So my question is, did these students pass and do well in these courses? If so, then obviously they were given the correct course placement.
I have to assume they were academically qualified to take those classes because athlete or not, it’s not going to look good to a top academic institution’s admissions department or a coach if they couldn’t pass the class.
You’re not going to fail courses in HS and make it into a T20 school, I don’t care how athletic that person is.
But you’ve been arguing that admission for athletes is not holistic at all, that just being an athlete gets the student admitted even if academically less qualified.
Holistic means the school can consider everything, including athletics, leadership, life opportunities (and disadvantages). Do some high schools know how to up the chances their kids will get into MIT? Sure. Does that sometimes include athletics? Hmm, maybe but not just for being a great shot putter but because being part of a team, being a leader, putting in the time necessary while keeping up academics tells MIT something about this person.
I have one daughter who was an athlete (on scholarship) and one who wasn’t. I think they were both deserving of their admissions. I don’t think they bumped anyone and earned their admissions holistically even though both schools were much more about their gpa and test score numbers (and awarded merit aid based on those numbers). My athletic daughter played because she loved it, not to get into college. That was a bonus (and the scholarship). She didn’t get any ‘extras’ at high school, the GC had NO IDEA how to apply to the school she attended, no idea how to ‘package’ an athlete - we did it all even though the college was 2 hours away from this high school. We did have one athlete at our school go to MIT and we all know she probably did not get an athletic advantage. Another to the Naval Academy and she probably did get an athletic advantage but all applicants need a sport there.
But I love big athletics at schools and do feel athletics adds a lot to college life. Should the school admit the athlete with a 3.8 and a 1400 SAT or one more Val with a 4.999 and a 1600? Holistically, look at more than the numbers. At my high school, the top golfer was also president of the junior class, also a top student, also worked a job since he was 14 (to pay for the golf). A much more interesting person than the Val.
Independent schools face far less transparency and accountability than public schools.
Numerous practices like: capped smaller classes when other students qualified and funds were not limited; varsity athletes with identical final grades getting those seats over non-athletes; extra time given in exams to certain students when such policy is said not to exist for anyone; select students getting to retest and supported in challenging classes when struggling, while less prioritized students were moved down right away; students getting tutored for accelerated classes despite an honor code restricting such practice; closed decisions for course approvals without explanation or ability to challenge; school awards and leadership roles for resume building dominated by athletes; and unequal grading and quality of teachers across same section of courses…all contribute to very different opportunities and outcomes for students based on their ability to get Ivy preference.
Unhooked kids who are academic can get into some very good schools like OOS publics and less selective LACs, while the athletes who weren’t as gifted or hard working academically who ended up at the Ivies and top LACs were prepared enough to manage if not distinguish themselves…so it continues. There are athletes who deserve their places academically too and they do very well.
Consequently, I am not saying the evolution of schools like this is tragic, pervasive everywhere, or even avoidable if people can move their kids elsewhere (my athletic children attended public options, and it was much more fair there), but it does exist. However, when transferring isn’t an option, personal resources and time are limited, or parents and their children don’t recognize such practices and leave students’ education and self-esteem under such institutions’ control, it can be problematic and disillusioning.
I encouraged my children’s efforts, abilities, and desires to learn regardless. When they were not given opportunities or challenged, I said that’s life and encouraged them to go beyond their schools’ offerings to earn competitive opportunities, pursue activities that were meaningful to them, and read widely.
I am only posting here to offer what I have witnessed happening in schools around me as it relates to elite schools and athletics. I am sorry to have said so much on just one aspect of the topic and bow to others to redirect the conversation elsewhere. : )
IMO, there is 0 holistic evaluation when it comes to athletic recruiting and admissions.
For the sport I am familiar with, consider that D1 schools give out offers at the beginning of Junior year. That means their admissions office only gets transcripts containing only 4 semester of grades. There is nothing else to review. There are no standardized test scores. Athletic recruits typically have very little other extracurricular activities to show the admissions office. So it’s basically a 4 semester transcript and a coach’s recommendation that they use to determine what likely letter they will send.
D1 schools claim that they need to give out early offers because their competition is recruiting early and they risk losing out on top athletic recruits.
This process is very different from the touted holistic evaluation that the admissions office uses to evaluate regular applicants. it also informs the public how much of a priority the athletes are compared to their classmates.
