NISR:  Could you tell us a little bit about your background? I know that you have been in academia most of your life, but could you give us a feel for your training and what your interests have been in higher education? 

ERICSON:  When I was discharged from the army, I had no idea what I wanted to be or do, but I did know I wanted to go to college. I continued until I ran out of degrees. It was a path that led me to become a college professor.

NISR:  When did you start focusing on issues of sports reform and academic corruption? Was there an event or events that prompted you to become involved in this area?

ERICSON:  Not unlike many universities in the early 1980s, financial difficulties caused Drake University to create a faculty committee to review all programs in the university. As a member of the committee, I saw academic records of athletes that challenged the most generous definition of "higher" education. That was my introduction to what goes on behind the closed door of the university.

NISR:  Were there things right on your campus at Drake that prompted you to become more involved in the issues surrounding academic corruption?

ERICSON:  One of the Committee's recommendations was to terminate the Division I football program. As expected, the recommendation met strong opposition, and the subsequent fight was my initial involvement in the role of athletics in the university.

NISR:  How do you feel about the vast academic support systems that have been created specifically for athletes on many campuses?

ERICSON:  Academic support programs for athletes and the buildings built to house them are testament to the fact that many athletes are not prepared for higher education. Students who participate in sports should receive the same academic support available to all students. Separate academic support for athletes leads to a focus on short-term eligibility rather than on long-term academic success.

NISR:  A great deal has been made lately of "jock" majors - that is, the "hidden" and watered down curriculum that many athletes take just to stay eligible in colleges and universities. Doesn't the faculty bear much of the responsibility for this? How did this develop and how can we rid ourselves of it in our institutions of higher learning?

ERICSON:  "Hidden" is the key term.  As long as universities are secret societies, rumor and gossip about jock majors serve only to caste negative implications on athletes. Disclosing the courses and professors taken by the athletes will shift attention from the athletes and place it where it belongs: on the faculty who teach these courses and on the administrators who approve of the practice.

NISR:  You started an organization called the Drake Group. Could you tell us a little bit about it and its mission and goals?

ERICSON:  The Drake Group was created by and is open to those who are fed up with the academic corruption in college sports and are willing to work to end it. In other words, the goal is to restore academic integrity in college sports.

NISR:  College faculty, the group you are trying to organize, are often a pretty apathetic and poorly organized constituency. Is this a problem for solving issues surrounding academic corruption? If you could get across one point to them, what would it be?

ERICSON:  Faculty are the guardians of the curriculum, and coaches and athletics directors are quick to reply to any allegation of academic impropriety in athletics that the faculty establish the academic programs. True, and the impropriety will continue until what goes on in secret is subject to public accountability.

NISR:  You have been very vocal in the past about something called the Buckley Amendment. Could you explain this for us? Why is it so important to the mission of the Drake Group and the larger issues of sports reform?

ERICSON:  In 1974, Congress passed the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act commonly known as the Buckley amendment.  The law provides students with the right to inspect and review their educational records, and it prohibits the release of educational records without the permission of the student.  Written in haste, enacted without consideration by any congressional committee, the law has been subject to numerous amendments [for greater disclosure such as the Campus Security Act] in an effort to balance the rights of the student with the public's right to know.  Because the Department of Education has failed to make careful distinctions between "directory information" and  "educational record," the amendment is the shield behind which the closed society of higher education hides the academic corruption in college sports.

NISR:  There are some big time colleges that apparently do things the right way. For example, Stanford comes to mind. Why canÕt we all be like Stanford with successful athletic programs going hand in hand with excellent academics? Or, is this a myth tooÉis Stanford as bad as everyone?

ERICSON: Until we have public accountability, claims that any university is "doing it right" are exercises in self-promotion.

NISR:  College presidents, faculty, trustees, the NCAA, and the athletic establishment (ADs, coaches) are probably all culpable when it comes to academic corruption. However, do you put the blame on any one element more than others?  If so, why?

ERICSON:  Assigning blame should follow telling the truth. Again, make public the courses with names of the professors and the course GPA taken by athletes and we will take the first step in determining who is culpable.

NISR:  What tangible accomplishments have emerged from the Drake Group?  Tell us about some of the things that the group has done to push for sports reform in our colleges and universities.

ERICSON:  The Drake Group has provided support for faculty who have spoken out against academic impropriety. Gardner-Webb University is a recent example. At our annual meeting on March 29, we will set a course of action to work with other groups who are addressing the problems in college sports, and to work with faculty senates to adopt our plan to restore academic integrity in athletics.

NISR:  You were a part of the recent Knight Commission hearings on intercollegiate sports. Do you support their recommendations or do you feel that they do not go far enough?

ERICSON:  Their recommendations were a great disappointment. Then again, the commission was doomed from the start: A majority of the members were university presidents or former presidents.

NISR:  There is talk that a coalition will form between faculty senates and governing boards of trustees. The purpose of the coalition will be to push a college reform agenda. Do you think that this is a good thing? Do you think that this will produce some significant reforms?

ERICSON:  The formation of the coalition is an encouraging sign, and as I mentioned, the Drake Group looks forward to working with the coalition members. All of us are aware that the reform of college sports is a history of failed reform, so the chance for success will depend on whether efforts repeat the tinkering of the past or provide a plan that faces the problem.

NISR:  Do you think that the NCAA will actively push for reforms or do you think instead that it is pretty much a lost cause? In other words, do you think that true reform, especially as it relates to academic corruption, is going to have to come from outside sports governing bodies?

ERICSON:  Problem-solving begins with telling the truth. No solution will be successful until we expose the corruption in a way that it can no longer be denied, explained away, or rationalized. If public accountability is good for Enron and the Catholic church, it is good for the university.

NISR:  The buzz word now is pay for play at the college level. What do you think of this? Are you for it or against it?

ERICSON:  It depends on what is meant by pay. Paying the athlete will mean greater control over the athlete. Greater control over the athlete is exactly the opposite of what the athlete needs. Also, paying the athlete will do nothing to address the academic corruption in college sports.

NISR:  What would you say to a kid who is on an athletic scholarship but really doesn't want to be in college? He is there because he wants to go to the NBA or NFL someday and he knows that going to college is really the only way to do it. Can you blame this kid if he doesn't want to go to classes and could care less about getting an education?

ERICSON:  No, I do not blame the young person nor do I blame athletes for the academic corruption in college sports. If universities require an interest in education or at least academic preparation for higher education, then those who lack the interest or preparation should go directly to athletic programs where they can devote all of their time and energy to achieve their goal.

NISR:  If you were advising Lebron James, the high school phenom basketball player who is likely to be the No. 1 NBA draft pick, would you tell him to go to school first and get his college degree? Just what would you tell himÉwhat would you advise him to do?

ERICSON:  If Mr. James has the talent and preparation to enter the profession of his choosing, he should be free to do so. 

NISR:  Thank you Professor Ericson for your candor in answering our questions.