<p>At most schools the athletes have a grad rate about the same as the student body and a similar GPA.</p>
<p>I think it’s important for all students to have physical opportunities in college-- club sports, intramurals, hiking clubs, martial arts, etc. To me, the opportunity for a LOT of the student body to be involved physically is more important than intercollegiate teams. Am sure some schools manage to offer both. </p>
<p>OP mentioned lacrosse, which seems like a particularly popular recruiting sport for colleges, esp. a lot of top east coast ones. Other sports are becoming popular around here lately as well. We see parents steering their younger kids towards crew and fencing, and several have told me they are hoping and even counting on, scholarships. Hmmm.</p>
<p>Physical activity aside, though, I would much rather watch a play or concert than a sporting event 
Our HS drama club productions are a highlight of each spring for our family (alright, maybe not for my husband :(). It would be hard to imagine a vibrant college campus that was lacking in the arts.</p>
<p>midmo, I don’t mean to diminish the value of non-athletic pursuits. I’m not, was never, an athlete. I’m a musician. My kids are musicians, too. And they are athletes, and good students. I digress…
When I was in college, I remember going to my suitemate’s field hockey games, my boyfriend’s soccer games, my roommate’s plays, another friend’s coffee house performances; another girlfriend (who ended up becoming a producer)- I “acted” in her shorts; I had a group of friends who were into attending lectures, another who were very liberal activist/protesters. I remember my suitemates getting us all up at the outdoor theater one night to have some Wiccan celebration (Saman, something like that?). My Deadhead friends dragged me to a concert in Greensboro. I religiously watched basketball (I was THERE when Michael Jordan played for the Heels!!) </p>
<p>Anyway, all of these things added to the richness of my college experience.</p>
<p>Many athletes do not get that much for all of their time and endeavors. Those in the top level of the top sports may get a lot of press for their scholarship and the large leeway given to them to basically play sports for a college, but that is a small part of the picture. The average athlete in a minor sport often has his parents basically providing the 4 year scholarship for the sport. Division 3 athletes do not get scholarships, and many D1 and D2 athletes do not get a dime either. Those who do get money and/or the opportunity to play just as often lower their sights in where they go to school as they get opportunities to go a notch up for athletic reasons. It’s always the exceptional case where the rare athlete gets an academic bye to go to higher level school than he would with his academic stats that gets the attention. My son’s teammate who did get into Harvard, was not accepted to a number of schools, including ED to Princeton, and that was with an academic profile that would not surprise anyone to get into the very top schools. And that was with the athletic hook. THere were others like him that did not get into any top level schools because they were not lucky in where they placed their apps. Their skills did not match the ultimate needs of their college teams. That happens often. My friend’s son who is a football player with a high gpa, in solid college prep courses from a rigorous school and a mid 1400 SAT applied to 18 schools to get 5 acceptances (due to the sport) two of which he really wanted. He will hear from the other 13 schools later, but most of those decisions will not be due to being on the coaches’ list because those answers have already come. </p>
<p>I also know kids who are playing sports at schools that are far less selective and that they could have easily gotten in even without the sport. They so wanted to play the sport at a certain level, that they took this into heavy consideration in selecting a school. </p>
<p>Those situations do not get the attention that high profile cases get where someone gets into HPY with lower than usual stats or gets a full scholarship somewhere. For low impact sports, many athletes have the academic profile to get into the school with the sport being the “hook” to tip the balance. And for many of those sports (and all d-3 sports), the only scholarships the kids are getting to play the game are funded by their families.</p>
<p>
Very good point. Scholar-athletes often choose schools lower on the selectivity rank because of what the school offers in athletics. Regardless of whether or not athletic scholarship $$ was involved.</p>
<p>Anecdotal – At D’s h.s., the high honor role is very heavy with varsity athletes, some of them all-state caliber.</p>
<p>curious14-</p>
<p>Thanks! At last someone has clarified and understood the point I was trying to make. There is a lot of talk on these boards about advising students to pursue their passions - for some kids that does not involve a sport (or maybe it does, but they are not particularly good at it). Several people on this thread argued that their kids were athletes, but were also competitive academic matches for the school they wanted to attend. I have no issues with that - that is terrific.</p>
