<p>Well, maybe other unacknowledged feelings were beneath the surface. They seem to get over it quickly.</p>
<p><<why can't="" the="" schools="" look="" at="" academic="" ability="" first="" and="" then="" choose="" best="" athlete="" who="" meets="" grade?="">></why></p>
<p>Because high schools make it almost impossible for a student to be both a top student and an athlete. Students like my son, who play a varsity sport and strive to do well academically are often persecuted by their coaches. God forbid you skip practice to attend a debate or model congress, much less to study for a big test. Let's face it, most high school coaches are not scholars and because they apparently chose sports over academics, they are resentful of any student who succeeds at both, so they trip him up until he chooses one or the other.</p>
<p><<i've seen="" the="" look="" of="" shock="" on="" many="" faces="" this="" spring="" when="" told="" specific="" individuals="" who="" have="" gotten="" into="" brown,="" harvard="" and="" yale="" because="" they="" can="" run="" down="" field="" with="" a="" ball.="" i've="" known="" some="" these="" kids="" since="" were="" young="" they've="" never="" cared="" one="" iota="" about="" school.="" i="" think="" if="" people="" aware="" how="" cut="" chances="" for="" their="" kids,="" they'd="" realize="" even="" more="" absurd="" process="" is.="">></i've></p>
<p>It is beyond absurd. It is abhorrent. Maybe colleges should start a new system where they aren't pretending that these athletes are actually students. Pay high school graduates/athletes to do what they do - play ball. Keep it separate from academia.</p>
<p>digmedia-</p>
<p>I think we came up with a good college list and my S got into 5 of 6...HOWEVER...this scenario you mention kind of played itself out with us on merit aid. He applied to 5 schools that give aid, but none that give it based on SAT scores/GPAs...all based on hoping the right person reads your essays! <em>ONE</em> school offered scholarship money and it worked out to be his best choice for many reasons, but how lucky was that in the end?? Amazing...</p>
<p>Iderochi yes, it's very similar. No doubt inspired by my thread combined with others. S is still on three waiting lists. Pursuing them and looking into other options.</p>
<p>I don't think most parents are guilty of 'overestimating the qualifications of their children.' What I have learned is not that my son is underqualified in any way, I don't think I misjudged on that account at all, but that there are a ridiculous amount of admissions of students who DO NOT meet the academic standards but sadly are admitted because they are from some sort of special interest group. </p>
<p>There are a lot of students from our hs and nearby private schools who don't have any 'national' level of achievement. None. As a matter of fact I can't think of one who has. The sad thing is that so many are from special interest groups. Example: three kids from our high school are children and grandchildren of professors at H and they were accepted. One of them is a completely middle -of -the -road student. Another, a football player, (Brown) is TOTALLY inferior academically and motivationally. It's one thing to give preference to the son of a prof over another student IF they are equally matched, but to give preference over MANY other MORE qualified applicants from our school is another. Someone argued that the athletes promote "diversity" on campus. Well fine, but the athlete should have to meet the same academic standards. Choose the athlete over another EQUALLY qualified candidate to accomplish the diversity, not over a BETTER qualified one. </p>
<p>This whole warped college process is where we went wrong. Frankly, I think there is a problem with the system.</p>
<p>kdos -
I still get the shakes reading the acceptance/denial results on some of the individual college boards. I'm glad its over (at least for undergrad!).</p>
<p>Athletes aren't the only ones who work hard! My friend's son has to go to a jazz performance that will last, including travel time, from noon until into the evening. And this is taking place on a day between two final exam dates. Kids who are in school plays rehearse until 11 p.m. Serious student musicians often practice three hours per day, go to music schools all day on Saturdays or Sundays and have performances that can happen at totally inconvenient times. Debaters have to travel and do hours of research. What is the difference with athletes?</p>
<p>Andi-- your issue isn't with the warped process, it's in the perspective of people who live in Boston (and I grew up there and most of my family, many of whom are academics, still live there.) The pecking order of colleges in Boston is pretty well entrenched and folks don't like to have to explain where Rice is or why Pomona is considered a fantastic LAC or why you'd go to Tulane or Emory or Vanderbilt or St. Olaf's or any one of 50 stellar universities.</p>
