Search News


Browse Archives

News

When Independent Study Raises Red Flags

March 18, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

When it comes to the academic clustering of athletes, the question typically is "in what major?" The suggestion: Members of a given sports team are enrolled in a particular program at a much higher rate than are other students at the college. But what about when the question is "with what professor?"

That's the case at the University of Michigan, where officials Monday were responding to an Ann Arbor News article that alleges athletes there have been steered to independent study courses taught by a psychology professor who often requires little of the students and gives them high grades. The investigation found that the professor, John Hagen, taught 294 independent studies for students, 85 percent of them athletes, from the fall of 2004 to the fall of 2007.

Michigan doesn't dispute those numbers, but it refuted the article's description of Hagen as a safety net for athletes who might need a quick grade-point-average jolt. The university also denies that athletics department academic counselors are directing students to Hagen, or that any athlete has been forced to take an independent study course with him.

The Michigan allegations come less than two years after the New York Times published findings that a large number of Auburn University athletes were taking “directed studies” with the same professor and earning significantly higher grades on that work than in regular courses. As a result, Auburn announced new limits on the number of students whose independent study work can be supervised by a single professor.

That the practice of independent study, commonly reserved for students with unique intellectual interests, is at the center of a controversy over special arrangements and academic rigor comes as little surprise to some faculty members. Among them is R. Scott Kretchmar, a professor of exercise and sport science at Pennsylvania State University's main campus and a sports philosopher. He said in a recent meeting with academic support staff at Penn State, independent study emerged as one of several potential red flags.

"It's clearly an area of risk," Kretchmar said. "Any student can go to any faculty member and work out a deal, and there aren't many checks on that. It's one of those slippery areas in higher education that probably deserves a little more scrutiny -- both for athletes and generally speaking."

The content of independent study courses can be met with skepticism, Kretchmar said, because it often doesn't undergo Faculty Senate review as new courses typically do. In many cases, a department chair signs off on the topic.

David Goldfield, a professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and past president of the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association, said that despite the fact that the majority of independent study arrangements would pass an academic merit test, the possibility of impropriety is significant.

"The great advantage of independent study at a public institution is that it gives students an opportunity to work one-on-one with a particular faculty member in a subject area that's of interest to them," said Goldfield, the current faculty athletics representative at Charlotte who has served on the academic eligibility and compliance cabinet of the NCAA. "The most disturbing aspect of [the Michigan case] is that there appears there was no monitoring, and it's mind boggling that nobody picked up on this."

For its part, Michigan says that the psychology department closely monitors independent study, and that two internal investigations have showed no wrongdoing on the part of Hagen or the department. (More on that later.)

Still, Goldfield said based on what he's read, it looks to him like a case of academic advisers feeling the heat to boost athletes' academic standing. When the National Collegiate Athletic Association lowered initial eligibility requirements and raised the stakes for athletes remaining eligible, it placed an increasing strain on institutions -- and in particular academic support staff within athletics departments -- to keep athletes eligible, Goldfield said.

The question, then, is who should set the tone on independent study? While the NCAA has talked recently about taking a closer look at which majors athletes tend to choose, Erik Christianson, an association spokesman, said that it's up to campuses to come up with independent study policies that best fit their institutions.

Kretchmar said such decisions as how many such courses an athlete (or non-athlete) can take, or how many students a professor can take on should be handled internally.

"I worry about the NCAA regulating it, because we aren't all cut out of the same mold," he said. "Clearly, each institution should be vigilant about keeping statistics on number of students in a major, number of students taking a course from a professor and grading differences.

"Our general philosophy is we don't want to be draconian in prohibiting athletes from taking independent study, but we don't want to be stupid about ignoring particular problems."

Goldfield agreed that the NCAA "can't micromanage academic integrity" and that its role is to "set a standard and hope universities live up to it." Faculty athletics representatives have the responsibility to monitor statistics on who's choosing what major, Goldfield said.

The Ann Arbor News continued its series Monday with a look at the rise in general studies majors among Michigan athletes. Critics of clustering say that athletes are funneled year after year into programs that are seen as less rigorous. Others argue that if a major isn't up to university standards, it's not the athletes or academic advisers who should be faulted -- it's the committee that approved the program.

Goldfield said he has never asked his department about the number of independent studies athletes are taking. "I believe in the integrity of the athletic-academic support center," he said.

Fallout at Michigan

In his experience running independent studies, Goldstein said there's "no way to provide any semblance of academic rigor" by directing as many students as Hagen did over several years. There's simply not enough time and energy to go around, he said.