Of course, other sports have different recruiting calendars.
Likely letters (which are utilized by only a very small subset of 4 year colleges) don’t go out until senior year, after the applicant applies. When the recruit applys, AOs will undertake a complete review/re-review of academics/transcripts/tests/ECs/Essays/LoRs, and to be sure some recruits do fall out at this point. The verbal offer/commitment from junior year is not binding, on either side.
Often those juniors do have test scores. Usually the coaches have years of experience to know whether they can get the players through admissions based on the 4 semesters of grades they do have. And it is only a preliminary offer in Sept of junior year. Those who know the system well enough to be in the recruiting pool early know to take the ACT early, took the PSAT as sophomores, etc. My daughter didn’t know to do that but others on her team did (older siblings, family in the know). They were prepared.
The Yale women’s lax coach wrote an article a few years ago saying she doesn’t (can’t) consider average students when looking for players. They really need to be outstanding students as sophomores and likely to continue that path. Why would she waste her time recruiting students she can’t get through admissions in a year (or two)? She also has a huge pool to swim in as there are tons of smart lax players who want to go to Yale.
Coaches want it all - good players with good academics. Those who have spots at top 20 schools get to pick the best of the best. They can’t get a below average student in, unless it is a huge school like UCLA or Michigan. A little more wiggle room at Stanford; Christian McCaffry had a 24 ACT but decent grades, and he also had two alum parents and that admission seems to have worked out well for both the school and him.
I really don’t understand your argument. Do you want all schools to drop athletics? Do you think if prep schools drop athletics those students wouldn’t figure out another way to get into Harvard and Yale? It may not be Biff with a lax stick but it would be Muffy with a part in a Hollywood movie or someone named Rockefeller or Buffett. All may have a perfect 4.0, excellent LOR and 10k hours of community service because those schools really want their students to get into top schools. Athletics works because the colleges also want good athletes.
Do schools like Bronx Science and Brooklyn Tech use athletics to get students into the top 20? I haven’t heard that they do, yet they send a lot of students to the Ivy League.
Do you have a source for the information about Christian McCaffry? People on forums including this one seem to report that he had a wide range of different scores on both the SAT and ACT, but I’ve never seen a source listed beyond references to other forum posts.
McCaffry was academically successful enough at Stanford to win the Division I CoSIDA Academic All-American Player of the Year (The Dish - Retired | Stanford News ) for 2016. Various news articles mention that he had a 3.43 GPA at Stanford, at the time of the award.
I’m a little confused by the OP’s position on this question:
BUMD, meet BUMD. Your argument is with them.
Well, I consider this an excellent starting point. We all agree that this is what is happening, even if we disagree on the ethics of it.
He’s from Denver and I think I read it in a review or interview. He was in the same school grade as my kids so I’ve been following his playing since he was in third grade. He went to another catholic school but played against the boys from our school in the basketball league. One of the ‘boy dads’ told me that when they played there was no doubt who was in charge on the floor. Christian ran the show at 8 years old. The league had a rule that if any player scored 12 points they were out for the rest of the game. He’d score 11 and then just pass off, tell everyone where to play, where to stand, who to cover. He had a very high sports IQ.
He went to a christian high school that produces a lot of athletes and all students college ready.
His mother calls him ‘the college drop out.’ The interviewer asked if she really called him that and she said Yes, of course. I think she really wants him to get that Stanford degree and has no problem hassling him till he does.
At the Ivies, the only thing that a recruit can do for most sports on Sept 1 of their junior year is commit to the “admissions process” of that school if the coach indicates that they want them. It essentially means nothing in the grand scheme as it is non-binding. If it hurts anyone it actually hurts the recruit as they are pretty much agreeing to pull themself “off the market.” If that recruit cannot maintain or attain the grades or scores to get in, it is no loss to the coach. They just move on to the next recruit on their list. There is no NLI signing for an Ivy League recruit as there is no athletic scholarship offered. Most athletic recruits I have dealt with as a recruiting coordinator for a sports team take their SAT/ACT the summer after their sophomore year so they can have it entered into the NCAA registry which is required for all D1/D2 recruits, and they can see how much more they need to improve if they want to continue to pursue a high academic program.
