Rhubarb Report: Episode 26

A day late and a dollar short. It seems like that is how my writing schedule has gone this past week.  With a conference presentation on my platter, and a freelance article for National Masters News on deadline, my normal publication schedule went askew. There is no better time than now to get back in the zone.

This episode of the Rhubarb Report looks at intelligence, testing, and the scholar athlete. Sit down, relax, and enjoy some fresh Rhubarb!

Transcription of Episode 26 (continued)

1. I just don’t get how people think sometimes. Over the past few years, I have heard some people mutter and complain that President Obama is “too intelligent”. What? Are you kidding me? No, really, I am perfectly fine with the leader of the free world being smarter than me. Really.

With that idea in mind, I would suggest that we find a Presidential candidate equivalent of the Wonderlic Cognitive Ability Test – the test used by NFL executives to assess cognitive abilities for football players. You can find a sample of the Wonderlic Test here. This might just give us a baseline measure of cognitive function in our Presidential candidates much like the purpose it serves with NFL quarterbacks.

We could then have all candidates perform a pronunciation test. They could be asked to pronounce the names of world countries (I-r-a-q) or other important words in domestic and foreign policy (n-u-c-l-e-a-r). Add to this a simple punctuation and grammar test that could assess the applicant’s ability to create full sentences. This would eliminate a number of current candidates, including Perry and Paul. It is pretty hard to understand a candidate’s foreign or domestic policy agenda when they can’t even complete a full coherent sentence. At this rate, we might end up with a candidate that sounds like Boomhauer from King Of The Hill …

If you pass the testing procedure, then you can run for President. How does that sound? We have standardized testing for everything else these days, so perhaps the Presidency shouldn’t be any different.

2. Kudos to the Big 12 Conference for taking a positive step by making a formal invitation to West Virginia. But the better part is that they went ahead and made the decision regardless of Missouri’s indecision. The “paralysis of analysis” from what is considered a fine academic institution is beyond me.

For my money, West Virginia sounds like a long plane trip. Morgantown isn’t Dallas or Houston by any stretch. The good news is that it has a better basketball program and a good football program. Hey Big 12, while we’re at it, could you please go ahead and add SMU and Louisville. Please?

3. Finally, the NCAA is considering giving $2,000 payments to student athletes to “more closely approach” the costs of going to school. This is after the student athlete receives a scholarship for tuition, fees, room, board, and books. I wonder when the last time was that the NCAA actually compared what the student athlete already receives as compared to the actual non-scholarship student who is trying to make ends meet.

Imagine if we looked at the cost of going to Stanford. A free education at Stanford is a pretty big chunk of change these days. The student athlete gets an athletic scholarship to a good academic institution, and then has the opportunity to gain a great education in the meantime. Maybe the NCAA should put that $2,000 per athlete into the general scholarship fund for non-athletes as a reminder that going to school does still involve getting an education and not just preparing for your shot at the NFL.

Photo credits: Wikipedia