WP: New NCAA Rule Targets "Diploma Mills"

[millerj9]

NCAA Attacks Academic Abuse
New Rule Targets 'Diploma Mills'

Wednesday, May 2, 2007; Page E01

In its latest and most significant step toward addressing academic abuses in prep basketball, the NCAA has approved a rule that prohibits the practice of players attending prep schools for a year to correct deficiencies in their academic transcripts following four years of high school.

The new rule states that upon entering ninth grade, athletes have four years to meet the eligibility standards in core academic courses to participate in college athletics; following those four years, they may take only one additional core course to achieve eligibility at any high school recognized by the NCAA.

The rule addresses the recent proliferation of "diploma mills," fraudulent schools that players use to correct deficiencies in their academic transcripts compiled at traditional high schools. In the past, players who did not meet eligibility standards after their high school careers could enroll in these prep schools, which had little if any oversight, and receive the grades necessary to compete as college freshmen.

The rule also takes aim at the emerging trend of "reclassifying"...As of Aug. 1, all student-athletes who need more than four years to fulfill their core-course requirements -- except for those currently attending prep schools -- must apply to the NCAA for a waiver to be eligible to play college athletics....

...The Washington Post reported in February 2006 that Lutheran Christian Academy in Philadelphia, which sent players to Georgetown and George Washington among other programs, was operated out of a community center, had no textbooks and had only one full-time employee, a former sanitation worker with no college degree.

[ColumbiaHeightsHoya]

Good for the NCAA. Gtown obviously reached in that first class as JTIII and crew were playing catch-up. We now have the luxury of being more selective as we are back at the competitive level we all want to be, both on the court and in recruiting. Good for the WaPo and NCAA on this move.

[hoyasexy]

Didn't read the entire article, but I'm not sure how I see that this step is going to effectively shut down the diploma mills. As I see it, this rule will only encourage struggling students to seek out the diploma mills before their four years are up, or even worse, enroll there as freshmen.

I'm not sure that, so long as the NCAA is serious about shutting down the diploma mills, it has any choice but to actually investigate the qualifications of all schools who issue diplomas and enforce strict certification standards.

[SFHoya99]

Doesn't this seem like extreme overkill? No prep schools whatsoever? I'm not a huge fan of prep schools, but a lot of kids get in trouble because they don't work as freshmen / sophomores... Should a mistake made at age 14 really ruin your chances for an athletic scholarship?

Coaches better start learning the rules and educating kids.

[GIGAFAN99]

sfhoya99 said:

Doesn't this seem like extreme overkill? No prep schools whatsoever? I'm not a huge fan of prep schools, but a lot of kids get in trouble because they don't work as freshmen / sophomores... Should a mistake made at age 14 really ruin your chances for an athletic scholarship?

Coaches better start learning the rules and educating kids.

More athletes will go to JUCOs and more, better JUCO players will be recruited by high majors. That's pretty much the impact of this rule.

[HoyaAtHeart]

hoyamonkey said:

As I see it, this rule will only encourage struggling students to seek out the diploma mills before their four years are up, or even worse, enroll there as freshmen.

Not if the NCAA won't touch a transcript coming out of those type schools regardless of when they enrolled...

[hoyasexy]

hoyaatheart said:

hoyamonkey said:

As I see it, this rule will only encourage struggling students to seek out the diploma mills before their four years are up, or even worse, enroll there as freshmen.

Not if the NCAA won't touch a transcript coming out of those type schools regardless of when they enrolled...

I guess my point was that this rule seems to differentiate between prep schools and 4-year institutions, in an attempt to differentiate between diploma mills and actual educational facilities. If a diploma mill offers 4 years of sham education instead of only 1, then this rule appears to do nothing to identify it, and it continues to operate.

I'm not sure that my point is really different from SF's. In outlawing all prep schools, the NCAA may be targeting a segment of diploma mills, but it is certainly opening the door for a much more insidious one. In the meantime, legitimate institutions where kids go to improve their academic profile are being punished.

[Jack]

Does it make sense to say something like athletes have 8 years of eligibility between high school and college sports, and in order to play college sports you have to meet certain requirements, so that if you spend a year at prep school you lose a year of NCAA eligibility but you can go straight from prep school to college eligibility?

I guess that then kills a kid's chance of graduating college, which would not be a good consequence. I understand the purpose of this rule, but, like the text messaging ban, it sounds like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. As SF said, punishing a kid for being immature at 14, or worse, for the deficiencies of his grade school education, is awfully harsh.

[hoyaboy1]

Couldn't they just not accept credits from the diploma mills, but still allow guys to go to legit prep schools? Perhaps that is too much legwork for the NCAA.

