<p>Thank you Benley! I agree wholeheartedly. Internationally over the very long term I fear the US will lose out if the best schools recruit atheletes and lose sight of academic rigor. Athletics serves a great and wonderful function, but can be perverted by $100 million broadcast rights deals and coaches getting $5million salaries (Texas). Are colleges entertainment sources or academic institutions?</p>
<p>Exactly! They are academic institutions first and foremost. The extent to which they adhere to that very fundamental premise indicates what the leaders of those schools are about.</p>
<p>But, the “ivory tower” has always been and continues to be at the mercy of the culture at large – why? – because it does not live in “its own world” – at least not without regular interaction with the “outside”, and all its popular vulgarities. </p>
<p>These schools are not monasteries, after all, where a much more disciplined focus is possible. Yet…weren’t monasteries (at least in the Middle Ages) where schooling actually began?!</p>
<p>Should schools revert to a more monastic approach, or is that viewing education with the same lens of 700 years ago? How else to uphold the ideals of pure education?</p>
<p>Reading over my last post I see that it sounds like a middle-aged stick-in-the-mud who has forgotten what it is to be young, with energy to burn – physical energy that can only be used in physical ways. That, too, has always been understood – even by the most zealous “molders of young minds”. So that, sports has been and is a very important part of the equation.</p>
<p>It is finding and maintaining the right balance between academic, athletic, spiritual and social life that is the never ending challenge these schools must accept if they are to retain their lofty status.</p>
<p>One thing I love about boarding schools is that they provide opportunities for every student to participate in sports - some even make daily sports mandatory. It’s one thing to develop well-rounded students that are strong both physically and intellectually. It’s another thing to turn sports into a “business” by recruting atheletes and coaches expensively. The don’t have to go hand in hand at academic institutes or do they?</p>
<p>why do you think schools place such high priority on sports and athletes.</p>
<p>because colleges are known for two things; academics and sports.</p>
<p>thats why schools care about athletics because it brings them the prestige and renown that they are unable to obtain with academics. also when talking about colleges sports bring in a lot of money especially football. why do you think that the ivys are investing more and more money each year in athletics because they want to be the best at everything not just academics.</p>
<p>Since we’re talking about colleges now, there is a 2007 article from Forbes about the economics of college football. They really have nothing to do with academics.</p>
<p>[The</a> Most Valuable College Football Teams - Forbes.com](<a href=“http://www.forbes.com/2007/11/20/notre-dame-fooball-biz-sports-cx_ps_1120collegeball.html]The”>The Most Valuable College Football Teams)</p>
<p>I don’t get too worked up over athletic recruits at BS unless the kid is otherwise unqualified. I find it hard to believe that they would admit any athlete that wouldn’t also benefit from and contribute to the academic life of the school. And I think this is probably the case at the top schools anyway. The video about a basketball star at Hotchkiss that Kafkareborn posted a few days ago showed a young man that I would love for my son to be a classmate of.</p>
<p>Young people learn important things on the playing fields that cannot be learned sufficiently in the classroom, from a great book, from the pews, or in front of Wii Fit.</p>
<p>Some things can only become part of a person by means of direct experience, blood, sweat, and tears.</p>
<p>Thus, we must remain strong proponents of a combined academic and athletic curriculum in high school and college. That little British scholarship has it right.</p>
<p>For high school age students, where it crosses the line into something ugly, and where America’s finest boarding schools have lost their way, is the sanctioning and cultivation of over-age players. It’s unsporting, and over-age athletes deprive age-appropriate athletes of playing time. Last year, 45% of Loomis’ hockey team was over-age. Some schools have double-repeats on the roster, which I’m surprised is allowed.</p>
<p>My concern with age does not carry forward to college, where the younger athletes have developed adult bodies and all is fair in that regard.</p>
<p>
Well that’s fair, but remember up to 80% of applicants to top schools are academically admissible, so theoretically all of them would “benefit from and contribute to the academic life”.</p>
