Prioritizing character in American sports

right on point: Post and poke: why the social media experience and college culture are joined at the hip

Happy birthday, Facebook! Ten years since the social media giant launched from Mark Zuckerberg’s dorm room at Harvard, the company could not be in better shape at the start of 2014. It now has a billion-plus users, enjoyed a very profitable fourth quarter in 2013, receceived great publicity from the media’s coverage of the anniversary, and on top of all that, its stock price has reached an all-time high.
To thank its loyal users, the company developed LookBack, a feature on its website that creates a 102-second personalized montage video of a user’s activity over the years. And to no one’s surprise, hundreds of millions of users have already taken advantage of this new service less than one week after its release.
Facebook has had its fair share of social media competitors including Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, WhatsApp, etc. But despite the competition, Facebook unquestionably remains the king of social media among the millennial generation—and for good reason. It is simply the most effective, thorough and accessible way to connect with other people whether platonically, romantically or anything in between.

right on point: Looking beyond the SAT: the need for a new, innovative evaluation

No Bowdoin student—anyone who attends an elite college or university in the United States for that matter—is too far removed from the college admissions process to know it is more intense and cutthroat than ever.
Statistics might suggest that overall enrollment at American universities is declining, but that isn’t relevant to America’s best and brightest (and yes, fortunate) high school students. Admissions officers at many top-tier schools admit that they are turning down well-qualified students who are indistinguishable from ones they are accepting and who they would have given the “thumbs up” to in the recent past. Admissions counselors are running out of tactful ways that justify choosing one qualified applicant from another.
While I regard the upcoming changes to the SAT—which include providing more focus to the mathematical content and altering the vocabulary section in favor of gearing the test towards what students actually learned in high school—as an improvement, they do not do enough to fairly and critically assess the most intellectually accomplished students applying to the very best American universities. In the nontransparent and inconsistently judgmental system that is college admissions, the institutes of higher education governing boards owe it to the students to come up with a more efficient system of evaluation.
I propose a mandatory and original, innovative supplemental test to complement the SAT for a list of selective schools, which will give admission counselors a fresh, more thorough way to evaluate its applicants. This supplemental test should be designed to determine skills such as critical thinking, problem solving, and creative expression. These attributes are as important as academic knowledge and are critical for an enriched collegiate experience and a prosperous career path. Leading innovators, education specialists, and management companies—the likes of Bill Gates, IBM, and Khan Academy—should work together to create a standardized assessment based on an algorithm that combines the best of creative, intellectual and technical insight.
A compilation of multiple-choice questions—such as what The Learning Channel does with its list of “Test Yourself” creative questions that measure critical-thinking skills—is a must. I applaud the work of FourSight, a company that creates creative training skills to help individuals solve problems—an abridged version of its assessment to identify thinking styles is also a great fit.
This new testing method should have a more insightful writing section than the SAT that sparks imagination. Having the ability to write logically and effectively is a meaningful skill for life, whether you want to be a chemical engineer or a journalist. Some responses or sections of this supplemental exam don’t necessarily need to have a right or wrong answer, but simply need to give admissions officers a more in-depth look at what really makes up the students they are evaluating.
While this would be additional testing and time spent for students and admissions officers alike, I believe that this would best serve each group’s interests in the present and long-term future. Furthermore, this system would not play into the expensive SAT and ACT tutoring programs that have often been at the core of arguments about these tests favoring the affluent.
On a separate note, the elite institutions I speak of should give meaningful advantages to applications in other ways amidst the review process. For example, students who are bilingual, have the undeniably practical skill of computer coding, who describe a meaningful experience in the professional world on a Common App section, or who list an intention to study abroad and explore other cultures should not be seen only as their SAT scores. College-bound students who see the “bigger picture” and show it through their skills and work experiences, should be rewarded.
This year, Stanford had an acceptance rate of 5 percent; in the liberal arts field, Amherst and Bowdoin both had admission rates less than 15 percent. These impressive figures are not going to change anytime soon. Therefore I propose a more honest, modern way of reflecting on the competitive market of college admissions. And in reality, students must prepare for the even more competitive job market.
Harvard education specialist Tony Wagner is on point when he says that the pre-collegiate and university systems are not “adding the value and teaching the skills that matter most in the marketplace.” The cultivation and implementation of these attributes—whether it’s critical thinking or problem solving skills—should be further proactively developed by professors within the classroom walls and collegiate seminars.
In Tom Friedman’s writing on Lazlo Block, the senior vice president of people operations at Google, he said that the company has determined that GPA’s and test scores are very poor predictors of success when hiring, but that they see those who innovate and think well on the fly as most beneficial to them. He lists five key skill markers: general cognitive learning ability, emergent leadership, intellectual humility, ownership and technical skill.
More critically assessing the very best of prospective American college students is a pertinent and urgent need to maintain our status as a global leader.
Instead of just bandaging the wound like the changes to the SAT does, significant reform is necessary for the education hole we are in. A bold move that tackles higher education in a more comprehensive manner and has its students better prepared to be successful leaders in the “real world.” We have the resources and intelligence—let’s do it already.

right on point

Prioritizing character in American sports

This piece represents the opinion of the author:

Gabriel Frankel

Columnist

February 27, 2014

I took the announcement of Derek Jeter’s impending retirement at the end of the upcoming season as bittersweet news, even if he’s played professionally for over two decades. Baseball fans take for granted his clutch hitting and acrobatic plays in the field and his leadership as captain of the Yankees. But what really stands out is his consistently flawless character off the field and in the public eye. Whether it was his establishment of the Turn 2 Foundation to help troubled teenagers or calling (unprompted) the family of a Sandy Hook victim who was a fan of the Yankees, Jeter is the ultimate class act. General Manager Brian Cashman summed it up best when he said that Jeter is the type of guy you’d want your daughter to marry.

