Crimson's McNally two-way defenseman seeking one-way ticket to NHL

[LickTheEnvelope]

McNally withdraws from Harvard

http://farhandevji.com/?p=540

“plagiarized answers or inappropriately collaborated on the class’ final take-home exam,â€

Wtf does that mean?

These schools these days... yeesh.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

Despite being such a big, profitable market, we have some of the worst reporters in the whole NHL. It's pretty pathetic. Even the Thrashers had better reporters, I'm pretty sure.

It's really pretty freaking awful.

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

It's really pretty freaking awful.

I like Botchford though...who am I kidding, no I don't.

 

[Richard Murray]

I think this whole thing at Harvard is pretty ridiculous. A take-home test is meant to be worked on together...

 

[vanuck]

I think this whole thing at Harvard is pretty ridiculous. A take-home test is meant to be worked on together...

Seems a little naive of the prof to honestly expect your students to not take advantage of a take-home exam. The only reason there should be punishment is because these students cheated poorly.

And if one reads up on the situation a little bit more, it seems that course wasn't taught very well and the instructor wasn't being very helpful, plus poor availability of office hours and such.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/8/30/academic-dishonesty-ad-board/

Still hope he turns pro and joins the Wolves. He can always go back to Harvard later, can't he?

 

[shortshorts]

Seems a little naive of the prof to honestly expect your students to not take advantage of a take-home exam. The only reason there should be punishment is because these students cheated poorly.

And if one reads up on the situation a little bit more, it seems that course wasn't taught very well and the instructor wasn't being very helpful, plus poor availability of office hours and such.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/8/30/academic-dishonesty-ad-board/

Still hope he turns pro and joins the Wolves. He can always go back to Harvard later, can't he?

If he has the money to.

 

[Callhee]

If he has the money to.

He would if he signs a pro-contract, or if we are talking about beyond 2-3 years later, he may even get a sniff at a NHL contract which should be more than enough.

 

[Yossarian54]

I think this whole thing at Harvard is pretty ridiculous. A take-home test is meant to be worked on together...

A take home exam at university level is absolutely not unless explicitly stated. It's pretty clear they've broken the rules, irrespective of whether the lecturer is useless or not.

 

[Seattle Totems]

Does his leaving Harvard have any effect on the Canucks ability to maintain his rights? I know it's only been two years but there's a lock out situation right now so the Canucks obviously can't make an offer.

 

[Nuckles]

Does his leaving Harvard have any effect on the Canucks ability to maintain his rights? I know it's only been two years but there's a lock out situation right now so the Canucks obviously can't make an offer.

I think someone said in the last prospect thread that we have until August 2013 to sign him.

Edit: whoops, I think it's actually June 2014
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=56438741&postcount=724

In the expiring collective bargaining agreement between the NHL and the NHL Players Association, section C of Article 8.6 states the following:
"If a Player drafted at age 18 or 19, who had received a Bona Fide Offer in accordance with Section 8.6(a)(ii) above, becomes a bona fide college student prior to the second June 1 following his selection in the Entry Draft and does not remain a bona fide college student through the graduation of his college class, his drafting Club shall retain exclusive rights for the negotiation of his services until the fourth June 1 following his selection in the Entry Draft."

He was drafted in 2010, so I guess that means until 2014?

 

[Seattle Totems]

I think someone said in the last prospect thread that we have until August 2013 to sign him.

Edit: whoops, I think it's actually June 2014
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=56438741&postcount=724


He was drafted in 2010, so I guess that means until 2014?

I dont wanna get into a whole thing about the legality but it sounds like that clause states that the Canucks needed to have tendered a QO to retain his rights.

Either way I dont think this is a good situation for the Canucks or McNally.

 

[thefeebster]

I dont wanna get into a whole thing about the legality but it sounds like that clause states that the Canucks needed to have tendered a QO to retain his rights.

Either way I dont think this is a good situation for the Canucks or McNally.

