Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Educational Policy Studies Dissertations Department of Educational Policy Studies 10-2-2009 Failing at College Football Reform: The Jan Kemp Trial at the University of Georgia Michael John Fulford Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.edu/eps_diss Part of the Education Commons, and the Education Policy Commons Recommended Citation Fulford, Michael John, "Failing at College Football Reform: The Jan Kemp Trial at the University of Georgia." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2009.edu/eps_diss/47 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Educational Policy Studies at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Educational Policy Studies Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact scholarworks@gsu. ACCEPTANCE This dissertation, FAILING AT COLLEGE FOOTBALL REFORM: THE JAN KEMP TRIAL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA, by MICHAEL JOHN FULFORD, was prepared under the direction of the candidate’s Dissertation Advisory Committee.
It is accepted by the committee members in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in the College of Education, Georgia State University. The Dissertation Advisory Committee and the student’s Department Chair, as representatives of the faculty, certify that this dissertation has met all standards of excellence and scholarship as determined by the faculty. The Dean of the College of Education concurs. Philo Hutcheson, Ph.
Merrily Dunn, Ph. Committee Chair Committee Member Mike Metzler, Ph. Jodi Kaufman, Ph. Committee Member Committee Member Date Sheryl A.
Chair, Department of Educational Policy Studies R. Dean and Distinguished Research Professor College of Education AUTHOR’S STATEMENT By presenting this dissertation as a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the advanced degree from Georgia State University, I agree that the library of Georgia State University shall make it available for inspection and circulation in accordance with its regulations governing materials of this type. I agree that permission to quote, to copy from, or to publish this dissertation may be granted by the professor under whose direction it was written, by the College of Education’s director of graduate studies and research, or by me. Such quoting, copying, or publishing must be solely for scholarly purposes and will not involve potential financial gain.
It is understood that any copying from or publication of this dissertation which involves potential financial gain will not be allowed without my written permission. Michael John Fulford NOTICE TO BORROWERS All dissertations deposited in the Georgia State University library must be used in accordance with the stipulations prescribed by the author in the preceding statement. The author of this dissertation is: Michael John Fulford 1665 Cum Laude Way Lawrenceville, GA 30044 The director of this dissertation is: Dr. Philo Hutcheson Department of Educational Policy Studies College of Education Georgia State University Atlanta, GA 30303-3083 VITA Michael John Fulford ADDRESS: 1665 Cum Laude Way Lawrenceville, GA 30044 EDUCATION: Ph.
2008 Georgia State University Educational Policy Studies M. 1998 The University of Georgia Student Personnel in Higher Education B. 1996 The University of Georgia Accounting PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: 2007-Present Assistant Director of Housing Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 2005-2007 Director of Student Services Lanier Technical College, Oakwood, GA 2001-2005 Community Director Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 1999-2001 Assistant Dean of Students Oglethorpe University, Atlanta, GA 1998-1999 Area Coordinator/Coordinator of Recreational Sports Oglethorpe University, Atlanta, GA PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: 2007-Present Association of College and University Housing Officers 1996-Present Georgia College Personnel Association 1998-Present American College Personnel Association 2004-Present Association for the Study of Higher Education PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLICATIONS: Fulford, M. “Creating and Simple and Comprehensive Assessment Plan for your Organization.” ACUHO-I 2008, Orlando, FL.
“Writing an Effective Resume.” Lanier Technical College. “Understanding the Diversity of our Different Colleges.” Presented at GCPA Conference, Augusta, GA. “Career Evolution: Mapping Your Path to Success.” GCPA Workshop, Atlanta, GA. “Addressing Consumerism in Higher Education through Collaboration Between Faculty and Student Affairs.” Presented at ACPA 2004, Philadelphia, PA.
“Race-Related Campus Crises: A Case Study.” Presented at SACSA 2002, Myrtle Beach, SC. Creating a Set of Assessment Standards to Help Division III Institutions Make the Choice Between Having and Not Having A Football Program. GA Journal for Student Affairs. Georgia: Georgia College Personnel Association.
Keeping Summer Residents Satisfied. ACUHO-I Talking Stick. Association of College University Housing Officers-International. Employers’ Perceptions of Necessary Leadership Skills to Succeed versus Students’ Perceptions.
GA Journal of College Student Affairs. Georgia: Georgia College Personnel Association. ABSTRACT FAILING AT COLLEGE FOOTBALL REFORM: THE JAN KEMP TRIAL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA by Michael J. Fulford Throughout the history of college football, there have been efforts to reform the system and stop improprieties, yet conflict between gaining academic and athletic prowess at colleges remained a central theme.
In the 1980s, the Jan Kemp trial involving the University of Georgia demonstrated this clash between revenue-generating athletics and academic integrity. This historical study is an in-depth analysis of archives, legal documents, interviews, and other textual evidence that demonstrated how the factors surrounding the Jan Kemp case evolved and how key administrators and faculty members reacted to pressure related to academic and athletic conflicts. An analysis of past reform efforts in college football identified presidential control, commercialization of athletics, and corruption of the student-athlete ideal through preferential treatment as the key issues universities must address in relation to their football programs. An analysis of the University of Georgia in relation to these issues showed that pressure to increase revenue from football led to a lack of presidential control over academic-athletic conflicts and allowed preferential treatment of athletes to persist at the expense of academic integrity.
