<p>
</p>
<p>Given that the % of high school students who attend schools that offer classes in philosophy (or who have the chance to study philosophy in high school in any systematic way) is miniscule, “recruiting” for philosophy students is about as tilted-to-the-already-affluent as “recruiting” for water polo, fencing, etc. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but it’s not a particularly good example of “fairness.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My legacy son certainly didn’t receive as much “special attention and treatment” during the admissions process as any of the athletes at his school did. Which I’m not begrudging, but just saying. No one reached out to him and said he was a special snowflake because he was a legacy. No “office of legacies” acted on his behalf. So don’t even go there.</p>
<p>And, no Ivy reserved a certain percentage of the class for music performance stars or philosophy majors, etc. Yet, roughly 15% of the class at every Ivy IS reserved for athletes. </p>
<p>Yes, if you send in a performance tape or an art portfolio, the admissions office will have it evaluated by an expert. However, the art and music department are not guaranteed a certain number of “slots” in the class.</p>
<p>It’s NOT at all the same process and it is complete and utter nonsense to suggest that it is. I would doubt very much that xenophon’s D was “recruited” by an Ivy as a music performance major.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I’m NOT going there–the OP of this entire thread is the one that raised this claim, and in fact it’s a common contention in many CC threads.</p>
<p>The supplements are being evaluated for someone’s brilliance in that area (one of the reasons the schools say don’t bother sending something unless you are considered very accomplished at state or national level). They are not necessarily to provide people to those departments.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Perhaps it is different in the helmet sports, but certainly the coaches for smaller sports are not “guaranteed a certain number of slots” either. They may be allowed a MAXIMUM number of slots, which they may not exceed, but there is no “guarantee” of any at all. If a coach is unable to identify candidates in the positions he needs, who also satisfy the high academic requirements of Admisssions, then he will simply not fill those positions. Ivy teams often end up with major holes in their rosters because of this. In the video interview on the Princeton fencing website, the coach even discusses how he is going to have to shift fencers from one weapon to a completely different weapon in order to have enough to field a complete team. Trust me, this is no trivial task for the fencer or the coach.</p>
<p>Jonri, you probably shouldn’t be blithely tossing around accusations of “complete and utter nonsense” unless you know what you’re talking about.</p>
<p>
The same applies to many “recruited” athletes, too. Recruiting in low profile sports tends to be applicant driven. DS, a top recruit in his sport his year, was offered support at many schools, but only after he initiated contact.</p>
<p>But after the connection is established, PG’s description, “special attention and treatment” is dead on. He went from being an applicant with a decent shot at elite schools to being in the enviable position of getting to choose, and knowing early.</p>
<p>Of course I understand the irrationality of this. </p>
<p>National AP Scholar junior year: nice
Valedictorian: good
Prudential Spirit of Community State Honoree: pretty cool
16 APs, with 5s on all but one: very nice</p>
<p>Demonstrated proficiency at poking people with a metal rod: Priceless???</p>
<p>"Demonstrated proficiency at poking people with a metal rod: Priceless??? "</p>
<p>If you were on facebook - i would put a major like on it!</p>
<p>I DO know what I am talking about…</p>
<p>Please tell me which Ivies “recruit” students for vocal performance.</p>
<p>Please tell me which Ivies reserve 15% of the class for stars in performing arts or other fields.</p>
<p>To say that the process of athletic recruiting AT THE IVIES and the process for recruiting for vocal performance AT THE IVIES is the same IS complete and utter nonsense.</p>
<p>I am on jonri’s side here.
I really have never heard of anyone except an athlete being courted for one of a pre-set number of slots by a non-admissions officer at an Ivy.
Of course, I am willing to be to be corrected.
Xenophon’s story comes close, BUT the point is that these profs have no slots set aside and all to themselves to fill as the athletic coaches do, even for non-helmet sports, I promise, from my own experience.</p>
<p>X- could you explain in greater detail HOW the whole process started in the VP area? did your D contact to the music profs? or, did they see she won a national award or something, and contact her?
