Ivy/Prestigious versus scholarship schools for athletes

Parents Forum
1

<p>This was originally posted in the thread “Prestigious Ivy college never a consideration” but I felt the thread was getting slightly off topic. So I am going to post here.</p>

<p>Original Post</p>

<p>My S actually was considering the Ivies. He had a written ‘likely letter’ from one and a couple verbal ‘likelies’ from others as a recruited athlete. (He also had the stats for admission. Not tops by Ivy standards, but more than solid for Ivy athletes.) </p>

<p>His academic interests are in Engineering and Business. As we researched all of his choices, he decided on a ‘Public Ivy’ that offered him a significant athletic scholarship. (We did not qualify for any fin aid at the Ivies). Taking into account both his academic interests and our financial interests, attending the ‘Public Ivy’ with a top 20 engineering program and a top 25 business program is right for him. Also, this state university has a top 4 program in one of the engineering majors he is considering. </p>

<p>S has already informed us that he would like to continue his studies beyond the undergraduate level. His decision to attend the State U will allow us to pay for his graduate education without incurring any debt.</p>

<p>In regards to State Us having large classes, during his first semester he will have only one large lecture. Two of his classes will have about 25 students, two will have about 35 students, and one will be slightly larger. I must note that when we visited the Ivies, we also saw large science lecture halls and large science labs.</p>

<p>So what are the reasons S chose the ‘Public Ivy’? </p>

<li> Very solid, rigorous engineering program</li>
<li> Large availability of majors in case interests change over time</li>
<li> General education requirements in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Arts, and United States and International Cultures for a well-rounded education</li>
<li> Availability of cooperative education and intern programs</li>
<li> Availability of undergraduate research assignments</li>
<li> Excellent job placement/career center</li>
<li> Great alumni network</li>
<li> Scholarship money allowing for debt free undergraduate/graduate school.</li>
<li> Able to compete athletically at a Division I level</li>
<li>Great social environment</li>
</ol>

2

<p>IMO, high achieving students who also are high achieving athletes have a difficult decision to make regarding attending Ivy and other prestigious LACs versus scholarship schools. The following is my personal experience with colleges and the recruiting process. </p>

<p>The Ivies and many of the more prestigious LACs do not have any scholarship money to offer. (If you have a EFC equal or greater than the COA, you will not receive any financial aid.) When compared to scholarship schools, the difference per year can be $45K+ per year. Even with being an OOS student with only a 50% scholarship, the savings can approach $30K per year. Over 4 years, it can exceed $120K (taking into account tuition increases and appreciation on the savings, or savings of interest on loans). If the scholarship school offers a rigorous, highly ranked academic program in the student’s area of interest, it is pretty safe to say that it might be a good decision to consider the scholarship school. </p>

<p>Additionally at some of the Ivies, athletes actually pay some of the cost of their equipment and training trips. Normally, most if not all of these items are paid for by the scholarship schools. Many scholarship schools also offer early/preferential registration to their athletes as well as preferred housing and support services, including additional advisors, scheduled study halls, and tutoring, if necessary, at no cost to the student-athlete. At the Ivies we spoke to, the student-athlete is treated as any other student in their class, with the exception that some (not all) did offer to house athletes with other athletes in the same sport. </p>

<p>Then add to the above, 20 hours per week of practice plus weekend travel. It now appears that our student-athlete at the Ivy (prestigious LACs) is paying more than any other students on campus and is having his/her available study time reduced by 20 or more hours per week. No matter how bright a student is, it is difficult to compete with all equally bright students with 20 less hours a week available to study.</p>

<p>The above is just my personal opinion and an exposition of my experience over the past year. Many others may have had different experiences and I encourage them to post.</p>

3

<p>The following is from a recent Stanford Magazine article. There is much more to the article, much of it paints a more positive picture, but my experience is that we rarely hear the negatives...athletes who end up hating their sport or quitting (and giving up the scholarship) or not graduating after their eligibility runs out just fade into the workwork, never to be heard from again. The spectacular success stories are always hauled out and dusted off for public view, but it's not at all clear to me that they are representative of the whole.

