<p>Reported by school/sport when possible. Unfortunately many top programs would not release the info.</p>
<p>CNN</a> Analysis: Some college athletes play like adults, read like fifth-graders</p>
<p>[CNN:</a> Some college athletes play like adults, read like 5th-graders - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-scores/index.html?sr=fb010714athletesreadingscore530p]CNN:”>http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-scores/index.html?sr=fb010714athletesreadingscore530p)</p>
<p>Any thoughts? Opinions? Refuting anecdotal evidence?</p>
<p>No news here. And then we’re supposed to be surprised when athletes are placed in meaningless classes and given passing grades for doing nothing–what else could be done with students who don’t have the qualifications to attend these colleges? I don’t have a problem with college students enjoying the fun and excitement of rooting for sports teams, but we all know that at so many of these universities (not all), the athletes aren’t really students. Why pretend otherwise?</p>
<p>Most of these student athletes shouldn’t be in the classrooms. They are entertainers - they keep the alumni engaged, become a rallying point for the university and help with raising the profile of the university. In return, they get a free education, a chance to play the sport they love and a shot, albeit a small shot, at a professional career.</p>
<p>The fix is easy - create a minor league system where they can play after high school and give them an option to play in college (just like baseball). In basketball and football, the schools are the minor leagues - the schools want the money and student / alumni support. </p>
<p>No, many of these kids shouldn’t be at these schools but I have a hard time blaming them. Many just want to play football or basketball and there aren’t options - they can’t go straight to the pros and there isn’t a minor league. No one is going to stand up to the University Presidents that want the money and ESPN that pays big dollars for the television rights.</p>
<p>I admit I have seen these stories about the athletes at UNC Chapel Hill over as long as they’ve been coming out. I went to college in one of the Carolinas so this was always on my radar.</p>
<p>From the comments I have read on articles published, several stayed with me. </p>
<p>One was, not only do these athletes work full-time for 4 years and not get to the pros, but then they don’t even have an education to fall back on.</p>
<p>Another was the whole part about creating an entire department within the university with courses where 40% of the students signed up were athletes in the football program and when all the inquiry started, professors and TA’s fled and administrators took the blame in place of the athletic staff.</p>
<p>I would think other schools like (was it UConn Huskies?) have to be on this. You can’t sanction any schools when crap like this is going on.</p>
<p>By the same token why pretend that the schools are doing anything but taking advantage of these kids and making millions of dollars off of them all under the guise of giving them a free education which they are not qualified to utilize.</p>
<p>Refuting anecdotal evidence?</p>
<p>That’s easy. </p>
<p>State AP Scholars
National AP Scholars
Valedictorians
Ivy League Engineering students
Magna cum laude STEM graduates
Rhodes Scholars</p>
<p>etc.</p>
<p>Agree with sherpa, not all student athletes fit the stereotype.</p>
<p>And I hate the NCAA with a passion…</p>
<p>In my kid’s sport NONE of the student-athletes fit the stereotype. They are all GPAs 4.0+ students and SAT scores above 2000. They will all get a great education and go on to successful careers (like their predecessors). I guess it depends on which schools and which sports you are talking about. Like in so many things, generalizations are of no value. My kid’s sport is crew.</p>
<p>Many NCAA swimmers are admitted to medical school every year.</p>
<p>For the sake of argument, what would happen if guidelines were put in place to ensure that all D1 recruited athletes were statistically similar in their academic qualifications to the rest of their peers on campus? That’s the way it’s done in the Ivy League. The standardized test scores/GPA of the recruited athletes (as a group) must be within 1 standard deviation of the rest of the students on campus.
So UNC basketball and Alabama football recruits would have to be academically similar to the rest of the students at their respective schools. I wonder how that would play out? Would administration at the sports powerhouse schools come under pressure from the alumni and athletic department to lower their overall academic profile? Would non-selective schools become the new players in college sports? Maybe they would become the de facto “minor leagues” of pro sports.
