PonyFans.com

CalallenStang wrote:Tunks is stepping out of this role:
http://www.smudailymustang.com/?p=25397

Interesting follow up link...

SMU Faculty Passes New GEC To Go Into Effect Fall 2012

SMU’s proposed new General Education Curriculum has passed with a 194-to-74 vote and will become effective beginning the fall semester of 2012.

"The goal is the learning outcome. It’s not to simply just take classes but to acquire the skills we think are important for any college graduate no matter what they choose to study," said Olness.

Now that the new curriculum has passed, faculty committees will begin meeting this May through December of 2011 in order to further define and shape it.

I am curious if this had any effect on the "marginal qualifiers" situation.

...but you can't major in Education in the state of Texas (you can minor but you are required to have a minimum 3.0 GPA to enter the education program at SMU) and we don't have kinesiology or any type of PT major at SMU - and I imagine getting such a major at SMU would take quite a bit of money and time.

This link needs to be added to the discussion of this thread. The elimination of the minimum SAT floor was reported by ESPN on November 3, 2009. (IMPORTANT: although I found this article with a search that showed a publish date of November 1, 2009:

ESPN.com: GEN - It's all academic now
Nov 3, 2009 - Thursday, October 31. Updated: November 3, 9:57 PM ET It's all academic now. By Tom Farrey ESPN.com.


-I find the article cited in scholarly articles on November 3, 2002. The article says it was an update but I'm really not sure. No mention of an effective date either which is often several years later

.http://espn.go.com/columns/farrey_tom/1453693.html

Stallion wrote:This link needs to be added to the discussion of this thread. The elimination of the minimum SAT floor was reported by ESPN on November 3, 2009.

.http://espn.go.com/columns/farrey_tom/1453693.html

Good find Stallion!

Typical Big Televen Quote...

"What else are we supposed to do?" said Jim Delany, Big Ten commissioner. "Discriminate?"

Makes you wonder how Turner will play this...

If the college game gets more exciting in the coming years, more inclusive of the best young talent available, more attractive to fans and viewers, credit will go to, of all people, the presidents. Once they survive the scorn from faculty for accepting players with 500 SAT scores.

For perspective-the article states:

"For the record, just 4 percent of all test takers nationally score less than 700, according to the College Board, the SAT folks. The national mean is 1020."

Stallion wrote:This link needs to be added to the discussion of this thread. The elimination of the minimum SAT floor was reported by ESPN on November 3, 2009.

.http://espn.go.com/columns/farrey_tom/1453693.html

wow

Hold on-I'm seeing this article cited in scholarly articles as published on November 3, 2002 not 2009. Also not sure of the effective date which often is several years later

OK it gets kind of complicated because there are multiple changes in the sliding scale, core curiculum(went up from 13 to 14-more recently 16) and required core courses(eliminated some core courses which a recruit was allowed to take). It appears to have been partially effective immediately meaning you could qualify under the new rules or old rules -but not mix and match the lower requirements of each rule-between November 1, 2002 and August 1, 2005 and became fully effective for all recruits entering school effective on or after August 1, 2005. The subsequently enacted 16 core curiculum requirement was increased again from 14 to 16 very recently within the last year or so. Core curiculum is important because it is basis of the GPA used by the NCAA on the sliding scale-not a recruit's ordinary GPA. There have also been important intervening definitions of the terms "partial qualifiers" and "non-qualifiers" which substantially changed the type of players who practically could be admitted to a school and the available and preferable avenues to get admitted(ie JUCO, Prep School, admission but ineligibility for athletic scholarship during freshman year etc)

Stallion wrote:OK it gets kind of complicated ....

You got that right.

No wonder this mess happened. Keep it simple, folks. This should not have happened.

The other issue which is not necessarily the fault of the student is where a student comes from a notoriously bad school system (or diploma mill) and has low SAT scores. In that scenario, the University in the appeals process cannot take everything at face value or they just deny admission due to the low SAT score. I have to believe that the Committee and Turner are making the best guess as to whether these candidates can hack in in the SMU classrooms (where there are profs who would love to fail them). Yes, its an inexact science, but a let's face it, there are players who will not be accepted here that might get into other schools in our conference. What JJ is learning (through some of the academic failures) is that there are steps after acceptance that need to be done, and it is more than just making sure the kid shows up to class. Recent failures in the classroom led in many ways to this. What JJ has to prove to the admissions committee is that the academic help side of things has been beefed up enough to deal with the marginal recruits we already have.

EastStang wrote:Recent failures in the classroom led in many ways to this. What JJ has to prove to the admissions committee is that the academic help side of things has been beefed up enough to deal with the marginal recruits we already have.

I think this point carries a lot of weight. We need to make sure student athletes are making the grades once they make it here so we can continue to get the guys in we need.

Also Turner has the problem of beefing up APR's (as a Member of the Knight Commission) when our APR is starting to decline. What I am sure Turner wants is for the rest of the NCAA to come back toward SMU in admissions criteria. Its a delicate balancing act for Turner. JJ, the Administration and the current players need to show that our recruits can hack it in the classroom. If that occurs, then I suspect Admissions will be a lot less of an issue.

It would seem the NCAA rules change faster than our admissions process. When everyone made the statement that NCAA qualifiers would be accepted, what were the rules then?

ANSWER:
For several years prior to Jones' arrival at SMU there has been no minimum SAT floor(ie deemphasized SAT)-just a sliding scale which makes it possible for kids with high GPAs and low SAT/ACT to qualify more easily when they might formerly be considered a partial qualifier

I think you said there were 17 marginal academic athletes accepted. I know there is no way of truly knowing, but I wonder out of those 17, how many would have been accepted during the cavan and bennett years.