<p>CA2006,</p>
<p>Most Div. I basketball players are on a full-ride scholarship. I don't have the precise number, but I believe Div. I schools are alloted about 12 scholarships. I think you can find that info on the NCAA website.</p>
<p>"How hard is it to do pre-med and compete in a Div 1 sport? Are commitments at colleges like Duke, which are equal academically to ivies, similar to ivy league colleges?"</p>
<p>We have done some exploration, though only for women's gymnastics. On the whole we found that the higher the academic ranking of the school, the LESS likely the athletes were to be involved in (what I would consider to be) very serious academic pursuits. In other words, pre-meds among the gynmasts at the University of Denver, rarely among those at Stanford or UCLA. I have no idea how that holds for other non-revenue sports.</p>
<p>mini,</p>
<p>re - majors of gymnasts - did you notice any difference among schools that had the higher levels of selectivity in admissions, i.e., ivies, mit, etc.? any differences between public vs. private? </p>
<p>best of luck to your d.......hope she finds a good fit.......it can take a lot of looking to find what college fits best for her for both academics and sport. someone else on cc wisely referred to the fit issue as "adds another layer to the process."</p>
<p>"re - majors of gymnasts - did you notice any difference among schools that had the higher levels of selectivity in admissions, i.e., ivies, mit, etc.? any differences between public vs. private?"</p>
<p>Great question, and I don't know the answer. Mind you - selectivity for admissions generally speaking, and selectivity for a particular sport could be entirely different. And, in my d's case, most of the Ivies are second-rate - they either don't have gymastics, or don't have athletic scholarships, don't have international accounting majors, and (with a few exceptions) aren't strong in Arabic.</p>
<p>There are also schools with strong academic support for athletes (Denver and George Washington come to mind), and some with very little, steering students into "exercise science" majors. Bowen's report suggests that athletes at Ivies generally speaking have significantly poorer academic outcomes (which statistically seems to be true); however, many of these students may not have attended Ivies to begin with if it wasn't for their athletic abilities, and they may have achieved THEIR desired outcomes, which is something Bowen and Co. never considered. (I know that, at least in the case of alumni at my alma mater, they may have tended to be less likely to be doctors and lawyers, but they also seem to have tended to have ended up wealthier than their more "academic" classmates.)</p>
<p>Mini, I admit I don't know any studies of this or what it is like elsewhere or in different sports. But I can tell you that on my D's Ivy League sports team, the level of academic excellence is high and several won Academic All American and many are bound for med school, law school, etc. My kid is bound for architecture school. In fact, there is a high percentage of her team in pre-med. I can't speak for other schools or sports.</p>
<p>I suspect (but I have no data) that Bowen's report falls down where it doesn't differentiate sports by spectator v. non-spectator (i.e. football/basketball/ice hockey v. equestrian, squash, skiing, gymnastics.) I also suspect (but have no data) that while there are middle class ($40-92k) recruits in the former category, there are very, very few in the latter category. One then has to ask the degree to which income (and the academic preparation which often goes with with) is a predictor of future college performance (whether one is a recruited athlete or not.)</p>
<p>Prestige colleges are not likely to release such data, and likely with good reason.</p>
<p>As in almost all areas academic and professional, success-mediocracy-failure depends on the individual student. Yes, colleges can inplement some things which will assist students classroom performance but it will usually only result in a marginal difference.</p>
<p>And to answer the OP question, I do not think that playing Div 1 sports provide any more benefits than Div 2 or Div 3 athletics provide unless you are that oh so rare individual destined to play professional team sports.</p>
<p>And don't forget how competetive that many D-1 sports are. I was a very good hs golfer who qualified for the NYS meet for 4 consecutive years, the first time anyone had done that according to my coach. At least in Section 4. When I went out for the Ohio State team as a walk on freshman year I quickly realized that I had no chance of making the team even though I shot an opening round of 71. And OSU's golf team wasnt even that great during the years I attended!!</p>
<p>In my H's familiy there is a history of playing Division I sports at highly academic schools. Niece plays basketball for an Ivy; H and his brother both played tennis in top Division I schools. The experience of all of them was similar: they were passionate enough about their sports to WANT to play Division I simply because that's where the level of play was highest. And because they had to juggle sports and school since early childhood, they were used to the discipline necessary to also do well academically. In fact, all three of them say that sports made them better, smarter (meaning more organized & focused) students. Our nice is getting top grades at her Ivy -- her biggest challenge is not missing out on school but missing out on family vacations - hasn't been home for Thanksgiving since starting college, has only a couple of days off around Xmas - due to the ambitious game schedule.</p>
