<p>Blueliner, </p>
<p>Thank you for supplying good, supportive information form your personal experience for your view of the situation. And from your experience with those boys coaches, I can see how you'd come to the conclusion that you have about the boys. I don't think it reflects well on those coaches, nor the institutions that they seemed more worried about draft potential than test scores. I'm also sorry to hear that these players seem to get their validation from the fans as opposed to from academic and personal growth. </p>
<p>And it is great to see that your son can be both a recruited athlete and a top student at a great school. And I've corresponded with a couple of families of male hockey players coming from AAA backgrounds applying to AESDCH schools as well, all of whom have GPAs and test scores above the averages for the schools they are applying to. My point is that your son is not alone and I believe that there are plenty of well qualified applicants out there who do very well at these schools. OK, maybe they arent first round draft picks, but do these schools look at themselves as prep schools or as Junior hockey teams?</p>
<p>For your daughter, I wish her luck as well in the optomistic sense. I'm not sure from the way you wrote it what the coach's tone was for that "good luck", (being professional, discouraging, or being personally supportive). Being a 4-year multi-sport varsity athlete at a bigger prep school probably isn't as important as at a smaller school where they need kids who can fill many needs, but still has advantages when the adcoms look at whether they can fill the varsity squads only using full-pay, academically superior candidates. They generally prefer not to have to use scholarship money or academic tipping to fill in the ranks (solid players, but not difference makers) of most squads. </p>
<p>You said your daughter would be a 4-year varsity player, but didn't indicate that she is a difference-maker. These difference-makers I believe is where schools start using the coach's influence in admissions (both in boys and girls sports). Having been around girls hockey for a number of years, there are very few of them out there. Most girls teams are lucky to have 1 or 2 of them. Often at the prep schools they are Canadian. I can't speak for the boys side.</p>
<p>Perhaps the difference between recruiting boys and girls difference-makers is that the girl difference-makers have better stats. My experience between girls and boys hockey (my D played both) players has been that I've seen many boys who are benched for academic issues by their parents, but I've only seen one girl held off the ice for those reasons (and she wasn't a difference-maker). Perhaps the population of girls who participate in sports like ice hockey is different and the boys who participate in ice hockey. Perhaps girls mature younger and "figure it out" sooner. So perhaps it doesn't take as much of a tip by the coach to get the girl difference-maker as it does for the boys coach to get that difference-maker.</p>
<p>I appreciate the light you have now brought to your first post and I hope I've shed some light from my end. While it is disappointing to hear how much of a difference your son has seen in his teammates, I think that to bring out these poor admissions decisions without bringing examples of the things done correctly only serves to prepetuate the myth that athletics can overcome anything. And personally, I don't think the coach is doing these kids any favor by getting them a diploma that doesn't fit their true achievement (based upon your rocks for jocks statement). I think these kids could very well go to another more academically fitting school and play every bit as good hockey. Maybe the crowds would be smaller, but if their motivation to play hockey is the love of the game and not the love of themself, the crowds are not nearly as important.</p>
<p>And yes, I am trying to fight against the generalization, especially when it is being espoused by students who aren't a part of the varsity teams they generalize about. And when they have a young, impressionable audience, I believe this behavior on their part only serves to build prejudices and poison the minds of those younger board members.</p>
<p>You may call it political correctness. I repsectfully disagree and think of it as trying to stop the cycle of ignorance. Your input about your son's teammates has shown the grain of truth, but more importantly, your son's personal situation demonstrates that hockey players (as well as other high-profile athletes) are more often great students, just like everyone else. </p>
<p>Thanks again.</p>