<p>For ANYONE-- if your kid, however, wonderful, is applying to the same list of 6 schools that dozens of kids from your high school are applying to.... that in and of itself is a message that you need a handful (at least two) of safeties that your kid can love. I've lived in lots of places as an adult and constantly meet people who are smart and talented and have had wonderful professional success who graduated from places that are just not on the radar screen in Belmont and Needham and Brookline High school. And no, Andi, I don't mean Wash U. which is Hot Hot Hot right now.</p>
<p>Your kid can be performing neurosurgery in your garage and composing a symphony to relax....... but if your list is top heavy with reaches, and even the match schools are places which are popular in your neighborhood, you are looking for disappointment.</p>
<p>Andi - I think the universities are a mirror of our society. Do Americans really value intellectual pursuit over athletic achievement? I don't think so. In fact, I think it's the opposite. There is a problem with the system alright, but it's not just in academia.</p>
<p>ASAP:
Excellent point.</p>
<p>"Serious student musicians often practice three hours per day, go to music schools all day on Saturdays or Sundays and have performances that can happen at totally inconvenient times. Debaters have to travel and do hours of research. What is the difference with athletes?"</p>
<p>The answer is the same as anything else..MONEY! Good sports teams bring $$$ to the school, debate teams and performing arts do not. It's always about money.</p>
<p>BTW..I have the opposite problem on this topic. Everyone keeps telling my D she isn't aiming high enough for her stats, but she has her list and the schools on it are where she thinks she will be happy, so that is fine withme.</p>
<p>School admins and board members frequently attend sporting events. Not a one at the state academic decathlon banquet (would have been a free meal, too). That certainly sends a message.</p>
<p>Value is the word. Athletes bring in revenue for schools, whether from television advertising or from happy alumni. It's not warped at the level of the schools - they have to get money from somewhere or they can't offer financial or merit aid (that other factor in outcome disappointment). Humans desire to see people engage in physical activities in a competitive arena. What can you do about it?</p>
<p>I think of this as one of the "It is what it is" issues.</p>
<p>ohio_mom-</p>
<p><i still="" get="" the="" shakes="" reading="" acceptance="" denial="" results="" on="" some="" of="" individual="" college="" boards.="" i'm="" glad="" its="" over="" (at="" least="" for="" undergrad!).=""></i></p><i still="" get="" the="" shakes="" reading="" acceptance="" denial="" results="" on="" some="" of="" individual="" college="" boards.="" i'm="" glad="" its="" over="" (at="" least="" for="" undergrad!).="">
<p>agreed..... I still am trying to get rid of the knots in my upper back.</p>
</i>
<p>As the mom of a deciding (still!) senior and an about to be rising senior, I anticipate taking a different approach, but in a way, expect similiar results.<br>
IMHO, it's not just the student & parent expectations, but also the school, classmates, grandparents & community expectations. Each group would be more helpful, if they were better informed about the apparent arbitrariness of college selection!</p>
<p>I recently discussed the "athletes get a break" issue with my daughter, a junior at an Ivy League school who has several close friends who were recruited athletes (as she most definitely was not!) She strongly defended the practice of recruiting athletes. Her points were as follows:</p>
<ol>
<li>The athletes are not blockheads; they are, in her experience, as bright as anyone else.</li>
<li>They have demonstrated through their athletic achievements the ability to develop a high level skill, perform under pressure, and manage their time competently -- all important factors for college success.</li>
<li>Athletics are a vital part of college life and how are you going to have them if you have no athletes?</li>
<li>Being on a team at a college at this level means being able to keep up with your studies while spending hours a day at practice, plus being frequently absent for meets/games/whatever -- no easy task.</li>
</ol>
<p>Why is it just athletes that irks so many ? Why not all the other uncommon special admits such as Hispanic singers with 1250 SAT's, or American Indians, or any of the many, many types of students that selective colleges want among their student body? Selective schools want these students and that is why they are admitted.</p>
<p>The plain fact of the matter is that athletically talented AND high achieving (stats that are Ivy worthy) students are uncommon. And the Ivy League is an athletic league -- It stands to reason that they want athletes attending their schools. I believe that if the tables were turned and musically talented and high achieving students were uncommon, and generated revenue like sports, selective schools would be admitting them with lower stats just like they do for athletes.</p>
<p>There are more debaters and talented musicians with high stats than these schools need. There are not enough talented athletes able to compete in the Ivy League with stats that compare with the rest of the class. End result: kids with athletic talent get in with lower stats.
Admission to these elite schools is based on academic talent for many, (probably most) but not all.
