One of the most interesting lines in the report of the special UNC faculty panel that looked into academic fraud was in the section entitled: A Campus with Two Cultures.
"....some faculty are reportedly openly disapproving of having any student-athletes enroll in their courses."
The report doesn't elaborate on that sentence. But you can speculate where those "openly disapproving" faculty members are coming from, given what we have learned about cases of academic fraud involving, primarily, football players at UNC-CH. If, on the first day of class, a faculty members looks out at the students sitting in the room and sees a bunch of extremely large men squeezing into the seats, what is the professor to think?
a. Great. Somehow my class has gotten on the unofficial list of gut courses circulating in athletic circles. So much for my reputation.
b. Great. I give lots of homework and quizzes, and take off points for missing classes and late assigments. I don't know who put these guys in my class, but I'm going to be the guy who, halfway through the semester, will be in the dean's office explaining to some offensive line coach why his starters are failing.
I taught at Maryland in the journalism school, in the mid-'90s. My course was an introduction to news writing, and there were - as you might imagine - non-stop writing assignments. If you couldn't write clearly and quickly, or if you had spelling or grammar issues, you were toast in this class. Attendance was mandatory and there were constant quizzes. In four semesters of teaching nearly 150 students, I had exactly one athlete take the course - a member of the woman's lacrosse team. I knew this because instructors had to fill out progress reports for any athlete in a class and send the form to the athletic department.