About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

25 J. Legal Aspects Sport 75 (2015)
NCAA Academic Fraud Cases and Historical Consistency: A Comparative Content Analysis

handle is hein.journals/jlas25 and id is 72 raw text is: Journal of Legal Aspects of Sport, 2015, 25, 75-103 http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/las.2014-0021 Human Kinetics .N @ 2015 Sport and Recreation Law Association ORIGINAL RESEARCH NCAA Academic Fraud Cases and Historical Consistency: A Comparative Content Analysis Bradley David Ridpath, Gerald Gurney, and Eric Snyder Academic fraud violations in NCAA Division I sports are considered to be major violations if institutional staff members knowingly are involved in providing fraudulent academic credit for athletes (NCAA, 2014). The purpose of this study is to perform a comparative content analysis of NCAA D-I football and men's basketball academic fraud cases since 1990 using similar sources as the NCAA in gathering information for investigations. The researchers focus on violations of Bylaw 10.1 (b) and compare with similar academic fraud allegations not documented within the NCAA's Legislative Services Database (LSDBi). Find- ings indicate the most common forms of academic fraud include providing exam answers and/or writing assignments for athletes. Inconsistencies exist regarding the following: disassociation periods for individuals, accrediting letters, institutional probation, informing future athletes of sanctions, and paying of fines. As such, it can be inferred that the NCAA may use Fletcher's Theory of Situational Ethics in its decision making. Intercollegiate athletics has a unique place in American history (Crowley, 2006.; Falla, 1983). Oftentimes, the spectacle of commercialized college sports along with the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and its member institutions, have been accused of overwhelming the university and diverting its mission of academic primacy (Sack, 2008; Splitt, 2002). The pressure to win games, garner elite prospective athletes, maintain the eligibility and retention of athletes, and generate revenue, ostensibly to benefit the university is frequently used as an impetus to engage in academic fraud and misconduct at the expense of institutional integrity (Marsh, 2014; Ridpath, 2010; Sack, 2008; Sack & Staurowsky, 1998). Outside of athletic pressures, institutional employees and the general public often coincide with the belief that intercollegiate athletics are the front porch of the university and its existence drives enrollment, branding, and more meaningful alumni relations. As a result, athletics are the first attribute of the university that the public often notices or what they are most familiar with concerning a given institu- tion (Nixon, 2014; Pratt, 2013; Ridpath, 2010; Suggs, 2003). Another result is the perceived notion that having an NCAA Division I athletics department will result in economic benefit for the institution. This economic benefit, if it exists, is largely Ridpath (ridpath@ohio.edu) is with the Dept. of Sports Management, Ohio University, Athens, OH. Gurney and Snyder are with the Dept. of Education, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK. 75

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most