up running, I could haveI should have taken got into Columbia with a 1270!

Colleges & Universities A-Z Columbia University
1

<p>I live in Riverhead on Long Island, and one of our biggest rivals in track is Half Hollow Hills West. They have this kid who was born to run. He recently ran a 4:15 mile, has won states, every XC title, set endless records. I just talked to him, and he was accepted ED to Columbia. Now, there are VERY few nationally ranked runners like him, but in any case, he got a 1270/1880 on his SAT's, something that many people on these forums freak out about. He said that recruiters usually take as low as a 1250 on average, meaning anywhere from 1200-1300. That blew my mind.</p>

<p>One thing that made me wish I was naturally a good runner was this: He has been on official visits to Georgetown, UVA, William and Mary and others for recruitment. He has been called by every single ivy wanting him to go to their school, including Harvard who called on the FIRST day of the recruitment season. </p>

<p>In any case, something must be going right for this school, since this kid could have gone to literally ANY college he wanted, and he chose Columbia.</p>

<p>Good luck to everyone applying!</p>

2

<p>lol could've should've..i;ve heard that before. i wouldn't go out blurting out peoples personal info like that though</p>

3

<p>Agreed with biggyboy. Though I know that this runner has himself shared that information online (albeit in a very different forum), it's really not yours to re-post on College Confidential.</p>

<p>I do understand that your intentions in posting this were good, and I too am excited that Columbia was the top pick for this athlete (I'm intentionally trying not to re-post his name--are you able to edit it out of the OP?), but this is the kind of thing that...isn't typically received well on CC. ;)</p>

4

<p>My friend is one of the best runners in Florida and he got accepted into all the ivy's, but he decided to go to University of Florida. His reason was that just because you were a good athlete doesn't mean you will survive the academics at some of these schools.</p>

5

<p>


</p>

<p>Not necessarily true. Athletes are usually given much higher curves than their peers. Sports are very profitable for the universities and gifted athletes attract $$ in attendance sales and merchandise.</p>

6

<p>that's not true at all at columbia, Uri. Maybe at Ohio State.</p>

<p>I dated a girl at columbia who was one of the top athletes in her sport in the country. She was also rather academically unprepared for the school. I - a math major - wrote an essay for her art hum class (a class i never took) on at least one occasion. She ended up dropping out because of grades pressure, and because her confidence levels were at an all-time low - for a top athlete!</p>

<p>It's not easy to hack it at top schools. they don't cut you all the slack that athlete-factory schools will.</p>

7

<p>Definitely agree with Denzera,</p>

<p>As an athlete myself at Columbia, I do not get any generous 'curves'. The only leeway athletes get is the occasional extra excused absence from class - hardly what anyone would consider as a benefit.</p>

8

<p>columbia, despite being an ivy league school, is not too big on athletics as some of the other ivys. and at any top school, no professors cut other students slack for taking up intercollegiate sports. the rest of the student body at columbia (the non-athletes) do more than just go to class and study. they are a diverse group of people...columbia doesn't admit students who are solely athletes and nothing else, or bookworms. many students do other things besides join teams, so it wouldn't make sense to cut athletes some slack.</p>

9

<p>It's my opinion that anyone with decent a work ethic who is moderately intelligent (maybe 1 standard deviation above the mean IQ, i.e., 115... or 1200 SATs) should be able to graduate from Columbia. I'm not taking Dean's List or a tough engineering major; I'm taking B-'s and C+'s in cushy classes. It's nearly impossible to fail a liberal arts class at Columbia if you put in some amount of effort.</p>

10

<p>I knew a soccer player who applied to Princeton 4 mos after the cutoff. Coach said, "he would take care of it". Ranked 30ish in class of 350 in NJ. Also got lots of scholarship money to attend. Not "athletic" money but "special talents" money. Sadly the Val of his class was rejected.</p>

11

<p>athletic admits are a consequence of administration priorities. you'll find that at every school. The only defense I have for my school is that once those athletes get in, they really don't get any other help.</p>

<p>in the end, it can be a raw deal for the athletes, and a good deal for all the other admittees, because you always have those guys keeping the curve down. as long as that sector's proportion of the student body stays within reasonable bounds, I don't think many of us can have much of an objection - especially given the travesties of education that many other schools commit in the name of football TV ratings and the like.</p>

<p>anecdotes like that aren't that uncommon, but they're also not as big a problem as stories like that make it seem.</p>

