I am writing a paper on college athletics vs academics. Below is my introductory sentences. Let me know if it catches your attention or if any changes are needed. Thanks, Britney
Are colleges sending the wrong message when they give a student athlete a full scholorship because he can run like the wind, or bench press 500 lbs but can not read at a 50% comprenhension level?
Opening with a question caught my attention, but if this question is the thesis of your essay I suggest that you open with some sort of an example, like an anecdote. Then follow up by stating your thesis.
Should I give an example of coaches providing leway for star players?
That would work just fine. Tell how a stereotypical athlete breezes through the system, but a dedicated and motivated "brainiac" gets all the tough breaks.
May you please elaborate on that? I don't really understand?
Ok look at this.
It's time for the NCAA tournament and the star players grades arent up to standard. The coach can not afford for him not to play remember this is the tournament. Should the coach allow him to play or should he be put on probation just like the other players?
What you have is very good except for some structural issues. You pretty much got what I was trying to tell you.
bbjo lwisle ac cnoaoe qozllt sqopen
Your introductory sentence catches the reader's attention with a thought-provoking question about the message colleges may be sending through their scholarship allocation. However, there are a few minor revisions you could make to improve clarity and grammar. Here's a revised version of your sentence:
"Are colleges sending the wrong message when they award a full scholarship to a student athlete solely based on their athletic prowess, despite their limited reading comprehension skills at a 50% level?"
In this revised sentence, I rephrased "because he can run like the wind, or bench press 500 lbs" to "solely based on their athletic prowess" to enhance clarity. I also clarified that the comprehension level is at 50%.