Others quoted in the News article make similar points. They say that athletes have signed up for several of Hagen's independent studies knowing that they'll have to put in minimal effort -- earning three or four credits for meeting with him as little as 15 minutes every two weeks, the investigation found. An analysis of transcripts also showed that athletes performed better in his classes than they did in other classes.

Hagen issued a statement defending his academic record and said in an e-mail Monday that he takes issue with some of the data cited in the News article. He said that students in his courses do demanding work.

A FAQ response posted on the university's Web site says that faculty such as Hagen make themselves readily available to students. "The independent study model is very flexible," it says. Hagen scores high in accessibility and time spent with students in student evaluations, Michigan added.

Percy Bates, Michigan’s faculty athletics representative and a professor of education, said “it’s clear to me that the monitoring that we do is pretty adequate, even around the issue of independent studies. We make sure that what people are doing is legitimate work for students, and these aren’t professors who are willy-nillying.

"Given all that's out there, that doesn't mean we won't take another look at what we're doing," Bates added.

Two summers ago, after the Auburn case became public, Michigan's provost office asked deans in each undergraduate college to look into how independent studies courses are vetted. A professor in the psychology department has since raised concern with Hagen's arrangement.

Two subsequent reviews -- one by his department's executive committee and another by the College of Literature, Science and the Arts -- found Hagen clear of wrongdoing, saying that the courses are academically rigorous and that the professor's grading patterns caused no concern. The latter report concluded “not only that there is nothing about Professor Hagen’s independent study program that should concern us, but that in fact he is performing a valuable service for the students in those studies and to the university by having them available.”

But are enough non-athletes getting that experience? Michigan says that the ratio of athletes to other students in Hagen's independent study courses is often 2:1 in a given semester. University research shows that other psychology professors have a proportion of athletes to students that ranges from 0 to 60 percent.

Phil Hanlon, vice president for academic and budgetary affairs at Michigan, said Hagen's focus on developmental psychology -- and in particular student learning and teaching style -- attracts many athletes who are interested in becoming coaches or teachers. According to Michigan's FAQ explanation: "Much of Professor Hagen’s scholarly work addresses learning styles and skills among college students who excel in physical attributes and performance."

Word of mouth, Hanlon said, is another reason to explain the high number of athletes in his independent study courses.

The university's FAQ explanation also says that "in a recent term, more than 20 students with identified learning problems or disabilities took Independent Study with Professor Hagen because his expertise and interest in working with students in this area is well known."

Hanlon said because the university doesn't disaggregate students by disability status, he couldn't say whether more athletes had learning disabilities than students over all at the institution. “I have no reason to think there’s any kind of connection,” he said.

Bates, the faculty athletic representative, said he didn't find the number of athletes in Hagen's courses alarming. "What he was doing was focusing on a number of athletes who might be labeled at-risk and with learning problems." Bates said he's unsure if they are athletes with documented disabilities or not, but that many students heard from past students that Hagen had a record of helping students with different learning styles.

"I can't think of a professor who’s been more concerned with at-risk students than Hagen has over his time here," Bates said.

According to Michigan, in academic year 2006–7, nearly 4,000 undergraduate students enrolled in one or more independent study course. This year, Michigan has 716 athletes, but the university said it couldn't immediately provide data on how many athletes took independent studies courses.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on When Independent Study Raises Red Flags

  • Posted by George on March 18, 2008 at 7:05am EDT
  • Where are all the Jim Harbaugh bashers now?

  • Fourth and long
  • Posted by Abbott Katz on March 18, 2008 at 9:15am EDT
  • If the NCAA shouldn't micromanage, and the university isn't managing, then what? Punt?

  • Hats off to Professor Hagen
  • Posted by Louis A Reibling , Retired VP-Instruction at Schoolcraft College on March 18, 2008 at 10:20am EDT
  • Observing 40 years in academia, I note that most faculty will not accept an independent course. Their rationale includes such statements that it is too time consuming, requires additional office hours and does not compensate financially.

    I applaud those faculty who accept these courses for students with day to day instructional problems, at risk students and general academic challenges.

    By the way, Michigan with 40,000 students and only 4000 taking independent courses tells me there are very few faculty accepting independent courses.

  • Just More Evidence
  • Posted by Higher Ed Diogenes on March 18, 2008 at 12:05pm EDT
  • The pressure to keep athletes eligible academically has for years involved academic fraud and will continue to do so. There is no reasonable way to police what goes on in the classroom. Institutions may have a rigorous process for approving academic programs, but now many ever check to see if the syllabus is being followed? Most wouldn't dare.

