College Athletes Must be Held to the Same Standards as Full-Time Studen

patronage a tendency for entrys to be lenient with college athletes, as they enjoy the benefits of full-time-student status, they moldiness be held to the same standards as non-athlete students. Every institution has an obligation to adjust attendance rules students who attend these institutions stupefy an obligation to abide by them, however, in actuality, professors chose whether or non theyre enforced. This may cause significant problems in the midst of other students targeting a player, rather than who is responsible, the Professor. Although institutions want their students equally treated, diversity is nearly accepted. Existence as a college athlete contributes to diversity as puff up as a substantial amount of favoritism. Issues arise pertaining to how one may view an institution as well as the institution itself, repayable to an athletes gift. Though athletics contribute to a go down in anxiety and stress, in some cases, facts show otherwise. Furthermore, every inst itution has a set of rules pertaining to attendance policies, that every student, including athletes need to follow.Most institutions fox similar attendance polices. Their policies include attending regular classes on time, to the full comprehending the syllabus for every class, prompt notice to instructor regarding absences due to controversy and/or travel, once a certain amount of days have been missed the student is dropped, and failure to properly communicate with instructor may result in a failing grade. Policies have acknowledged the student-athlete is fully responsible for communicating with their professors regarding their attendance. They have also acknowledged students are not entitled to a certain number of absences. Most importantly, policies have give tongue to the importance of in... ...Q Educause Quarterly.NDP. Web. 28 November 2011. Educause Quarterly Magazine, Volume 30, Number 2. 2007.www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Quarterly/EDUCAUSEQuarterlyMagazineVolum/clickeri ntheclassroomanactive/157458Pros, Cons on pay for play yahoo. USA Today. 31 August 2004. Web. 25 November 2014. www.usatoday.com/sports/2004-08-31-pros-cons-pay_x.htmTaylor, Donald L. A Comparison Of College Athletic Participants And Nonparticipants Of Self-Esteem. Journal Of College student Development 36.5 (1995) 444-51. ERIC. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.Student Athlete Class Attendance Policy JEFFCO. Viking Intercollegiate Athletics. 14 October 2011. Web. 25 November 2014. Jefferson College Policy.www.jeffco.edu.edu/athletics/inex.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=287&Itemid=256Worsnop, Richard L. College Sports. CQ Researcher 26 Aug. 1994 745-68. Web. 12 Dec. 2014.