International Student Athletes in the NCAA: Professionals or Exploited Children?
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I. INTRODUCTION II. FOREIGN STUDENTS IN AMERICAN HIGHER EDUCATION A. History of Foreign Students in American Colleges and Universities B. Current Economics and Distribution of Foreign Students C. Interests of the American People in Retaining Foreign Students D. Burdens that Foreign Student Athletes Face in America III. DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTAL SPORTS MODELS A. The European Union Model B. The American Model IV. National Collegiate Athletics Association RULES AND STANDARDS A. Eligibility Requirements V. SIGNIFICANT ISSUES WITH NCAA AMATEUR ATHLETICS A. Loopholes B. Anti-Trust Issues VI. PRACTICAL AND IMPRACTICAL SOLUTIONS A. Plausible Solution for International Student Athletes B. Implausible Total Change VII. EPILOGUE I. INTRODUCTION Why can't eighteen-year-old Turkish basketball player Kanter go to the University of Kentucky? An investigation by the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) determined that Kanter received benefits beyond those required for actual competition from his club team in Turkey. Enes took advantage of an opportunity to play at the highest level available to him, but the consequences of receiving payments above his actual expenses is not compatible with the collegiate model of sports that our members have developed, said Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president of academic and membership affairs. (1) Kanter is a recent example of the result of intermingling two systems of developmental athletics. (2) He was attempting to make the transition from the governmental and club model for developmental sports in Turkey (3) to the scholastic model in America, where athletic teams are tied to education. The underlying principles of amateurism promoted by the NCAA are directly at odds with the culture both ideologically and governmentally of that which Kanter was accustomed to. (4) The developmental athletics institutions in Turkey are built on a club and governmental model rather than a scholastic model. (5) The result of the NCAA investigation into his amateur status determined that he received approximately thirty-three thousand dollars above his actual expenses not directly required for competition. (6) Included in these expenses were housing and travel provided to his family members. (7) If Kanter's situation had been slightly different and he was born into the scholastic model for developmental athletics in the United States, his eligibility would not be in question. If Kanter had been born in America, he could have attended a private school on a scholarship that would have provided him with full-time room and board, and the NCAA would consider these expenses to be directly related to competition. (8) American-born amateur athletes and their parents have always found ways to fit in with the NCAA system and its rules that limit them from taking advantage of the opportunities presented by a packed stadium. If had been born in the United States, his parents could have taken a high interest loan leveraged against their son's potential future income and current marketability as a blue chip recruit. (9) For American-born students, the NCAA provides some exceptional multisport athletes with another alternative where they get paid and are still able to attend a NCAA university by getting paid in another sport. (10) If Kanter had played professional soccer, the most popular sport in Turkey, he could still be eligible to play basketball at Kentucky. (11) By way of example, college football is currently rich in former minor league baseball players following in the footsteps of former Heisman trophy winner Chris Weinke from Florida State University. (12) Chris Weinke played in the Toronto Blue Jays farm system. (13) After six years playing professional baseball, Weinke switched gears and went to play football at Florida State University. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle