Assignment Prompt & Instructions
please see attachment
– 2 years ago
**files (3)**
– ## thesis.docx
– ## lu07.edited1.docx
– ## BrainStormingActivity2.docx
**## thesis.docx**
Need an outline with thesis
**## lu07.edited1.docx**
Last Name3
Debate over Stricter Academic Requirements for Athletic Eligibility: Balancing Education and Opportunity
Will stricter academic standards for athletic eligibility benefit or harm student athletics? Over the past few years, policies have been changed to increase athletic academic eligibility requirements to maintain of balance athletic performance and academic work. These changes have sparked ongoing academic on whether academic standards for athletic eligibility should be stricter. Historically, athletic eligibility has evolved significantly. Before, academic eligibility rules or requirements were more lenient but as sports commercialization increased, so did the standards placed for student-athletes. Today, academic eligibility varies based on the competition level, whether it is high school, college, or professional leagues. Organizations such as the NCAA have set specific academic requirements such as certain GPAs or credit hours a student must meet to be eligible for participation in sports. For instance, an academic student-athlete is required to “16 approved NCAA Core Courses during your high school years” (NCAA 1). These changes aim at ensuring that the student-athletes were pursuing education genuinely, not just focusing on sports. As the sport grows into an educational institution, the controversy surrounding athletic eligibility rules or roles has become more relevant in the field of sports. Proponents argue that having higher requirements will help improve student-athletes' academic outcomes, help establish a more balanced experience, and prepare them for life after athlete On the other hand, opponents argue that stricter standards will unfairly limit opportunity for the talented students, especially the underprivileged. With the increasing pressure to balance academic and sports participation, the topic is central to investigating if academic eligibility should be stricter.
Promoting a balanced approach to academics and athletics is one of the most compelling arguments in favor of the debate. According to experts, many student-athletes may be overly focused on sports at the expense of their academics due to the financial benefits involved. According to Bradsher, some states "passed legislation explicitly allowing the right for college-and sometimes high school athletes to earn money from" (2), sports-related activities or commercials. This encourages student-athletes to focus more on sports compared to their education. Raising academic eligibility will ensure athlete students are also well-grounded people who value academics in addition to their talent.
Stricter academic edibility will also ensure fairness across all students. According to Day Madison et al., the NCAA supports student-athlete success "on the field, in the classroom, and for life,” but many "student-athletes enjoy many benefits from their status,” (6). These benefits include getting scholarships due to their talent and low academic performance. The rule requires student-athletes to hold to similar academic standards to non-athletes, preventing special treatment. This promotes a culture where regardless of a student's athletic talent, all students are expected to meet similar academic expectations.
Enforcing higher academic standards helps prepare student-athletes for life after sports. The reality is that few student-athletes get long careers in professional sports. Education is the key to securing opportunities outside athletic life (Gard 406). Therefore, requiring student-athletes to meet stricter academic requirements will encourage the student to also gain academic knowledge and skills, which will be valuable in their post-sports careers.
One of the most stated arguments against the debate is how such standards limit opportunities for talented students, especially those who struggle academically and excel in sports. Many student-athletes, particularly those from lower class encounter significant barriers in performing well in their academics. For some, their talent is often their primary mains of accessing higher education through scholars. As such, higher academic eligibility may limit their chance to pursue sports and gain access to college education.
Placing higher academic eligibility may also result in negative consequences like loss of scholarship, mental health issues, and increased dropout rates. According to Curs et al., “Student-athletes have unique pressures and challenges that are distinct from their non-athlete peers, “(3). Therefore, the majority of them may struggle to balance their academic and athletic responsibility, resulting in a decline in performance or mental health. In extreme cases, some may drop out of sports and lose their scholarship, affecting both their athletics and education.
To conclude, the debate over stricter athletic academic eligibility is both complex and multifaceted. Although there are clear benefits, there are also legitimate concerns. Therefore, there need for a middle ground, which will help ensure fairness in education, while ensuring student-athletes receive need support to succeed both athletically and academically.
**Work Cited**
Bradsher, Bethany. Paying College Athletes: Should students be treated as employees?
_CQ Researcher._ [https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresearcher/report/paying-College-athletes-cqresrre20240503#](https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresearcher/report/paying-College-athletes-cqresrre20240503)
Curs, Bradley R., et al. "The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success."
_Research in Higher Education_ 64.4 (2023): 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper.
