Year Round Discipline?

Why a we doing this? 

It's dumb and probably not authorized under law. 

Here's the situation. No other branch of government is going to stop a school from expanding their authority in this way. It is just less responsibility on the police, parks, etc. In fact, mayors and other elected officials I am sure love when schools on their own and without funding take on additional responsibility. 

But, the way the law works, once you start taking on additional responsibility, it is very difficult to get rid of it. For instance, several years back, I railed against schools taking on additional responsibility for regulating off-campus speech. But, down the road a bit now, patrolling Facebook and whatnot is now largely seen as a core duty of schools. There was no money for that ... it was just something that schools decided to do on their own (and no one stopped them). And then schools have the gall to talk about not having enough funding to do these things. 

So, again, I'm begging you schools to stay out of this stuff. If the Legislature wanted you to regulate in the summer, they would tell you to and they would pay for it. Otherwise, it is not your problem. I get the arguments that bad behavior might translate into the school year, but that is never going to go away no matter how much you try to regulate. 

Stop it.

Are Athletic Associations Forgetting About Learning?

The UK basketball issue seems resolved, thankfully for us. But, the incident has certainly caused me to question the role of the NCAA. Of course, I'm guessing folks in Tennessee, Florida, North Carolina, Michigan, Southern California, just to name a few high profile programs, are also wondering about such things. The Reggie Bush Heisman issue, the Conference realignment this summer, or any of the other seemingly weekly national news events surrounding the NCAA keep it at the forefront of the national consciousness. 

My main question with the NCAA is, can a billion dollar entity keep students first and money second (at best)? 

Wait, you didn't know about the money? The 6 billion dollar CBS deal? That March Madness generates more revenue than the NFL playoffs, Superbowl included? 

Did you know your state high school athletic association is likely a multi-million dollar enterprise itself? There is so much money that now high school athletic associations are instituting revenue-sharing plans to redistribute the left-over money. 

Why is all this money showing up in the ledgers of non-profits? How much money does it take to assure a level-playing field for the educational benefit of students? Surely less than a 1/2 a billion a year. And, if so, then why does the NCAA continue to receive tax-exempt status? 

Anyone that reads the blog knows my historical unease with, let's say, educationally-sponsored athletics. That winning frequently overtakes learning on the priority list highly concerns me not because winning is bad, but that it should not be public schools that compete in this fashion. We should be looking to maximize learning, not the scoreboard nor the bottom line, so do we use these athletic associations as proxies to do avoid the sticky issues of educational institutions putting learning down the priority list?

So, my question today, and I'm interested in all responses (I've always said I can be convinced otherwise on this), is whether at the college and/or high school athletic association level winning (as defined in $$$) has overtaken student welfare (as defined by learning) as the priority? Let me know.