<p>bluebubbles, academic institutions are made up of more than just brains. You have been posting on the Amherst board alot, and I can assure you, while students there are all bright, admissions does not make up a class based on academics alone. Many more factors figure into admissions at ALL top institutions.</p>
<p>edit: sorry bluebubbles, mistake on my part on Amherst, it is bluepurple.
But the rest of my post stands.</p>
<p>blah blah.
She’ll bring more fame to Stanford than the typical high-scoring nerd will.</p>
<p>why does she even consider going to school? Just apply there as a coach and not a student.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just because you are an athlete doesn’t mean you don’t want to be a student. How about she wants to go there for the same reason as everybody else, to learn???</p>
<p>^^ I think a lot of CCers are just jealous.
They don’t realize that there are literally thousands and millions of hard working students out there, but there are VERY FEW dedicated olympic-medalling champions.</p>
<p>Perhaps, but I’m not. Personally, I agree with playing sports for fun, but doing it professionally… I don’t find that very… satisfying. But that’s just my stupid opinion.</p>
<p>a few things:</p>
<ol>
<li>She’s not admitted yet, is she?</li>
<li>She was quoted saying “falling behind”, as a reason for taking courses online.</li>
<li>If she was going to be an athelete, that’s understandable. If she was going to be a coach… Well let’s just say just because you earned a gold medal doesn’t mean you know how to coach at all. Plenty of my teachers are very knowledgeable people but just doesn’t know how to teach.</li>
</ol>
<p>
Does this mean it’s easier to become a olympic medalling champion? Less competition…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If she just wants to go there to learn, then there are plenty of other good schools. The fact that she said UCLA and Stanford have better gymnastic programs mean her focus is more into coaching.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am sure a 17 year old who is truly a world class mathematician at the adult level is pretty sure to be in anywhere.</p>
<p>IMO is a youth competition, and awards many gold medals. Even so I expect a gold medal from IMO has very high chances anywhere they want to study.</p>
<p>Stanford has one of the top college athletic programs in the nation. Shawn Johnson would be a great bonus. Besides, what school wouldn’t want to put “Olympic Gold Medalist Shawn Johnson” on their list of alumni?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Either you’re kidding yourself, or you’re making a lame joke that hurts your case.</p>
<p>username, you are really embarassing yourself.</p>
<p>“Personally, I agree with playing sports for fun, but doing it professionally… I don’t find that very… satisfying.”<br>
That is a very ignorant statement, in my opinion. First, what about an athlete who enjoys a sport and wants to make some money using their talent? You seem to assume that pro athletes don’t have fun playing. And even if a professional athlete hates their sport (rare), what is wrong with that? I know a lot of teachers who hate to teach, but do it anyway because they are good at it or because the money is good. I’m sure there are people in other professions (which you probably view highly) that just do it because of the money, fame, or convenience. You probably think that the only thing that deserves your recognition are more cultured pursuits. From what I’ve seen, the people who have this opinion (my mom does as well) are jealous that they weren’t good at sports growing up. You also probably think that all sports requires is raw talent and no passion, intelligence, or dedication. While there are cases where this is true, I bet that if you watched an athletic competition (almost any kind) for a few minutes, you’d realize just how difficult it is and how you need more than just talent to go far. </p>
<p>“She was quoted saying “falling behind”, as a reason for taking courses online.” Yes, but doesn’t that make sense? Wouldn’t you fall behind if you had to train to win an olympic gold medal? Honestly, when you become such a high caliber athlete, there really isn’t time for 9-3:30 school and homework afterwards. There really isn’t much time for school and homework when you are working on becoming an all conferences athlete, either. </p>
<p>“Well let’s just say just because you earned a gold medal doesn’t mean you know how to coach at all. Plenty of my teachers are very knowledgeable people but just doesn’t know how to teach.”
Teaching academically is very different from coaching athletes. I know myself, as I both tutor math (which I do quite poorly) and teach golf (which I do really well). Golf I can offer a ton of advice: shots to hit, clubs to buy, mental approach, lines for putts, and occasional swing corrections. You accumulate a ton of knowledge on how to do a sport, especially when you have been coached yourself. If the only thing she did was explain her approach before getting up to do routines, that would be enough (and you don’t need some expertise to tell a story). Could she be a terrible coach? Possibly, but not very likely. </p>
<p>"Does this mean it’s easier to become a olympic medalling champion? Less competition… " Are you kidding here? Your logic makes zero sense. There are very few dedicated olympic champions because there can ONLY be a few. By your logic, since there are only a few top students, there must be zero competition. She’s a top gymnast in the U.S. (and in the world for that matter). There is a ton of competition. Just ask how many of your friends were gymnasts as a kid. </p>
<p>“But that’s just my stupid opinion.”