<p>Tristan,</p>
<p>What do you consider “overage”? I believe the maximum age for athletic participation at most schools is 19.</p>
<p>If you think that is old, consider cases where students have late birthdays, forcing them to start a year later. Then, for any number of reasons, they may feel that repeating a year upon entering boarding school makes good sense. That is a fairly common thing these days. Now you have a students who will be 19 for the better part of senior year.</p>
<p>Is that wrong?</p>
<p>Public schools have a cutoff date for starting Kindergarten – Sep 1 of a certain birth year.</p>
<p>A specific date ensures a worst case gap in the cohort of 364 days.</p>
<p>The adolescent body matures rapidly. An extra year makes quite a bit of difference on the athletic field. (I’m not concerned about the classroom).</p>
<p>For SADGE and other top tier boarding schools, a 45% over-age roster is wrong.</p>
<p>10% is tolerable.</p>
<p>0% is ideal.</p>
<p>SADGE hold themselves to the highest ideals in every other dimension; why not athletics.</p>
<p>Still, that doesn’t address the fairly common scenario I laid out.</p>
<p>So, are elementary school administrators supposed to determine who might be athletically inclined at the kindergarten level, then allow anyone of that type, whose birthday would normally preclude his/her entry until the following year, to enter kindergarten BEFORE he/she actually turns of age so that there won’t be an unfair athletic advantage at the high school level?!</p>
<p>Now you have a students who will be 19 for the better part of senior year.</p>
<p>Actually, you can have many athletes who are 20 for the better part of their senior year. All that is required by NEPSAC is that they be 19 or under on September 1st. Have you read “Outliers”? I wonder if a disproportionately large fraction of NEPSAC football and hockey players have birthdays in the last 3-4 months of the year?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s more complicated than that. Around the time today’s high school students were approaching preschool, many Massachusetts public school systems moved to setting a cutoff date and age for kindergarten. Children who were 5 by September 1st could enroll in public Kindergarten. They chose to implement it this way, because it was sort of an end-run around the state laws, which allowed any student who turned 6 by December 31st to enroll in first grade. The schools are not required to offer kindergarten, so they could set the age limit for that year. Most parents want their children to attend public kindergarten, so they comply with the rules. </p>
<p>However, in our district, there’s the understood proviso, “as long as the child is ready for kindergarten.” Our local school will encourage parents to wait if they have any doubts. I know many families who choose to wait a year to enroll their child in kindergarten, because they feel that their child needs another year. Boys born in the summer frequently fall in this category, as do children who were born prematurely. Also, children born after September 1st can’t enroll in kindergarten until the following year. Thus, a certain number of students are 6 when they begin kindergarten.</p>
<p>To add to the confusion, private schools tend to enroll older pupils. A child who changes from a public to a private school will often repeat the grade, which isn’t as bad as it might sound, as the private school student body will have a number of students who are “old” for their grade.</p>
<p>leanid, reading your example, it appears you have your thought process all twisted up.</p>
<p>Next I hope you won’t tell us, based on your experience, that the 400 meter dash is best performed with a hip gyrating race-walk form.</p>
<p>Anyway, it’s very simple. Public schools currently specify a certain cutoff date that creates a cohort within 364 days of each other. They use a Sep 1 date of a certain birth year for this purpose.</p>
<p>Let’s say that a school or league believes, and many do, that over-age players have an unfair advantage in youth sports. A simple cutoff date is used to identify which players in the “senior cohort” are over-age and no longer eligible to play. Over-age players could play through their junior year. No need to have a crystal ball in kindergarten.</p>
<p>There are a couple sub topics running through this discussion…I’ll address a different one below…</p>
<p>From a purely academic perspective, some rank Williams as finest liberal arts college in the country. </p>
<p>From a purely athletic perspective, guess where Williams ranks?</p>
<p>Answer: #1 (Div III)</p>
<p>Three cheers for Williams.</p>
<p>Same for Stanford. Elite university + #1 athletic program (Div IA).</p>
<p>Source: Directors Cup results across all sports for the last few years.</p>