BTW, I’m not saying that great athletes can’t also be great students. But from a sheer numbers perspective, there are a lot more kids to pick from that have scored 18 or better on the ACT than there are that have scored 27 or better.</p>
<p>Varska I agree but the problem is practical application. The Ivies are that way because they want to be. That makes it easy to put into action. The coaches don’t have all the power. But if Nick Saban says " I know this kid didn’t do well on his SAT but it’s because the SAT favors middle class white kids and he isn’t white and his GPA was low because he had to work part time to help feed his family" how do you know if it’s true or if the kid is just the best defensive end in the country? </p>
<p>I agree we need a system that values the students. We need university presidents to take the lead.</p>
<p>Is the tail wagging the dog here? Why is it that all these “nonprofit” and “public” colleges and universities have a clearly dysfunctional (for the “student” athletes) situation that can’t be tampered with? Sure there are outlier student athletes who succeed while they play basketball and football in college but they are not the majority, for sure. And forget the other sports: basketball and football are the monster moneymakers and entertainers.</p>
<p>Old mom. I disagree. Who says good students are the minority? And why discount the 470,000 scholar athletes who do make it work?</p>
<p>Anecdotal evidence? My son and his four cousins are all student athletes. All have over 3.0 gpa’s. Their combined GPA is probably close to 3.5. The NCAA is about a lot more than the couple of thousand football and basketball players in the top 100 sports schools. </p>
<p>Sure there are problems but you can’t solve those problems without affecting the 470,000 athletes. I can’t say that number enough. 470,000. </p>
<p>Also please remember that there are plenty of students out there who are losing scholarships because of academic difficulties or bad behavior but those stories don’t make the news.</p>
<p>Here is the result from one college on the list:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I’ve said here, and elsewhere before, the statistic provided above is not an accurate assessment of the true situation. As the quote says, non-scholarship athletes are included in the report. There are around 100 members on a large university’s football team. Telling us the ACT or Sat score of the third string tight end tells us nothing.</p>
<p>What would truly show the situation in clear focus is to report on the ACT or Sat scores of the starting defensive unit or the starting five male basketball players. You will see a tremendous difference.</p>
<p>Oldmom. These stories are not the majority. There are 470,000 student athletes in US colleges. Let me type that number again. 470,000. The vast majority are training and studying and contributing to their schools. </p>
<p>There are a few athletes at premier sports schools that create these issues. So if you are saying that the tail is waging the dog because we need not worry about a few “outliers” well the good students are the norm. The subpar athletes are the outliers.</p>
<p>So maybe the problem should be redefined as big football and big basketball? Any photo of these teams shows that the players are not representative of the schools at large, and I am not talking about height or bulk or musculature.</p>
<p>I don’t agree that the Ivies and other top LACs are taking only athletes who would otherwise be admitted in every sport. I don’t think they are taking 2.0 students with 17 on the ACT, but these are not hockey and lacrosse players who otherwise would be admitted without the ‘hook’ of athletics. Ironically, their football and basketball teams are probably fully of students who could be admitted based on their academic records alone. </p>
<p>Most student athletes aren’t getting full ride scholarships (football and basketball are big exceptions) so they and their families are still paying tuition and other costs. Most aren’t taking ‘fluff’ classes and most do graduate. My daughter picked her school for the academics, and the athletics are a bonus. She will probably not participate in the co-op program, but many non-athletes don’t participate either.</p>
<p>So just thought of this thread and am popping back in with an observation: my D is trying to get recruited for golf. We are applying at schools she is a match for academically (she’s a B- student who shows that she might test pretty good). I’ve enrolled her in a couple of the recruit management websites. I see a post for an opening at what seemed like a decent enough college looking for ‘academically strong’ athletes with a 3.0 GPA and a 900 CR+M SAT and a 12 ACT? Can’t figure out for the life of me how 900 and 12 is academically strong (but I think I’m about to email the coach to find out). D is projecting (from PSAT and PLAN) in the 1200 range for SAT CR+M and 21 - 25 ACT comp. So ***? Head scratcher…</p>