Yes, it is. </p>
<p>And you do seem to be jealous. Maybe not of her winning a gold medal, maybe not of her probably being a millionaire already, but because she may get into schools that you may get denied from because of non-academic factors.</p>
<p>I wanted to refrain from ad-hominem attacks, but I’d rather have Shawn Johnson be a potential classmate at Stanford than you.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure she was a straight A student when she was at school “normally”. (Yes, she actually did go to regular HS). Supposedly, her schedule over the last year has been really crazy thus causing her to “fall behind”. Falling behind doesn’t mean academically, it could just mean credit hours wise.</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - Gymnast Shawn Johnson Put To Sleep After Breaking Leg](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMsLg4jqlJw&feature=PlayList&p=4EB21EC030266499&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=55]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMsLg4jqlJw&feature=PlayList&p=4EB21EC030266499&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=55)</p>
<p>What? I thought she died?!</p>
<p>lol jk link is funny though</p>
<p>Being an elite athlete doesn’t automatically translate you into being an elite coach. Often, they struggle because they have little tolerance or patience with athletes who don’t “get it” as quickly as they did, have the work ethic that they once had, lack the competitive spirit they have, etc. Olympic volleyball player Dietre Collins-Parker was a coach at UNLV. One of her players told her: “Coach, I think you want us all to be Olympians…” DCP said that was her cue that she needed a change of venue and went to Cornell. She couldn’t be around athletes that didn’t have the work ethic that she once had or who weren’t willing to put the time in to be better.</p>
<p>Besides the technical aspects of coaching (which SJ would probably be good at), coaches are also mentors, pseudo parents, academic advisors, counselors, business speakers, motivators, therapists, ambassadors, fundraisers, and the list goes on. A coach wears lots of different hats - many of which an 18 year old is not equipped to handle…</p>
<p>^She would probably be an assistant coach. Again, if all she did was show up and tell the team her approach before routines, that would have a positive influence. That is an extreme example. There are some assistant coaches that are more strategizers, some that are more the parent figure, others that are the organizers, and others that teach technical skills. There is obviously some overlap in coaching, but she would not have to do nearly all that stuff you mentioned.</p>
<p>Even if she’s not a great coach, it would have a big recruiting influence. That’s often just as important as, if not more important than, actual coaching ability. There are plenty of college coaches at all levels and sports that are just glorified recruiters.</p>
<p>^Great point.</p>
<p>Who’s to say she wouldn’t get into Stanford? I recall my friend (who actually knows Shawn) said that she was somewhat smart. When a gymnast says they’re falling behind, it means that they still have a lot of school work to make up, not that they’re failing their courses.</p>
<p>Now my friend, who doesn’t have the best academic record and the courses she takes aren’t at all rigorous, was recruited by Stanford for gymnastics. She “falls behind” all the time too when she goes to compete nationally/internationally. What’s funny is she declined them lol. So it’s entirely possible Shawn could go there, even just as a student.</p>
<p>Also who cares if gymnastics is her only EC? Do you know how many hours they pour into that sport? That’s pure dedication and hard work - and it got her to the Olympic stage. The fact is you don’t know if she puts in that same effort into her academics. So who’s to say she would or would not make it?</p>
<p>It would be incredibly difficult for Shawn to do her whole training regiment AND go to a regular high school. I know Nastia Liukin actually went to a specialty school that was for people that were trying to be really good at sports or acting or other things like that who needed to go to school with more flexible hours. Nastia was training 36 hours a week and I assume Shawn trained for about the same. Right now Nastia is going to SMU she said she wasn’t going to do NCAA gymnastics and she was just going to focus on her academics. I don’t know about Shawn.</p>
<p>I’m shocked and appalled at the amount of negativity some posters hold towards Shawn Johnson. She wants to go to Stanford/UCLA. There’s a big chance both schools will accept her. What right does anyone here have to say she doesn’t deserve to get in? Let’s for a minute discard her ‘EC’s’ as people here love to characterize them. If an Admissions Committee reviews her profile, and deems her worthy, and accepts her, then they accept her. She deserves to get in. If she didn’t she wouldn’t have gotten in. Pure and simple. Just because a person doesn’t do IMO, or take 25 AP tests, or have a 2400 SAT score doesn’t mean they don’t deserve to go to a world class college. Talk about prejudice - and it’s the same prejudice that exists when people talk so scathingly about student athletes, and it’s sickening to say the least. If a college feels that said athlete has something to positively contribute to the school environment, then discussion is closed. It is nobody’s right to question anyone else’s admission.</p>
<p>But let’s look at her ‘ec’s’. For goodness’ sake, the girl is an Olympic Gold Medallist. Do you know how much time gymnasts/athletes in general practice and practice, just to qualify for the U.S. Trials? I do - my brother runs track, and puts in hours upon hours, every single day. He didn’t make National Trials. And that’s for JUNIOR OLYMPIANS. Shawn Johnson is competing against ADULTS for a SPOT at the UNITED STATES TRIALS and that in itself takes FOREVER of practice. So she qualifies just to make Trials. Add on the extra hours she has to practice to qualify FROM trials to be on the Olympic Team. </p>
<p>But she didn’t just go to the Olympics. She won a freakin’ gold medal, guys. She competed against the best of the best in the entire world, and she came out on top. How many people can say that? How dare anyone say she doesn’t deserve a spot at a college?</p>