Before Recruiting in Ivy League, Applying Some Math (New York Times)

Applying to College
81

<p>Born 2 dance - your comments “It’s insulting and egotistical to believe that only the activity you or your child does-- in this case sports-- has any value and ability to teach life skills and lessons.” and “which he implied are NOT learned from other activities, regardless of the time commitment” were not written in my posts and your comments above are fabrications based upon YOUR perceived injustice of IVY admissions. </p>

<p>My posts stated my view that IVYs see these qualities in qualified student athletes and thus want to include that group within their environment and does not state that these traits cannot be developed in anything but athletics.</p>

<p>Good luck with your college admissions process</p>

82

<p>

</p>

<p>Rentacop, you realize that Harvard is prohibited from giving out athletic scholarships, as are all other Ivies?</p>

<p>He may have been promised money, but it wasn’t an athletic scholarship in the truest sense of the word. It could have been need, or based on his family financial situation, since Harvard offers the sliding scale for tuition up to a certain income. </p>

<p>Ivies don’t have committed athletes sign National Letters of Intent, because they aren’t given athletic scholarships.</p>

83

<p>samurailandshark…I would venture a guess that the scholarship offered may be what they will give him in financial aid if he gets his SAT up. He may come from a lower income family, and they were able to manipulate the numbers in his favor.</p>

84

<p>bayou</p>

<p>Julliard is a school for those interested in the Arts, Music, Dance etc. It is not a a school where a student would study economics, engineering, etc. Therefore, excelling in dance, a musical instrument etc. is pertinent to admission. Please tell me how running faster, jumping higher etc. is pertinent to any degree at the ivys?</p>

<p>Again, I think it sends the wrong message to our children. I would prefer these schools first admit on academic quality and then field their teams. It would send a better message to our children. Academics are more important than sports. This is my opinion and is supported by many others.</p>

85

<p>on and on and on… some athletes as qualified as the next kid and some not but bringing something obviously coveted by the institution. Let’s be clear: university is not just an academic institution. There has to be a lot more to it or you could sit at a computer station and learn from the greatest minds and published pieces all day long. The university offers a lifestyle - highly marketed and increasingly branded with each individual schools particular flavor. Find the one that wants you and where you can contribute and everyone’s happy. My eldest son is at an academically tough ivy and he is a varsity athlete. No exceptions made for his coursework (tough mandatory curriculum and no grade inflation) and doing very well! Son 2 going next year to top ivy as a recruit with likely letter. I have no doubt he will continue to succeed. These schools are not looking for a class full of 2400’s, though they surely want plenty. They want kids with spikes - all manner of quantifiable excellence. The ivies happen to value athletic excellence, particularly when combined with very strong (if not tippy tippy top) academics. Don’t forget the traveling businessperson’s adage: "With whom would you want to spend the layover in Cleveland?</p>

86

<p>

</p>

<p>Irrelevant to the topic at hand. We could discuss URMs and legacy all day, but this is about recruited athletes. They are mutually exclusive. Saying “oh but other kids get hooks” doesn’t automatically mean it’s okay for other hooks to exist.</p>

<p>But regardless-- as we’ve seen throughout this thread, there will never be agreement. The recruited athletes and their parents and friends, etc will always believe it’s okay, and those without a dog in the ring will almost always side against it, or if their kids or they are unhooked themselves.</p>

<p>This has just been going round and round, and getting rude and personal.</p>

<p>@CollegeDad16 No need to insult a 17 year old and (seemingly) tongue-in-cheekly wish me luck in the admissions process. Are you really going to put yourself on that level? I never commented on your child getting into college, so no need to bring this to a personal level and comment on me getting into college. That has nothing to do with anything said here.</p>

87

<p>Since I didn’t read the original NYT article discussing the academic recruitment formula, was legacy status factored into the mix?</p>

<p>From previous experiences, D and I know several recruited Ivy athletes who, though certainly good students and fairly strong student athletes, weren’t going to get into their particular Ivy of choice (with their grades and scores) unless one of their parents had attended. As it happened, the legacy variable made a big difference.</p>

88

<p>Newsflash guys:</p>

<p>life isn’t fair.</p>

<p>Deal with it. If you’re going to be upset because someone who worked hard in their own ways (if you even try to counter this with a “4.0 2400 SAT 34230948 hours of EC” argument then I won’t listen) got in a school you were applying to, and you’re so distraught and cynical because of that, you need to sort out your priorities between what’s the most important key to success. A student with Ivy league stats will almost never be snubbed out of a university that is dearly respected in this nation.</p>