How so? We can't tender him an offer right now but if he were a free agent in your scenario, no other team can either. Not like he is bolting to sign with another team during the lockout. And we still retain his rights for a few years.

This clause was put in place to give all college players (even those who play an extra year in juniors) an equal 4 years of rights being retained, as drafted players who go straight into college have their rights retained until graduation (a 4 year period). Just because you leave early or prior to that 4 year date doesn't mean that you are suddenly a free agent running around, able to look for contracts. Otherwise, that would be greatly exploited.

From what i remember that August date is for guys who you've drafted, went straight into college, and have just graduated. You have until that August date to sign them after their graduation, or else they become FA like Sweatt.

 

[Jyrki]

A take home exam at university level is absolutely not unless explicitly stated. It's pretty clear they've broken the rules, irrespective of whether the lecturer is useless or not.

Yeah, I don't think you can argue that there hasn't been academic misconduct. But the idea of take-home exams are pretty silly in the first place, if it's exceedingly difficult/ambiguous people WILL get together to figure things out.

 

[ChilliBilly]

I actually hope the new CBA deals with this.

I want players to be retained by their team for 1 yr after they leave university. In other words, they can't stay in university until their drafting teams rights have expired.

I hate loopholes.

 

[RTN]

Yeah, I don't think you can argue that there hasn't been academic misconduct. But the idea of take-home exams are pretty silly in the first place, if it's exceedingly difficult/ambiguous people WILL get together to figure things out.

Take home exams are usually just essays that need to be handed in within a certain period of time (i.e. a week, a few days, etc.). Not sure why people would really get together, except maybe throw ideas around. It's not like they're usually multiple choice questions.

 

[Proto]

I think this whole thing at Harvard is pretty ridiculous. A take-home test is meant to be worked on together...

Seems a little naive of the prof to honestly expect your students to not take advantage of a take-home exam. The only reason there should be punishment is because these students cheated poorly.

And if one reads up on the situation a little bit more, it seems that course wasn't taught very well and the instructor wasn't being very helpful, plus poor availability of office hours and such.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/8/30/academic-dishonesty-ad-board/

Still hope he turns pro and joins the Wolves. He can always go back to Harvard later, can't he?

It seems like an incredible stretch to blame it on poor office hours or the professor not being helpful. Maybe the professor was just tired of having a bunch of jocks who don't give a *&#@ about having an opportunity to go to Harvard so they cheat on what was probably a ridiculously easy take-home exam.

Besides, much of university is about learning rules about academia. There isn't always going to be someone there watching you to make sure you source what you read/research -- there's always a few losers like Margaret Wendt or Dave Pratt out there in the professional world, too.

I actually hope the new CBA deals with this.

I want players to be retained by their team for 1 yr after they leave university. In other words, they can't stay in university until their drafting teams rights have expired.

I hate loopholes.

I don't. I think if after 4 years a kid doesn't want to sign with the team that drafted him, he should have the chance to sign somewhere else. Then again, I'd like to see guys get to pick where they play a lot earlier than they do.

 

[deckercky]

I don't. I think if after 4 years a kid doesn't want to sign with the team that drafted him, he should have the chance to sign somewhere else. Then again, I'd like to see guys get to pick where they play a lot earlier than they do.

Then they should go back in the draft and the team that lost them should get a compensation pick, much like happens with everyone else who doesn't sign an ELC.

It's a loophole almost guaranteed to be closed (like the long front loaded contracts).

 

[Proto]

Then they should go back in the draft and the team that lost them should get a compensation pick, much like happens with everyone else who doesn't sign an ELC.

It's a loophole almost guaranteed to be closed (like the long front loaded contracts).

It's not a loophole. It's a pretty explicitly stated provision in the last CBA. These are 22/23 year old men who have never signed a pro contract. Why should they have to be re-drafted? Seems strange.

 

[RTN]

Then they should go back in the draft and the team that lost them should get a compensation pick, much like happens with everyone else who doesn't sign an ELC.