<p>But if you have an extremely bright student who would benefit from the academic environment at a top school and instead spots are given to less-qualified students (who may even struggle at such a school) who happen to be athletes, it seems somewhat misguided to me. I know there are plenty of scholar-athletes who are qualified to attend top schools on their academic merits alone, but there are also many kids who get cut a break in the academic dept. just because they are athletes.</p>
<p>BTW, the girl who received the lacrosse scholarship is probably not going to attend the top school afterall, because she recognizes it will be more academically demanding than she is willing to deal with. Many people seem to imply that just about every athlete that gets recruited is qualified to study at the school they are recruited by. What I am saying is that the student with the higher grade sans the athletic talent would probably get much more out of the academic opportunites made available to him/her.</p>
<p>Again, while I understand this is a cultural phenomenon in this country, I am wondering if it is correct. I know many parents and students who are more concerned about athletic development than academic development. I think this manifests itself in a lot of the crazy behavior that is seen around athletics (parents attacking other parents, parents attacking refs, out-of-control cheerleaders, Duke lacrosse scandal (no I don’t think a rape was commited, but I don’t think the lacrosse players were paradigms of virtue, either)).</p>
<p>Ultimately, I’d rather see the focus at our universities directed back to their primary purpose. There are plenty of faculty members at schools across the country that are upset with the amount of resources athletics draw away from academics. Maybe the athletic frenzy could just be toned down a bit, that’s all.</p>
<p>“athletes add the $, but take away from intelligence and respectability of the school. case in point, we prepare for a midterm in my class the other day. most of us are busting and working hard, while the athletes get free tutoring. what will happen when their bodies are no longer useful?”</p>
<p>What a racist statement. This post seems to be t b itch session about things you don’t have so you must point out the “injustice” behind it. Blah. </p>
<p>Creating a sterotype (dumb athelete) to feel better about yourselves… c’mon. What stupid remarks from supposedly smart people.</p>
<p>My k is a NMF, a val and applying to med school currently (graduating with honors and scored top 10% in mcap) he also is an athelete. So is he stupid when he plays and smart in the lab? </p>
<p>Seeing how roughly 50% of college freshmen don’t make it to sophomore year there’s alot of people who get into college who aren’t qualified, not just atheletes. </p>
<p>Your mom or dad hopefully made a point to you growing up, maybe you missed it. “worry about the things you can control (yourself)”. Take care of your own abilities and the rest will take care of itself.</p>
<p>Just replace athelete with jew, black, hispanic… sad, just sad.</p>
<p>Sometimes… colleges don’t make allowances for poor academics even for extraordinary athletes. In my son’s high school the nations’ top athlete in a particular sport has just been turned down by five Div. I schools that have been intensely recruiting him since he was in middle school. Even though this boy will undoubtedly represent the country in the next Olympics, each school understood that he cannot handle the academics, even with a retinue of school supplied tutors and minders. There are minimum requirements that even the most competitive athletic departments must respect.</p>
<p>Vango,</p>
<p>I believe alot of your anger and frustration stems from ignorance. Many people on this board have tried to educate you, but you have already made up your mind about the value of college athletics and how you think it impacts admissions.</p>
<p>If you really understood how college athletic recruiting works, I think you’d realize that its impact on your chances for admission is so miniscule as to be insignificant.</p>
<p>Example: NCAA rules allow only 12 basketball scholarships TOTAL per Division 1 school. So maybe a couple of basketball athletes will be admitted with subpar grades, but it is literally a handful per year at most, at D1 schools that likely have thousands of freshman admittees.</p>
<p>I have a great respect for kids who persue the arts. My own D is the concertmaster in her h.s. orchestra, performs in h.s. musicals, takes classical voice lessons, plays several instruments, and plays & sings just about every weekend in a band (they get paid pretty well, too.) She gave up dance instruction because there are only 24 hours in a day, or she’d be fitting that in & driving me crazy. We place a very high value on the the arts in our family. (And spend a fortune on these opportunities, as well.)</p>
<p>That being said, one of the most time-consuming activities she ever took part in was winter track. Practices & long, drawn-out meets in distant locations were enormous time-killers. I don’t think parents whose kids are not athletes are aware of the commitment. And it’s usually at least a six day a week commitment. All season long, with mandatory summer participation. Top athletes in many sports often must take part in club teams if they want to advance and attract the attention of a college. It’s not hard to see why a serious athlete might have a GPA or SAT score that dips a bit below the mean, yet who might be a fantastic student with great potential.</p>
