<p>You can think about math and science while you run
It is possible to study in airports on your way to or from soccer tournaments
You can play a sport, play an instrument, do well in school and have a life if you are efficient
Title IX applies to more than sports
Vector calculus and sorority life do mix</p>
<p>Sports are fun. It's none of your business whether people get in a school because of sports and not grades. You worked hard in academics and didnt get in. They worked just as hard in athletics and got in. It's life and you better learn to deal with it. If you don't like sports, don't take part in sports. Worry about yourself and don't try to justify that athletics is unjustifiable.</p>
<p>"You can think about math and science while you run
It is possible to study in airports on your way to or from soccer tournaments"</p>
<p>Playing devil's advocate, you don't at all think that this attitude implies that studies comes a very weak second to athletics? I mean I'm all for athletics as a crucial part of education but do we really want to suggest that learning should be done in small pockets of down time from the game?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Playing devil's advocate, you don't at all think that this attitude implies that studies comes a very weak second to athletics? I mean I'm all for athletics as a crucial part of education but do we really want to suggest that learning should be done in small pockets of down time from the game?
[/quote]
reading your posts I'm left with a few questions ...</p>
<p>do you raise the same concerns and ask the same questions of the parents of a musician, dancer, actor, or any activity other than sports that a child pursues in focused way?</p>
<p>In your earlier post you discussed how you did not steer your kids to sports like some moms did ... what would you have done if your child wanted to focus on sports intensely? Would you have deined them their passion?</p>
<p>In your earlier post you talked about your kids private prep and the time denied academics because of sports ... to me it read like you believe this is a recent development. Do you know where the preps got this model? (The idea of being of sound mind, spirit, and body goes back to the ancients)</p>
<p>I have only posted a few times but feel I must respond to a few comments here. My cousin was heavily recruited for a sport. One school that initially pursued him heavily after he attended summer camps was Harvard. As soon as the freshman coach looked at his grades and scores he told him not to bother applying there or any Ivy League school. Sports will definitely give you a leg up but you need the goods to back it up for a HYPS school.</p>
<p>And to PofIH post:
"Wake up fellow Americans before it is too late. Our overpaying baskeball players loose to lowly Greece in international champioships."</p>
<p>Do you know anything about international basketball? Greece happens to be a country that has always been competitive in basketball. Children there play basketball as much or more than soccer.</p>
<p>i believe athletics are a big part of the admission offices at the top colleges in the country, just like development cases, legacies, etc are. I had an athletic tip to a couple of top colleges. Do i think the tip helped me get into the schools? I think it helped but they wouldn't admit me or anyone else if they didn't feel the student couldn't do the work. I don't feel like i took a spot from someone else. I think the OP is sort of looking down on the athletes as people who aren't good enough for the prestigious colleges. It takes time and dedication to excel at a sport and do well in the classroom that i think your missing. That's just the attitude i get from the OP posts.</p>
<p>There are still people who play for Harvard who have(had) mediocre stats. But yes, overall, most of them are great students too.</p>
<p>"do you raise the same concerns and ask the same questions of the parents of a musician, dancer, actor, or any activity other than sports that a child pursues in focused way?"</p>
<p>Yes, I'm all against taking up Extra Curriculur Activities to get into Universities. See these are suppose to be EXTRA and should be done when you have time from academics and not the other way around.</p>
<p>Universities are for higher learning and let it be like that. Let student enjoy their Extra Curricular Activities. THose who want to make those activities as their career then they should go to specialized learning of higher institutes meant for that like San Francisco Art Academy.</p>
<p>If a Football player goes to Academy of Football and gets a 10 million scholarship to attend I don't think anyone has any issue but when someone gets into Harvard to play Football and gets the scholarship then there is a problem.</p>
<p>Harvard is not meant to be a football academy.</p>
<p>"gets into Harvard to play Football and gets the scholarship then there is a problem."</p>
<p>Well since Harvard is in the ivy league they aren't allowed to give out scholarships for athletics. They can give need-based fin. aid only. Just wanted to clear that up.</p>
<p>ParentOfIvyHope,</p>
<p>Does this means that participating the university's orchestra or choir is not part of a higher learning experience? I have not been following the thread, and it seems it is related to sports, but that comment caught my attention.</p>
<p>Anyone else find it ironic that this whole thing is about sports and the Ivy League is merely a sports conference?</p>
<p>artiesdad :The point is not about not taking part in extra curricular activites which can be anything from sports to participating in University Orchestra.</p>
<p>It is about making that Extra Curricular Activity more than the Academics making Academics as a secondary prepositions.</p>
<p>Most of the sports students I know devote more than 3 -4 hrs a day on that sport and then spend weekends on it. That makes the Academics as secondary. </p>
<p>If such a sport person then go to Stanford over a person who actually devoted that many hours to academics and did sports or band or dance as an extra curricular activity then it is a problem.</p>
<p>Because Stanford is not meant to be a sports academy instead a place of higher learning and to participate in sports and dance or band as an Extra Curricular Activity.</p>
<p>Most US universities take a broader view of higher education that includes ECs and sports. We have lots of schools--more than any other country--and there is room for many types--even at the "elite" schools. You know what they say--if you don't like it.........</p>
<p>Mens sana in corpore sano.</p>
<p>BTW ... one of Harvard's outstanding lacrosse players scored 1570 (M+V) on his SATs and was top 1% of his graduating class -- and an all american lacrosse player. </p>
<p>He certainly belongs there -- more so because he is both an outstanding student and an outstanding athlete.</p>
<p>barrons :We were able to afford it in the past but now the competition is increasing. We are no longer at the top in Olympic medals and we most likely will be displaced by China in 2008 as the highest holder of Gold medalists also.</p>
<p>Most of the post docs or even graduate students at the top univerisities are of foreign Origin.</p>
<p>And all this is happening because we are not changing. What worked in the past will not necessarily always work.</p>
<p>If you want to dominate sports then have a special academy. If you want to dominate research then have universities dedicated to that. </p>
<p>Don't mix and match. </p>
<p>Otherwise our Multi-Million dollar Basketball team will always lose to lowly GREECE.</p>
<p>And our public will remain of the opinion that a Nobel prize is worth $1.5 Mil.</p>
<p>"do you raise the same concerns and ask the same questions of the parents of a musician, dancer, actor, or any activity other than sports that a child pursues in focused way?"</p>
<p>If the parents were going to the headmaster and lobbying for less attention to academics? You betcha. But strangely enough none of the parents whose children took piano, acting, or any other activities ever thought that schoolwork/school activities should revolve around their child's activities. This happened to include kids in professional theatre, serious music students, competition level riders and one girl who worked her olympic hopeful skiing around school. It was only the ' organized sports' parents who complained about difficult teachers and too much work.</p>
<p>"In your earlier post you discussed how you did not steer your kids to sports like some moms did ... what would you have done if your child wanted to focus on sports intensely? Would you have deined them their passion?"</p>
<p>My kids actually did focus on sports intensely. Vigorous sports that they loved, they've fenced all their lives and have two blacks belts. Sports are an important part of who they are. But would I have encouraged sports over their education? Are you kidding? Let's remember we're talking about a school here. If someone wants their precious to be the next best thing than they should do it on their own time instead of trying to reshape the school experience of other children so that little is learned and yet A's are easily obtained. </p>
<p>"In your earlier post you talked about your kids private prep and the time denied academics because of sports ... to me it read like you believe this is a recent development. Do you know where the preps got this model? (The idea of being of sound mind, spirit, and body goes back to the ancients)"</p>
<p>Sound mind, body and spirit is all about balance. It's not balanced when money enters the picture.(Or admission to an elite school) The push for more time with the coach and less with a book is recent. Trust me, Socrates wasn't letting his kids get an easy A just so they could get out there and play ball.</p>
<p>So if USA will be displaced by China in the Olympics, isn't it all the more reason for colleges to recruit atheles ;)</p>
<p>God PoIH, your logic has got to be the most retarded thing ever and *** do you have against Greece.</p>
<p>Despite Greece being up and coming, that was their only place in the FIBA championship...US is still in first place overall.</p>
<p>I've said this before: You can't have it both ways. One person can't insert themselves in the very rigorous admissions process for a slot into one of the ultra elites (HYPS, etc.) and then turn around and decry the very reason they are the best ranked, most prestigious, most sought after slots. The reason they have attained that status in peoples' minds (and it's perception -- I'm not saying that the prestige is worth it all -- I don't think so and if my kids don't want to use daddy's Legacy, then so be it. I just want them to be happy and attend the college that best suits them) is that they are able to cobble together an incredibly diverse and high-achieving entering class. That includes people whom you call "undeserving". Well guess what? The schools' adcoms have let these "undeserving" folks in and it's not as if their ranking/prestige etc. has plummeted.</p>
<p>You want purely stats based admissions? Those schools CERTAINLY exist. Canada & European colleges are rife with them. ECs up the wazoo? They don't care. They want your GPA, class rank, SATs. By all means apply and attend if you feel it meets your kid's needs. However, don't slam the adcoms of the US ultra-elites for their policies. The very thing you don't like about them is the very thing that MAKES them the ultra elites.</p>
<p>Like it or not.</p>
<p>"So if USA will be displaced by China in the Olympics, isn't it all the more reason for colleges to recruit atheles "</p>
<p>That was the reason to be in this position so you would like to change that instead of stengthening it.</p>
<p>Some time complex logic is beyond the understanding of the common public and to them it sounds like garbage.</p>