<p>The NCAA recently released its latest data on graduation rates for student-athletes across America. </p>
<p>Congrats to the following colleges that recently ranked in the USNWR Top 20 and which graduated their football players at better than a 90% rate:</p>
<p>The graduation rate for black football players at Duke was 81%, at Vanderbilt 81%, at Northwestern 83% (only 77% for white football players...they need more tutors), at Notre Dame 73%.</p>
<p>Note how USC and UC Berkeley are <em>worse</em> than Oklahoma State, Missouri, and Alabama in football program grad rate. UCLA's basketball program has only a 46% grad rate.</p>
<p>But what's interesting is that they're expected to still do a "real" major and perform up to the same standards as everyone else, so I'd be interested in seeing if the significant time commitment required by even DIII sports shows any sort of correlation with graduation rates.</p>
<p>Wow. UMCP men's basketball is up to 10% graduation success rate. That's an improvement...but I wonder if they're still worst in the ACC? Div 1? Country? (I forget which it is, but they've been a [graduation] disgrace for years.)</p>
<p>The GSR Graduation Success Rate GSR is not the same as the "graduation rate" that is mandated by federal law. The NCAA's GSR is designed to inflate the rate by allowing schools to include transfers in and exclude transfers out or drop-outs as long as they would have been academically eligible. It is bogus. </p>
<p>"The GSR measures graduation rates at Division I institutions and includes students transferring into the institutions. The GSR also allows institutions to subtract student-athletes who leave their institutions prior to graduation as long as they would have been academically eligible to compete had they remained."</p>
<p>Sam,
For SC. once you take out the athletes who are drafted by the NFL, the graduation rate is much higher.<br>
SC had a basketball player in 2007-2008 who was a Rhodes Scholar.</p>
<p>Be very cautious when looking at the academic success rates for basketball teams. The numbers are small, usually 20 or so, and a couple of students who are really struggling or a couple who are doing really well can really skew the numbers. It is not unusual to see wide swings in BB rates from one year to the next.</p>
<p>Why so? It seems fair not to count students who left before they graduated as long as they were academically eligible. Are you arguing that they were run off?</p>
<p>Georgia Girl,
I don't know what the number would be like when you factor that in. I can see the point of not counting them. But not counting them entirely isn't exactly fair either because those are the most heavily recruited at the first place and so there's a reason to believe the schools compromise the admission the most to get those players (tsdad: being academically eligible doesn't necessarily mean the person is going to graduate eventually). Also, note that schools like Alabama are also heavily drafted. So in comparison to those schools, things even out. Of course, some of the athletes are great students at USC. But I think that applies to other schools too. The thing I want to point out is USC/Berkeley, while having much higher admission standard than the schools I mentioned, have the same football program grad rate as those others. I do not believe USC can have #1 recruiting class while holding the recruits to a higher admission standard than schools like Georgia/Alabama. You can't have your cake and eat it too. The formula is simple: if you want championship team year in and year out, you can't have any disadvantage in recruiting.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Be very cautious when looking at the academic success rates for basketball teams. The numbers are small, usually 20 or so, and a couple of students who are really struggling or a couple who are doing really well can really skew the numbers. It is not unusual to see wide swings in BB rates from one year to the next.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, the numbers are often less than 20, because the NCAA only allows about 12 BB scholarships, and that is across all grade levels. So when you see a BB grad rate of 66%, that could mean that just one student-athlete was drafted/transferred/dropped out; likewise if there were only 2 players in that grade level to begin with, then it would look like a 50% grad rate.</p>
<p>What Sam Lee said is very true. Even Stanford has to lower it's standards to field even a marginal football team. The gap on the SAT M+V is usually around 200-300 points for football and basketball players on scholarship vs the rest of the student body. That's true at Stanford and USC and Alabama (might be a bit less at Bama as the overall average is pretty low)</p>
<p>
[quote]
For SC. once you take out the athletes who are drafted by the NFL, the graduation rate is much higher.
SC had a basketball player in 2007-2008 who was a Rhodes Scholar.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Georgia Girl,
I don't know what the number would be like when you factor that in. I can see the point of not counting them. But not counting them entirely isn't exactly fair either because those are the most heavily recruited at the first place and so there's a reason to believe the schools compromise the admission the most to get those players (tsdad: being academically eligible doesn't necessarily mean the person is going to graduate eventually). Also, note that schools like Alabama are also heavily drafted. So in comparison to those schools, things even out. Of course, some of the athletes are great students at USC. But I think that applies to other schools too.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, the USA Today article fully includes the issue of athletes leaving early (possibly because they were drafted). The problem is that the article erroneously states "graduation rates" when actually what they have published are "Graduation Success Rates" which subtracts those students who left early but were still in good standing. </p>
<p>"The GSR measures graduation rates at Division I institutions and includes students transferring into the institutions. The GSR also allows institutions to subtract student-athletes who leave their institutions prior to graduation as long as they would have been academically eligible to compete had they remained."</p>
<p>For the GSR by the NCAA, players drafted or transferred don't count as an automatic 0 as long if they leave in good academic standing and on track to graduate. However, most basketball prospects will stop attending their spring classes to attend try outs.</p>
<p>Basketball players often find it more difficult to balance school and sports due to its year-round nature. It's 2-semester (and winter mini-mester) commitment during the season, and there's summer camps, It's hard to graduate on time when you're taking so few classes (especially if one has to take additional 0-credit remedial classes). One potential action is often ignored: basketball programs very rarely offer red shirt or gray shirt seasons, like football, that allow athletes to grow physically and academically without losing a year of eligibility.</p>
<p>A player could be on the Dean's List, but walking such a tight rope on the required yearly credits that dropping those spring classes can push them over the edge. And, if they guessed right on their talent, they're in the NBA, NBDL or over seas, and in no position to meet the 6-year graduation requirement due to the season's length and summer camp.</p>
<p>I am pretty sure that all of the Ivy League universities would have football graduation rates in the 90's. I recall that Harvard had a 100% rate for 4-year players for many years in a row. However, since the Ivies do not offer athletic scholarships, the NCAA does not compute their graduation rates by team.</p>
<p>The same may be true of other highly academic colleges that do not offer scholarships. So I agree it is nice to see some scholarship places doing well, but it is notable only because of the poor performance of their colleagues.</p>
<p>Well, USC isn't too surprising given how many of their players are drafted (even their backup quarterback gets drafted), and the fact that it's an elite football school. Cal is very surprising, though.</p>