<p>Every so often questions are posed about how academics and athletics really mix. While there is anecdotal evidence that the time commitment of D1 athletics impact the ability of an athlete to major in STEM areas, at Princeton a quick and dirty study opines that athletes tend to cluster in majors, and those majors are NOT in the STEM area.</p>
<p>This is also true about other extracurriculars, such as sorority or fraternity membership and marching band. More true about sports it is likely. It is also a stereotype that geeks like sports less than “normal folks” so those of us who like STEM and sports are prized LOL.</p>
<p>Engineers were more likely to drop marching band or be thrown out of fraternities due to lack of attendance when their programs get tougher. I was pulling down 18 hours of class per week (12 is normal) and had to drop out of the Greek system because I had to miss events.</p>
<p>stemit - Interesting stats as it pertains to Princeton and the BCS schools. I’d really like to see some broader datapoints for the entire NCAA across all sports if it exists.</p>
<p>I would think the Ivys would be higher overall for STEM based upon their academic focus, and flexibility. I’ve known a few baseball STEM majors (over the years) at sons Ivy school and they have all been pitchers (slightly less time commitment). Any STEM position players at P? My son has told me more than once that he couldn’t be a STEM major if he was a baseball position player. I think it would be next to impossible to be a STEM major at a major conference college in just about any sport…but there are always exceptions. Best of luck to him or her.</p>
<p>To the best of my knowledge, there are no STEM majors who are sophs and up on my sons team. Over the past 3 years, I believe there have been 2 (one went to med school, the other was a financial engineer [whatever that is]).</p>
<p>Many incoming freshman matriculated believing that STEM will be their major (called concentrations for some reason), only to realize very quickly that STEM requirements are not compatible with the athletic demands. My son was one of this group - his early thoughts about chemical engineering now a distant memory (economics is his choice today).</p>
<p>During the recruiting process, however, EVERY coach went to great lengths to assure us that STEM would be no problem - including d3, Ivy, and top d1 powers. Looking back, I realize it’s part of the sales pitch. The coaches recognize that the players will generally conclude - in light of the athletic load - that there just isn’t enough time left in the week to be at the top of their game academically in a STEM major (and the academic competition in these schools in the STEM area is intense).</p>
<p>For us, it is no big deal. If one of the goals of choosing a college (and for him an Ivy) is employment post-graduation, his school does very well and his teammates exceptionally well. His teammates employment success (very few turn pro in their sport) is remarkable in light of the fact that their GPA is around the school mean or slightly less. </p>
<p>While my wife and I are not ecstatic about the “quality” of education (meaning really large classes taught by professors whose language is not English, backed by TAs who are not necessarily good teachers), the end product (a rapidly maturing young man ready to sally forth into the real world) exceeds our expectations.</p>
<p>D was an Ivy STEM major and 3 season athlete (XC/Track Indoor and Outdoor), had an on-campus job about 8 hours per week and was a member of a social club something like a sorority during senior year as well as team captain. She was busy ALL THE TIME but somehow made it work. She had priority registration for labs which was very helpful.</p>
<p>S tells me that the generalization doesn’t seem to apply to Princeton fencing. He concentrated in physics, and quickly named a handful of teammates who majored in civil, electrical, and chemical engineering, and another in math.</p>
<p>I would look at degree programs based on whether you can graduate and go out into the workforce or attend graduate school…that would negate all sales jobs because you don’t really need a background when dealing with certain product nor is a degree of any kind necessary…</p>
Good point schoolhouse. My son has told me about 25-30% of his Ivy schools engineering majors (only part of STEM) actually go into practical engineering after undergraduate. The majority go to grad school or get hired by Wall Street financial firms for their math talents. I was very stunned to learn that.</p>
<p>^ I’m missing the point. It is true that some STEM grads get high paying Wall Street (or consulting) jobs, others get jobs directly in their field, some go on to grad school, and others go on to law school or med school. Does this abundance of options somehow de-legitimize their STEM studies?</p>
<p>I don’t think any implication was made de-legitimizing STEM studies. On the contrary, the options available to STEM students is yet another reason to consider them.</p>
I don’t see it that way. Life is about options. I was just surprised to learn where most of son’s engineering undergrads are gravitating toward. It is strange to me that he is an engineering major but pursuing a direction that is in the minority after graduation. I don’t know enough about the other STM majors to comment.</p>
<p>During any Division I college football telecast, when majors are displayed, there is usually a large prevalence of Sports Theory majors, Criminal Justice majors, Hotel and Restaurant Management majors, etc. </p>
<p>I don’t recall seeing many Quantum Mechanics majors or Organic Chemistry majors or Nuclear Physics majors, etc.</p>
<p>(A very long time ago I also had direct knowledge of this phenomenon at one particular institution.)</p>