Just curious! Always looking to learn…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You speak with forked tongue. You are implying that if a coach CAN identify candidates who meet the requirements of admissions–one stanine below the medians–then those students WILL be admitted.</p>
<p>I know of no Ivy at which the theatre or music department is offered a “maximum” number of slots to be filled by students who excel in these fields who meet the statistical admissions standards.</p>
<p>Performersmom,</p>
<p>You say,</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Happy to oblige. Of course, I never claimed music departments have a pre-set number of slots. All I said, was that music departments (and probably other academic departments as well) engage in “recruiting.” In D’s case, her local music teacher (a prof at a local LAC) recommended her to the music department of an Ivy, not unlike her local coach contacting an Ivy coach. An exchange of phone calls and emails ensued, not unlike the contacts she had with the athletic coach. She was invited to visit the music department (not unlike an invitation to visit a team, although there was no budget for airfare and hotel, like a team might offer). An assistant dean gave her an extensive tour of the music facility (not unlike atour of the athletic facilities by an assistant coach). She was taken out for a nice lunch by said dean, and arrangements were made for her to observe classes and practices, not unlike an arrangement offered by a team. Finally, she was urged to submit an application early, along with a recording, so that there would be plenty of time to review the recording and provide appropriate support to her application with Admissions. Both the coach and the music prof made it quite clear that there were no guarantees, but that, at least at that point in time, she was a desired candidate.</p>
<p>Another anecdote: D’s friend applied to a local selective LAC this year, early, eager to study Music Composition, and while researching the college, developed a good relationship with the Comp prof. Unfortunately, friend got rejected, and called the prof simply to inform him of the bad news. Prof was astonished, and immediately called the Admissions Dept. to ask them what was up. Long story short, friend recieved a very nice letter from Admissions several days later, telling him they were reconsidering their rejection, and asking him to refrain from making any other college decisions until after Christmas break. Who knows how it will turn out? Do we consider this as “recruiting” by the Music Dept.? (Frankly, I would.) In any case, that prof felt there was a need to be filled by that student (you might call it a “slot”), and the prof felt he had some sway with Admissions and was going to exercise it. OK, the situation isn’t Ivy, but I believe it’s a good illustration of what I’m talking about. Private colleges build their student community as they see fit, and that generally involves a certain number of potential science majors, English majors, French-horn players, vocalists and, yes, athletes. And stakeholders in all those various areas (profs, administrators and donor alums) advocate to get their favored candidates in the door. I fail to see why athletics, in particular, is singled out for demonization.</p>
<p>Well, I have now learned that there can be instances of networked courting of talented arts applicants by professors who are impressed with them.</p>
<p>However, this is not a yearly, systematic program involving a set percentage of each class with guaranteed (to the coaches/ a la prof) slots.
Nor do the professors have much sway, let alone a set number of slots as the coaches do as they seek, find, and commit to applicants to fill, year in, year out, subject to final approval by the Admission Office.</p>
<p>What I am seeing is a more enhanced version of the “send in a CD and have the profs express interest in your work to he Admissions Office”- very different from the athletic situation, even in the the two example you provided.</p>
<p>The guarantees in the athletic process are NOT to the courted/"committed " athletes applying or to the coaches for exactly which athletes, but they ARE guaranteed a certain number of yeses each year. The coached will hedge their bets and “commit” to more applicants than slots. But that is a heck of a lot more say than the music profs have. Please aware of these differences, which the Ivy and LAC adminstration are most aware of, I promise you.
This thread morphed from the hook of legacy to the hook of athletes, and was trying to parse WHY the different treatment in the admissions process between talented artists and talented athletes.
