Focusing on the actions, not the abuse, select one person involved in this case(Assistant Coach/Athletic Director/State Attorney General/School President, etc.) and discuss the following: * What were the actions taken by the person you chose?
* What was the impact of those actions?
* If you had held the same position, what action would you have taken? * How did your moral reasoning impact your decision?
Focusing on the actions by the college athletes involved in this article, they apparently needed to have sufficient grades to be eligible to play in “bowl games” for their sports. Some of those who were lacking academically, but still wished to compete in the bowls, looked for an “easy out.” They found this easy out in the form of schools offering online classes which only lasted 10 days. These courses didn’t provide much substance or learning for the students, however they did get the student athletes an “easy A” so that they would be academically qualified for bowl games.
The student athletes who chose this route may have managed to academically qualify themselves for bowl games, but it could be argued that they did not gain anything from doing so. The courses described in the article would likely be easily passed by a grade school or middle school student. The courses lasted only 10 days, so even if there was some sort of substance to be taken away from the class, these student athletes wouldn’t have had very much time to absorb the material. The students’ academic records might have reflected higher grades, but there would be a possible problem of the courses the student selected counting for their degree of choice. Even if the credits gained from these courses do indeed count for the student’s major, one would question what kind of degree the student was getting, and what use if any, it would be to the student after graduating. It could be argued that these courses exist mostly for colleges and universities to...