Why are athletic ECs so valued?

Parents Forum
141

<p>The stricter transfer rule is new. From what I understand, it had been a full year, was changed to only 30 days for several years, and now got reinstated. When the people you knew transferred, the sit-out was only 30 days which is doable. But for D to lose her whole junior year would be pretty tough if she wants to run in college.</p>

<p>And by the way, blossom, I can’t speak for other schools, but in our hs the music teachers are considered the most extreme of all. So, D would be jumping right from the frying pan into the fire! If a kid is truly sick and has to miss a peformance, the parents have to drag the child to see the band directors and have him vomit or cough up blood at their feet or they won’t believe it and will hold it against the poor kid forever. You can’t have a hole in the marching band–it wrecks the visual effect score.</p>

142

<p>epiphany, the expression “you people” communicates to me that you are lumping parents of athletes into some inferior category of lesser beings who simply aren’t bright enough to understand your enlightened point of view. And since you’ve singled me out as supposedly having large gaps of knowledge and now again are referencing the “more intelligent” posts on this thread, I can only assume that once again you are implying my posts are stupid. </p>

<p>Since I have acknowledged several points of yours as being valid and have never insulted you, I’m not sure why I deserve this. I’ve been accused of many things, but stupidity has never been one of them before now.</p>

143

<p>Hi GFG,
Our transfer rule is one calendar year from the date the student enrolls in the new school. Harsh. I’ve seen a couple of kids try it. One boy had had a horrible soph year with a coach he couldn’t work with. He ran JV track and XC his junior year at his new school, at the front of the pack week in and week out. His senior year, finally on varsity, was stellar. This is not a solution for you, but does illustrate the impact of these policies. He did not run in college, but could have. I think the HS experience took its toll on his enthusiasm for the sport and accompanying politics.</p>

144

<p>I never said nor implied that you were stupid. I spoke about the content of posts, not the content of brains. Brilliant people are capable of writing less than informing, helpful, or – in this case – on-topic posts. Comparing musicians to athletic performers is not on-topic, in my book. Not at all. Whenever I discuss athleticism in the performing arts, you switch to music. But there are many many diversionary & off-topic posts on this thread.</p>

<p>There have many, many more overtly insulting & uninformed posts about performing artists on this thread, including on the last 2 pages, than absolutely anything I have said anywhere on this thread.</p>

145

<p>Blossom, obviously no poster on this thread has bought into any abusive culture or is drinking any Kool-Aid. GFG is speaking of her challenges with keeping a healthy, reasonable balance in her athletic D’s life. I can appreciate the dilemma; sorry that you can’t.</p>

146

<p>Anecdotes may not be the most informative in a statistical or academic sense, but they do point to realities. (We inferior beings are forced to rely on less intellectual forms of communication; please be tolerant of our deficiencies.) The OP wanted to know why athletics seemed to be valued so much, ie. over other EC’s. Posters gave possible reasons for that emphasis in our culture, and then other posters argued that the benefits of athletics can be derived just as well from other EC’s. Then, an effort was made to identify what might be unique about the athletic experience, a theory was proposed, and then posters gave personal examples to support that theory. It took 10 pages for insults to start. I don’t think that’s at all bad for an online forum discussion.</p>

147

<p>GFG, agree with comment about anecdotes/personal experiences. I don’t believe you or most others are about one-up-manship between music and sports. I’m learning lots from this thread about both arenas, and have musicians and athletes at home so appreciate the insights.</p>

148

<p>I have a somewhat different perspective on the original question, which I stated early on, but no one has addressed (I think). </p>

<p>I don’t see any evidence that athletic ECs are valued much at all UNLESS the results are such that the kid is a recruited athlete. I don’t see kids getting much credit for being 3-season athletes unless they are stars. And the non-star kid goes to the same practices and meets, and in many cases puts in the same hours. The kid simply doesn’t have the same level of physical gift going in. (And don’t start with the “my kid works hard for his/her successes” stuff. Sure, they work hard. I’ve see kids who work just as hard as the eventually-recruited get precisely nothing in the college admissions stakes, which is the topic at hand.)</p>

<p>If the benefits of participating in athletics are supposedly all these intangibles like teamwork, commitment, time management, and the like, this doesn’t make sense.</p>

