Academic reform is really reshaping the focus of analysis to the team level.
We imagine that type of information will be made available as mitigation, if you will.
We know that the abuses are going on as we speak.
For example, they drop your major. (Or) you have significant health problems. The retention piece is a part of the APR, in part, to prevent runoffs. And if you have legitimate reasons that you can say 'this isn't a runoff issue' ... we ought to figure out a way to adjust the APR.
Teams that use the squad-size adjustment to escape penalty rather than improve their academic practices right away might find the 'pay-me-later' syndrome hard to accept. As more years of APR data become available, teams will find scores harder to change.
There's some thought that this can't just be the highest APR. Maybe it's the biggest jump from one year to the next. Maybe it's the biggest difference between student body and student-athlete. Maybe it's a matching grant for programs that are underperforming that want to do better. All of those things, I think, are going to be fleshed out at this meeting.
In the past, we haven't had the authority to do this. But for those (schools) that have no state oversight, that's where we'll have additional questions.
Many and most of the nontraditional high schools do have integrity and do provide a quality education. But it is clear that some do not. The committee recognizes that these are real problems. We know the abuses are going on as we speak, and I think there's a great sense of urgency among all of the members of the committee to take on these issues as quickly as possible.
There are about 5,000 schools that fall in the category, non-traditional.
Copyright © 2024 Electric Goat Media. All Rights Reserved.