    The only way for institutions to be involved in bigtime athletics and maintain their academic integrity is to give athletes four years of eligibility and and let them be students if they can qualify and want to be serious about their studies.

    The majority of the general public doesn't care about the student/athlete philosophy--they care about winning. There might be a little pain in coming clean, but in the long run it would be worth it. We would at least get rid of the hypocritical cancer infecting most institutions. The University of Michigan is not in the minority.

    Higher Ed Diogenes

  • A bit more in defense of independent study . . .
  • Posted by independent study instructor at flagship university on March 18, 2008 at 12:55pm EDT
  • Like any other form of education, independent study courses can be useless. But my own experiences as an instructor of several independent study courses have opened my eyes. My i.s. students learn much more, on average, than my regular students. Why? They have to do *everything* in writing. By the time they finish the course, they've written about ten times more than they would have in a normal classroom setting.

    As for i.s. courses not being "monitored," I echo some of the comments above. Are college classes *ever* really monitored?

  • University monitoring
  • Posted by David , prof. emeritus at USC on March 18, 2008 at 5:05pm EDT
  • As a past faculty member of the Athletic Academic Oversight Committe at the Univ. of Southern Calif. (with its major athletic program), I can say that we would have been all over this situatiion had it occured there. We would have been talking to the Athletic Director, athletic counselors, the chair of the Psych Dept., the professor. Routine monitoring is good, but investigating incidents is essential for the good and ultimate reputation of the university. Michigan should not rely on P.R. announcements to cover over its obvious problem here.

  • Why are we surprised
  • Posted by Drbob8 , Angry Psychologist on March 18, 2008 at 6:45pm EDT
  • Athletics is a big "money maker" and attracts many students to a particular educational institution. How else can you explain coaches making millions of dollars a year at "serious" athletic institutions. We, as a nation are more concerned that our university have a excellent athletic team than we are about having excellence in education. I don't know why this should be considered news. It's college athletics, which has been corrupt for many years.

  • Red Flag Study
  • Posted by shane corn , observer on March 19, 2008 at 5:20am EDT
  • I find it to be very interesting that the piece mentioned Auburn University. I've researched the issue from that standpoint. Much to my chagrin, I now completely understand where the battle lines are drawn between the athlete and the academics.
    College football is "big business". The educational side has become meerly an obsticle to get around in order to put the best players on the field. I have no doubt that half the athletes who are cleared as eligible are "greased" through the system. By the way, the fat lady has already sung in this case. There is simply no way to rein in this runaway beast.

  • Hypocrisy and greed dominate college athletics
  • Posted by Frank G. Splitt , Member at The Drake Group on March 20, 2008 at 2:50pm EDT
  • Hypocrisy and greed know no bounds in college athletics; it's a modern-day form of legalized corruption. As Robert Maynard Hutchins, the fifth president of the University of Chicago, said “they all cheat.”

    The NCAA and University of Michigan (UM) spinmeisters are earning their keep this week, thanks to Jim Carty and his colleagues at the Ann Arbor News. Their investigative project on potential academic improprieties/compromises involving UM athletes resulted in a four-day series; see "ACADEMICS AND ATHLETICS” at mlive.com/wolverines/academics.

    Who would be surprised if a deeper investigation showed that the distinguished Mary Sue Coleman, UM President and Knight Foundation Trustee, and Andrea Fischer Newman, UM Regent and member of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, not only serve as the foxes guarding UM's henhouse of big money accrued by its college sports entertainment business, but also contributed to the co-option of the watchdog mission of the Knight Commission by the NCAA?

    The Indy Star's Mark Alesia added to the spinmeister's workload with his March 17, piece headlined "Some question NCAA's ticket-market ties" that was picked up by USA TODAY with Mike McCarthy's March 19 front-page story "NCAA cashes in on Final Four ticket resale." Alesia's article can be found at http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/articleAID=/20080317/SPORTS/803170365/1247/SPORTS and McCarthy's at http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2008-03-18-final-four-tickets_N.htm

    The cash registers at the NCAA and its member institutions will continue ringing up ill-gotten gains and college athletics will continue to preempt academics so long as the federal government continues to look the other way—avoiding a follow-up on the investigative work of the 109th Congress (Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and House Committee on Ways & Means Chairman Bill Thomas).