<p>You also have to be aware the NCAA has enrollment standards for atheletes. A school can’t be below those standards without the NCAA’s approval (special need ex learning disability) NCAA has no special interest in ANY athelete anywhere. </p>
<p>And as SS pointed out the life of an average college athelete is hardly glamorous one.</p>
<p>But if you have an extremely bright student who would benefit from the academic environment at a top school and instead spots are given to less-qualified students (who may even struggle at such a school) who happen to be athletes, it seems somewhat misguided to me. I know there are plenty of scholar-athletes who are qualified to attend top schools on their academic merits alone, but there are also many kids who get cut a break in the academic dept. just because they are athlete</p>
<p>I don’t think schools would be doing themselves any favors by recruiting and admitting students that they don’t feel are capable of graduating. Do you?</p>
<p>I have not been on any admitting committees, but the kids I know who are athletes are quite capable of participating on academic merit alone at the schools they attend.</p>
<p>This really sounds more like sour grapes to me, as there are many many wonderful schools what ever your passion, and the fact that some students were admitted, that you don’t feel have equal accomplishment to students who were denied, is just an opinion, and it is distracting you from all the choices that are out there.</p>
<p>As long as you expect humans to always be logical and everything to be equal, you will miss out on opportunities.
Don’t.</p>
<p>Let’s remember that natural talent is usually not enough to turn a kid into a recruitable athlete. A student good enough at his sport to attract that sort of attention typically had to put in not only time and dedication, but significant mental effort to excel. This mental effort may not be of the same nature as what would be required to pass AP Physics BC, but don’t underestimate it either. Why? Because the needed competitive edge and focus on winning is the same quality that could eventually propel that athlete to the forefront of post-graduation endeavors.
I would have been totally in agreement with the OP a few years ago, but lately I’ve witnessed my athlete child regularly eyeing the recent performances of the competition, setting goals, and envisioning herself reaching them. And guess what? She does. Recently she missed the first 2 months of her winter track season due to a medical issue. When she came back she was out of shape, but she so detested the thought of having dropped in standing in her sport that she determined she would not be surpassed. When she came back, you could literally see that she was racing on pure heart and drive, not training. You can be a good athlete without that mental strength, but you can’t be a truly elite athlete without it. That strong motivation tends to spill out into other areas of their lives as well.</p>
<p>
Vango: The reason is pretty simple. There are many, many more capable dancers/musicians/etc. out there than there are capable athletes. How many people can throw a football like JaMarcus Russell or Brady Quinn? Virtually nobody. How many people have beautiful soprano voices or flawless violin technique & tone? Thousands. Add to that the fact that athletic ability can be objectively, quantifiably measured. The arts are subjective. So we can argue all day about who captures the perfect essence of a concerto. But the guy or gal who reliably crosses the finish line first, or has the best freethrow percentage, or lowest ERA, is rather obvious.</p>
<p>Many of the best in the arts tend to go to the many specialized schools that train artists of all types. None of these places have major sports programs.</p>
<p>Bay-
You mention 12 scholarships for one sport. What about the 20 or so other sports, men’s and women’s, that most schools have? And what about kids who get admission preference, but not necessarily a scholarship? When you look at the size and number of teams, that’s a lot of students. And while many may have great stats, there are plenty that don’t. I have heard first hand from a Dean of Admission at a Div. I school that for each sport the coaches can submit a list of students they want and, depending on the sport, they are pretty much guaranteed admission for a certain number of those students, regardless of academic ability. Yes, there are some NCAA academic standards, but they are really low. Some posts on this thread on one hand downplay the effect athletics has on admissions and on the other talk about it being big business, etc. It is clear from the budgets of athletic depts. around the U.S. that sports are a big thing. I pose a philosophical question as to whether this is the direction this country should be taking. </p>
<p>Also, I am not personally attacking anyone’s kids. I have nothing against athletes. I just don’t agree that they should receive PREFERENCE over other students. It is obvious that a great many ED slots go to kids because of their athletic ability. The fact that they do indicates that athletes are important to the school’s mission. I just don’t agree that athletics should have such an important role in post-secondary education. Many people have suggested that one simply finds a school where it is not the focus. However, that rules out a huge number of schools and leaves a few where the academic fit may not be there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t have a dog in this fight however, I would really like to know what exactly constitutes being less qualified? Should an athlete be admitted, he will still have to maintain academic standards to continue with is sport or remain in school (just like any other student).</p>