12

<p>On one hand, the amount of time it takes to train in order to be a nationally ranked athlete makes it pretty hard to earn the 4.3s that other applicants, with less demanding schedules manage, so I can definitely understand giving athletes some leeway.</p>

<p>That said, I was pretty surprised when I got to Columbia by how many kids had their financial aid packages substantially improved and were allowed to apply after normal deadlines purely because of athletics (although the overall number of REALLY special cases is probably less than 10 per year, to be fair).</p>

<p>But there's nothing you can do about it. And it doesn't really affect your life.</p>

13

<p>I am transferring in next week, as a student athlete. I am transferring from a CA JUCO so I know it is going to be a huge change. At my JUCO we practiced 40hrs a week all year round except summer. The major disadvantage to that is you can't really have a part time job, do sports and do school. You have less time to do homework, but I think it's engineered that way because then you’re always practicing pressure situations on and off the field. If you really take to sports in college and learn the underlying meaning of it all, it will help you anywhere, it really teaches you how to be a realistic optimist who can accomplish goals. Then when you translate that to your school work, you do fine. As an athlete I put my primary focus into my sport, I'm constantly visualizing success, which does dampen my grades a little bit, transferring in with a 3.3 or so. I am not going to get caught up in the grades race, I rather follow my passion. Two heroes in my life both whom I am close to graduated very bottom of their classes one at Navy and the other at Columbia, are extremely successful, and they completely believe in just get the damn diploma and start doing when you get done. </p>

<p>As for athletes getting money, that is a good thing. If you have a capitalist perspective. It fuels competition for positions if you know the guy next to you has your money. It makes you a better person when you realize you lost your money because the guy next to you paid more attention to detail, and prepared harder for success. It makes you a better person when you get that extra money for preparing to the best of your abilities.</p>

14

<p>so you have been accepted as a transfer? Or are submitting an application next week?</p>

<p>I think a positive mental attitude is a good thing to come out of playing sports, but I would argue (A) You can get a positive mental attitude through practicing success in other areas, some of them academic or intellectual, and (B) many people who put a lot of effort into sports never develop that positive mental attitude (they may end up warming the bench most of the time but that's still the case). It's not a cure-all.</p>

<p>Furthermore, while the only requirement to get A's in your average academic institution may be a decent work ethic, the same is not true at a place like Columbia. Student athletes who "put their primary focus into their sport" end up like my ex-gf, who couldn't handle the pressure and took a year off.</p>

<p>Your argument about money doesn't make much sense as a paragraph, but to the extent that I understand what you're trying to say, I completely disagree. Universities exist to promote intellectual understanding of humanity and the universe, and their money gets spent on helping nurture the best prospects for future intellectual growth and exploration. Their money should be spent on the best bets for future academic stars - researchers and professors and the like. Most schools who have merit-based aid have a lot more going to star academic prospects than star athletic prospects. The Ohio States out there are the exceptions, not the rule. We're talking mostly about scholarships that are awarded at the time of admission, not earned through success in classes over the course of semesters. There is nothing "capitalist perspective" about throwing money at athletes, when your goal is to attract and develop future intellectual stars.</p>

15

<p>I have been accepted as a transfer. I'm not saying athletics is a cure all. Some people can spit out lines in theater, some can run fast, others can paint, some can hit homeruns. It's diversity. Some have minds of champions some don't, life is not always fair. Some can hold their water some can’t. </p>

<p>Although I come from a JUCO, it's not Columbia, but it's the top rated JUCO in the country and Columbia heavily recruits from it every year. My JUCO was sweet Santa</a> Rosa Junior College</p>

<p>A 3.3 there is not easily done, I had a 2260 on my SAT's to put it in perspective. </p>

<p>It's the type of JUCO in CA anyone with a 3.3 or higher can walk right in to UCLA or Berkeley. </p>

<p>"Your argument about money doesn't make much sense as a paragraph, but to the extent that I understand what you're trying to say, I completely disagree. Universities exist to promote intellectual understanding of humanity and the universe, and their money gets spent on helping nurture the best prospects for future intellectual growth and exploration. Their money should be spent on the best bets for future academic stars - researchers and professors and the like. Most schools who have merit-based aid have a lot more going to star academic prospects than star athletic prospects. The Ohio States out there are the exceptions, not the rule. We're talking mostly about scholarships that are awarded at the time of admission, not earned through success in classes over the course of semesters. There is nothing "capitalist perspective" about throwing money at athletes, when your goal is to attract and develop future intellectual stars."</p>