At the NESCACs and other high academic D3’s, coaches typically won’t ask for any type of verbal commitment until after the recruit has passed the academic pre-read the summer before their senior year. This includes 3 years’ worth of grades, test results, their senior year schedule, and an academic resume. Again, the verbal from the recruit means nothing - it’s just an agreement that if they can get admitted, then they have a spot on the team. The coach may have some input in the admissions process which has been stated numerous times, previously. They still need to be an academically qualified student for these schools.
I would assume that most athletic recruits don’t have too many other EC’s because of all of the time dedicated to their sport and academics. Athletic recruits usually compete in their sport or are practicing their sport year-around. That means practices before or after school, along with position-specific workouts for certain sports. They are working out in their “off-season” with strength, agility, and weight-training. They tend to travel a lot in order to compete in top showcases. Many are 2-3 sport varsity athletes at their HS. Athletes who are good enough to compete at the next level sacrifice a lot - probably more than most people can imagine - if they are able to be recruited by a high academic school.
Do you really think an admissions office would subject a recruited athlete to a holistic evaluation when that athlete has barely finished 1/2 of his/her high school education? How could that even be possible? No, D1 recruited athletes who have just started their junior year are not asked write personal essays, send letters of recommendation from their teachers, and demonstrate their “maximum academic and personal potential.” Yes, they have to complete the regular college application as an early action/decision candidate during their senior year like everyone else. But barring an unforeseen circumstance, the results are basically pre-ordained. I’m sure it’s happened, but I’ve never heard of a recruit who got a likely letter not get accepted for admission.
Coaches are at least roughly aware of where their admissions office’s boundary line is, so I don’t think any of them will offer a recruit who has very little shot of getting through the pre-read process. Since many schools are now test optional, there are a lot of college admissions offices that no longer require the recruited athletes submit standardized test scores with their pre-read or their official application.
Yes, junior year offers are verbal and do not become official until senior year. In our sport, the most competitive D1 recruits are committed in the first 3 months of their junior year. (You can look up the NCAA’s recruiting calendar for each sport to see when contact occurs and offers are allowed by college coaches.) It is uncommon for a recruit to decide to switch schools. It is almost unheard of for a college coach to change his/her mind on a verbally committed recruit.
I don’t think I ever meant to imply that recruited athletes aren’t smart and shouldn’t be admitted. As a I wrote in a previous post, the issue of who is “deserving” is impossible to define. I’m just stating a fact (at least to me) that the admissions process for athletes works differently than regular applicants. This is the process that I personally observed as a parent and my intent was merely to enlighten this group.
And those applications have test scores and 3 years of high school grades. If the college doesn’t require the essays or LOR, that’s up to them. I agree that once the Likely Letter is issued, the schools don’t withdraw them, but the LIkely letters aren’t issued until senior year has started.
Read the Wesleyan thread on ‘sure thing’ admissions this year for athletes. Not so guaranteed after all.
What T20 schools are offering “likely letters” before a student’s junior year? They (D1 programs) aren’t even allowed to have contact with that student-athlete until 6/15 after their sophomore year or 9/1 of their junior year for most sports.
ETA: Fixed dates to add in 6/15. Most coaches I’ve dealt with want to start establishing a relationship with a recruit once they are allowed to contact them. They are not offering anything until they know more about the recruit beyond their athletic ability.
The Harvard lawsuit data showed I believe 86% of recruits were accepted, so 14% did fall out. They fall out in the admissions committee when they review the entire application, BEFORE a likely letter is issued. One caveat is there isn’t great clarity in that Harvard data if they included just slotted/fully supported recruits, or if the data also included those who were receiving soft support.
I agree not many fallout after receiving a likely letter…that would require failing a class/classes in first semester senior year, or some type of disciplinary situation/arrest….all situations which have happened.
Verbal offers never become official. Nothing is official until the recruit receives their acceptance notification.
Yep, process is different and varies by league/conference too. Most recruited athletes experience their college rejections in junior/senior year as coaches are making their decisions, prior to the formal application process.
It’s actually June 15th after their sophomore year for soccer, so a few months earlier.
Edited to fix the dates in my previous post. 
Whatever the point of this thread is, I don’t think it is to argue about athletic recruiting.
The most selective schools probably have the most to gain by utilizing the good looks and vitality of athletes to enhance their images.