<p>Two must-read columns, in order of publication (the second is a response to the first):</p>
<p>Great post.</p>
<p>My daughter was looking for a college that would provide both a challenging academic experience and a positive athletic experience. She considered many DIII options, but ultimately decided Chicago would provide the best overall experience. She received her good news in December, and will be joining the class of 2012 this fall. Like Ryan McCall, the author of the second column, she was very impressed with Coach Hall, and his approach to creating a running program that allows the athletes to be students first. </p>
<p>For those who are skeptical of antecdotal evidence and prefer more systematic evidence, read "Reclaiming the Game: College Sports and Educational Values" by William Bowen and Sarah Levin. They compare students at the Ivy League, NESCAC (schools like Amherst), and the UAA (Chicago and others). They find statistical evidence that at Ivy League and NESCAC schools, the athletes really are "different" --they have different academic profiles coming into the school, and have different outcomes during school. UAA schools, on the other hand, do not show such divergence between athletes and other students. Coaches at UAA schools fill their teams with student-athletes that are statistically indistinguishable from their non-athlete peers. The book actually praises the UAA conference in general, and Chicago in particular, for being a model for what college athletic programs should be, but too often are not.</p>
<p>Well I would have to agree with the first article. My daughter is a student- athlete at Chicago and I know a few members of her team that were recruited and are barely at a 2.0 GPA. I also know of students who left that (recruited athletes) because they couldn't cut it academically. We received a parent survey last year, the recruitment of athletes and the awarding them university scholars awards is the the only concern I stated( strongly)in response. Yes, I know it is against NCAA division III rules, but the University Scholars awards states it is based on academics, EC, or talent. It makes it broad enough to cover themselves. If the recruits were such a good match for Chicago the coaches would not have to advocate for them. I noticed on previous posts on this board that someone stated their was some resistance from admissions this year to the recruiting lists. Hopefully, they are making changes!</p>
<p>DS applied RD to U of C and has the highly valued "resume'" to be considered for admission to U of C as well as any of the top schools. He too is a talented athlete that has great potential to add to any college team. He selected his list of schools based on their academic merits first. If he is offered admission, his athletic involvement would be extra.</p>
<p>momof3boyz, same with my daughter, she realized that academics had to come first because she will not become a professional athlete. She loves it at Chicago. In her case she really enjoys the student athlete experience. I am sure your son will too. For her and many of her teammates the frusration of the recruited athletes that don't measure up academically is that these teammates bond and it is hard to watch a friend fail because they were put in a situation where they didn't belong.</p>
<p>It's got to be hard to find qualified students and qualified athletes. Certainly your D knows that there's no "easy way" around Chicago academics, and that, coupled with the intense time commitment of athletics, is tough to handle, probably too tough even for myself.</p>
<p>Glad to hear your D is doing well, though!</p>
<p>I agree with toshima's daughter. I am also a student athlete. I chose to be a walk-on on one of the teams and I've watched some of my closest friends try to cope with an academic environment they would not have otherwise chosen if they were not recruited. They end up not doing very well and hating it here and it's difficult to watch. I'm not saying that most of my team is this way, but there is a fairly significant portion. I know that I was very disappointed to learn after I got in here that Chicago does recruit athletes so heavily and allows them to get in and receive merit based aid due to athletics because it seems so contrary to what the University stands for. My coaches, however, have said that this year the admissions office is a little less receptive towards the recruiting list. I'm not sure if this is because my team has been recruiting so heavily in the last years or because so many people have been quitting.</p>
<p>From my limited understanding of what goes on Chicago athletic-wise, it's that different coaches spend different time and effort into recruiting. Some are very vigorous at seeking out each individual; others don't put that much into it.</p>
<p>Is the aid athletes get the same as the merit-based university scholars? I don't think so. I know a lot of university scholars who were chosen solely on grounds of merit (i.e. non-athletes and white). For example, poster midmo's son and poster SBDad's son were both awarded merit-based scholarships. If you're interested in their sons' profiles, I recommend you contact them individually, but from what they have posted about their children, they both sound like extremely accomplished individuals who won the scholarship on merit terms alone. Of the other friends I have who are merit winners... all but one is white, none are athletes.</p>
<p>One athlete friend told me that the terms of her aid package were fuzzy, but she was not a College Honor Scholar or a University Scholar (i.e. the scholarships that Chicago advertises as merit-based). It's possible that Chicago has under-the-table athlete-only scholarships. </p>
<p>If Chicago is giving athletes a financial boost to non-athletes but still offers the merit-based scholarships at the rate it advertises to merit-based recipients, I think that's fair.</p>
<p>Clarification: I am not saying that University Scholar award only goes to athletes, I am saying that it sometimes is given to people solely because they are athletes.
It might balance out but I know 2 athletes on my team alone who have received the University Scholar award (30,000 a year, definitely not need based) and struggle to maintain the 2.0 they need to participate in athletics. Neither one of these recruits had any extra curricular activities aside from their sport in high school and neither graduated in the top 20% of their class. From being in a sport all of my life, I know this happens at all division 3 schools. Because they aren't allowed to officially give money to top recruits they give a lot of merit-based aid because how else can they persuade them to come here as opposed to a division one or two school? I do think, however, that only the very top recruits in each sport get these scholarships and I also think its something the university tries to play down. Like I said, as someone who had take multiple loans to attend here, I find it very disheartening because when I came here I thought the University of Chicago was above that. I understand that they have to recruit but they don't have to pay people to go here.</p>