I still think the differences in the admissions processes are significant, and a bit puzzling form the point of view of institutional power.</p>
<p>BTW, X- kudos to your D for getting such attention on both counts.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not true. Vast majority of likely letters are issued during the early app season starting in Oct. </p>
<p>Your D’s chances of admission was ‘only’ 40% because she did not get a LL. If she had, it would be close to 100% and that is a different animal altogether. </p>
<p>Maybe akin to getting ‘pinned’ in the olden days (do they do that anymore?) vs being ‘very engaged’ in the recruiting courtship.</p>
<p>There are kids courted by ivies by ivies, but not many. If the school has a need to fill they will let admissions know. It could be that millions were just donated for a music or other arts program and the college needs to kick start it with some accomplished contributors to keep the money coming. It’s all about institutional needs that year. Athletes are always needed, successful teams bring in money.</p>
<p>If your daughter did not receive a likely letter, then she was not recruited. You clearly have little understanding of the process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely not true. Coaches will ensure that they fill their max slots every year, lest they convey the notion that they don’t need them. </p>
<p>Throughout the summer and early in the school year, coaches give the names of any and all potential recruits to the provost, who makes sure that the athlete can “do the work,” and is of generally decent character - the PROVOST LIST. As likely letter time comes round, the coach picks off the list the athletes who he really wants - this can go right to the wire and is certainly subject to last minute SAT results. Those students receive likely letters (most in October) and guaranteed admission.</p>
<p>GorillaGlue, I believe I have quite an intimate view of the recruiting process; judging from your previous postings, you do not. Allow me to elaborate.</p>
<p>The coach arranged for D to fly out to the university at team expense, to spend precisely 48 hours on campus (Official NCAA requirements for athlete recruits). Upon arriving, she was required by the coach to sign papers clarifying precisely what the expectations were for her conduct while on campus under team supervision (NCAA and university requirement for recruits). She stayed in the dorm with a host athlete, attended class and attended team practices as an observer (not a participant). She was formally introduced to the team by the coach as a “recruit,” and they were urged to make her feel welcome so she would choose to apply to that school. Her host student was given a (small) expense budget to treat her to food and events. I accompanied her as her father, and my hotel was completely paid for (though NCAA regulations preclude paying for my flight). The coach hosted us as his sole guests for two dinners and two lunches, personally picked us up at the airport and dropped us off afterwards, and took us to a football game, at which we sat with him and several other coaches and their recruits in center, sideline seats. During the entire time, she was constantly referred to as a top “recruit” and I was introduced to other athletes and coaches as the “recruit’s father.”</p>
<p>By the official NCAA definition, the University definition and the coach’s definition, she was a “recruit.” I’ll take their definitions over the GorillaGlue definition any day.</p>
<p>Let me fill you in. It sounds like the school did not close the deal. Many athletes go through this process. Coaches, for obvious reasons, must cast a wide net, but those recruited, at Ivies at least, receive a likely letter ahead the admissions notification date. Your daughter was probably among those under consideration, but she was not among those who received the coach’s allocated spots. </p>
<p>A friend’s daughter went through a similar process with Dartmouth - numerous meetings, wining and dining, etc. Athletes in more popular sports do this with coaches from multiple schools. It turned out that the slot he wanted the girl to fill was at the highest end of his AI range, so she did not get a likely (her SATs were mid to high 600s). She could certainly still have applied and taken her chances with the normal admissions process, but she decided to go with another school who did give her a likely.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s difficult to take seriously anyone who quotes Michele Hernandez, but “coach’s support” is code for “you’re on your own, but if you get in you can join the team.” It’s what coaches say to students they decide NOT to recruit.</p>
<p>one of our friend’s kids went through this process last year (currently a freshman at an ivy). Received assurances from 3 Ivies that if she were to say yes, a likely would follow. Said yes to one of them, got a letter and but Princeton was still calling asking if she can change her mind and come to Princeton instead. The likely was issued in October so that she would not commit to someone else.</p>
<p>Interestingly enough, I read a note from Princeton early in the process (April 2010) encouraging the kid to apply although an LL could not be promised.</p>