Another Rumor

[tm3308]

I thought that Iowa and the rest of the BigTen was different than the SEC as far as class requirements etc for athletes. If some of what I read here (above) is true, it seems to me that we are the same as the SEC; we just don't get as good of players. It does make one wonder why there isn't just a minor league for football.
Also, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I don't quite understand what "Golfer" is trying to say. I am not in any way close to what has been going on in Iowa City so maybe that's why I dont' understand what he's saying.
Lastly, my brother in law teaches at an SEC school and he says the same things about many of his rural students as some of the posters above have said.

Almost every school will push the envelope when it comes to football and basketball players. But they do it to varying degrees. You find more of the guys who can't even read in the SEC. It's not THAT bad in the Big Ten, or at least at Iowa. But they do get breaks/perks that other students don't, and many couldn't handle a genuine course load (though there are plenty who could, too).

 

[MoseSchrute]

.

As I said, it isn't directed at anyone in this thread. Although, I have sat in on a course at the U of I, where the professor explained to us, as fact, all about inappropriate American intervention, including Pearl Harbor, etc, and drew the conclusion that 9/11 was in fact, our fault.

I once sat in a HEALTH class and listened to the instructor proceed to bash on Reagan. I can't imagine what the U of I has devolved to now.

 

[MoseSchrute]

This "rural" argument is just plain stupid. I know, I went to a very small rural school. Here is a quote from one of my old teachers.
"I ordered IQ tests for an average rural community – the results showed I had a room full of geniuses. I called the area agency and was told, "…many of the farmers in that area had a college background and many had married teachers who came to teach there. Therefore, the quality of reading material in the homes was varied and plentiful…."

Or

"Our high school scholastic standing was always among the highest in the state and in the country at the time, and looking back, was much better than that of most schools today."

Or

"Our class received a 99% ranking in both the state and the nation on ITED tests all four years of high school."

So dont give me that "rural" load of bs your selling. If you want to blame anyone blame the teachers and communities, but it applies across the board and is not dependent on the size. It does have to do with community involvement, parent involvement and getting good teachers.

I'm with you on this one, olddude. It's total BS.

 

[Foval21]

since i am a teacher i can tell you the #1 thing for student acheivement is the family involvement. school size doesnt mean anything. in fact a bad family situation in a school with great teachers can lead to worse results than the other way around. i went to a school of 400 students in the hs and the school was incredibly strong in all areas and the families were very involved in the school. rural or size isnt a major factor at all.