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, Ashley N. "High school academics: Increasing the standard."
_Physical Educator_ 74.3 (2017): 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes.
_NCAA Eligibility Center_.
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)
**## BrainStormingActivity2.docx**
1
2
**Brainstorming Activity**
**1A. List the primary objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
Critics argue that correct academic standards for student-athletes mean that athletic talents and athletes with low GPA scores will not be allowed to flaunt their talents. This could particularly affect underprivileged athletes significantly; these athletes can only get scholarships to school and college. Therefore, they stand to be significantly affected by this. These athletes may also be shut out if the academic standards are increased to unreasonable levels.
**1B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Academic barriers: Most student-athletes, especially those from low-income families, struggle to balance school work and games. Curs et al. (2023) argue that due to the various pressures, student-athletes have to grapple with academic challenges that can be even harder than students who are not athletes.
· Scholarship dependence: For some athletes, sports provide a critical pathway to higher education, and raising academic standards could prevent them from qualifying for sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
· Dropout risk: Increased academic pressure could lead to mental health struggles, including stress and anxiety, and may result in higher dropout rates among athletes who lose their eligibility due to poor academic performance (Curs et al., 2023).
**1C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s first claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
Indeed, academic difficulties are potentially problematic for some student-athletes, especially those from low socio-economic backgrounds, and such athletes would find it more challenging to meet the high standards required in academic learning. These students may have fewer resources and encouragement from parents or other academic-related things (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
Although there is some truth in this concern, it is crucial to highlight that academic achievement is paramount to the overall success of the student-athletes. This means embracing strict academic standards to guarantee that student-athletes can be equipped for something else after their short-lived sporting days. The NCAA (n.d.) mentions one of its missions as helping the student-athletes succeed in their athletic and academic pursuits. However, academic assistance in the form of tutoring, counseling, or even mental health care can assist in meeting these criteria for student-athletes and, at the same time, ensure that all students are treated equally under the general law (Gard, 2017).
**2A. List a second objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
A second argument is that more academic pressure entailed by stricter eligibility requirements will not be beneficial for students as they can experience mental problems and then drop out.
**2B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Student-athletes already face immense stress from balancing their academic and athletic responsibilities, and stricter requirements might exacerbate this pressure (Curs et al., 2023).
· Mental health concerns such as anxiety, depression, and burnout are often cited as reasons why student-athletes might struggle to maintain their academic standing, potentially leading to a higher dropout rate (Curs et al., 2023).
**2C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s second claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that high academic pressure may lead to mental health concerns for some of the student-athletes where more academic problems exist (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
However, this cannot be solved by reducing academic standards, but this should be resolved by increasing the provisions for student-athletes, including mental health, counseling, and academic help. With these resources, people can overcome all the pressures placed on them as athletes and succeed academically and athletically. However, fulfilling high academic standards benefits student-athletes in their future careers by preparing them for the academic challenges after their career in sports is over (Gard, 2017).
**3A. List a third objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
The third argument might be that children who are academically less capable but have raw talent in athletics may not advance to the next level to continue with sports and further their education at the same time.
**3B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Critics might argue that athletic ability should be prioritized over academic performance, especially for students who may not excel academically but have significant potential in sports (Curs et al., 2023).
· Talented athletes from disadvantaged backgrounds may lack the academic resources needed to meet stricter eligibility requirements, which could further limit their access to sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
**3C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s third claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that academically challenged athletes are at a disadvantage in performance due to high academic standards, which can reduce the chances of one being offered a scholarship to pursue the sport.
**Rebuttal:**
Nevertheless, there is a necessity to bring more equity and fairness in the educational setting. Setting higher academic standards entails that all the students in the institution follow specific academic standards, irrespective of the ability a student may display in athletic activities. Further, it enables athletes to have something to fall back on should they retire from the sport, as well as prepare the athletes academically for the future. This is not to remove the athletes but rather enable the athlete to complete his/her education in a balanced manner that caters to success in the future (Gard, 2017).