  • Hagen and Independent Study
  • Posted by Tom , Dickson Centennial Professor of Classics at University of Texas at Austin on January 4, 2009 at 9:20pm EST
  • According to the data, Hagen taught 294 students in independent study over 7 semesters. That is 42 independent study students per semester. 85% were athletes (250 students; 36 per semester).

    the real question here is not why so many athlete students were in these courses, but why so few regular students were. When I was an undergraduate, I chose an ethics/philosophy course just to satisfy a requirement. It was the only course in 4 years I chose because of its time slot. It turned out to be an easy-A course. I believe there were only two other non-athletes in the course. It was a farce. We read, literally read page from, two books for a semester and wrote one final paper. I have no doubt that many of the athletes in there found reading two books of philosophy hard going. Keep my experience in mind as you read on here.

    The report from The University of Michigan Dean of Undergraduate Education (http://www.vpcomm.umich.edu/pa/key/pdf/Hagen_report_080501.pdf) is full of fuzzy statistics and irrelevant factoids.
    (1) of five courses in question two are said to be regular courses, though one of these was a regular course version of an independent study course. The dean does not, however, clarify how many of these students in question were enrolled in the two regular courses.

    (2) He then says that in Winter 2007, 29 of said students responded to a course evaluation questionnaire. We are not told out of how many who were enrolled that semester. But if it was an average semester, 13 would be missing. Of those 29, we are told that 20 of 29 said the course load was moderate to heavy, 9 said it was light. That then we are told settles the matter. The course load was reasonable.

    There are two problems here.

    A. If the 9 saying the course load was light were the 6 non-athlete students and the other 3 were serious athlete students, then they would be the true arbiters of the course load. (As I was in my one and only accidental 'gut course'.) If the 20 who said the course load was moderate to heavy were all athlete students without good academic skills and used to being directed to courses, then their testimony would have little merit.

    The principle here is that a football defensive tackle used to lifting weights might find lifting 100 pounds light work, a breeze. But an old professor like myself would find it more than moderately heavy.

    B. If I were trying to beat the system as an adviser to athlete students by herding them into known easy classes, I would also stress to them how they should rate the courses.

    Hagen, we are told, also received high marks for availability outside of class. This also is taken as proof of rigor.

    In my experience as a professor, if twenty students in a class of seventy try to see me during office hours or before or after class 2-3 times during a semester and I am there, word will get around and I will get the same kind of superior ratings for availability that Hagen gets.

    Availability, too, is a relative term and just means that a professor was there when a student wanted to see her. There is no check as to how many times a student actually did want to see her. Hagen could get these superior numbers seeing all of the 29 students who did the survey 3 or 4 times for 10 minutes. Is this proof of that the courses he teaches are legitimate?

    The same applies to learning a great deal and being able to apply it. High marks here are relative, too. I had a colleague who got perfect scores on such questions in his graduate course evaluations. Our department was given 'grade-inflation' statistics, and another colleague pointed out that in his many years at my institution said professor never gave any student a grade less than A.

    The paragraph that ends page 2 and the first paragraph that begins on page 3 are full of gobbledygook. We are told that grades in these courses are 1/6th of a grade scale higher than the department average. We are then told not what the department average grade is, nor what the actual GPA was in these courses, but that the transcripts of students taking these kinds of courses in Psychology are full of A's and B's. Why not just give the average grade in these courses on a 4-point scale? If it is a 3.5 (as the A-and-B-filled transcripts might suggest), then say that the GPA in Hagen's courses is 3.66.

    The only reason not to give such easily determined hard stats is in order to obfuscate.

    The rest of the so-called exoneration of Hagen continues in the same spirit.

    At my university (a big state university comparable to U Michigan in academics and athletics) Psychology is the 6th largest undergraduate major. It does not go without notice that at beauty pageants, the top competitors declare they are majoring in Education, Communication, or Psychology.

    The average undergraduate GPA for all students in all courses at my university is a disgraceful 3.12.

    The trouble these days is that students have to work hard at failing. This is one of the problems of American higher education.

    The balderdash the U Michigan dean presented does not allay legitimate suspicions that taking on 42 students in independent study classes, 36 of them athletes, is both smoke and fire. In the rare cases that I do independent studies, I expect students to see me at least two hours per week, and even then I do this only with the most exceptional students, because I know 2 hours outside of class is not 3 hours in class. If Hagen did this in order to make his course legitimate he would be seeing students 84 hours per week. Incredible! Or he would be herding them together in groups to reduce those hours.

    This is deeply suspicious. And University of Michigan should be embarrassed by its dean's report.