With the costs of attending college skyrocketing, high school graduates are now more competitive than ever before when vying for scholarships. Graduation rates reached an all-time high in the U.S. last year of eighty-three point two percent. Last fall, somewhere around twenty and a half million students attended American colleges and universities, five point two million more than in the fall semester of 2000. More and more students every year are pushing further into higher education, which has made the competition for admission and financial aid significantly more intense. The average cost for tuition and fees at a four year public university for an in state student 2016-17 was $9,648, well over double the average cost of $3,508 in 2000-01. So there’s no surprise that aspiring students in higher education are yearning for scholarships and financial assistance from these colleges and universities.
With that being said, it’s a shame to see bright students and honor graduates unable to afford the higher education they need to meet their full potential. With the amount of money colleges and universities take in every year from having the highest cost of attendance yet, why aren’t there enough scholarships to go around for those students with impeccable grade point averages, reaching the top of their graduating class? Well, while one high schools valedictorian is denied on their partial scholarship application, another high school’s star athlete with subpar grades and SAT scores is offered a full ride scholarship for an education they won’t merit. Across the United States, an estimated annual three billion dollars is awarded in scholarships to student athletes, which is not allocated to recruits based on academic performance, but by athletic achievement and prospect. This is just outrageous, and seems to appear almost as if higher education institutions care more about their ranking in sports than about actual education. Under no circumstances should an academically mediocre student-athlete receive priority over accomplished and brilliant students for paid tuition costs. It’s unfathomable how we treat students who achieve in the classroom compared to the students who achieve in sports.
School is a place for academics, so why are so many schools giving money to athletes first and academically achieved students second? From the point of view of many others, it’s believed that student-athletes deserve their funding because, at many division one and two schools, popular sports like football or basketball make a hefty amount of money for the school. However, that’s not exactly put to great use seeming as those funds will majorly go right back into the football programs.
Student athletes at division one and two schools often have special dining halls, tutoring and academic assistants, health care services, and leisure areas (such as “player’s lounges” and game rooms) that are not available to regular full-time students. Those athletic perks also carry a fairly large price tag for the university, and not to mention paying the yearly salaries of the special tutors, physical therapists, etcetera. On top of all that, we have not even discussed the unnecessary expenditures large division one football teams seem to be notorious for. A perfect example is the University of Alabama. Crimson Tide football has a locker room facility worth right around $100 million, including a hydrotherapy room with a forty foot long waterfall. Another luxurious touch, the University of Texas at Austin installed all new high-tech lockers, each encompassing a forty-three inch television monitor, for Longhorn football this past spring costing about $10,500 a piece. Though college sports might be a cash cow, they are also quite unbelievably costly. The argument that student-athletes are more deserving of scholarships because sports bring money to the school is null and void because that money does not go to research, or to teacher’s salaries, or to libraries, or to any academic department. The money they make goes right back into the athletics programs, pampering and indulging these kids who get to attend college for free and live like royalty with minimal academic responsibility.
I do not believe that is fair to distribute athletic and academic scholarships equally, either. My reasoning for this is because college is a place that is supposed to prepare you for a career, and sports, much more often than not, are not at all reliable for careers. In 2016, 1.1% of NCAA Men’s Basketball participants were drafted into the NBA, and only 0.9% of Women’s Basketball participants were drafted into the WNBA. In the same year, 1.5% of NCAA Football players made it to the NFL. No matter which school you choose, hardly a handful of college athletes will ever make careers out of their sport. It’s unreasonable to believe that every scholarship athlete is there because they’re going to be professional someday.
Going further, in almost every normal career path, intellectualism will consistently trump athleticism. Once you earn a degree and get a job in absolutely any industry other than professional sports, it will almost never make you a more valuable employee to be more athletic than intelligent. Employers and corporations aren’t offering positions to people who are fast and strong, but are instead often looking for people with critical thinking and problem solving skills. As simple and realistic as that sounds, to someone who has been rewarded for years based off of their athletic abilities, it can still be a shock when they get into the real working world. That’s why I am convinced we have got to start showing college athletes that you are a student first and an athlete second. We must reward profitable skill sets besides athletics, in order to push students towards practical careers and pave better futures.
Lastly, in order to guarantee a better future for generations who have yet to come, it is profoundly important that we assure the best and brightest minds of our time have access to the education they need to go out and make a difference in the world. Today’s most crafty and brilliant students are tomorrow’s most influential leaders, activists, and innovators. They are the people who are going to bring change to the world and progress society in all the right directions. How could we justify taking a scholarship away from who may very well be our future president or a medical researcher who discovers the cure for cancer, just so we could give it to a wide receiver that had a less than two percent chance of reaching the NFL? Who would have made a greater impact with their free tuition? Accomplished students become accomplished lawyers, doctors, politicians, engineers, and so on. They prepare our future and they make history. They give back to their communities and inspire those who will live after them. It should be utmost priority that we educate them first, and worry about the athletics later.
Concluding from any stance you may have on the argument, it cannot be justified to deny an education to a high achieving, distinguished student while also offering a full-ride scholarship to a mediocre or average student solely for the benefits of their athletic talents. Higher education institutions must prioritize distributing grants and scholarships amongst scholars rather than athletes. I am not arguing that athletes should not receive scholarships, but that scholarships should not be given for athletics. Student-athletes should be held to the same standard and earn their funding with academic achievement, just like any other student has to. No 4.0 student should ever come in second place to a 2.5 athlete.