[quote]
...But at what point are the demands too much even for the most dedicated student-athletes? “The athletes I have had in class do fine, but they are exhausted. How much learning goes on when you’re exhausted?” wonders civil and environmental engineering professor Jeff Koseff, a fan of the athletics department.</p>

<p>Pulitzer Prize-winning historian David Kennedy, ’63, believes a lot of students are compelled to compromise their commitment to the classroom when they commit to a sport. “I believe that for a lot of young people it’s a delusion to think they can truly excel in both those dimensions,” Kennedy says. “One or the other suffers. My impression is a lot of them suffer academically, not because they are academically unqualified, but because their sport is their priority.”</p>

<p>Leland has similar concerns. “I worry that we bring them here and we tell them that they can be world-class in sports, and they can be world-class in academics. That’s Stanford’s brand. We’re world-class in both. But can we be?”</p>

<p>He notes that training and preparation for most sports is now a year-round phenomenon, requiring 30 to 40 hours of work per week. “There’s no off-season. In the old days, when football players got done with football, they didn’t see the football coach until they showed up for spring practice. Now you start weightlifting the next morning.”</p>

<p>“Winter conditioning is ridiculously hard,” says senior linebacker Timi Wusu, a premed student. “We have 6 a.m. or 7 a.m. workouts every day of the week. Winter is when we get a lot bigger, faster and stronger.”</p>

<p>Meanwhile, with an eye on medical school, Wusu knows that just getting by in his classes isn’t good enough. “The difference between an A and a B is huge in terms of workload,” he says. “I’ve trained my body to perform at a constantly high stress level, but there have been times about two weeks into a quarter that I’ve experienced a physical and mental breakdown.” Wusu gave up track and field after his sophomore year. “There is only so much energy you can put into anything. Something has to give.”...

[/quote]
<a href="http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2005/novdec/features/athletics.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2005/novdec/features/athletics.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>As an aside, I can vouch for the Wusu's assertion that the difference between an A and a B in terms of workload is huge at Stanford. That's very true.</p>

4

<p>karp - I think that was exactly the right choice.</p>

5

<p>We have told S that if the academics and sport become too much, we would support him if he decided not to compete. We would happily pay whatever difference would result from giving up his athletic scholarship. (He also received an outside merit scholarship which was not associated with athletics.) Even if we had to do this, we would still be about $70K ahead, enough for almost 2 years of graduate school.</p>

<p>When doing our research, I found some interesting facts. At Princeton, approximately 30% of all students who enter Princeton as Engineering majors never take an engineering class. They switch into other majors. Another article stated that approximately 50% of all students who enter as athletes quit competing by the time they are juniors because of work load. To me, being an engineering major and athlete at Princeton would be very difficult, if not nearly impossible for even the brightest of the bright.</p>

6

<p>
[quote]
Another article stated that approximately 50% of all students who enter as athletes quit competing by the time they are juniors because of work load.

[/quote]
That, and the somewhat circular problem of over-recruitment at schools that don't offer athletic scholarships. Since there's no money to hold the athletes, they have to bring in more freshmen, hoping that a few stick around. The more they bring in, the more competition for playing time. If you're working your tail off and looking at being a sub for 4 years, quitting starts to look pretty good. And so it goes...</p>

7

<p>"Since there's no money to hold the athletes, they have to bring in more freshmen, hoping that a few stick around."</p>

<p>From what I encountered, Ivy admissions only allows coaches a designated number of recruits. The coach lists his recruits, prioritizes them, and submits them to admissions. Admissions then reviews the student's application and decides if the student-athlete will be accepted. Normally, the athletes at the top of the list have a better chance of admission than those towards the bottom. Those with better stats and near the top of the list have the best chance of admission.</p>

8

<p>"Those with better stats and near the top of the list have the best chance of admission."</p>

<p>I know that's NOT how it works at my alma mater. Athletic coaches reserve their "tips" for those with marginal (for the school) academics, but excellent athletic abilities. They will take their chances with the admissions office generally speaking with those who are toward the higher end of the academic ranges. The result is that athletes with lower stats have greater possiblity of admission.</p>

<p>And I have no problem with that whatsoever. Over the next four years, the academic tables may turn topsy-turvy, with admissions offices being not particularly capable in predicting, of those accepting, who end up doing best. But they CAN very well predict who will perform well athletically.</p>

9

<p>mini- </p>

<p>You are absolutely right! </p>

<p>Coaches will put the better athletes with lower academics at the top of their list. I guess I did not phrase what I was thinking correctly. I guess what I wanted to say was that if a student has exceptional athletic skills and excellent academic ability, the coach may put him/her a little higher up on the list than someone that has less athletic skills and comparable academic ability.</p>

<p>Thanks for the catch.</p>

10

<p>karp, you're right, coaches have a limited number of tips for each sport, but without scholarships to keep players in the program, recruiting can get out of whack, with one class representing 1/3 or even 1/2 of the roster. That causes problems down the line and throws the balance off. When a players leaves before junior year, they are usually not replaced by an incoming junior...they're replaced with a freshman. That can blow up the freshman class.</p>

11

<p>1Down2togo</p>

<p>True...so true...</p>