It's a loophole almost guaranteed to be closed (like the long front loaded contracts).

It's not a loophole. It's a clause that was specifically set up, partially to encourage players to go the college route. Everyone knows about it now and when it was set up. It's not like someone discovered a loophole.

 

[CookieCrumbs*]

Playing the sport you love for one of the most recognized and prestigious Universities in the entire world - something you don't **** up.

 

[MarkMM]

Came across this:

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/09/the_harvard_cheating_scandal_i.html

If it's the same, then 125 students cheated, and moreover, you can read the question(s) they were cheating on (along with the author's critique of the university system and this particular professor).

Disclaimer: I don't condone cheating.

That said, I have a degree in political science and this is a first-year civics course and I was doing mental gymnastics on this question, not because it's particularly challenging, but because it is the most contrived example of superfluous academic jargon (and I've also worked in politics professionally, this kind of "education" as the author notes is in no way helpful towards constructive learning).

Cheating is wrong, and fair enough, punish the students, but what the hell, Harvard has to take some responsibility if this is what they're charging students for. If over 100 of the world's smartest students feel that the best chance for them to get through the class is to cheat then something is wrong with the school (and this prof). Suspend the students, replace the professor, and rethink the state of academia.

 

[Lard_Lad]

If it's the same, then 125 students cheated, and moreover, you can read the question(s) they were cheating on (along with the author's critique of the university system and this particular professor).

It appears to be the same. The course number matches the one Farhan Devji mentioned in his article.

 

[Cocoa Crisp]

Came across this:

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/09/the_harvard_cheating_scandal_i.html

If it's the same, then 125 students cheated, and moreover, you can read the question(s) they were cheating on (along with the author's critique of the university system and this particular professor).

Disclaimer: I don't condone cheating.

That said, I have a degree in political science and this is a first-year civics course and I was doing mental gymnastics on this question, not because it's particularly challenging, but because it is the most contrived example of superfluous academic jargon (and I've also worked in politics professionally, this kind of "education" as the author notes is in no way helpful towards constructive learning).

Cheating is wrong, and fair enough, punish the students, but what the hell, Harvard has to take some responsibility if this is what they're charging students for. If over 100 of the world's smartest students feel that the best chance for them to get through the class is to cheat then something is wrong with the school (and this prof). Suspend the students, replace the professor, and rethink the state of academia.

Thelastpsychiatrist, eh? Thelastphilistene was what was going through my mind as I read the piece. The first question, to be sure, was designed to be be easily marked. The second is open-ended to such a degree that I pity the grad students for having to wade through it when they grade it.

To my original statement: It's a pet peeve of mine to listen to some ****** pontificate on that which he clearly has little understanding. All academia is just a shell game of sophistry? Never heard that one before.

I'm not defending Platt. From what I've read, he's not a good teacher. But spare me the know-nothingness at the core of 'he's a phony being propped up by a system entirely reliant on meaningless jargon'.

 

[Tiranis]

... That post is making my head hurt. How can you even take an issue with "Context is the frontier of participation research."

Pathetic piece of drivel (the article, that is).

 

[xtra]

... That post is making my head hurt. How can you even take an issue with "Context is the frontier of participation research."

Pathetic piece of drivel (the article, that is).

I think the point that he is trying to get across is more or less that today alot of acdemia is a bunch of useless jargon. I know graduating with a poli science-econ degree that the hardest part of the stuff was translating their jargon into simple english that i could understand. I would ask questions all the time if my understanding of the jargon (in simple english) was correct which i know helped alot of students (who mentioned it to me) understand useless jargon.

Of course that's not to say what he did was right, that essay is 2-4 pages which is tiny espically with having 5 sources to use to get an A.

Most of my essays by the end had introductions that went 2-4 pages but of course by the end i learned to play their game and use Jargon that as i would write i would say this is extremely stupid and can be explained much simpler.