Faculty Senate stands up for athletic department
Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 8:42 amhttp://www.smudailycampus.com/opinion/l ... -1.1291709
Letter to the editor
By Faculty Senate Members
Published: Thursday, April 1, 2010
Updated: Thursday, April 1, 2010
We appreciate the fact that The Daily Campus is actively looking into how SMU is administered (“$93 million and countingâ€).
The Faculty Senate takes as one of its tasks the overseeing of all aspects of the University that affect the academic mission. The question of athletics financing has, as a consequence, been one the Faculty Senate has devoted much time to over the years.
Since one of our documents formed the basis of the reporting in Wednesday’s story, we would have liked the opportunity to discuss the budget issues with your reporter. Not having had that conversation, we wish, for the moment, to comment on two aspects of the story.
First, the spending characterized as “losses†are in fact mostly budgeted expenses for the maintenance of our athletics programs.
Second, two thirds of those expenses are for scholarships that provide for the academic careers of athletes.
While there may be disagreement over the level of funding for the athletic programs, calling these expenses “losses†does not accurately reflect SMU’s decision to provide that funding. A reasonable discussion of athletics at SMU demands clarity about the various categories as a complement to transparency.
Sincerely,
Dennis Foster, Ex-President, Faculty Senate
Fredrick Olness, President, Faculty Senate
Matthew Wilson, Member, Athletics Policy Committe, Faculty Senate
Letter to the editor
By Faculty Senate Members
Published: Thursday, April 1, 2010
Updated: Thursday, April 1, 2010
We appreciate the fact that The Daily Campus is actively looking into how SMU is administered (“$93 million and countingâ€).
The Faculty Senate takes as one of its tasks the overseeing of all aspects of the University that affect the academic mission. The question of athletics financing has, as a consequence, been one the Faculty Senate has devoted much time to over the years.
Since one of our documents formed the basis of the reporting in Wednesday’s story, we would have liked the opportunity to discuss the budget issues with your reporter. Not having had that conversation, we wish, for the moment, to comment on two aspects of the story.
First, the spending characterized as “losses†are in fact mostly budgeted expenses for the maintenance of our athletics programs.
Second, two thirds of those expenses are for scholarships that provide for the academic careers of athletes.
While there may be disagreement over the level of funding for the athletic programs, calling these expenses “losses†does not accurately reflect SMU’s decision to provide that funding. A reasonable discussion of athletics at SMU demands clarity about the various categories as a complement to transparency.
Sincerely,
Dennis Foster, Ex-President, Faculty Senate
Fredrick Olness, President, Faculty Senate
Matthew Wilson, Member, Athletics Policy Committe, Faculty Senate