''Frankly, our president wasn't sure we needed to enforce an attendance policy for athletes when we didn't have one for the general student population. He feels strongly that student athletes should be treated similarly to the student body.'' That makes sense. I'd be pissed if I got suspended from a game for missing class when other students can miss class and not get in trouble. But If it's a class where attendence is mandatory, it's a different situation. Judge these students by their grades - they don't make the grades, they don't play. Going to class is only something to aid in making those grades. Some kids need to go to make the grades, others don't.
I can see both points of view on this one. I can understand wanting to treat the athletes like the rest of the student body, but the fact is, they're not like the rest of the student body. They represent the school in ways that the average student never does, so they can be held to stricter standards than the average student. I think I could respect either decision; a coach who wants to treat his athletes as closely as possible to the other students and not have this type of rule, or a coach that wants to emphasize the importance of going to class and getting an education and enforces something like this. That being said, I would've had trouble in my day. I certainly skipped my fair share of classes, and a couple of other peoples share too. The best was Civil War History. I went to 1 class between mid term and final, and still pulled a "B". :hihi:
I say this is a good policy for a number of reasons (in no real order of importance): 1. You, I, and most normal people cut our fair share of classes in college...but most of us paid our own way through school and, if we chose to put our tuition money at risk by skipping class, that's our perogative. Players essentially get paid to be college students, which also entails going to class. In short, going to class, like going to practice, is part of their "job". 2. Frankly, the more time they spend in class, preparing for class, in practice, preparing for practice, etc., the less time they have to do the sort of things that can get them front-page coverage in the press. We hear incessantly how players "represent their schools" while on scholly, so having them put some weight behind the "student" part of their student-athlete titles by attending class is fine by me. They're not regular, normal college students. Some 90,000 people never turned up to watch me take a World History midterm, for example. I dunno. Just seems like a good idea to me. How can promoting class attendance be a bad thing?
So do you require those students on TOPS to go to class or lose their scholly? Afterall, that's taxpayer money. Personally, I think it's silly. Grades should be the determining factor, not class attendance. Some are smart enough to get by without attending all the classes, and some are not.
Honestly, I don't think attendance should be mandatory anywhere. I got a B during my last summer semester in ANTH 1003 because I never went to class -- whatever the points assigned to attendance brought my 91% down to an 89.2%
Some classes are so easy that teachers feel they have to make attendance mandatory or nobody will come, like my Art Apreciation class last year - or other classes where group discussion & participation are important. I only agree with mandatory attendance if it truley effects the importance of the class. I think getting players to go to class is a great idea and that the players should be going anyways. But, you can't tell me that if I make a 3.5 gpa without ever going to class that I will be suspended from a football game because of those missed classes. That would be ridiculous. The grades are what matters.