**References**
Curs, B. R., et al. (2023). The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success. Research in Higher Education, 64(4), 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. (2015). Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper. Retrieved from
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, A. N. (2017). High school academics: Increasing the standard. Physical Educator, 74(3), 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. (n.d.). NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes. Retrieved from
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)
**## BrainStormingActivity2.docx**
1
2
**Brainstorming Activity**
**1A. List the primary objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
Critics argue that correct academic standards for student-athletes mean that athletic talents and athletes with low GPA scores will not be allowed to flaunt their talents. This could particularly affect underprivileged athletes significantly; these athletes can only get scholarships to school and college. Therefore, they stand to be significantly affected by this. These athletes may also be shut out if the academic standards are increased to unreasonable levels.
**1B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Academic barriers: Most student-athletes, especially those from low-income families, struggle to balance school work and games. Curs et al. (2023) argue that due to the various pressures, student-athletes have to grapple with academic challenges that can be even harder than students who are not athletes.
· Scholarship dependence: For some athletes, sports provide a critical pathway to higher education, and raising academic standards could prevent them from qualifying for sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
· Dropout risk: Increased academic pressure could lead to mental health struggles, including stress and anxiety, and may result in higher dropout rates among athletes who lose their eligibility due to poor academic performance (Curs et al., 2023).
**1C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s first claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
Indeed, academic difficulties are potentially problematic for some student-athletes, especially those from low socio-economic backgrounds, and such athletes would find it more challenging to meet the high standards required in academic learning. These students may have fewer resources and encouragement from parents or other academic-related things (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
Although there is some truth in this concern, it is crucial to highlight that academic achievement is paramount to the overall success of the student-athletes. This means embracing strict academic standards to guarantee that student-athletes can be equipped for something else after their short-lived sporting days. The NCAA (n.d.) mentions one of its missions as helping the student-athletes succeed in their athletic and academic pursuits. However, academic assistance in the form of tutoring, counseling, or even mental health care can assist in meeting these criteria for student-athletes and, at the same time, ensure that all students are treated equally under the general law (Gard, 2017).
**2A. List a second objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
A second argument is that more academic pressure entailed by stricter eligibility requirements will not be beneficial for students as they can experience mental problems and then drop out.
**2B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Student-athletes already face immense stress from balancing their academic and athletic responsibilities, and stricter requirements might exacerbate this pressure (Curs et al., 2023).
· Mental health concerns such as anxiety, depression, and burnout are often cited as reasons why student-athletes might struggle to maintain their academic standing, potentially leading to a higher dropout rate (Curs et al., 2023).
**2C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s second claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that high academic pressure may lead to mental health concerns for some of the student-athletes where more academic problems exist (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
However, this cannot be solved by reducing academic standards, but this should be resolved by increasing the provisions for student-athletes, including mental health, counseling, and academic help. With these resources, people can overcome all the pressures placed on them as athletes and succeed academically and athletically. However, fulfilling high academic standards benefits student-athletes in their future careers by preparing them for the academic challenges after their career in sports is over (Gard, 2017).
**3A. List a third objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
The third argument might be that children who are academically less capable but have raw talent in athletics may not advance to the next level to continue with sports and further their education at the same time.
**3B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Critics might argue that athletic ability should be prioritized over academic performance, especially for students who may not excel academically but have significant potential in sports (Curs et al., 2023).
· Talented athletes from disadvantaged backgrounds may lack the academic resources needed to meet stricter eligibility requirements, which could further limit their access to sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
**3C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s third claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that academically challenged athletes are at a disadvantage in performance due to high academic standards, which can reduce the chances of one being offered a scholarship to pursue the sport.
**Rebuttal:**
Nevertheless, there is a necessity to bring more equity and fairness in the educational setting. Setting higher academic standards entails that all the students in the institution follow specific academic standards, irrespective of the ability a student may display in athletic activities. Further, it enables athletes to have something to fall back on should they retire from the sport, as well as prepare the athletes academically for the future. This is not to remove the athletes but rather enable the athlete to complete his/her education in a balanced manner that caters to success in the future (Gard, 2017).
