Don’t increase tuition, cut athletics funding : News-Record.com : Greensboro & the Triad's most trusted source for local news and analysis

The only time I’ve known UNC system President Tom Ross to use “balance” concerning UNCG’s budget and the financial burden placed on its students, he was excusing his consideration of education and athletics as competing priorities.

Athletics aren’t priorities. Athletics are unrelated to our universities’ constitutional requirement to provide education as free as practicable and their statutorily mandated mission to educate by discovering, creating, transmitting and applying knowledge. The universities have no other mission, especially not forcing students to subsidize athletes.

Improved educational opportunity is the “brand” and only meaningful measure of growth. More students apply than our universities can accommodate. Students who are accepted must borrow more to pay higher tuition and fees. Fees not contributing to education waste students’ money.

Yet UNCG has eliminated 157 teaching positions while hiring more athletic administrators whose numbers have doubled in just two years. Fewer teachers means fewer course offerings, more semesters to graduate, and more student debt.

Under Chancellor Linda Brady’s control, the athletics budget has begun growing by a greater percentage than tuition, and Ross’ “balance” approves another large fees increase, mostly for athletics, than tuition.

This is farce rushing headlong toward tragedy.

Christopher Tew
Greensboro

destinys mother in law

February 15, 2012 - 9:15 am EST

What would happen if all athletic scholarships were dropped? Perhaps schools would have to attract students based on the school's academic and cultural strengths. Perhaps the head bashing would cease. Perhaps the athletes would migrate to professional sports and have an additional 4 years of making money before their bodies are totally wrecked.
If schools depend on "professional" sports to generate income, perhaps they could sponsor teams the members of which would get free scholarships once their bodies were ruined.

rooster8786

February 15, 2012 - 10:09 am EST

"...statutorily mandated mission to educate by discovering, creating, transmitting and applying knowledge..." What about the education in team work, leadership skills development, and overcoming adversity? Are these not effective and necessary skills to have in today's world? Maybe the LTE writer was a proverbial "last one picked" or "no you take him" athlete earlier in life that today doesn't recognize the education that athletics can and does bring...

Yvonne

February 15, 2012 - 10:56 am EST

Or maybe, rooster, the letter writer thinks it is wrong for students not involved in sports to subsidize the sports budget as he has written. While I have no dog in this fight, it is my opinion (as one who participated in school sports and was fairly good in most sports...running being the exception) if one looks at the big picture regarding college sports, the money invested in this program does not benefit the majority of students. Thus, most of the students are paying for the enjoyment of a few. If a college can support a sports program WITHOUT taking away from other programs or requiring a higher tuition in order to subsidize a sports program, I say have at it.

If a student has not developed the skills in team work, leadership and overcoming adversity before he/she gets to college, I somehow doubt they will in college.

2fer

February 15, 2012 - 4:56 pm EST

Numerous studies have show that the "education" gained from sports is largely imaginary, in that the same qualities, often to a greater degree, are "taught" by academic studies ranging from those concentrating on maths, sciences, languages, and history, to the performing and graphic arts. The sports myth is just that, real only for those, like Linda Brady and Tom Ross, who choose to believe.
I was always in the middle, neither a jock or the "last chosen." I always knew, however, why I was in school, and that wasn't to prove speed or strength, and as above, leadership and even dexterity could be proved more effectively in so many other ways. Sounds like you have issues that I can't help.
BTW, the caption for this letter is not of my doing and makes little sense in light of the text of the letter. Tuition increases are necessary because the legislature has been negligent, but there needs be no net increase in the total cost of tuition and fees if the UNC System and local administrators had the wisdom and courage to cut unnecessary and wasteful expenses from the fees side. Tuition got approved about 44 cents on the dollar for education; fees got approved about 84 cents on the dollar, mostly for athletics.
Seems like some people don't want to "throw money" at education, but they're delighted to throw it at entertainment and folly.

news-record.com

OPINION