<p>
</p>
<p>Music, theater, etc. are arts and part of the function of a university as much as English, philosophy, history and biology. Athletics is not. I can’t believe you actually put athletics on the same level as musical talent.</p>
<p>You go, mantori suzuki. </p>
<p>The “so what,” Bay, is that it’s not right. It’s pathetic that colleges lower their standards to get athletic recruits (and yes, my alma mater does it too, doesn’t make it right or laudable). It’s pathetic that there are special coaches and study sessions and classes and what-not available to athletes as if they are somehow special because they can toss a ball.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Whatever for? Developing athletic ability isn’t the mission of a university. Developing academic ability is. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Because some of us are disgusted by adulation paid to athletes. We’d rather see that adulation go to people who are doing something more important in the world. It galls me every time that my kids’ hs newsletter starts off with “congrats to the football team for doing X” and only way down on the list is “congrats to the National Merit semifinalists” or whatever. It should be the other way around. Academics before athletics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>or artistic, I assume</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can’t be serious… but I know you are unfortunately…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess you will need to educate all the universities fielding competitive teams, that they are not fulfilling their missions as you see fit. No doubt they will bow down to your superior intellect on the subject. You go, Pizzagirl.</p>
<p>I thought a strong mind and a strong body went together. Doesn’t that concept go back to the Greeks?<br>
I would think in this day and age with obesity at high levels - folks would applaud role models who put in the effort required to be physically fit.</p>
<p>That speaks to individual students’ sports and physical activity participation, not spectator sports that only condition the handful of athletes that participate in them. IMO, a fitness culture–which encompasses riding a bike vs taking a bus across campus, or an intramural program where all can participate regardless of skill–fosters “sound mind in sound body” more than fielding competitive teams in spectator sports.</p>
<p>And being/staying physically fit is laudable but has zero to do with competitive sports.</p>
<p>Having a competitive music/art department has little to do with fostering creativity or promoting art in/to the average student.</p>
<p>“Because some of us are disgusted by adulation paid to athletes. We’d rather see that adulation go to people who are doing something more important in the world.”</p>
<p>At last–someone who comes right out with the real reason some people on this list are incensed about the recognition of athletic prowess. Outright jealousy.</p>
<p>Just to give some context, I am one of the most nonathletic nerds in the world. However, S1 is one of the people y’all love to hate–admitted to one of the most selective LACs in the country because of his athletic accomplishments and ability, even though his grades and scores alone would not have gotten him a sniff (I know–its not fay-ur. I’m so sad for all of you). The irony is that sports were not a big deal at his high school (the Science Olympiad team gets much more recognition).</p>
<p>But even leaving aside the tremendous positive impact that interscholastic sports have had on the lives of all of my children, I would observe that sports potentially have a unifying effect on a community quite unlike any other activity. The reason is simple–sports are much more accessible to the average viewer than music, Science Olympiad, etc. So its no accident that colleges with exciting, successful sports programs often have very strong alumni loyalty, and that athletes are often lionized (although not at the college that S1 attends).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Huh? That’s a non-sequitur. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes; for example, there’s no loyalty among U of Chicago alums for their school, at all (tongue-in-cheek; they are among the most passionate fans for their school if I judge by cc posts, and good for them).</p>
<p>Sports tend to unify, well, those people who care about sports.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely. Just like having a competitive math department has little to do with fostering math skills in the non-math student. But math is part of the function of a university, as is English, foreign language, the sciences and the arts. Is the function of a university to provide the farm-teams for the major sports leagues? If so, then let’s at least be intellectually honest and let the athletes who aren’t interested in school major in football (etc) instead of pretending that they’re majoring in English or biology or communications or whatever. </p>
<p>BTW, the NY Yankees manager and former pro player himself was an industrial engineering major at a t20 :-)</p>
<p>And how exactly are you deciding what is and isn’t part of the function of a university? Sports aren’t the only non-academic pursuits sponsored at universities in this country. In fact there are plenty of majors, i.e. whole courses of study, available that aren’t really academic.</p>
<p>The college admissions system is set up to reward the talent of plenty of non-athletes too. That’s why there’s an EC section. Admissions officers have confessed that the contents of that section can tip the balance for or against candidates. The kid who plays the oboe and has good stats, might be accepted over the kid who plays the flute and has superior stats. Why is that? Is it the goal of a university to produce a balanced orchestra? Or a radio station, a newspaper, a theater, or an ultimate frisbee club? Yet many do worry about sustaining these things. And my personal pet peeve: why the heck does one school need 15 a cappella groups? Why should all of them be supported monetarily by the school when 2 or 3 could serve the educational purpose, that is if there even is one. Yet adcoms look for kids to fill all those extra-curricular spots too, even though I don’t think they are central to the mission of a college.</p>
<p>The proof of that is the fact that so many high schoolers have become quite mercenary about their involvements. Kids admit that they are only doing x y z activity so as to have something impressive to include on their college application. They put in community service hours not because they care, but because they think colleges care. They’ve learned how to sound oh so passionate about everything. Worse, they don’t quit EC’s they’re tired of and are no longer committed to (thereby annoying the serious participants) just so they won’t appear inconsistent to the colleges. To me, favoring a student like this is much more distasteful than rewarding with admission a kid who plays well a sport he loves.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never said that sports were the only non-academic pursuits sponsored at universities. Universities sponsor all kinds of things (student dances, the Greek system, campus festivals, homecoming parades, the jujitsu club, etc.) that aren’t part of the mission of the university. </p>
<p>What courses of study are you thinking of that aren’t academic? Would you say that art history or music theory are academic, but art and music themselves aren’t?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m rather cynical that the adcoms really know if the orchestra needs another oboe or a flute, myself. But that’s just me. I think they are more in love with the idea that the campus needs another oboist or flutist more than they really know what the orchestra needs. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, as someone who went to a university well-known for its top theater program, its top journalism program and its top music program, I would argue that those things were indeed parts of my school’s mission.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pretty much. I don’t really know what they teach in art classes, so I couldn’t comment in that regard, but I don’t think music performance classes are academic.</p>
<p>Things like business, marketing and leisure studies perhaps tread a fine line.</p>
<p>So pizzagirl’s school once upon time decided to offer theater, journalism, and music activities, and then experienced success in those endeavors. Now they are an accepted part of the mission of the school? Hmm, sounds like what has happened with sports teams…</p>
<p>Pizzagirl - your elitism is bubbling up to the surface here.
Athletic in the mission statement?
Let look-
Penn State:
</p>
<p>University of Alabama:
No mention of a Football Championship.</p>
<p>Here are two D-1 univeristies with well-renowned athletic programs. Yet, I don’t see athletics mentioned anywhere here.</p>