**References**
Curs, B. R., et al. (2023). The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success. Research in Higher Education, 64(4), 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. (2015). Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper. Retrieved from
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, A. N. (2017). High school academics: Increasing the standard. Physical Educator, 74(3), 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. (n.d.). NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes. Retrieved from
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)
**## thesis.docx**
Need an outline with thesis
**## lu07.edited1.docx**
Last Name3
Debate over Stricter Academic Requirements for Athletic Eligibility: Balancing Education and Opportunity
Will stricter academic standards for athletic eligibility benefit or harm student athletics? Over the past few years, policies have been changed to increase athletic academic eligibility requirements to maintain of balance athletic performance and academic work. These changes have sparked ongoing academic on whether academic standards for athletic eligibility should be stricter. Historically, athletic eligibility has evolved significantly. Before, academic eligibility rules or requirements were more lenient but as sports commercialization increased, so did the standards placed for student-athletes. Today, academic eligibility varies based on the competition level, whether it is high school, college, or professional leagues. Organizations such as the NCAA have set specific academic requirements such as certain GPAs or credit hours a student must meet to be eligible for participation in sports. For instance, an academic student-athlete is required to “16 approved NCAA Core Courses during your high school years” (NCAA 1). These changes aim at ensuring that the student-athletes were pursuing education genuinely, not just focusing on sports. As the sport grows into an educational institution, the controversy surrounding athletic eligibility rules or roles has become more relevant in the field of sports. Proponents argue that having higher requirements will help improve student-athletes' academic outcomes, help establish a more balanced experience, and prepare them for life after athlete On the other hand, opponents argue that stricter standards will unfairly limit opportunity for the talented students, especially the underprivileged. With the increasing pressure to balance academic and sports participation, the topic is central to investigating if academic eligibility should be stricter.
Promoting a balanced approach to academics and athletics is one of the most compelling arguments in favor of the debate. According to experts, many student-athletes may be overly focused on sports at the expense of their academics due to the financial benefits involved. According to Bradsher, some states "passed legislation explicitly allowing the right for college-and sometimes high school athletes to earn money from" (2), sports-related activities or commercials. This encourages student-athletes to focus more on sports compared to their education. Raising academic eligibility will ensure athlete students are also well-grounded people who value academics in addition to their talent.
Stricter academic edibility will also ensure fairness across all students. According to Day Madison et al., the NCAA supports student-athlete success "on the field, in the classroom, and for life,” but many "student-athletes enjoy many benefits from their status,” (6). These benefits include getting scholarships due to their talent and low academic performance. The rule requires student-athletes to hold to similar academic standards to non-athletes, preventing special treatment. This promotes a culture where regardless of a student's athletic talent, all students are expected to meet similar academic expectations.
Enforcing higher academic standards helps prepare student-athletes for life after sports. The reality is that few student-athletes get long careers in professional sports. Education is the key to securing opportunities outside athletic life (Gard 406). Therefore, requiring student-athletes to meet stricter academic requirements will encourage the student to also gain academic knowledge and skills, which will be valuable in their post-sports careers.
One of the most stated arguments against the debate is how such standards limit opportunities for talented students, especially those who struggle academically and excel in sports. Many student-athletes, particularly those from lower class encounter significant barriers in performing well in their academics. For some, their talent is often their primary mains of accessing higher education through scholars. As such, higher academic eligibility may limit their chance to pursue sports and gain access to college education.
Placing higher academic eligibility may also result in negative consequences like loss of scholarship, mental health issues, and increased dropout rates. According to Curs et al., “Student-athletes have unique pressures and challenges that are distinct from their non-athlete peers, “(3). Therefore, the majority of them may struggle to balance their academic and athletic responsibility, resulting in a decline in performance or mental health. In extreme cases, some may drop out of sports and lose their scholarship, affecting both their athletics and education.
To conclude, the debate over stricter athletic academic eligibility is both complex and multifaceted. Although there are clear benefits, there are also legitimate concerns. Therefore, there need for a middle ground, which will help ensure fairness in education, while ensuring student-athletes receive need support to succeed both athletically and academically.
**Work Cited**
Bradsher, Bethany. Paying College Athletes: Should students be treated as employees?
_CQ Researcher._ [https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresearcher/report/paying-College-athletes-cqresrre20240503#](https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresearcher/report/paying-College-athletes-cqresrre20240503)
Curs, Bradley R., et al. "The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success."
_Research in Higher Education_ 64.4 (2023): 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper.
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, Ashley N. "High school academics: Increasing the standard."
_Physical Educator_ 74.3 (2017): 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes.
_NCAA Eligibility Center_.
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)
**## BrainStormingActivity2.docx**
1
2
**Brainstorming Activity**
**1A. List the primary objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
Critics argue that correct academic standards for student-athletes mean that athletic talents and athletes with low GPA scores will not be allowed to flaunt their talents. This could particularly affect underprivileged athletes significantly; these athletes can only get scholarships to school and college. Therefore, they stand to be significantly affected by this. These athletes may also be shut out if the academic standards are increased to unreasonable levels.