But unfortunately, “whole-packages” like Jeter are a rare sight in professional sports. We’re at a point now when athletes are expected to crash and burn or erupt in scandal. There’s been half a dozen breaking scandals of one kind or another since I came up with the idea to write this column at the beginning of the academic year. So it’s worth asking: Do character values in the American sports industry matter in this cynical age?

While professional team sports unify many commendable aspects of the human spirit, they also represent a dark microcosm of American spirit. Athletes are encouraged and rewarded for aggression and violent behavior, starting in the Pee Wee leagues. This “bad boy” culture is condoned or even encouraged by many parents and celebrated by coaches and school administrators who want results (i.e. a winning team). Habits form and their personal lives are reshaped, which often leads to trouble later in life. Domestic abuse, gun violence, DUIs, cheating with performance enhancing drugs and brawls are the usual ramifications.

Sports journalist Frank Deford recently said that the “NFL is home to bullies, wife beaters, racists and, yes, some homophobes,” but he wouldn’t be far off the mark by widening his field. The condition is made worse by the handlers and executives who look the other way when athletes go rogue. Like any corporation, professional teams strive to keep harmful information out of the public eye, but inevitably the truth rises up and breaks out. To cite one prominent example, the New England Patriots knew they had a rotten apple in star tight-end Aaron Hernandez, but it took an accusation of murder to cut him.

Yes, there are many athletes who simply are in it for the love of the game, but they are tainted by the same toxic brush that paints over their sport. Many cyclists may be totally drug free, but anyone in that sport who does well is now looked at with a degree of skepticism that was unimaginable a decade ago. The NBA may demand that all its athletes wear a jacket and tie when seen in public, but it’s not the clothes that make the man. Metta World Peace (formerly known as Ron Artest), Gilbert Arenas, and Raymond Felton set back the entire league when they have run-ins with the law. So, if we accept as a given that a stunning, widespread lack of character and civility exists in a wide range of sports, we can also equally assume that it is only going to get worse. If we don’t start turning this around, sports at every level and age group will have all of the character depth of most pro-wrestlers.

Fortunately, there are several actions and reforms that the sports industry can take, on every level, to stress the importance of creating athletic men and women of whom we can all be proud. Youth coaches and parents must advocate that good character behavior is as important as winning. Excessive violence on and off the field has no place and must not be tolerated under any circumstances. High school is often when bad behavior comes to light and teachers, coaches and parents must be vigilant in maintaining these standards. Some have suggested that maintaining a dress code in the classroom might instill discipline, but I don’t buy it. We have to go a lot deeper than changing what you pull out of your closet each morning. College jocks who violate the rules must no longer be tolerated. This, of course, is easy to say and hard to enforce, because the financial blood of so many schools are dependent on those jocks scoring touchdowns. The alleged sexual misconduct charges facing Jameis Winston, the 2014 Heisman winner, were swept under the rug on his way to becoming an NCAA superstar. Whether or not there was a shred of truth to those accusations, we will never know. Associate Professor Billy Hawkins in the Deptartment of Kinesiology at the University of Georgia recently stated that executives from America’s big four sports league offices must make programs to address the culture of violence that embroils athletes and reverse “character underdevelopment” that many pro athletes develop.

The emphasis on good character in the pro sports world should extend to improved tolerance of openly gay athletes playing. Earlier this week, Jason Collins broke barriers by becoming the first openly gay NBA player, signing a short-term contract with the Brooklyn Nets. And just last year, on a smaller scale in the U.S. sports arena, Robbie Rogers became the first openly gay player to sign with a Major League Soccer team.

Comments by sports executives and pundits, behind a wall of anonymity, suggesting that Michael Sam (the star college football player who came out as openly gay to the public earlier this month) won’t be welcomed appropriately in the NFL because the game isn’t ready for a gay player in the locker room, are beyond preposterous. Those who defend this idea argue that the NFL is a “man’s game” and that these players don’t have a manly enough reputation to succeed.

The color barrier, another civil right obstacle in pro sports, didn’t stop the great Jackie Robinson from becoming the first black player in Major League Baseball. Athletes and representatives from pro sports teams should take a stand and visit LGBTQIA youth groups in their communities to get the message across that a kid can be openly gay and still achieve their dream of becoming a professional athlete.

All professional sports leagues should mirror and extend the goals of the NFL’s Character Development Program. This organization prioritizes anger management and reconciliation skills.
This will not solve all the problems, but it certainly could limit the number of domestic abuse cases and DUIs that some high-profile athletes get entangled with. These can lead to an improvement in public perception of character value in American pro sports, a possible domino effect for changes at all levels of the game.

Comments are permanently closed.