Odds and Sods

In Part Two of their sure to be Pulitzer Prize-winning expose, the Ann Arbor News examines the relationship between the Kinesiology Dept. and the Michigan Athletics program.

There are two major findings for this segment.

First, a large number of Michigan athletes have enrolled in the school of Kinesiology.

Is it really surprising that there would be a large number of athletes in Sports Management classes?

Another stunning development, the program isn’t as academically rigorous as the College of Literature, Science and Arts.  Why does this matter?

Much like the Dental or Nursing school, they are under no obligation to hold students to the same educational standards as the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts.  Why do athletes need to hold to the most difficult standard?

Many Michigan athletes enrolled in a program that met their interests and their academic ability.

Second, when the Kinesiology Department introduced more intensive Sports Management requirements more athletes pursued a general studies degree or transferred out of the program.

They made the program more difficult, fewer people enrolled in it. Again, this is hardly a foundation faltering fact.

The Bachelor of General Studies is in some respects easier. There is no foreign language requirement. One does not have to pursue a major.

However, it is also a more difficult track by some measures, such as requiring you to take more 300-level classes than a person pursuing a major.

The foreign language requirement is often a difficult one to fulfill for an athlete. The classes are four days a week at the same time and have rigid attendance policies, a problem for say a women’s softball player traveling across the country mid-week to play Arizona.  It is not inconceivable that athletes would try to find a program to fit their schedule.

Students in Engineering don’t have to take a foreign language.  Neither do Business school students.  Neither do nurses or dental school kids.  Neither in fact do Literature Science and the Arts students who apply for a waiver.

Moreover, much of this scandalous information comes from one source Jay Basten, a lecturer in the Kinesiology department.  How accurate can one source be with no hard data to back him up?

The article opens with a moving lead about an anonymous athlete struggling with an exam, but is this one figure an embodiment of the program in general or simply one idiot?

As with part one, this article is pure conjecture and insinuation based on flimsy evidence, at best. They have no hard evidence and, consequently, nothing newsworthy.