89

<p>Hooks are relevant and it’s not tangential to discuss on this forum, because it’s not all about grades and test scores when gaining admission to the Ivies.</p>

<p>So what about the advantage of the kid who has taken individual test prep or tutors to score that tippy top GPA or SAT scores?</p>

<p>Or about the advantages of the kids who can afford to go to the most exclusive prep school with the best teachers/counselors, etc?</p>

<p>What about the advantages of those that can afford to write the check to send their kids to the college of their choice, regardless of financial impact?</p>

<p>Life is about inequities and the college admissions game is no exception. </p>

<p>It’s never, ever, ever going to be about just academic excellence, because then you would have to define what academic excellence is. The kid who scored the highest on the SAT on the first try? The one who won the Science Olympiad? The one who won at the Academic Decathlon? </p>

<p>We are all individuals and what makes us so isn’t so easily quantified. This creates the diverse community that nearly all of the top colleges want. </p>

<p>It’s a tough pill to swallow, but intelligence alone doesn’t predict success, in either academia or life. Read “The Outliers”. There is a fantastic section on several people, including Bill Gates and Christopher Langan. If you aren’t familiar with Langan, or his story, you should read this. He has a 195 IQ and was not academically successful and has not had the kind of life that you would think, considering his genius.</p>

<p>Not everyone is suited for college. Not everyone does well enough in High School to get into the top colleges as a senior, even if they are deserving by all reasonable standards. There are also those late bloomers who achieve much later, or kids who have difficult situations in high school that prevent them from achieving to their highest levels. There are also those incredibly genius kids that don’t turn in their homework, but ace every test and astound their teachers. There are kids that are hungry and moving around from foster home to foster home, or dealing with circumstances and situations that you hope you never have to deal with. </p>

<p>There are even those kids that seemingly do okay in high school despite the odds and given an edge because of athletics - smart, but maybe not the 2400 kind of smart and are given a chance to attend an Ivy League, can rise above their circumstances. There are several studies that say that African American students who attend Ivy league schools instead of Historically Black Colleges have a better chance of not only graduation, but higher levels of wealth after college. </p>

<p>On one level, I understand the discontent that those who see the Ivies as being a place that only should welcome those early academic superstars. But on another, it’s hopelessly misguided - in my opinion - because it doesn’t address the mission of these schools…which is to give a marvelous education to those that gain entry. They get to define how that entrance is gained…not us.</p>

<p>There have been anecdotes over the years from people in admissions and Presidents of some of the best universities in the country that say that they could essentially throw out the whole class and replace them with kids that would be equally deserving of a spot on campus. Some have said they can do that not once, but several times, having such a large number of quality applicants. Do you think that they were only talking about vals and sals with perfect or near perfect GPAs’ and 2400 test scores? Because…I sincerely doubt it.</p>

<p>These admissions folks were talking about the collective classes, at large. How diverse and interesting they are, and how it pains them to deny admissions to so many bright and fantastic kids. It’s just part of their job, to balance the right amount of oboe players with the artists, the athletes and the URM’s and the geographically desirable candidates. It’s how their build their freshman class…and will be forever. </p>

<p>You can argue all day long that it’s not right. It may not be. But it is. It’s how they work. Some win the golden ticket to HPYS. Some don’t. Even without that Ivy League admissions, they can still get an amazing education at quite a large number of universities around the country.</p>

90

<p>Since I had not read the article, I was just curious if the legacy variable played any part in the formula. Perhaps it doesn’t really need to, since it just factors into the general admissions process anyway.</p>

<p>Don’t misunderstand my question about the legacy factor – I (and my college-age D) get it – college admission isn’t necessarily “fair” (though this word has subjective meaning in the sphere of CC) Institutional need, class demographic and cultural composition, financial incentive, etc. all play a part in the process. I don’t think anyone is inclined think really think otherwise. This is the way of the world.</p>

91

<p>I interviewed kids for Cornell for about 5 years … in that time there were lots of decisions that could have gone the other way (mostly very talented and accomplished students who were denied and easily could have been accepted) … however there were 3 cases where I thought Cornell definately made a mistake.</p>

