Arguments suggesting a potential lowering of standards (or at least a perception of it) often include:
* Specialized academic support: Athletes receive significant academic support, including tutoring and advising, that non-athletes may not have access to. This can lead to accusations of creating a separate, potentially less rigorous, path to graduation.
* Graduation rates: While Notre Dame boasts high graduation rates for its athletes, critics often compare them to the overall student body's rate. If there's a significant difference, it could fuel the argument of preferential treatment.
* Admission practices: The admissions process for athletes is subject to scrutiny, as athletic ability is a significant factor alongside academic merit. This naturally leads to questioning if the academic bar is lowered for highly recruited athletes compared to equally qualified non-athletes.
Conversely, arguments against lowered standards point to:
* High graduation rates: Notre Dame's athlete graduation rates remain consistently high, suggesting a commitment to academic success.
* Strict eligibility requirements: Athletes must maintain specific academic benchmarks to participate in sports, often stricter than the general student requirements.
* University's reputation: Notre Dame's reputation and commitment to academic excellence are significant assets. Lowering standards would damage that reputation.
In conclusion, while there's no concrete evidence of a deliberate lowering of academic standards, the unique support systems and admissions processes for athletes inevitably lead to ongoing debate and scrutiny. Whether that translates to a factual lowering of standards or merely a perception of it remains a matter of perspective and interpretation.