<p>
[quote]
We have done some exploration, though only for women's gymnastics. On the whole we found that the higher the academic ranking of the school, the LESS likely the athletes were to be involved in (what I would consider to be) very serious academic pursuits. In other words, pre-meds among the gynmasts at the University of Denver, rarely among those at Stanford or UCLA. I have no idea how that holds for other non-revenue sports.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I do not understand this statement --or at least the methodologyy of the exploration that could warrant such conclusion.</p>
<p>What did you check? The number of athletes at the various schools who are enrolled in a "pre-med" program? For starters, do all schools even have a pre-med program? Did you try to find out the number of athletes who enrolled in medical schools a few years after graduating? Or was it simply based on ... a hunch? </p>
<p>There are many reasons why VERIFIABLE statistics for acceptances at medical schools are so hard to come by. Schools that report their rates are free to introduce numerous qualifiers (minimum MCAT scores or GPA) and the number of years between garduation and acceptance is ... flexible. </p>
<p>FWIW, I really do not believe that anyone could make a VALID comparison between schools based on your criteria. How do you really compare the University of Denver and Stanford on a athletic basis or ... academic basis. Where do the scholar athletes compete? Which medical schools do they apply to? How many athletes from the University of Denver have competed in the Olyimpics and have gone to medical school? How many at Stanford? </p>
<p>Based on the difficulty of obtaining verifiable data, most anyone could pick and choose a few elements, and draw erroneous or misleading conclusions with ease or glee.</p>
<p>The only data we found available is to check the actual majors of enrolled athletes in specific sports. This isn't particularly difficult to do (in fact, we've done it). The samples of course are small, just those athletes still in the athletic program over a four-year period.</p>
<p>Schools or athletes could lie, of course. All we would see is which ones were "exercise science" majors and which ones "pre-med" (or international relations, etc.)</p>
<p>With any scholarship athelete it is a congratulations/that's too bad feeling. First It's great to get any finanical help to go anywhere these days as only a small segement of our society has the means to absorb college costs without some discomfort. For many families, a college atheletic scholarship is an opportunity.</p>
<p>The too bad part comes in when you have to deal with the expected committment for that money. In season 6 days a week, 21 hours of coached time. This does not count idividual time spent. Had a brother who played D1 football many moons ago and he and some teammates sat down one night to figure out how much their scholarship was actually worth per hour when they added up the inseason AND expected offseason committment in time. It worked out to about half of the state minimum wage per hour. </p>
<p>This also doesn't take into account that some majors are just not possible to do and compete at a major college level. Too much time away from classrooms and labs. Also the risk of injury and how it effects scholarships. </p>
<p>As a scholarship student athelete you also lose the ability to simply say "no" in regards to your situation without risk of loss of scholarship. Usually if you decide to say no to your coach, you're pretty much done having someone else foot the bill. </p>
<p>If the stars aline and you stay healthy and you're in the right situation, it can be done. However, for alot of kids it just doesn't happen that way.</p>
<p>One thing I would love to see is all colleges that offer sports scholarships offer them for the life of the player, no strings. Locally the U of Washington lets former sports scholarship atheletes complete their degrees free of charge. They've had explayers in their 40's return as students and get that degree. It's something the NCAA should require flat out of all schools. If you promise an education, you'll provide for one as long as it takes.</p>
<p>OPIE that would be financially unreasonable ^^ for many schools - which do not promise an education - they offer one for something in return - and if the student is not able to participate for 4 years - they schools should not be responsible for them financially for that education. That is a very good reason to really consider what one is getting into in a D1 sport for scholarship - if that scholarship is lost due to not being able to play - plan B better be in place - realistically.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I do not think that playing Div 1 sports provide any more benefits than Div 2 or Div 3 athletics provide unless you are that oh so rare individual destined to play professional team sports.