FAILING AT COLLEGE FOOTBALL REFORM: THE JAN KEMP TRIAL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA by Michael J. Fulford A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Policy Studies in the Department of Educational Policy Studies in the College of Education Georgia State University Atlanta, GA 2008 Copyright by Michael J. Fulford 2008 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study has been a major part of my life during the past 7 years and I could not have done it without the support of many people. First and foremost, I have to acknowledge the support of my wife, Jennifer, and my children, Mackenzie and Emerson.
They have helped me endure and reminded me why I am doing this work. Along those lines, I have to thank my mother, Jane Bowen, and my mother and father-in-law, Chris Freidenstein and Fritz Freidenstein. Together, they took care of the kids at various times so I could spend time working and Jennifer could spend time working. They have always been and continue to be a great support network.
I have to thank Philo Hutcheson for his patience and humor throughout this process. Philo has been an inspiration and has helped me see the profession from a variety of different perspectives. I also have to give thanks and credit to Merrily Dunn for serving on my committee and being a tremendous supporter of my dissertation and my career thus far. I have to thank Hue Henry.
Hue is the reason I was able to do this study. He gave me insight into the trial and university that could not be found in books. Hue also allowed me access to his files which served as the foundation for this study. I want to give special thanks to Jan Kemp for allowing me to meet with her and discuss this part of her life.
I want to thank Margie Kemp, Jan’s daughter, for assisting me in gathering information from Jan. Lastly, I want to acknowledge some people who have been a major supporter during this process: Dan Morrison, Artie Travis, Diane Cooper, Mark Wheeler, Jan Wheeler, Diana Fruth, and Andy Altizer for their support of me while I worked on my Ph.D and this project. This has truly been a labor of love and I could not have accomplished it without the help of these people and others. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abbreviation ………………………………………………………………………….
v Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM. 7 The Intent of this Study………………………………………………. 47 Deciding on a purposeful sample of documents and people…………. 47 Interview protocol and questions……………………………………… 49 Analysis of Hue Henry’s legal files…………………………………… 50 The University of Georgia archives…………………………………… 52 Analysis of secondary sources………………………………………… 53 4 ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE…………………………………….
54 Promotion and Tenure………………………………………………… 58 Preferential Admissions of Athletes……………. 62 iii Administrative Exiting of Athletes……………………………………. 70 Other Preferential Treatment of Athletes……………………………… 77 The Events that Led Kemp to Sue. 79 Responses After the Trial……………………………………………… 90 The Faculty’s Response to the Jan Kemp Trial……………………….
93 5 CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS. 103 Commercialization of College Football…. 109 Recommendations for Future Research………………………………. 115 The Challenges of Athletic Reform…………………………………… 117 References ………………………………………………………………………….
129 iv 8 ABBREVIATIONS BoR Board of Regents UGA The University of Georgia NCAA National Collegiate Athletic Association IFA Intercollegiate Football Association IAAUS Intercollegiate Athletic Association of the United States Penn The University of Pennsylvania SMU Southern Methodist University SEC Southeastern Conference FERPA Federal Educational Rights to Privacy Act SAT Scholastic Aptitude Test GPA Grade Point Average v 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION From the beginning, fans and boosters have driven college football and to a point where it exudes a tremendous level of power on college campuses today. The 80,000 screaming fans in a stadium watching 22 young men playing football exemplifies the popularity of this sport. The combination of spectators and money has created a powerful enterprise. In his book, Rammer Jammer Yellow Hammer, Warren St.
John described the love for college football in Alabama like this, “To understand what absolute minority non-fans are in Alabama, consider this: they are outnumbered there by atheists.”1 Football is arguably the most popular and most influential sport in the United States of America (US). In Lawrenceville, GA, about 40 miles from the University of Georgia (UGA), the Board of Regents (BoR) opened a new college, Georgia Gwinnett College. In his proposal to the county commissioners concerning plans for the future of the college, President Daniel Kaufman quipped, “the parking lot of a nearby Wal-Mart Supercenter would be the perfect location for a football field.”2 Kaufman’s statement may be more a prophecy than a joke. Since the first intercollegiate football game between Princeton and Rutgers in 1869, football has become a major component of the perception and culture of college.
Football has been used as a public relations tool to 1 Warren St. John, Rammer Jammer Yellow Hammer (New York: Crown, 2004), pp. A poll done by the Mobile Register showed 90% of the state’s citizens described themselves as college football fans. 2 Young, Camie, “College Planning Future of Campus” Gwinnett Daily Post.
Sunday February 11, 2007, sec. 1 2 increase exposure for colleges and increase revenue in the form of tuition, donations, tickets, and licensing. However, few football programs bring in millions of dollars and there are many others that lose money. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) recognizes different levels of competition, called divisions.
The majority of revenue-producing sports are in what the NCAA calls Division I-A, and within this division, the largest revenue-producing schools play football. In the NCAA’s 2004-2006 study of revenues and expenses at Division I-A institutions, 19 out of the 119 institutions that make up the Football Bowl Subdivision had a positive net revenue during that time period. The average net generated revenues for those surplus programs in 2006 was $4,291,000, while the average net deficit for the remaining (deficit) programs was $8,923,000. The gap between the financially successful programs ($13,214,000 in 2006) and others continues to broaden and has almost doubled since 2004.3 The study showed that football does bring in a lot of money, but in the end, the majority of the institutions participating in intercollegiate athletics are running on a deficit and need additional revenue from the university to at least break-even.
For those colleges where football does produce revenue, the effect and influence it has on the institution is even stronger. At many colleges and universities with revenue-producing football programs, the athletic department reports directly to the president.