<p>I know Princeton stats show a low rate of students who actually leave after their freshman (or later?) year(s), but I would find it very helpful to learn WHY anyone who DID leave, left. I guess this is sort of the reverse of asking “what is the personality or culture of the current student body?”, by figuring out what type of personality DID NOT ultimately find a good or best fit there. (Yet in a very real way, pretty much answers the same question - just from another point of view). Anyone?</p>
<p>I’m sure it runs the gamut. I went to a Princeton peer and people left for medical reasons, homesick, academic issues, to expulsions. I don’t know if there’s anything that can be gathered from such a relatively small sample size.</p>
<p>Someone I knew ended up leaving after freshman year. She actually did really well academically, but I think she realized that the only reason she had chosen Princeton was because of the prestige. Because the other schools she had to choose from weren’t regarded as highly, she felt that she HAD to go to Princeton. You can learn more about her decision (and that of a few others) in this article.
[The</a> missing 4 percent - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/12/08/26516/]The”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2010/12/08/26516/)</p>
<p>First and foremost, thanks T26E4 for your reply and a big thanks to stlkarategal for also providing me with the exact type of answer I was seeking, and for providing that article’s link. I realize the sample size is small overall, but gaining an understanding of just WHY some people DON’T fit with a school may be instrumental in helping some to make what could be one of the biggest mistakes in their lives or at least gain insight into why some other college may ultimately prove to be a better choice. </p>
<p>Secondly, and maybe this is not the ideal thread to do so, but I have to make a comment regarding some sentiments in the article where a student was quoted as suggesting that Princeton “create a more extensive tutoring system for athletes” – and my first reaction was, “WHY”? (ok, actually, it was more like “heck, no!”) I mean, I am not naive and I understand students are accepted to any given college, including Ivy League ones, for all different reasons BUT I strongly believe that first and foremost every student accepted should be able to meet the academic requirements of the school they are accepted into. Sure, EVERY student is entitled, and should receive a bit of help, tutoring, etc. for the occasional subject/class when needed, but overall, if they are feeling generally overwhelmed with a given school’s curriculum, and especially if they were mainly accepted into the school for reasons other than their academic prowess (ie: their athletic skills, ethnicity, geographical desirability etc.), then my feeling is that they are NOT entitled to any “special treatment” to meet the academic graduating standards required of everyone. Colleges are first and foremost for academic learning and growth, and of course, also for social growth – but other priorities – ie: athletics, being active in any given club, etc. are secondary, and students should not expect a “free ride” or exceptional help academically just because they may excel in one of these secondary areas.</p>
<p>lifelearner: You say that you oppose “extended tutoring” for athletes. Would you oppose an office which can help identify athletes who are facing struggles in order to link them up with existing tutoring services available for the entire student body? If anything, schools like Princeton are deep in resources. They want everyone, athlete or not, to succeed. What happens is people slip through the cracks – who otherwise would benefit from more counseling/tutoring. Perhaps more tend to congregate among certain sub-groups (athletes, inner city admittees, ESL international students, etc.). I see nothing sinister about the college doing its best to cover their entire population. Favoritism? I don’t see it. Minority kids and internationals have additional counseling resources. Nothing wrong, IMHO, if it gets extended to athletes.</p>
<p>Truthfully, I am not well versed - no, scratch that - not versed at all on the specific services at Princeton. But allow me to pose this question back to you: Why do athletes need to be “identified”, number one, and then have a third party “link them up” with services apparently already available to all? If a student is admitted to a school like Princeton, or especially to Princeton itself, regardless of the key aspect that allowed them to take a coveted student spot, they should be intelligent enough to seek the help they need - just as non-athletes must do. Like I may have expressed before, I believe they should receive no less (help), nor more!</p>
<p>As a parent of a Princeton student athlete, I tend to agree with lifelearner. In fact, one of the things that turned DS off about another elite school was their emphasis on the tutoring services they offered their athletes. He recognizes and is grateful for the admissons edge his athletics gave him, but he wouldn’t want to attend a college where he was in over his head and needed extra help beyond what is offered everyone… He considers himself a student first, and athlete second. Happily, he is thriving at Princeton.</p>
<p>Sherpa, VERY WELL SAID. That was my perspective, exactly. Thank you very much for your post.</p>