[/quote]
I don't think the walk-on with the least playing time on USC's football team would agree with that after their Rose Bowl win yesterday. Some high profile Div1 sports opportunities will be once-in-a-lifetime experiences that the athlete treasures. So once again, it depends.....on the sport, on the athlete, on the team, on the season. Div1 football on a losing team at a school with no storied tradition would probably not offer many benefits other than the free ride.</p>
<p>A reputable school will honor a scholarship even if the athlete is injured early and never steps foot on a field or court.</p>
<p>This article in the SF Chronicle yesterday was interesting, and speaks to some extent about the life of the student-athlete. It rang very true to me, based upon watching my S and his year-round training regimen. </p>
<p>On the pre-med and engineering issues, I think that it is generally true that pre-med and engineering, and other majors with labs, are to a large extent impossible given the athletes' schedules of afternoon practices, since I believe that labs are typically also in the afternoon. On the other hand, I personally know several athletes who have become successful physicians (don't know any engineers though, but my experience is limited in this field). One right now, who just finished a very successful water polo career at an Ivy, is completing her pre-med requirements in a post-graduate year. I would be willing to bet that she was happy to defer finishing her pre-med requirements in order to compete in her sport. But for someone else, that would be asking too much. </p>
<p>Plenty of room for different conclusions and decisions!</p>
<p>Mini, I know several swimmers at Stanford ( probably the Olympic feeder program here in the US) , and an unusually high percentage of them go on to medical school or other competitive programs. Jenny Thompson comes to mind as she is here in our backyard, at some stage of medical training. She went to Columbia med school after graduating from Stanford as a bio major. Now, premed and prelaw are both very general preparatory programs supporting a wide variety of majors with only a few required courses (really non for law), so if you have a focused student who is highly motivated, it is possible to combine high level sports and high level academics. I cannot think of too many programs that require a larger time requirement than swimming as the preseason starts with prep in August before you set foot on campus, and continues through March---longer for national/internationaal level swimmers as the long course season is the summer. The athletic insurance that a college has to cover its athletes covers the swimmers for most of the year, as opposed to the shorter coverages on seasonal athletes. I would guess with gymnastics the club sport is as important or more than the official team sport even in college if your daughter is seriously into the national and above level of competition. This is a whole different level from many sports that just encompass college competition under NCAA rules. In fact, it is wise to find a college team that coordinates with national schedule. It is not the college practices and schedule that will wipe such students out. If the college team does not coordinate with the National/international schedules, it can be a real bear. We had to deal with this with our oldest son all through highschool. We saw some really nasty situations where the goals of the school coach did not mesh with the higher goals of the club and the national association. My son did not continue his association with the US team once he went to college. It would have been extremely difficult to do so, as his school did not associate or coordinate with the US team. I would guess gymnastics, tennis, swimming... a number of sports have this situation. </p>
<p>I was quite impressed with GW's support of its athetes, Mini. Know nothing about gymnastics, but they have an official office and program to keep student athletes on point wit the academics that looked strong. Since gymnastics is not a mainline sport for most colleges, it is going to be challenging to find a school with the academics your daughter wants paired with gymnastic scholarships or a div 3 school that will give merit with need consideration for its athletes. I have been told on this board by some D-3 college adcoms that this is not permitted and not done, but I know many, many D-3 athletes who have received what their families consider much sweetened financial aid packages that other kids in the same family with similar or better academic profiles did not get at the same financial levels. I know that the coach at my son's school, though would not comment on anything regarding what impact he has on an athletes's chances for admissions or his financial aid package, has indicated that things generally work out for those committing to his sport/team. My son's team was generously endowed with aid/awards at a D-3 school that gives very little in terms of merit money, and does not guarantee meeting full need, and tends to be tight with the money. There are often a number of welll rounded students/contribute to the spirit of the school grants that are not advertised on the web sites. We did not apply for financial aid but my son did get some small awards that were independently given by factions within the university, not their financial aid office. </p>