**1B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Academic barriers: Most student-athletes, especially those from low-income families, struggle to balance school work and games. Curs et al. (2023) argue that due to the various pressures, student-athletes have to grapple with academic challenges that can be even harder than students who are not athletes.
· Scholarship dependence: For some athletes, sports provide a critical pathway to higher education, and raising academic standards could prevent them from qualifying for sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
· Dropout risk: Increased academic pressure could lead to mental health struggles, including stress and anxiety, and may result in higher dropout rates among athletes who lose their eligibility due to poor academic performance (Curs et al., 2023).
**1C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s first claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
Indeed, academic difficulties are potentially problematic for some student-athletes, especially those from low socio-economic backgrounds, and such athletes would find it more challenging to meet the high standards required in academic learning. These students may have fewer resources and encouragement from parents or other academic-related things (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
Although there is some truth in this concern, it is crucial to highlight that academic achievement is paramount to the overall success of the student-athletes. This means embracing strict academic standards to guarantee that student-athletes can be equipped for something else after their short-lived sporting days. The NCAA (n.d.) mentions one of its missions as helping the student-athletes succeed in their athletic and academic pursuits. However, academic assistance in the form of tutoring, counseling, or even mental health care can assist in meeting these criteria for student-athletes and, at the same time, ensure that all students are treated equally under the general law (Gard, 2017).
**2A. List a second objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
A second argument is that more academic pressure entailed by stricter eligibility requirements will not be beneficial for students as they can experience mental problems and then drop out.
**2B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Student-athletes already face immense stress from balancing their academic and athletic responsibilities, and stricter requirements might exacerbate this pressure (Curs et al., 2023).
· Mental health concerns such as anxiety, depression, and burnout are often cited as reasons why student-athletes might struggle to maintain their academic standing, potentially leading to a higher dropout rate (Curs et al., 2023).
**2C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s second claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that high academic pressure may lead to mental health concerns for some of the student-athletes where more academic problems exist (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
However, this cannot be solved by reducing academic standards, but this should be resolved by increasing the provisions for student-athletes, including mental health, counseling, and academic help. With these resources, people can overcome all the pressures placed on them as athletes and succeed academically and athletically. However, fulfilling high academic standards benefits student-athletes in their future careers by preparing them for the academic challenges after their career in sports is over (Gard, 2017).
**3A. List a third objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
The third argument might be that children who are academically less capable but have raw talent in athletics may not advance to the next level to continue with sports and further their education at the same time.
**3B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Critics might argue that athletic ability should be prioritized over academic performance, especially for students who may not excel academically but have significant potential in sports (Curs et al., 2023).
· Talented athletes from disadvantaged backgrounds may lack the academic resources needed to meet stricter eligibility requirements, which could further limit their access to sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
**3C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s third claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that academically challenged athletes are at a disadvantage in performance due to high academic standards, which can reduce the chances of one being offered a scholarship to pursue the sport.
**Rebuttal:**
Nevertheless, there is a necessity to bring more equity and fairness in the educational setting. Setting higher academic standards entails that all the students in the institution follow specific academic standards, irrespective of the ability a student may display in athletic activities. Further, it enables athletes to have something to fall back on should they retire from the sport, as well as prepare the athletes academically for the future. This is not to remove the athletes but rather enable the athlete to complete his/her education in a balanced manner that caters to success in the future (Gard, 2017).
