Carty Article Drops
I will not link to it, because it's mostly really crappy, but Jim Carty's long-awaited article (written with John Heuser and Nathan Fenno) regarding some sort of academic scandal involving student-athletes at Michigan has finally been published by the Ann Arbor News. The general idea is that a lot of athletes take independent study courses with professor Jon Hagen.
Brief Synopsis of Carty's Arguments:
1) There are easy classes at the University.
2) Some athletes take these easy classes.
3) Academic advisors help athletes pick their classes.
All of these points so far are like, duh. He is actually trying to criticize advisors for doing their jobs, which... what?
Brief Summary of Carty's sources:
1) Two disgruntled former University employees.
2) Student athletes, who describe their classes.
3) A guy in the psych department who got passed over by the professor in question for a promotion, and admits he is not an impartial source.
4) Not Mary Sue Coleman, who agreed to answer some questions over e-mail, and was turned down by Carty.
Carty also notes repeatedly that there have been repeated reviews of Hagen's classes by the psych department and the college of LSA, all of which has proven that his independent study courses are aboveboard. So, what's the problem? There is no Auburn situation here.
Apparently this is the first in a series of four articles on the topic, but if this is supposed to be the bombshell article, it was certainly a dud. This article proves nothing other than that Jim Carty is trying to make a name for himself, and will take a standard situation, and try to spin it into a controversy.
Brief Synopsis of Carty's Arguments:
1) There are easy classes at the University.
2) Some athletes take these easy classes.
3) Academic advisors help athletes pick their classes.
All of these points so far are like, duh. He is actually trying to criticize advisors for doing their jobs, which... what?
Brief Summary of Carty's sources:
1) Two disgruntled former University employees.
2) Student athletes, who describe their classes.
3) A guy in the psych department who got passed over by the professor in question for a promotion, and admits he is not an impartial source.
4) Not Mary Sue Coleman, who agreed to answer some questions over e-mail, and was turned down by Carty.
Carty also notes repeatedly that there have been repeated reviews of Hagen's classes by the psych department and the college of LSA, all of which has proven that his independent study courses are aboveboard. So, what's the problem? There is no Auburn situation here.
Apparently this is the first in a series of four articles on the topic, but if this is supposed to be the bombshell article, it was certainly a dud. This article proves nothing other than that Jim Carty is trying to make a name for himself, and will take a standard situation, and try to spin it into a controversy.
Labels: academics, athletics, jim carty hate
This entry was posted by Tim, on
Sunday, March 16, 2008.
You can leave your response.
