<p>People here always seem to say that my athletic ECs are weak with 4 years of football and 3 of wrestling. Now I really don't have any academic ECs, but I was wondering do colleges like athletic or academic ECs better. To me it seems athletic ECs should be looked at more highly because I put in like 15 hrs/wk for 20 weeks a year in football alone whereas most academic ECs will meet like 1 hr/wk for the school year. So how do colleges weigh academic ECs vs. athletic ECs?</p>
<p>I have more academic ECs more. I would like to see an answer to your question/</p>
<p>Depends on the college and whether you're recruited. Ivy leagues and hardcore academic colleges look much more highly on some of the difficult academic EC's than they do athletic. But, if you are a possilble recruit, those atheltic EC's will stand out.</p>
<p>Playing a sport would help. It shows another side of you that doesn't say all i do is thinking and studying. It's the same about any other EC. You can dance, paint, be a DJ, do service projects, etc etc. Athletic EC's also show dedication. It takes time to condition, and during a season, it's very difficult to focus on other stuff due to matches and practices that lasts till 6:30.</p>
<p>However, you definitely should have some academic EC's if you apply to Ivys, but if your recs can say you are a very good intellectual contributor, it should be alright.</p>
<p>I play a varsity sport with 18-20 hrs/wk, and about 3 hours/wk during off season since 9th grade. The only academic EC I have really is math league, NHS, NSHS... Other activities are not really academic based...<br>
I think athletics should be given equal weight if you're a good student (high GPA/SAT) because you would prove by course load that you are intellectually capable but you also prove that you are part of a team and that you get out rather than keeping your nose in a book all day.</p>
<p>Don't worry about how colleges will look at your ECs, just do what you love. Colleges will look to your course schedule and grades for your academic prowess; the ECs will tell them how you like to spend your time outside of class, and give them a little insight into what kind of a person you are. Your athletics combined with good grades shows them you value your development as a "whole" person (mental and physical), and likely have learned some good life lessons from being a part of a team.</p>
<p>Athletic EC's IMO should be looked at in a bigger perspective. Athletic people don't receive enough credit.
For soccer, it's practice every day, and games practically every other day. During the season is the toughest part of the year. Time management is critical. I have to end up doing my homework on the bus to and from the games.
Not to mention all the hard work and sweat and blood you put in to all those grueling practices and games.
IMO, most athletes redefine hard work and seem more fit for the working world, which is why I think Athletics should be viewed greater in whole.</p>
<p>Then compare this to some nerd who can only post up numbers.
Just my opinion on why athletic EC's deserve more credit.</p>
<p>Exactly Greens I put it hours every day for football, even in the offseason, but some put in like an hour a week for some academic EC. Although I do think that community service ECs should be looked upon around the same level as athletics.</p>
<p>its nice to have a mix but unless your a VERY good athletic i tend to think that academic ECs are better</p>
<p>this coming from someone who is heavily involved in academic ECs and not so involved in athletic ones</p>
<p>during school season i easily hit 20 hours (two a days every day even weekends.....yippeee :( ) and out of season i hit at least 10 hours a week with only about a total of a month (give or take a week) off a year</p>
<p>the point is that Athletic EC's (if serious) shows commitment and work ethic but i still dont think they should count for more because my friend, who basically is complete opposite of me (all Academic EC and no athletics), is busy almost as much if not more doing mission trips, community service, fundraisers, or studying for scholar bowl which also shows commitment and work ethic</p>
<p>basically they should not favor one over the other but just look at each EC and give more credit to commitment/work/sacrifices needed for each one</p>
<p>There is a lot of merit to athletics. They build character, resilience under pressure, leadership, and a work ethic. They also show tremendous dedication, and in the case of a year-round sport, tremendous passion for something. Athletes also will put in more time for their activity than anyone else with all this glorified model UN/math team/etc. (which I participate in as well). Also, a lifetime athlete that is spectacular academically has demonstrated that (s)he is willing to resist much of the peer pressure to enjoy the fruits of high school popularity that prominent varsity athletes are all subjected to. In other words, they will not likely be allured as strongly by the college party scene that steers many freshman away from books. </p>
<p>A couple years on an average varsity team may not help so much for Ivies, but I can't possibly believe that excellence in a sport is not valued, particularly in light of the unquestionably more rigorous commitment in comparison to these "academic ECs".</p>
<p>Academic people get in when they win the AIME/USAMO/STS/ISEF/regional debate/regional math/etc. awards, not by going to math team two times a week for half an hour after school.</p>
<p>bump this thread</p>
<p>A student's essay will tell the admissions people how to value his EC's, whether they be athletic or academic. You learn so much from making a commitment to an activity and explaining what you learned is part of how admissions gets to know you. That is why some kids who have some unique but not necessarily impressive EC's get admitted... it's not what you do so much as how you do it and what you take away from it. It can be sports, work, church, caring for your siblings, math team, or any other activity. There is no universal point system that admission officers use to determine the value of a particular EC.</p>
<p>The short EC essay or the 500-word one? I'm not sure that the latter is supposed to back your ECs in some way.</p>
<p>Regarding Post#1,
I agree. As someone who had significant academic ECs, I struggled to
have athletic ECs. My friends who had athletic ECs had very little time
on their hands compared to me. it was also harder for them to get to
equivalent level national achievements because of the increased
levels of competition.</p>
<p>It is easier to have academic ECs than athletic ECs. This may be a reason
why top athletes are treated so nicely by the top schools. The issue with
any EC though is that there are established levels of awards and if the
applicant is lacking in them it is going to relatively reflect on their app.</p>
<p>Passion and the number of hours one puts in is important, however, what
was the output other than focus and teamwork- what are the achievements
in terms of awards? Whe thinking from this perspective stduents with
academic ECs are going to have a ton of more awards typically than the
equivalent athlete?</p>
<p>State/national rankings/titles can be used as awards, but there's no "athletic awards" section, so it's tough to fit them in with the other necessary information in the activity section of the common app.</p>
<p>Athletes don't get enough respect.</p>
<p>They require BOTH physical and mental endurance. By the time you get home after a 3 hour practice, "screw hw" is the first thing on your mind. How much energy does the typical academic EC consume? Very little. Not to put down academic stuff, but the typical athletic EC requires more dedication and effort than the typical academic counterpart.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>While I hate to admit it (I'm no athlete), you're absolutely right. Athletes deserve all the cred they get, ESPECIALLY the good ones. Good for them.</p>
<p>athletes deserve credit, and they definitely are underappreciated</p>
<p>and I also agree that some academic ECs are just ridiculous in how much little time commitment is needed, but on the other side of the spectrum, there are stuff that are overly time consuming. for example, I probably spend 20 hours+ a week for competitions in my club, which participates in NOSB, NSB, SciOly, and Quiz Bowl (and we make states almost every year and usually place in top 10 at nats..)
but can't really compare sitting at a desk reading material with working your ass off out there in the muck and stuff =D</p>
<p>I play varsity basketball and taekwondo. I'll never be recruited, but I know they require much time commitment, the sad truth is, athletes probably will not receive much credit unless they are very good. And I mean very very good. </p>
<p>At the same time, I feel people really are not giving academic EC's enough credit. I agree with yjna4006, some academic EC's require a lot of time. I probably devote equal, if not more, effort to my math club as basketball.</p>