**References**
Curs, B. R., et al. (2023). The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success. Research in Higher Education, 64(4), 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. (2015). Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper. Retrieved from
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, A. N. (2017). High school academics: Increasing the standard. Physical Educator, 74(3), 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. (n.d.). NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes. Retrieved from
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)
**## thesis.docx**
Need an outline with thesis
**## lu07.edited1.docx**
Last Name3
Debate over Stricter Academic Requirements for Athletic Eligibility: Balancing Education and Opportunity
Will stricter academic standards for athletic eligibility benefit or harm student athletics? Over the past few years, policies have been changed to increase athletic academic eligibility requirements to maintain of balance athletic performance and academic work. These changes have sparked ongoing academic on whether academic standards for athletic eligibility should be stricter. Historically, athletic eligibility has evolved significantly. Before, academic eligibility rules or requirements were more lenient but as sports commercialization increased, so did the standards placed for student-athletes. Today, academic eligibility varies based on the competition level, whether it is high school, college, or professional leagues. Organizations such as the NCAA have set specific academic requirements such as certain GPAs or credit hours a student must meet to be eligible for participation in sports. For instance, an academic student-athlete is required to “16 approved NCAA Core Courses during your high school years” (NCAA 1). These changes aim at ensuring that the student-athletes were pursuing education genuinely, not just focusing on sports. As the sport grows into an educational institution, the controversy surrounding athletic eligibility rules or roles has become more relevant in the field of sports. Proponents argue that having higher requirements will help improve student-athletes' academic outcomes, help establish a more balanced experience, and prepare them for life after athlete On the other hand, opponents argue that stricter standards will unfairly limit opportunity for the talented students, especially the underprivileged. With the increasing pressure to balance academic and sports participation, the topic is central to investigating if academic eligibility should be stricter.
Promoting a balanced approach to academics and athletics is one of the most compelling arguments in favor of the debate. According to experts, many student-athletes may be overly focused on sports at the expense of their academics due to the financial benefits involved. According to Bradsher, some states "passed legislation explicitly allowing the right for college-and sometimes high school athletes to earn money from" (2), sports-related activities or commercials. This encourages student-athletes to focus more on sports compared to their education. Raising academic eligibility will ensure athlete students are also well-grounded people who value academics in addition to their talent.
Stricter academic edibility will also ensure fairness across all students. According to Day Madison et al., the NCAA supports student-athlete success "on the field, in the classroom, and for life,” but many "student-athletes enjoy many benefits from their status,” (6). These benefits include getting scholarships due to their talent and low academic performance. The rule requires student-athletes to hold to similar academic standards to non-athletes, preventing special treatment. This promotes a culture where regardless of a student's athletic talent, all students are expected to meet similar academic expectations.
Enforcing higher academic standards helps prepare student-athletes for life after sports. The reality is that few student-athletes get long careers in professional sports. Education is the key to securing opportunities outside athletic life (Gard 406). Therefore, requiring student-athletes to meet stricter academic requirements will encourage the student to also gain academic knowledge and skills, which will be valuable in their post-sports careers.
One of the most stated arguments against the debate is how such standards limit opportunities for talented students, especially those who struggle academically and excel in sports. Many student-athletes, particularly those from lower class encounter significant barriers in performing well in their academics. For some, their talent is often their primary mains of accessing higher education through scholars. As such, higher academic eligibility may limit their chance to pursue sports and gain access to college education.
Placing higher academic eligibility may also result in negative consequences like loss of scholarship, mental health issues, and increased dropout rates. According to Curs et al., “Student-athletes have unique pressures and challenges that are distinct from their non-athlete peers, “(3). Therefore, the majority of them may struggle to balance their academic and athletic responsibility, resulting in a decline in performance or mental health. In extreme cases, some may drop out of sports and lose their scholarship, affecting both their athletics and education.
To conclude, the debate over stricter athletic academic eligibility is both complex and multifaceted. Although there are clear benefits, there are also legitimate concerns. Therefore, there need for a middle ground, which will help ensure fairness in education, while ensuring student-athletes receive need support to succeed both athletically and academically.
**Work Cited**
Bradsher, Bethany. Paying College Athletes: Should students be treated as employees?
_CQ Researcher._ [https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresearcher/report/paying-College-athletes-cqresrre20240503#](https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresearcher/report/paying-College-athletes-cqresrre20240503)
Curs, Bradley R., et al. "The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success."
_Research in Higher Education_ 64.4 (2023): 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper.
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, Ashley N. "High school academics: Increasing the standard."
_Physical Educator_ 74.3 (2017): 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes.
_NCAA Eligibility Center_.
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)
**## BrainStormingActivity2.docx**
1
2
**Brainstorming Activity**
**1A. List the primary objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
Critics argue that correct academic standards for student-athletes mean that athletic talents and athletes with low GPA scores will not be allowed to flaunt their talents. This could particularly affect underprivileged athletes significantly; these athletes can only get scholarships to school and college. Therefore, they stand to be significantly affected by this. These athletes may also be shut out if the academic standards are increased to unreasonable levels.