[Omega]

First of all let me state up front that I have extreme dislike for the NCAA as an organization.

Having disclosed my bias, I have a question for those in the know. If I understand anything about the NCAA it is that the organization believes that student-athletes should not be eligible for benefits that nonstudent-athletes are ineligible to recieve. If this is indeed a principle tenent of the organization, then how can the NCAA pass a ruling that singles out student-athletes? Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't nonstudent-athletes, who complete four years of highschool, attend prep school to improve their GPA or to give them an additional year of mature, or additional time to prepare for the SATs in hopes of getting into a better school?

[JimmyHoya]

Uh, if kids can't go to prep school and are really great in the first place, won't this mean even less players come to college because after a good JUCO year (which I assume is as good as or better than regular HS competition) won't they jump to the big leagues since they are now eligible to do so?

[CO_Hoya]

Also, can someone explain how the JuCo route works? Do you need to graduate from a JuCo to gain your NCAA eligibility, if you didn't have it after high school?

[SFHoya99]

jimmyhoya said:

Uh, if kids can't go to prep school and are really great in the first place, won't this mean even less players come to college because after a good JUCO year (which I assume is as good as or better than regular HS competition) won't they jump to the big leagues since they are now eligible to do so?

How many really talented kids go JUCO or Prep? Not that many. It seems like maybe one a year out of the Top 25 go that route (usually a big man for some reason). I can't imagine that the NBA would be too thrilled with a major prospect eligible to play in college choosing to clean up versus weaker competition.

Now, reclassifying... people will just do it in eighth grade now.

[theexorcist]

Let's say a student transferred to a foreign country for a year to learn the language, then needed an additional half-semester. Or - my personal favorite - that a student was sick for one of the four years and needed an extra year to complete those courses. There are so many legitimate loopholes here that either a) anyone will get a waiver for anything, or b) someone with a legitimate reason will get denied (and ideally sue the NCAA).

Even better, this screams out for a lawsuit claiming that School A did not provide a worthwhile learning environment, and after transferring to a non-prep school, the student needed three years to complete their learning requirements. I'd love to see the NCAA defend itself against someone coming from a school that No Child Left Behind characterized as "failing".

And passing things to jucos doesn't help. If people move to jucos, some jucos will admit questionable students and allow them to do minimal work (just like diploma mills!). You've moved the problem - you haven't addressed it.

I'm trying to figure out whether this or the text-messaging ban is a more foolish piece of legislation. Right now, the texting ban seems more oblivious - this one seems to be actively ignoring the problem.

[mapei]

jimmyhoya said:

Uh, if kids can't go to prep school and are really great in the first place, won't this mean even less players come to college because after a good JUCO year (which I assume is as good as or better than regular HS competition) won't they jump to the big leagues since they are now eligible to do so?

Which is just fine. Not every kid who is suited to play basketball is suited to college. Let there be another path to the NBA.

[RusskyHoya]

One question might be how this will work with foreign high schools, where everything is completely different.

[SFHoya99]

russkyhoya said:

One question might be how this will work with foreign high schools, where everything is completely different.

The language of the rule comments on "equivalent foreign grade level." They apparently have equivalencies for each country.

[RusskyHoya]

I'm just thinking that it might be a lot harder for the NCAA to investigate diploma mills overseas, where they have 0 authority.

[hoyasexy]

Authority isn't really the problem. As it is right now, they have no authority over how high schools are operated, domestic or foreign, but they do have authority over the admission standards of member universities. Therefore, if the NCAA wants to impose some restriction on admission standards for foreign students, it can. The problem is with line drawing - how do you create a standard for foreign students whereby some students are acceptable and others aren't, when curricula in foreign countries can be so diverse.

[RusskyHoya]

hoyamonkey said:

Authority isn't really the problem. As it is right now, they have no authority over how high schools are operated, domestic or foreign, but they do have authority over the admission standards of member universities. Therefore, if the NCAA wants to impose some restriction on admission standards for foreign students, it can. The problem is with line drawing - how do you create a standard for foreign students whereby some students are acceptable and others aren't, when curricula in foreign countries can be so diverse.

Well, when I said authority I meant more that their authority over colleges in the U.S. gives them influence over high schools...namely, those high schools have a major incentive to be deemed acceptable by the NCAA. Schools overseas might not see that as a really important incentive.

There's also the logistical problems of going overseas. Aside from cost, schools and school boards in the states know what the NCAA is and work with it. Schools elsewhere may not be as willing.

I guess what I'm saying is - if this goes through and has the effect we think it will in the states, we may end up seeing a proliferation of diploma mills in the Carribean sending players to the U.S.