses as well. It looks like a lot of AU students knew that at best, this professor was willing to put time in to helping students who needed to take an IS credit, and, at worst, here was a professor that was an easy A. I could also see NCAA involvement if there was some sort of collusion between the athletic department and the faculty, or if the ahtletic department somehow pressured the faculty. Again, no evidence of any such thing. Also, SACS will not be concerned with this; again, this is the perogative of the individual professor, the department, the college, and the university. The professor, department, and college signed off on it, and now the university has established a committee to check on that. That is appropriate.

Now, the indivdual faculty member's integrity has suffered here. Basically, he just made the new york time's as being an easy professor to take classes from. Not the kind of press I'd want! By extension, it hurts the department's, the college's, and the university's reputation. Some people will read this and not think it is an individual faculty, but the entire Department or even the University, and that is unfortunate. It also seems to me - and this is probably because I understand academia - that the sociology department at AU doesn't have adequate resources to serve the students as they should.

Auburn has the responsibility to investigate the rigor of the courses and the grades and respond as appropriate. Maintaining academic standards is the issue here. You have to be concerned about grade inflation. It doesn't look good, it looks sloppy. It needs to be taken care of, and it is clear that the AU provost is doing just that. That is entirely the correct response by the appropriate body.

Having said that, the NYTimes article was pretty much a hatchet-job. To me, it really looks like they tried hard to frame everything as negatively as it possibly could be. Basically, it is a story that a professor at Auburn offered easy independent study classes that were taken by a number of students, including student athletes, and that this was addressed some time ago, and the university provost is taking the necessary steps to investigate. Not really that big of a story, until you add in the names of some NFL players and throw in a few lines about past NCAA investigations, etc., to try to make it seem shocking. Basically, big whoop. Shame on this reporter for tabloidism.

This is just my opinion of the printed material I've had access to, which is just that on the web.

248041[/snapback]

As a teacher in college, I totally agree with everythng there.

[autigeremt 6,661]

AS a member of the Auburn University Faculty/Staff....

I agree as well!

[AUloggerhead 2,252]

As an AU engineernig grad (who never had ONE crip course in my field of study,) I totally agree with the author: Hatchet job by the NYT. Unfortunately, if something is printed in a newspaper clueless readers will take it as gospel. I suppose I should care about that. But OTOH, what do I care what the bammies think?