What do you think? On one hand, health and physical strength is desirable. On the other hand, we seem to have too many ill behaviors and bad news associated with athlete students. To make things more complex, very top colleges tend to have a higher percentage of athlete students. It is often criticized that athlete recruiting is the biggest back door. But of course games and competitions are an essential part of college experiences for many.
Canadian universities have the right idea. There are no athletic scholarships and being a recruited athlete is not a hook. The level of play at Canadian universities is not that great and at attendance at games is quite low. Of course many Canadian athletes are wooed to US colleges.
The actual percentage of athletes at a school playing on their varsity teams is probably not that high - they just get the most press when things go wrong (sex assaults, bad team behavior, etc.)
I think the percentage probably is higher at small division one schools but at those big division one state schools it would be small. You could probably not run into one off the field for your entire four years (partly because they are off traveling and being tutored while you are in class).
There are club and intramural sports for kids who like to play and these are great for the kids and the schools. Creating ways for students to socialize, stay in shape, and reduce stress.
I agree that the percent of total population is generally not significant. Plus of that percent there are athletes that have a strong academic record…more so as the selectiveness of the college increased. Being an athlete and being a good student are not mutually exclusive. Perception and reality are often very different. I wish I would have bookmarked an article many years ago profiling PAC 12 football players that were in engineering…most college athletes do not have professional careers after the degree…they are in college for the degree.
We usually just hear about the college football team and the other “big” players at these schools. We don’t hear anything about the recruited female field hockey player who is looking to get a good education and playing is never going to be a career. There are more players on these teams where no professional sports career even exists than on the big teams.
According to the NCAA there are 460K NCAA athletes. According to NCES there are about 20.5M college students. That is roughly 2%, hardly a high percentage.
However, it depends on the size of the school. If a small school has the same teams that a large school has, the small school’s athletes will be a higher percentage of the students than the large school’s athletes.
Yes, at a LAC with 1600 students and full range of sports teams, that can affect the “feel” on campus. But there are schools which feel “jocky” and schools which don’t – at Oberlin, my kid, as a prospective recruit, felt being an athlete at Oberlin would be an isolating experience. At Kenyon, the drive to compete and win was palpable in his athletic meetings. Bard and Sarah Lawrence fields team but athletics seem to matter a lot less than even at Vassar and Skidmore. At some schools, being a recruit who applies ED is practically a lock for admissions, at others, it is still basically a crap shoot.
But, as the parent of a kid whose sport is nearly as essential to him as breathing, I’m grateful there are schools where he can continue to compete, his sport keeps him focused and mentally clear. If I had a kid who lived for theater, or writing for the literary journal, I would want there to be schools where he could continue to engage in those activities in college.
Funny @Midwestmomofboys -my son felt exactly the same about Oberlin. He really liked the coach and he met a few guys on the team and like them as well but he just felt that he would be isolated with only other athletes as potential friends.
@Proudpatriot Similar experience – loved the coach and the guys he met, but just felt the quirk factor was too high overall. Was reinforced when he competed this year against Oberlin, and there was discussion about which pronoun to use – for the Men’s team. The Oberlin team has outpaced his own school in success on the field – but overall, it would not have been the right school for him, at least.
Yes it is so silly to keep generalizing about this or that. There are plenty of colleges with low key athletics and plenty of colleges where the school spirit is tied to sports and both kinds have kids that are there to get a college degree. Kids just need to find their tribe and quit picking lint out of their belly buttons so to speak. To much sports culture for your taste…move on. Not enough…move on. Sooner or later the kids will settle on the “just enough”.
Having a lot of athletes seems to work for the Ivy league schools, since they are, after all, an athletic conference. Stanford doesn’t seem to have too many athletes. Notre Dame does okay by its students. Where are these schools that have ‘too many’ athletes? Harvard sponsors 35 varsity teams while UT-Austin only 18.
My daughter does spend most of her time with other athletes, but that’s no different than my other daughter who spends most of her social time with her sorority sisters, or her theater friends, or her dorm friends. Athlete daughter does have some ‘classroom’ friends because they have a lot of group projects and her teammates are not in her major. She did live with an athlete from another team her second year, and they met in a class. Her school is only 25% female, a lot of those females are athletes, so the pool is small from which to form a social group.
Getting exercise is not the only benefit of playing a sport in college. It has taught my daughter time management, study skills, being flexible yet organized. She eats better and sleeps more consistent hours than I ever did in college. She cannot experiment with drugs. She cannot go out drinking all the time. She is forced to get along with teammates even if they otherwise wouldn’t be friends. She did not get into her school through the back door, but was offered that option at schools the CC community thinks are ‘better’, which are ranked higher, especially LACs.
My only issue with student athletes is when the individual is underqualified for the institution and therefore unable to take full advantage of the opportunities the school provides.
I like the Ivy League model where athletes are generally held to the same academic standards as the overall student body but, if qualified, are given an admissions advantage.
My kids both attended selective colleges as recruited athletes and an unexpected benefit came when it was time to interview for jobs. It turns out that employers highly value athletes for the traits @twoinanddone mentioned above.
I figure people that have a problem with athletes weren’t athletic themselves or don’t have athletic kids. Seems like petty jealousy. The athletes and the programs add a great deal to a school and our society. Without it, schools are just robot factories, dull dull dull. There are places in the world to go without athletics, as mentioned above, move on, but don’t pick on these hard working students and their families just because they have talent and discipline in a way that others are unfamiliar with. Value each student for what they offer.
@twoinanddone I think Stanford takes athletes a lot more seriously than the Ivy League schools do. They also give athletic scholarships. The Ivy League schools don’t. That doesn’t mean that athletes don’t get a boost in admissions. I only knew two serious(ish) athletes when I was there. One was a cousin on the varsity squash team, the other was on the JV rugby team. I may have known others in passing. I attended one very exciting hockey team and the two Harvard Yale games that were at Harvard.
If I were in charge I’d put more emphasis on lifetime fitness and less on sports, but I do recognize that there is value in team sports. I was just no good at any of them.
I believe the data shows being an athlete is one of the strongest possible “hooks” at an ivy or elite LAC. If those colleges eliminated their athletic departments entirely(which I think the OP is proposing), then it would dramatically remake their admissions process. The anti-holistic crowd would be in favor of this.
D probably spent half her time at Dartmouth with her rugby teammates, half with her classics friends, and half with her roommates. (Math was not her strong point, but there was a lot of overlap between those groups so …) She learned from all of them – as any student would with the various friends s/he made. I fail to see the point of this thread.
Pfft. Many students don’t think varsity sports are remotely interesting, much less vital to the college experience. I attended a college with minimal sports activity (I don’t think most of the students could have found the gym) and never found any part of my college experience to be dull. My kids attended schools that fielded teams, but overall interest on the part of the respective student bodies was very low. Both enjoyed their college experiences. Why is it necessary to generalize? If you want a school with an emphasis on athletics, go to one; if not, don’t.
@MommaJ : Amen
To original post: an unequivocal yes at many SLAC.