[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: more on transfers

Tracy

 

----------
> From: Gary Larson <Gary.N.Larson@wheaton.edu>
> To: Issues concerning CEDA Debate   <CEDA-L@cornell.edu>
> Subject: Re: more on transfers
> Date: Saturday, November 30, 1996 7:01 PM
> 
> On Sat, 30 Nov 1996 EMarlowWSU@aol.com wrote:
> 
> > Will this thread never end?  Why do I keep making posts?  Will Florida
win?
> >  Daddy, are we there, yet?
> > 
> > I have another idea on the issue we can toss around.
> > 
> > One of the major tools that unethical recruiting seems to involve is
the
> > transfer of students to get more scholarship money.  Why not have the
> > director of the school receiving the transfer student provide proof
from
> > their institution's financial aid office that they are not receiving
more
> > money than they did the year before.  You only need to do this as a
stage of
> > the in-house program I discussed yesterday.
> 
> While I'm no great fan of presumed unethical recruiting. I'm not sure
that
> receiving more scholarship aid from the receiving program is necessarily
> an example of unethical recruiting or a probelmmatic transfer.  We have
NO
> debate scholarships whatsoever at Wheaton, so I imagine this proposal
> would make it unethical for anyone to accept a scholarship elsewhere.
> While it has never happened to date, in some cases I would be proud if
one
> of my students received a scholarship to debate elsewhere (all other
> things being equal).  The ability to receive a scholarship certainly is
> and should be one factor in student decision-making.  In fact, it is this
> legitimate interest in financial aid that makes "unethical" recruitment
> possible in some cases.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> GARY
> 
> > 
> > If a director feels that their student was unethically lured away by
the
> > bigger scholarship, they could petition the organization which could
request
> > the letter from the financial aid office.  I know that the cost of
attending
> > college vary from school to school so we might need a scale.  A tuition
> > scholarship at Weber would be a whale of a lot less than a waiver at
Cornell,
> > so some form of equalization would have to be applied.  I think this
would
> > provide a better answer than the Star Chamber system we all want to
avoid.
> > 
> > This proposal would be no more intrusive than the current reporting
> > requirements for registration, academic standing, and transfers.  It
would
> > not publicize our internal problems to external sources that could
effect the
> > reputation of the activity.  We return points to other schools when we
find
> > that students are competing without being enrolled.  This rule has
affected a
> > few programs without destroying them, in fact, one of them went on to
win a
> > national sweepstakes championship within two years.  Why can't this
type of
> > system keep our transfer troubles from creating havoc with our
community
> > reputation.
> > 
> > Transfers that violate the criteria should be shorn of points for a
year.
> >  Maybe we could even increase the punishment.  After all, the idea is
to
> > deter the directors not the students from unethical practices.  If
found
> > guilty, maybe the offending school should not be allowed to earn points
for a
> > year.
> > 
> > What do you think?  Obviously, this is not a complete proposal, but I
do
> > think it provides a springboard for more specific discussion on how we
solve
> > this problem.
> > 
> > Trying to Find the Secret to Life, the Universe, and Tranfer Ethics,
> > Marlow
> > 
>
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page