<p>It is discussed time and time again about admissions to highly selective schools being a “holistic process” and about schools building a class that consists of a community of learners. However, it all seems to fall on deaf ears. No one is denying that schools are interested in students that are dancers, singers, artists, musicians and they too are admitted. </p>
<p>Unless your student is presenting perfect SAT scores and Grades the vast majority of people will seem to be less qualified. We have seen that even students with perfect scores are not guaranteed admission. Perfect scores are still not the end all and the be all, it just means that you’ve cleared one hurdle and it gets your case heard before the committee because still there will be students who bring more or less to the table than your’s is bringing.</p>
<p>My rant is that most of these rants about athletes, legacies, URMs, developmental admits, celebrities, low income students or whatever group of the week is “presumably taking a spot away from somebody’s more deserving kid” only raises it head when we are talking about a handful of schools. </p>
<p>People tend to forget that overall 90 percent of the students applying to HYP are going to be denied. The school is looking to build a class of learners and it would be counter productive to them to admit a whole slew of athletes who can’t finish.</p>
<p>Riddle me this, </p>
<p>Most of us know going in the process, which schools have athletic teams, and which schools don’t. We also know that being a recuited athlete, an URM, a developmental admit or a celebrity is a hook or at least a big tip factor at each ivy league school. The net-net is this is 8 schools out of almost 4000 colleges and universities in this country some don’t even have athletic teams. </p>
<p>That being said, if one finds the concept of schools recruiting athletes to be so egregious, why would want want to or would want their child to apply to a school that upholds this process especially when you know that the process is not changing anytime soon because a various of number of admissions reps have even stated that having a diverse class of students is consistent with their institutional mission?</p>
<p>GFC-
I don’t doubt that dedication to a sport spills into other areas of life, but that could be said of many things. Dancing pointe, being a skilled musician, etc. all teach similar skills and require a tremendous amount of dedication.</p>
<p>I often hear it said that one reason athletics are so valuable is because of the leadership, teamwork, etc., etc. it teaches people. Personally, I feel there are kids that are predisposed to certain characteristics and who have certain values and these can be developed from almost any activity the child engages in. I don’t feel that athletics corners the market on that. You can learn a lot about teamwork, leadership and responsibility from a job at McDonald’s, from staging a play and from playing in an orchestra.</p>
<p>The athletes at our hs run the gamut from wonderful, upstanding citizens to disrespectful, hard-partying bigots. I don’t think it has anything to do with being an athlete, it has to do with being human. Some just turn out better than others. If athletic training were so important to character development, you would not see all the scandals that exist in the sports world today. Also, many athletes do not exhibit the tolerance to gay people that is seen in the arts (notice how few professional athletes admit to being gay).</p>
<p>
You can keep lobbing stuff out … but it doesn’t mean it will stick. Most D1 schools do NOT have a lot of varsity sports and even less scholarships and are very big schools. What ever breaks some athletes may get have virtually no affect on whether a non-athlete is admitted to those schools. Arguing the place in sports at the schools is another argument and you’ll get a lot more support but carrying the argument over to implying more qualified students are “losing” their slot to the football player just does not have alot of legs.</p>
<p>As a bunch of posters have mentioned this is a much bigger issue at smaller non-scholarship D3 schools where they tend to have more varsity sports and athletes may make up a fair portion of the student mix. However these schools tend to not give as “big” breaks as some athletes get at football/basketball factory D1 schools. In addition, the biggest problem I have with your argument is you mention musicians and actors … the same exact argument that you make against athletes can be made against a cellist or singer … why should an applicant with stronger academic credentials be denied admission for a student with fine (but not as as strong) credentials but who can play a mean cello. Because the school is deciding the mix of interests it wants in it’s class among the qualified applicants. </p>
<p>Or are you arguing that schools that schools should accept being on strictly academic qualifications.</p>