<p>This leads me to suspect that what is really valued is the ability to almost instantly garner public notice and awards for the school in our sports-crazed society. Success in a sport can be turned into cash from alumni who care about that sport. (Which is why Harvard gives likely letters to kids for sailing…) Hardly an original thought on my part.</p>

<p>An independent college counselor I know says that the perfect candidate is a football player who can reliably kick a 50-yard field goal. The college knows precisely what they are getting with that kid: at least 3 points a game.</p>

149

<p>[Rivals.com</a> Football Recruiting - Pryor picks Ohio State](<a href=“http://rivals100.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=787763]Rivals.com”>http://rivals100.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=787763)</p>

<p>Anyone has time to find his GPA abd SAT/ACT scores</p>

150

<p>Consolation, are you asking if admissions is presented with two academically identical candidates, and one is a 2-3 season athlete, committed, but not recruitable and the other is a musician, committed, but not regionally/nationally recognized, will the athlete always have the edge?</p>

151

<p>

</p>

<p>Childchood dream - yes, I agree. I was referring to a second interview with Dianne Sawyer, when he was answering questions from the viewers. In it the answer to regrets was the one I posted .</p>

152

<p>I wasn’t going to read this thread, I really wasn’t…but I did. Oh my…we parents are as bad as our children in a cafeteria. We got the band geek supporters, we got the quiz bowl nerd supporters, we got the jock supporters and the social butterflies that flit from EC to EC and we’re all arguing about which is better…and like epiphany is saying, the colleges are telling us that they will take a few of each kind to make a community…and yet we still argue.</p>

153

<p>I guess it just boils down to the different values we all cherish.
Being raised in Europe, a daughter of a soccer coach - over there known as football (of a major team in my country might I add), I value sports but ultimately I see that our american society goes to a lot of trouble to see to it that kids have a real chance to develop, for example, whatever athletic ability they may possess, whether that innate ability is awesome or merely run-of-the-mill. We do not do the same for intellectual ability. Or for the arts. That seems to me a horrible shame.</p>

<p>The problem with stereotyping recruited athletes is that majority of them do not have the grades/other credentials on par with other students at the particular university. We might fight about it, but just check around and you will see. And I said majority, not all:-)</p>

154

<p>…one step forward, two steps back ^^^…</p>

155

<p><<consolation, are=“” you=“” asking=“” if=“” admissions=“” is=“” presented=“” with=“” two=“” academically=“” identical=“” candidates,=“” and=“” one=“” a=“” 2-3=“” season=“” athlete,=“” committed,=“” but=“” not=“” recruitable=“” the=“” other=“” musician,=“” regionally=“” nationally=“” recognized,=“” will=“” athlete=“” always=“” have=“” edge?=“”>></consolation,></p>

<p>No, what I’m saying is that if admissions is presented with two academically identical candidates and Kid A is a 3-season varsity athlete, committed, good enough to qualify for states, perhaps, but not recruitable, AND that SAME Kid A is also a musician, committed, regionally recognized to the level of being in the regional youth symphony and all-state, and Kid B is recruitable in a sport and has no other activities, that Kid B gets in early and Kid A is tossed in the unhooked RD pool. </p>

<p>Now, as to whether the musician or the athlete has the edge in your scenario, I really do not know. I’d suggest that they are both rejected or waitlisted in favor of someone with a good sob story.</p>

156

<p>

</p>

<p>Consolation, can you explain what you mean by this comment? Is there something unique to the sport of sailing, as opposed to other sports, that renders it less worthy of an athletic likely letter? Or are you intimating that sailing alumni give more money to Harvard than other alumni athletes?</p>