<p>The athletes at my husband's alma mater seem to have done quite well. Lots of doctors and lawyers. A dearth of PHDs, research type people which his school tends to churn out at higher than usual levels. Don't know actual percentages but from the reunions, magazines and reports he gets, it isn't sticking the neck out to say that. I will definitely say that the athletic alums are the most high profile group, and a large group in organizing reunion events and other alum functions. They seem to continue contact with their college for a long time after graduating and donate the money, and keep the support rolling for their form teams. They also are often members of a frat, and keep the support going even among non athlete frat members. When you see this kind of directed long term support for a school from this group of people, it is no wonder to me why athletes enjoy some sort of favored status in admissions. Not only do you get something extra and substantial from the admitted athlete who is playing for the school, you get a long term commitment that you don't get from the vast majority of the college community. I also don't see an issue of these athletes getting some extra money with need programs, or merit money from D-1,2 and 3 schools because of this situation. Also with the time commitment to the sport, it is difficult and inadvisable for athletes to work for some extra money, something kids who are not as involved and committed to so many fixed hours , can do and often do. It is, in fact, advised for kids to take on a small time commitment of work during college. This group of kids tends to do better overall as long it is not overdone. Athletes do not have this time, which can be a financial issue. I know many kids who work on top of getting financial aid to make things more comfortable for them.</p>
<p>"I was quite impressed with GW's support of its athetes, Mini. Know nothing about gymnastics, but they have an official office and program to keep student athletes on point wit the academics that looked strong. Since gymnastics is not a mainline sport for most colleges, it is going to be challenging to find a school with the academics your daughter wants paired with gymnastic scholarships or a div 3 school that will give merit with need consideration for its athletes."</p>
<p>Yup. As it turns out, GW is as close to perfect as she has been able to find: strong international business/accounting focus, strong Arabic program, in a major city, academic support, near grandma (who worked at GW, and grandpa and uncle are alums), and relatively weak Div.I gymnastics team. </p>
<p>We'll see. We are prepared (but I am not sure she is yet) to go (elsehwere, we can't afford GW, and she probably can't get in) without the gymnastics, though I expect doing without four hours a day in the gym would negatively impact her academic performance.</p>
<p>"OPIE that would be financially unreasonable for many schools - which do not promise an education - they offer one for something in return"</p>
<p>To the extent that this is true, such schools should drop the pretense that the athletes are something other than employees. Pay them, let them endorse shoes, etc. Maintaining the fallacy that they are students, and that the NCAA is an educational program, serves no one. It sounds like the University of Washington is actually living up to the hype. I hope more schools follow suit.</p>
<p>"OPIE that would be financially unreasonable for many schools - which do not promise an education - they offer one for something in return"</p>
<p>And they sell jersey's, posters and advertisements along the way with the player getting no revenue from their use. At one time many moons ago, the same UW was listed as the most profitable sports program in washington.. more than the seahawks, sonics, and mariners I think combined. </p>
<p>It is not unreasonable to expect a school to make a commitment to a student athelete. If the school was concerned about the potential additional cost, they could certainly refine their recruiting process to ensure their student atheletes fall into the spectrum they need. They are the one's making the offer to a student athelete, they are not forced to take anyone. </p>
<p>Every year injuries claim student atheletes that make them leave school sometimes for years while they rehab both physically and mentally. Why do you feel it would be impossible for these schools to continue their commitment to these people? They may have given more than a pound of flesh for ole state U, why shouldn't state U be ready to take them back no matter how long it takes?</p>
<p>
[quote]
They are the one's making the offer to a student athelete, they are not forced to take anyone.
[/quote]
Agree. Schools should only take in students who stand a reasonable chance of graduating. I don't have a problem with lowering the bar a bit, as the athlete is bringing a special talent to the school & his athletic training certainly impacted his available study time. But the school must be prepared to support their athletes with tutoring if needed, and extra guidance in how to juggle the enormous burdens of Div1 athletics and academic expectations. It is almost criminal, IMHO, how many schools take advantage of unsophisticated families who have hopes of professional careers for their semi-literate kids.</p>
<p>
[quote]
When he visited Bucknell, he was set straight by one of the eng. professors: "It isn't possible to do a Division I sport and engineering. It just won't work."
[/quote]
Interesting ... Cornell, Penn, and Lehigh's varsity rosters do not seem to support this premise. Playing varsity sports in college is certainly a challenge however hundreds of thousands of kids pull off each year (yes hundreds of thousands) ... and overall with a higher GPA than non-athletes (and that is including football, basketball, and hockey which tend to drag down those average GPAs).</p>