<p>I tell you what, when USC football team loses the alumni brains shutdown out here in California. It's an alumni pride thing, people across the nation watch their schools and have good weeks and bad weeks solely based on the sports they watched on Saturday. California was in turmoil after Stanford beat USC, completely changed the dynamics of our community out here. Also how many college athletes move on to professional sports after college, like 3% or something close to that number. They have degrees as well and they do just fine in their lives after sports and even the ones who do move to pro sports and are banking with millions to their name, ought to have a college degree. Or they may just end up like Mike Tyson, broke as a joke.</p>

<p>Here is a link between winners in sports and in the real world. </p>

<p>His passion for enhancing human performance lead to the creation of his company, Heads-Up Performance, Inc. and consulting gigs with the likes of Microsoft, Fannie Mae, Kaiser Permanente and, in 2001, a full-time position coaching the New York Yankees.</p>

<p>Baseball</a> Confidence.com - Dr Tom Hanson</p>

<p>About scholarship money. Your competitive edge and hunger for winning grows when there is money involved. If I am competing against the guy next to me for playing time and money, I will be competing at a higher level for the sole fact of I want the whole pie to myself. If I am a future CEO and I am competing against the guy next to me for the same market, the same exact feelings in the body and mind exist as if I am competing in the bottom of the 9th to pull of a win in a playoff game. Sometimes life is all about holding confidence levels in the proper situations. </p>

<p>Wonder why Columbia has a $100 million dollar initiative towards athletics right now? Giving</a> to Columbia University: Campaign at a Glance</p>

<p>From Columbia "Our commitment underlies our efforts to bring athletics in line with Columbia’s hallmark standards of excellence."</p>

<p>Sports is one of many avenues that can breed a leader, not every intellectual out there is a leader. Not every leader is an intellectual. It’s a healthy balance.</p>

16

<p>Doesn't sound like you have much appreciation for this "healthy balance".</p>

<p>I'm not questioning your academic chops, stop getting so defensive. If you got in, you did many things right. Those things may have had little to do with your choice of sports as a focus in life, however.</p>

<p>In response to your points...

[quote]
I tell you what, when USC football team loses the alumni brains shutdown out here in California. It's an alumni pride thing, people across the nation watch their schools and have good weeks and bad weeks solely based on the sports they watched on Saturday. California was in turmoil after Stanford beat USC, completely changed the dynamics of our community out here.

[/quote]

So wait, you're arguing that it's emotionally healthy for numerous fine citizens of the state of california to have their mental health determined by the outcome of college sporting events? Do I have that right? I'm as big a sports fan as they come, but this smacks of the worst kind of logical fallacy. It's been a while since lit hum, but I think the greeks would argue that balance in life is what leads to harmony with nature, or happiness, or various good things. Balance. Overvaluing entertainment events over which you have no control seems rather out of balance, no?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also how many college athletes move on to professional sports after college, like 3% or something close to that number. They have degrees as well and they do just fine in their lives after sports and even the ones who do move to pro sports and are banking with millions to their name, ought to have a college degree. Or they may just end up like Mike Tyson, broke as a joke.</p>

<p>...</p>

<p>Here is a link between winners in sports and in the real world. </p>

<p>His passion for enhancing human performance lead to the creation of his company, Heads-Up Performance, Inc. and consulting gigs with the likes of Microsoft, Fannie Mae, Kaiser Permanente and, in 2001, a full-time position coaching the New York Yankees.</p>

<p>Baseball Confidence.com - Dr Tom Hanson

[/quote]

OK, so what you're arguing boils down to: Student athletes can succeed after graduation in realms other than sports? I already agreed with you. Sports is a great way to develop a positive mental attitude, which was your original point.</p>

<p>But what you seem to be implying here is that you need to try and convince me that athletics aren't a worthless pursuit. You're working really hard to try and cure me of some sort of bias. Of course not all athletes end up like mike tyson. But to imply that (to take your example) Tom Hanson's success was CAUSED by his involvement in athletics is the oldest logical fallacy in the book - confusing correlation with causation. He liked sports, so he fashioned a career out of it. That doesn't mean that without sports, he wouldn't have focused on something just as beneficial to his ability to succeed.</p>

