Читать реферат по английскому: "Title 9 Essay Research Paper Athletic Scholarships" Страница 1

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

Title 9 Essay, Research Paper

Athletic Scholarships: Who Wins?

Athletic scholarships are designed to support physically

gifted and talented students. This simple description makes it

difficult to envision the problems associated with athletic

scholarships, but recently, athletic scholarships and the

programs linked with them have become quite controversial.

In spite of this controversy, athletic scholarships should be

retained, but college athletic programs should be reformed to

deemphasize winning at all costs and to ensure that all

student athletes are treated fairly.

College athletic programs are certainly valuable. These

programs increase school spirit and help to create a sense of

community. They also help to raise money: winning teams

spark alumni contributions, and athletic events raise funds

through ticket sales. In addition, athletic programs–like

programs in the performing arts and music–help to provide

a rewarding, balanced education for all students. Student

athletes make important academic, social, and cultural

contributions to their schools and thus enrich the college

experience for others. Finally, without athletic scholarships,

many students would not be able to attend college because,

as Alvin Sanoff observes, the aid for which many

economically deprived student athletes are eligible does not

cover the expense of a college education the way athletic

scholarships do (par. 5).

Despite their obvious advantages, college athletic

programs have problems. First, not all athletes–or all programs–

are valued equally. On many campuses money, equipment, and

facilities have traditionally been allotted to football and

basketball at the expense of less visible sports such as

swimming, tennis, and field hockey. Men’s sports have been

given a disproportionate amount of support, and “winning”

teams and coaches have been compensated accordingly. In fact,

according to Sue M. Durrant, until recently it was not unusual

for women’s teams to use “hand-me-down” gear while men’s

teams played with new “state of the art” equipment or for

women’s teams to travel by bus while men’s teams traveled by

plane (60).

Another problem is that college athletes at all levels

complain that their roles as athletes are overemphasized, to the

detriment of their roles as students. According to Francis X.

Dealy, some college athletic departments have become little

more than glorified training camps for professional sports

teams. This problem is compounded by overzealous recruiting

practices, with colleges accepting academically unqualified

students solely because of their athletic skills. These students

are exploited and overworked, treated as commodities rather

than as students, and given little academic support; many fail

to graduate (106). With the demands of heavy travel and

practice schedules, many student athletes, even those with

strong academic backgrounds, risk falling behind in their

studies. Moreover, their grueling schedules tend to isolate

them from other students, excluding them from the college

community. Given these difficulties, college athletic programs

are under considerable pressure to institute reforms.

The problems associated with athletic scholarships are

numerous and complex, but they have less to do with the

scholarships themselves than with the way dishonest and

exploitive athletic administrators run their programs. It is

understandable that the main focus of most collegiate sports

programs is winning. According to Vince Lombardi, the

famous football coach, “Winning isn’t everything; it’s the only

thing.” To the alumni, the administrators, and the fans, the

only measure of an athletic program’s success is its win/loss

record. A winning record attracts money and students; a

losing record does not. They seem to believe, as the

philosopher George Santayana has observed, “In athletics, as

in all performances, only winning is interesting. The rest has

value only as leading to it or reflecting it” (qtd. in Dealy 61).

This concentration on winning has led to some of the

worst abuses in college athletic programs. Francis X. Dealy

reports that this competitive attitude existed even in the first

American intercollegiate competition, an 1852 rowing contest

between Harvard and Yale. Harvard won, and so began a

fierce rivalry between the two schools (56). As Dealy observes,

“Judging from the intensity of the spectators and the

participants, the stakes included which school had the more

beautiful campus, the smarter faculty, the brighter student

body, and the more successful alumni” (59). The emphasis on

winning encouraged the recruitment of the best athletes, no

matter what the cost. In fact, Dealy observes that the first

athletic scholarships were in the form of salaries paid to

professional athletes to perform in the name of a particular

school. Without regulation, athletic scholarships were like

shady financial deals arranged in smoky back rooms (56).

Athletes became commodities to be bought and sold.

Fleisher, Goff, and Tollison report that until the late 1870s,

collegiate games were generally “marked by violence . . . and

controversy over eligibility

Похожие работы