Friday, June 8, 2012

mo money, mo problems

Last week, Justin Combs was awarded a full scholarship to be a student athlete at the University of California, Los Angeles. Justin will play defensive back for UCLA's football team next year, and presumably the three (or four) years after that. By all accounts, he is a good student, a standout athlete, and has earned his scholarship. Justin's accomplishment is typical fodder for a local news outlet, but would be unremarkable on a national scale.

However, Justin Combs happens to be the son of recording artist and producer Sean "Diddy" Combs, indicating that he is hardly in need of the $54,000 UCLA is providing him next year to cover the cost of his education. This has drawn the attention of the national media and raised the ire of many who feel that Combs should refuse his scholarship because of his family's financial wealth.

Of course, this argument is lunacy and it is grossly unjust to single out Justin Combs. He has every right to accept the scholarship and be proud of it as any other future NCAA student athlete. However, Combs story does offer us an avenue through which we can engage in a meaningful conversation regarding the role of athletic recruiting in the college admission and financial aid processes.

As more institutions shift student aid priorities towards need-based programs, does it make sense for athletic scholarships to exist, preserving both the best and worst of the merit-aid system? Recruited student athletes receive consideration as such in the college admission process, and rightly so. A student like Justin Combs offers a rare, exceptional talent to the college or university he attends, and that should matter to an admission officer reviewing an application, or an admission committee voting on a decision.

Athletic aptitude may help some students merit admission, just as may standardized test scores, distinguished academic achievement and other extracurricular accomplishments. In the game of merit, isn't admission to an outstanding school such as UCLA enough? Would the resources devoted to athletic scholarships, as well as academic scholarships, not be better served redirected as need-based aid?* Certainly many athletes would still receive aid, but so too would many other students who currently do not enjoy financial aid packages to cover the substantial costs of their educations.

*Harvard and Princeton may likely end up with the best two football teams in the country, but still...

I supposed last summer that student athletes should be given an option regarding scholarship money - to receive the funds as a scholarship or to receive the money as payment for athletic service. That is an outside-the-box notion, as is this. I recognize that both are flawed plans, but I also know that both initiate thoughts of reform for systems that begs for it in so many ways.

Justin Combs should not be singled out - to do so is too small-minded. We need to think big and offer up big ideas, take a high-minded approach to athletic funding and financial aid processes, and find solutions that help more students, rather than chastise a young man who should be congratulated for his accomplishments.

No comments: