<p>Let’s not have any illusions here. I know for a fact that the most highly selective NESCAC schools admit a significant number of athletes in some sports who would not even be considered seriously if not for athletic considerations. The process is described in general terms in Reclaiming the Game (a book which for most other purposes is notable mostly for the pompous self-righteousness of its authors).</p>
<p>
I believe the NESCAC uses a system very similar to the IVY league … and I agree the majoirty of athletes are above the median admit academically or within one standard deviation … and lots of non-athlete applicants are also in the first band below the median admit … otherwise it would be Lake Wobegon where everyone is above average. But I believe it is also true a much higher percentage of athletes have below median academic backgrounds than the overall student population … not a lot lower (like many stud FB palyers at top BCS schools) but somewhat lower.</p>
<p>In the same AJC article, it mentions that 73.5 percent of athletes (not just football players) were special admissions exceptions, compared to 6.6 percent of the student body as a whole. More than half the scholarship athletes are special admits.</p>
<p>This looks extremely lopsided.</p>
<p>Now again, though, to look at raw numbers, Georgia’s freshman class is about 4800 students. Figure that about 250 of those freshman students are recruited athletes (I think I am overestimating here the number of recruited athletes in one class, but no matter). </p>
<p>So that means 183 students were given exceptions because they were athletes, and about 304 students were given exceptions for other reasons.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone is arguing with the claim that universities value athletes highly. But to say that universities are lowering standards for athletes, and not others, is simply not true. </p>
<p>If I figured correctly, more students overall were given special admissions exceptions for non-athletic reasons than athletic ones. </p>
<p>What is worrisome is not that universities make special exceptions for athletes, because if these numbers are right, universities make more exceptions for non-athletes than athletes. </p>
<p>What is worrisome is that athletes as a group need the special admissions status so much. </p>
<p>Universities could not make any special admit exceptions, but this would affect more non-athletes than athletes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is a poor analogy to the situation described, because giving out the answers would improve performance to students who might not otherwise perform at that level.</p>
<p>A better analogy would be that the class is Pass/Fail and that the professor sets passing at 70%. Let say that 5 students get only 68%, but she lets them pass. That wouldn’t be a so much of a problem in terms of fairness, if those were the only 5 to get 68% or above. What the professor is doing is essentially lowering the bar for passing.</p>
<p>But let’s say there were 12 students who got 68%, but the professor passed 5 of them and failed the other 7. That would seem unfair.</p>
<p>But then let’s say that those 5 always came to class, responded to questions, participated in discussion, got the discussion going in an intelligent way and made the class that much more interesting for other students, while the other 7 never really came to class etc. So the professor made a judgement call here and considered that as a factor–she made a special exception because those students showed something special that the other 7 who got 68% did not, and the professor valued their contribution.</p>
<p>Maybe that’s not fair as well. </p>
<p>But do you really want universities to never make exceptions?</p>