<p>Two cases where very high stats kids got in who I do not believe should have … one was very arragant and a snob … and one was the flatest least interesting interview I had in 5 years … but the high stats won.</p>

<p>One case was the best interview and most interesting candidate I interviewed … and she was denied because her scores were too low.</p>

<p>Whenever this discussion appears I’m at a loss at understanding what the “fair” system some people want would look like. My experience as an athlete at an IVY does not reflect all these stories about the un-worthy students getting into schools (for example, the captain of the Cornell cross country team my freshman year had a 4.15+ GPA in the engineering school (more A+s than plain As) … and in my experience as an interviewer rank ordering candidates on an “objective” measure like the AI would prove to far from the best method of picking the most interesting and best candidates.</p>

92

<p>born2dance94: You should attach this entire thread to your college apps. Your remarkable critical thinking and communication skills come through loud and clear. Reading the verbal sparring between you and the other writers is better than any athletic competition I could attend. I could imagine sound effects like BAM, POW, and SHAZAM accompanying your responses to each argument. Were I an admissions officer at ANY school, I would recommend we throw as much money as we could to get you through our doors. I predict you’ll have much success.</p>

93

<p>

</p>

<p>Fair enough. I won’t argue with your opinion (which is just as good – or bad – as mine!). I’m sure that others hold the same opinion (‘supported’ by what, btw?). Heck, Dartmouth’s former Dean of Admissions received a lot of flack for putting a similar personal opinion in writing. </p>

<p>But note, however, that Dartmouth’s Dean received a lot of flack for his personal letter because it was not official College policy. And when it comes to official college policy, our collective opinions don’t much matter…</p>

94

<p>Deb pix - I don’t think born2dance should submit this thread to adcoms because they may take a three minute check of the other 1200 plus posts on CC and reject her immediately.</p>

<p>On this thread she reprimanded another post (incorrectly) by writing “No need for you to be rude and imply an offensive term with “…”. Do you understand how offensive it is to call a girl a b!tch? Have I personally insulted you anywhere here? No, so I ask that you treat me with the same respect.”</p>

<p>Yet on one of born2dances other post “she” wrote "A friend of mine (ok just kidding, she’s actually a beyotch but pretends to be a friend. But I digress) "</p>

<p>NOW I am being dismissive as a significant amount of your posts on CC are rude and paint a picture of a condescending personality. </p>

<p>I also question whether you are in fact a student given your level of familiarity with all things college that seems a bit beyond a 17 year old. </p>

<p>Done with you as I have a daughter and “beyotch” is Off limits here.</p>

95

<p>Born2dance94, I’m not understanding why you believe any of these institution should be following YOUR rules rather than their own?</p>

<p>These schools exist to provide a world education, and they’re darn good at it. They can admit whoever they please, as long as they aren’t discriminating.</p>

96

<p>@CollegeDad16 woah. seriously. stop.</p>

<p>@Pancaked I don’t. I understand fully that recruited athletes always have and always will exist. Something which I have maintained throughout this thread. Do I think it is fair for the edge to be so great? No. And since the whole point of this thread seems to be the basic question of “is it fair?” that is all that needs to be answered. I haven’t said that I expect it to change, nor do I think it should, because I DO agree on the diversity front. HOWEVER, the one thing I have maintained this entire time is that I, personally, don’t think it is fair for kids with significantly lower stats to be allowed in on the basis of athletics. Does it occur sometimes? Yes. Is it “fair”? In my opinion, no. Is it going to end and/or am I saying it should go by “my rules”? Absolutely not.</p>

<p>All I’ve done is merely put my opinion. As a high school senior who spent the last 12+ years working my butt off to get good grades, it should come as no shock that seeing kids with pretty low stats get into schools I could only ever dream about causes confusion and some anger in me. But you know what? I am never going to get into Harvard. I am never going to get into Princeton or Yale or Stanford or MIT or any of those schools. Despite having what CC would call “great stats” I am realistic enough to know those schools are so far out of my reach. I am not a super athlete, I’m not a legacy, I’m not super rich, I’m not a genius, I haven’t made any huge impacts on this world. I’ll be happy wherever I go; in fact, the school I am really hoping for is what some would call a target or even a safety. So no, I do not presume to think any athlete is taking my place anywhere, because I am fully aware of the fact that I am not good enough to get into any of those schools in the first place.</p>