<p>Tossing me examples misses the point. I can come up, of course, with legions of people who had brilliant careers without so much as getting their knees dirty on a field. Saying "you can focus on athletics and still succeed" is kinda like saying "you can drop out of high school and have a baby at 16 and still succeed" - fine, it's possible, but the odds aren't with you. Not that the two are equivalent, but you get my point?</p>

<p>Finally, let's talk about money:

[quote]
About scholarship money. Your competitive edge and hunger for winning grows when there is money involved. If I am competing against the guy next to me for playing time and money, I will be competing at a higher level for the sole fact of I want the whole pie to myself. If I am a future CEO and I am competing against the guy next to me for the same market, the same exact feelings in the body and mind exist as if I am competing in the bottom of the 9th to pull of a win in a playoff game. Sometimes life is all about holding confidence levels in the proper situations. </p>

<p>Wonder why Columbia has a $100 million dollar initiative towards athletics right now?

[/quote]

I would imagine they have a $100MM fundraising initiative for athletics because they have a well-publicized $4 BILLION fundraising initiative university-wide. By those numbers, athletics are worth about 2.5% of the overall university's enterprise in the eyes of the administration. I'd say that sounds about right.</p>

<p>Of course my "competitive edge and hunger grows when there's money involved". But if my hunger is towards, say, finding a cure for cancer or doing robotics research or studying urban planning, don't you think that advances the cause of humanity just a little more than being big and strong enough to (say) beat up that silly team from Fordham? The question isn't whether athletic scholarships make athletes more motivated - the question is whether that money is being well spent. And in the case of the ivy league, which (theoretically at least) has no athletic scholarships, they are stating loud and clear that athletes are no more (and no less) special than any other kind of student.</p>

<p>As you say, confidence and preparedness in pressure situations is a key life skill. And not every intellectual is a leader (nor is every athlete). And not every leader is an intellectual OR an athlete. Just because high-performing athletes tend to develop an optimistic mindset does not mean that athletics CAUSES that mindset - or that money should be spent on them just because they're athletes.</p>

<p>I can't believe I'm arguing this, but there you have it.</p>

17

<p>I am not saying athletics is for everyone, you really shouldn't have talked for the athletes that it is our passion and gets us through the day. 100m for athletics is a huge sum of money there is only so much you can spend on sports, where as, cancer research obviously costs more. I'm just saying good athletes find ways to metaphorically translate what they learn from athletics to succeed in life. And obviously not everyone or athlete is a leader. Sure the odds may not be for everyone nor am I saying athletes are the pinnacle of society. Yes the community around silicone valley changed from that football game. You just sound bitter after years of being last pick in gym class.</p>

18

<p>The discourse on this thread feels like an SEC football message board with a bunch of jorts wearers.</p>

19

<p>I'm getting close to agreeing with you, C02. It used to be a decent topic, and might've turned into a discussion of Columbia's priority (or lack thereof) on sports, and the pros and cons of that. Unfortunately, I think Caliqwerty has made it clear he is either not reading my responses, or unable to comprehend them. Maybe part of that is my fault, but I'm not going to waste more of everyone's time talking through this.</p>

<p>The only reason I'm replying is,

[quote]
You just sound bitter after years of being last pick in gym class.

[/quote]

I guarantee I'm much better at sports than you are at math. See if you can wrap your head around that comparison, pardner. </p>

<p>And while you're sitting around thinking of ad hominem attacks rather than (say) reading my posts, why not head onto an ultimate frisbee field. Then see how good you're doing after an hour and a half of playing cornerback - except instead of getting 30 seconds' rest between plays, you're running <em>continuously</em>.</p>

20

<p>This is what I'm talking about, I like this thread. </p>

<p>Caliqwerty- I think that sounds like a challenge. May I suggest Marathon Race immediately followed by math competition?</p>

<p>Denzera-Caliqwerty makes some solid points, I tell you what after LSU won this week. Our corporation has had some good energy. Stock prices jumped 1.75% over the last three days during a historically slow time. My CEO was a Longhorn athlete and prefers to hire athletes, he always is trying to make where I work into a nasty competitive venue. We make money that way and we like it that way.</p>

<p>Columbia 2002- Hey, the SEC creates champions and champions are good for business.</p>

<p>To the two of you, all I see is two completely different types of minds. Two very different life paths, but undoubtedly both of you will succeed.</p>