intercollegiate athletics – Andrew Careaga

Academic bracketology

March Madness is upon us, and college sports fans everywhere are busy filling out their brackets for the NCAA Division I men’s and women’s basketball tournaments, trying to predict which teams will make it to the Final Four. Serious bracketologists study each team’s overall win-loss record, strength of schedule, tournament match-up, the predictions of experts/media personalities like Dick Vitale and other data in an attempt to divine the ultimate winners.

If the teams in the Big Dance were judged solely on academic performance, it would be much easier to pick a Final Four. That’s what Ben Miller has done in a recent post over at The Quick and the Ed. Miller is a policy analyst for the think tank Education Sector and writes frequently for ES’s The Quick and the Ed blog.

According to Miller’s analysis, the academic Final Four, based on a rolling calculation of players’ graduation rates, would be Kansas, Butler, Villanova and Wofford. “The championship game would then feature Butler vs. Wofford, with the former prevailing thanks to a graduation rate of 89 percent vs. the latter’s 83 percent mark.”

With the assistance of Education Sector’s Abdul Kargbo, Miller filled out his bracket based on the federal graduation rates of each team.

Miller’s post has some other interesting insights into the state of college athletics in terms of graduation rates by race and overall. It is not a pretty picture. “Some schools are failing their athletes regardless of race. Maryland and Houston’s first round matchup has the distinction of being the worst academic pairing in the tournament, as the two have basketball graduation rates of 9 percent and 13 percent, respectively.”

Logo wars: Wisconsin vs. Washburn

The Chronicle of Higher Education’s news blog reports that the University of Wisconsin is suing Washburn University (in Topeka, Kan.) for trademark infringement over Washburn’s use of a “W” logo that looks similar — in shape, if not in color — to Wisconsin’s “motion W” logo. The logos are part of the schools’ athletic programs.

The logos do look similar, except that Wisconsin’s is red and Washburn’s blue.

UMR used to compete against Washburn, a Division II school (like us), when we were part of the Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Association. I doubt Washburn (team name: the Ichabods) or Wisconsin (the Badgers) would ever compete in athletics, and probably not for students much, either. But maybe they should settle this dispute with a special bowl game or something. Or maybe, as one commenter on the Chronicle blog put it, “Why would anyone be fighting over a ‘W’ Hasn’t this country had enough of that?”

Rock-bottom font, Jayhawk?

The University of Kansas‘ recent decision to incorporate new typography into its athletics uniforms is not sitting well with at least one student.

Bradley Lewis does not like the Trajan font KU has adopted as part of its visual identity, and has taken to the web in protest.

Lewis’ website, Trajan Sucks, laments the demise of the “curling, arc-serifed typeface” that for decades has “emblazoned the uniforms of our beloved University of Kansas basketball players as they earned conference championships, final four appearances, and even a national championship.” He complains about how university officials are “[e]schewing this rich tradition in favor of an ill-conceived (and expensive) attempt to standardize the KU brand.” The new typography cuts a “lackluster profile” for his beloved Jayhawks. Oh, and he’s selling “Trajan Sucks” T-shirts, too, in the old font. $10 each, plus shipping.

About 15 or so fellow Jayhawk fans have expressed their opinions on the site, too.

As for me, I’m fine with the Trajan font. But I’m no Jayhawks fan, either.

Hat tip: Church of the Customer, which linked to this Brains on Fire link.

Things I love: about higher ed

Continuing on the things I love theme I began earlier this week.

Things I love about higher education

I’ve been doing PR and marketing work in the higher ed world for 16-plus years now. And while some days I seem to find more to dislike than love about this vocation, there is still much — so much — to love about higher education. Here are a few of my favorite things.

The architecture. Some of the most innovative architectural designs can be found on college campuses.

The sense of community. Colleges and universities are like microcosmic cities, each with their own infrastructure, police forces, governing structures, and inhabitants. People actually live on a college campus. That doesn’t happen with a business. Regardless of the degree of integration, centralization or decentralization, every college campus has an identity that its inhabitants share, and that fosters a cohesive sense of community that you just don’t get in most other organizations.

The faculty. I love to sit down with a faculty member over a cup of coffee and just talk about what it is he or she does, what motivated him or her to choose this profession. I don’t do this often enough.

The students. I love getting to know the students who work in our office. I love working with the student journalists who hassle me for information at inconvenient times and at the last minute (tight deadlines, you know). I love working with students who are building Formula-style race cars from scratch or initiating change through student government or some other organization or conducting research or just learning and growing as a person. I also love to talk to students about their musical interests (and mine).

The Chronicle of Higher Education. I would never have read this publication had I not gotten into this field.

CASE. I’ve met a lot of good friends through my involvement with the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, otherwise known as CASE. I’ve been fortunate to work with some dedicated, creative and fun people both at the international level and in our local District VI.

“Selling” the higher ed enterprise. In crass business terms, PR and marketing people are supposed to promote the benefits of their “product” to consumers. Of all the things to “pitch” to the public, few are as meaningful and provide the social and cultural benefits as higher education. I can’t imagine doing PR for some consumer product, when I can be promoting the enterprise that is the solution to many of society’s problems.

Intercollegiate athletics. Regardless of whether I was in this business, chances are great I’d still be a big fan of NCAA Division I college basketball and the annual ritual of watching March Madness. But here at a Division II school, where athletics isn’t a huge revenue-generating machine, it’s nice to take in a football game in the fall in an uncrowded stadium and know that the players are there to learn about teamwork and leadership and will forge friendships that will last beyond their playing years.

The people. Cliche, I know. But think about all the interesting people on your campus: not just the wacky graphic designers in your shop or the uber-geek code jockeys developing the back-end of your website, or even the eccentric professors. Think about the amazing diversity of people who work and study on your campus. There’s a lot of people to love.

Shared governance. I love the idea of shared governance — even when I’m impatient with how this approach slows things down to a near-glacial pace. At its best, shared governance is democracy in action. At its worst, though, it’s gridlock. Still, it beats autocratic rule.

What about you? What do you love about higher ed?