<p>Excuse me for being like every other 17 year old who gets a bit upset when seeing other people get things you worked really hard for as well, or even get things you know you’d never get, but subconsciously wanted. I know that may make me “petty,” or “immature,” or whatever else people would like to call it. But you know what? I just think it makes me human. And a teenager. With average human emotions and feelings.</p>

<p>So yeah, I’ll have to “get used to it” when another person gets the school or the job or anything else I want over me. But just like every other human being in that position, it stings. And sometimes you want to vent about it a little bit. Especially on an internet forum exactly about that subject.</p>

<p>I didn’t come here for people to post rude things about me or attack me personally. Many others in this thread share similar opinions, yet no one is personally attacking them, or making fun of their supposed bad spelling, or looking through their post history for inconsistencies, or accusing them of lying about who they are.</p>

<p>P.S. @CollegeDad16 It is none of your business why I called that girl a “beyotch” on that thread. I hope no one ever treats your daughter the way that girl has treated me over the years, and that no one does to your daughter what that girl has done to me. In my moment of anger, yes I mentioned that word, but when implied here by another user (and if you see the original post, you would see exactly why I came to that conclusion) it had no basis to be said. I usually try to refrain from using that word at all, but I don’t feel I should have to explain myself to you any further.</p>

97

<p>Kids with “great stats” and great resumes get into HYPSM. Of all the people I know at HYPSM, not of them have done anything extraordinary, aside win a state drum major competition or learn Japanese on their own. The only two athletes I know in ivy league schools are both brilliant. If you have great stats, you’ve got a shot.</p>

<p>I just don’t see anything unfair about it. HYPSM hasn’t been sitting there for 12+ years telling you that if you get good grades and great scores, you’re in, and if you don’t, you’re out, and there’s no other way. People perpetuate these myths about what is necessary to get in, and feel that they have been lied to and cheated when an unimpressively statted athlete gets in. There’s nothing unfair about it. The schools haven’t changed their standards. The schools haven’t lied. The schools want athletes and have been honest about it.</p>

<p>It would be unfair if you deserved a spot in HYPSM but it was taken by someone who didn’t deserve it. But here’s the thing, nobody deserves a spot, so there’s nothing unfair about it.</p>

98

<p>@Pancaked Like someone mentioned earlier, I think that it is unfair because it sends somewhat of a bad message to kids, that being a great athlete can overcome poor academics (disclaimer: yes, I know many are scholar-athletes, but I feel the need now to point out every time I post that I am talking only about those with low stats), so it’s okay to slack off if you are good at sports. So in that regard, I think it is unfair. You and others may have different opinions, but since this entire thread has basically become the simple question of “Do YOU think it is fair?” my answer would be, “No, I do not think it is fair.”</p>

<p>And yes, there are other situations, like legacy, developmental admits, URM status, the ability to hire tutors, etc, that may make things “unfair.” But those being “unfair” doesn’t undermine the “unfairness” in my eyes of recruited athletes. Perhaps they are all unfair. Which wouldn’t be surprising, because isn’t life unfair? But, to reiterate, I still do and probably always will consider recruited athletes with poor academic stats getting in to be an unfair thing. My opinion will never change the way things work, nor do I expect it to. It merely is what it is.</p>

99

<p>It’s difficult to argue that institutions like HYPSM, some of the world’s greatest educational institutions, are sending any message to kids about the unimportance of academics…</p>

<p>I think you’re just misinterpreting their message. A few people said it a while back on this thread- These schools recruit regular students, and they recruit athletes. There are slots allotted to athletes. They’re reserved and separate and unavailable to the rest of the applicant pool. If the #1 highschool football player with average stats applies to Harvard with no intention of playing football, he’s not getting in. They’re not saying athletics can make up for bad scores. They’re saying that athletics are traditionally and historically and functionally and socially an important part of their institution, so they want a few great athletes. </p>

<p>In fact, they’re sending a GREAT message to kids by saying they won’t take just any athlete- they have to be in good academic standing as well. Most schools will take any great athlete without a second thought- they’re the ones that are suggesting your academics aren’t imporant… the nation’s elite care enough about academics that they have decent academic standards for their athlete recruitment.</p>

100

<p>Not taking a position, but I think many would enjoy “Harvard Beats Yale 29-29”. I think this can still be accessed by streaming.</p>