157

<p>This whole thread really makes me pause. I have three kids. First was a really good athlete, recruited by a patriot league school. Played then ultimately decided couldn’t balance her hard science major and her sport and quit. Absolutely right decision for her and M & D totally supported her. Hopefully, med school in the future. Second was a great high school/ club player but never made it on his NESCAC team. Too slow! Life’s gene pool not always fair. Bummed but moved on with life and is happy playing intramural coed. Third is a recruited player in high school already committed to a great school. Funny thing is the college admission process was so so secondary to their involvement in their sport . After the first got involved it was natural that the second wanted to do the same thing, get a “uniform” for a travel team. And I guess the third didn’t have a choice. After being dragged around the state to every god forsaken field to watch the others, she was dying to play when she was finally allowed. So for awhile we had three scattered everywhere playing on various teams. Weekends were consumed by games here and games there. But it was never work for my wife and me. We loved the involvement, the folks we met, the kids learning to win, learning to lose. As they got older, they learned to balance their sports commitment with academics and other outside interests ( we never called them “EC’s”)The lessons they learned in sports as to working with others , setting goals, facing adversity, dealing with disappointment but trying again, I’m sure can be learned in many pursuits. Our kids just happened to use athletics. High school sports was really fun. Not high level like club, but the pasta dinners with teammates before big games, the goals against cross town rivals, high school tournaments, those memories will never be forgotten. But when all is said and done,what I will remember most is the conversations in the car, stuck on some interstate highway traffic jam, after an out of state tournament. Some of those were probably the best talks I’ll ever have with my kids… just us talking about life. I’ve been blessed in this life with three wonderful children, each FAR from perfect(the stories I could tell) and athletics were a major part of it. I hope for musician parents, drama parents, for parents of kids who care deeply about volunteering, its the same. I gotta tell ya though, it scares me to see how planned out some kids’ lives are. I think most of us parents kinda make it up along the way … and that isn’t necessarily a bad thing.</p>

158

<p>Actually, comparing athletics, music, academics, etc… is exactly on target to the original post. When the original poster asked why athletics were SO VALUED, it’s a question comparing a potential student who does athletics and one who does something else instead of athletics or nothing else at all. The implied question is quite clear. What isn’t clear are the defensive posters who think they understand what they’re reading, but in reality, they don’t. </p>

<p>No one here has said that athletics were better or more important than music, art, academics, goths, or any other social click. Different people were giving opinions of WHY athletics are considered so valued to the admissions office at many/most colleges and universities.</p>

<p>There are 2 ways to ask the question. 1) Here on a forum where you will get the many different opinions of why they believe athletics are so valued. But then, you will get those who are going to cry and say; “But my child the musician, dancer, artist, academia, nerd,… FILL IN THE BLANK; goes through that also”. Well, that isn’t the question. If you truly think that your kid and their NON-ATHLETIC activity accomplishes all the same qualities that the athletic EC does, then you need to contact the college you are interested in and convince them that your kid has accomplished exactly what they are looking for in someone with an athletic background. Convince them to give your kid such credit.</p>

<p>The 2nd way to ask this question is to contact some colleges and Universities directly and ask them why they value so highly students with some athletic EC’s in their resume. Then, when your kid doesn’t, but you are convinced that all the attributes that they are looking for in an athlete your kid somehow also achieved, then argue for them to get credit for it.</p>

<p>I think the problem here is that people forget that colleges and universities are not looking for a school of student athletes. They are looking for well rounded students. There are plenty of attributes that a musician, artist, debater, dancer, etc… has acquired from their activity that an athlete hasn’t. I’m sure that those too are qualities that are valuable to a college for a perspective student. But there are certain qualities that students who have been involved with organized and competitive sports that you can’t get from other EC. Or if you can, it’s at a different level. As I said, if you think your kid has gotten all the qualities and attributes that are achieved via competitive/organized athletics, but they were able to obtain them through a different method, then convince the school.</p>

<p>This has nothing to do with sports being better than another EC. It also has nothing to do with some people believing that their opinion is better than someone else’s. It has to do with why athletics appear to have so much value to a college/university from a perspective student; which means compared to someone who isn’t involved in athletics.</p>

159

<p>“Actually, comparing athletics, music, academics, etc… is exactly on target to the original post. When the original poster asked why athletics were SO VALUED, it’s a question comparing a potential student who does athletics and one who does something else instead of athletics or nothing else at all. The implied question is quite clear. What isn’t clear are the defensive posters who think they understand what they’re reading, but in reality, they don’t.”</p>

<p>Thanks, christcorp. I’m beginning to feel a little sorry I asked. I didn’t realize it would create such a brouhaha.</p>

160

<p>Hard to argue with Christ.</p>