Letters to the Editor

To the Editor:

Your article on the National Collegiate Athletic Association's rules of eligibility came the same week I learned that one of our 1996 graduates is ineligible to row for the University of Wisconsin because, under the new rules, he is one quarter short of English credits ( "Student Coursework Runs Afoul Of NCAA's Rules on Eligibility," Oct. 16, 1996). The NCAA ruled that one of our courses doesn't meet their requirements for, I assume, academic rigor. The course (Beginning TV) makes the mistake of combining the goals and curriculum of a speech course with the medium of television. Egad! Technology infused into a course to make it fun, interesting, and relevant to the '90s evidently renders it vocational. Vocational courses, as well as remedial or "special needs" classes, never make it past the NCAA clearinghouse censors.

As frustrating as that is philosophically, my real issue with the NCAA rules is procedural. If the purpose of the eligibility requirements is to keep colleges from recruiting students who are ill-prepared for college academics, then they should address college-admission standards. Students unqualified for college work should not be admitted. All of the students in your article, and the many others I know about from my crash course in the new rules, were easily admitted to their colleges. All had grade point averages over 3.0 and above-average SAT or ACT scores. All graduated from high schools whose leaders stand behind the fact that they are prepared for their...