I know having a 50% graduation rate is not good for obvious reasons, but doesn't having a 100% grad rate imply that you are (at least to some extent) pushing kids through the system? At what point does supporting a high graduation rate via easier classes, academic support, etc. reduce the academic accomplishment of a college degree.
I'm not saying that Notre Dame is doing this but North Carolina could have claimed that all of their athletes got straight A's in their entirely fictional classes and produced a 100% graduation rate.
On the other hand, lets assume Notre Dame gets 85 Joe Schmidt's who are capable of bringing it on the field and in the classroom. They all graduate with no help and get a 100% graduation rate.
Obviously, these are two ends of the spectrum (and you can generally see the caliber of an ND education in interviews and post football careers) but why do we celebrate a high graduation rate when its not necessarily indicative of anything more than a robust support system and at worst a signal that there is something else going on behind the scenes?
I'm not saying that Notre Dame is doing this but North Carolina could have claimed that all of their athletes got straight A's in their entirely fictional classes and produced a 100% graduation rate.
On the other hand, lets assume Notre Dame gets 85 Joe Schmidt's who are capable of bringing it on the field and in the classroom. They all graduate with no help and get a 100% graduation rate.
Obviously, these are two ends of the spectrum (and you can generally see the caliber of an ND education in interviews and post football careers) but why do we celebrate a high graduation rate when its not necessarily indicative of anything more than a robust support system and at worst a signal that there is something else going on behind the scenes?