I think the athlete bashing is unfair. The "it is what it is" comment hits the nail right on the head. As long as selective schools want athletes, they are going to get in with lower stats.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but if your list is top heavy with reaches, and even the match schools are places which are popular in your neighborhood, you are looking for disappointment
[/quote]
blossom, I couldn't agree more. I certainly realize that now. All I'm saying is that I hadn't realized before exactly HOW MANY athletes get into these so-called top schools that are significantly less qualified. I've lived in my town for 18 years and I've seen some of these kids grow up. Not only are some of them SIGNIFICANTLY underqualified academically, they are not particularly interesting people who will bring knowledge and an interesting point of view to an intellectual discussion in a classroom. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Value is the word. Athletes bring in revenue for schools, whether from television advertising or from happy alumni. It's not warped at the level of the schools - they have to get money from somewhere or they can't offer financial or merit aid (that other factor in outcome disappointment).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I always hear that they bring in revenue but is that actually true to a significant extent? And how much of the merit aid goes to the athletes themselves?
Why can't they select the athletes from a pool of kids who have already been qualified academically? If these institutions base their reputations on their 'fine academics' why don't they expect the athletes to meet those requirements. Some of the athletes are indeed qualified but many more have to rely on tutors to get them by and even then they just sqeak by. Is it too much for athletes to make the grade just as the kids in all of the other areas of EC interest do?</p>
<p>I understand the disappointment and frustration resulting from negative admissions news. That said, there is a great danger in making conclusive generalizations about anedoctal evidence. </p>
<p>For what it is worth, I know a number of athletes who attend a range of different schools. None of them is at a school at which he does NOT exceed the median qualifications, and at times by a very substantial margin. There is ample evidence that many Division I powerhouse field teams loaded with academically challenged students. I believe that the situation is quite different at schools that are more selective. While you may know -or be aware- of a few dumb jocks who may have made it at an Ivy or similar schools, I also know a few students who did not need the athletic angle to attend a prestigious school. Actually, I do not know any dumb jocks! </p>
<p>As far as the preference of sports over music or arts, is it REALLY that clear? Are the superstars musicians or debaters REALLY ignored? Are the stories about oboe or french horn players that circulate on CC myths? The reality is that the students fill the holes the colleges deem necessary to address. The colleges do not reach for competent athletes or musicians as much as they look for the best of the best. And, again, a dose of realism indicates that the numbers are much smaller than one would like to believe. For instance, how many scholarships are doled out to a soccer team? Divide the maximum number by 4, and you'll see that it far from utopia. </p>
<p>When judging athletes, you may have to look way beyond the high school grounds. While some sports are high school-centric, many have little to do with the school; the main activities are taking place at club levels. You may not be aware of the demands placed on an athlete who competes at an international, national level, or even at a regional level. </p>
<p>In addition, there are students who are able to juggle both worlds and emerge at the top of their class academically and athletically. I'm sure that most everyone remembers the posts of the 2003-2004 Caseyatthebat whose son attends Dartmouth. </p>
<p>It is a lot harder to measure one's merits correctly than to discredit him.</p>
<p>Andi, I'm sorry your son had a bad admissions experience, but I, too, am tired of the athlete-bashing. At the Ivys and like schools, it is simply not true that a large number of athletes are admitted with far lower academics. In the "big" sports like football, hockey and basketball, there ARE a number of recruits in the lower academic bands. However, the Ivys are limited in how low they can go. If you look at some of the other threads on this forum, you will see that many of our student-athletes are every bit as qualified as other applicants. I know my son is a disciplined and talented athlete and student, and if he is willing to contribute his time and talent to a college team, it certainly should help him with admissions. He is a top student but will fall into the middle range of stats for the highly selective schools- along with most of the other applicants. There have been recruited athletes on these boards who have NOT been accepted to the Ivy where they were recruited- even with SATs in the 1400s. So-if you have the impression that most Ivy athletes are weak candidates, you are very incorrect.</p>
<p>"I always hear that they bring in revenue but is that actually true to a significant extent? And how much of the merit aid goes to the athletes themselves?
Why can't they select the athletes from a pool of kids who have already been qualified academically? If these institutions base their reputations on their 'fine academics' why don't they expect the athletes to meet those requirements?"</p>
<p>Why can't we use names for the sake of this discussion? What schools are we talking about? Ivy League? Your answers are easy to find! There are no athletic scholarships. Now that that is established, how many athletes are YOU estimating did NOT meet the academic requirements for admittance? 10% of 2400 or about 240? More? Less? What is it? </p>
<p>What is the next level of schools that value fine academics? Large research universities? Liberal Arts Colleges? What are the schools that engage in such egregious behavior? </p>
<p>Let's name them!</p>