**1B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Academic barriers: Most student-athletes, especially those from low-income families, struggle to balance school work and games. Curs et al. (2023) argue that due to the various pressures, student-athletes have to grapple with academic challenges that can be even harder than students who are not athletes.
· Scholarship dependence: For some athletes, sports provide a critical pathway to higher education, and raising academic standards could prevent them from qualifying for sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
· Dropout risk: Increased academic pressure could lead to mental health struggles, including stress and anxiety, and may result in higher dropout rates among athletes who lose their eligibility due to poor academic performance (Curs et al., 2023).
**1C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s first claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
Indeed, academic difficulties are potentially problematic for some student-athletes, especially those from low socio-economic backgrounds, and such athletes would find it more challenging to meet the high standards required in academic learning. These students may have fewer resources and encouragement from parents or other academic-related things (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
Although there is some truth in this concern, it is crucial to highlight that academic achievement is paramount to the overall success of the student-athletes. This means embracing strict academic standards to guarantee that student-athletes can be equipped for something else after their short-lived sporting days. The NCAA (n.d.) mentions one of its missions as helping the student-athletes succeed in their athletic and academic pursuits. However, academic assistance in the form of tutoring, counseling, or even mental health care can assist in meeting these criteria for student-athletes and, at the same time, ensure that all students are treated equally under the general law (Gard, 2017).
**2A. List a second objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
A second argument is that more academic pressure entailed by stricter eligibility requirements will not be beneficial for students as they can experience mental problems and then drop out.
**2B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Student-athletes already face immense stress from balancing their academic and athletic responsibilities, and stricter requirements might exacerbate this pressure (Curs et al., 2023).
· Mental health concerns such as anxiety, depression, and burnout are often cited as reasons why student-athletes might struggle to maintain their academic standing, potentially leading to a higher dropout rate (Curs et al., 2023).
**2C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s second claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that high academic pressure may lead to mental health concerns for some of the student-athletes where more academic problems exist (Curs et al., 2023).
**Rebuttal:**
However, this cannot be solved by reducing academic standards, but this should be resolved by increasing the provisions for student-athletes, including mental health, counseling, and academic help. With these resources, people can overcome all the pressures placed on them as athletes and succeed academically and athletically. However, fulfilling high academic standards benefits student-athletes in their future careers by preparing them for the academic challenges after their career in sports is over (Gard, 2017).
**3A. List a third objection opponents might make to your thesis’ claim:**
The third argument might be that children who are academically less capable but have raw talent in athletics may not advance to the next level to continue with sports and further their education at the same time.
**3B. List key research or logic they might use to back up their objection:**
· Critics might argue that athletic ability should be prioritized over academic performance, especially for students who may not excel academically but have significant potential in sports (Curs et al., 2023).
· Talented athletes from disadvantaged backgrounds may lack the academic resources needed to meet stricter eligibility requirements, which could further limit their access to sports scholarships (Day Madison et al., 2015).
**3C. Explain how you would respond to the opposition’s third claim, making sure to list research to support each of your points:**
**Point of Concession:**
It is true that academically challenged athletes are at a disadvantage in performance due to high academic standards, which can reduce the chances of one being offered a scholarship to pursue the sport.
**Rebuttal:**
Nevertheless, there is a necessity to bring more equity and fairness in the educational setting. Setting higher academic standards entails that all the students in the institution follow specific academic standards, irrespective of the ability a student may display in athletic activities. Further, it enables athletes to have something to fall back on should they retire from the sport, as well as prepare the athletes academically for the future. This is not to remove the athletes but rather enable the athlete to complete his/her education in a balanced manner that caters to success in the future (Gard, 2017).
**References**
Curs, B. R., et al. (2023). The effect of college football bowl game participation on student-athlete academic outcomes and team athletic success. Research in Higher Education, 64(4), 497-519.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09710-x)
Day Madison et al. (2015). Evaluating the Issues of Fairness in College Athletics: A Policy Paper. Retrieved from
[https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf](https://academy.psu.edu/documents/current/policy-proposals/2015/athletics_fairness.pdf)
Gard, A. N. (2017). High school academics: Increasing the standard. Physical Educator, 74(3), 405.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369](http://dx.doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2017-V74-I3-7369)
NCAA. (n.d.). NCAA Eligibility Requirements for Student-Athletes. Retrieved from
[https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements](https://www.ncsasports.org/ncaa-eligibility-center/eligibility-requirements)