This discussion was created from comments split from: How important are extracurriculars (beyond sport) for recruited athlete at Ivies?.
What about a 2-sport Varsity athlete (ie, Varsity since 10th/JV 9th) who was solid contributor to school teams but is not looking to be recruited? Student-athlete has not had much time for other ECâsâŠwill this be understood by AOâs when the student is not in the recruit bucket?
I really want to know too. How terrible is it if Iâve been on a varsity sport and have had a part time job since 10th grade and have had no time for any other ecs? I feel like sports are such a different time commitment than clubs but are they treated differently in the admissions process?
A part-time job is an EC. Volunteering is an EC. A varsity sport is an EC, no better and no worse than any other EC. How an individual college âvaluesâ an applicantâs EC (when not a recruited athlete) has less to do with the EC than with what the applicant gained from it and/or brought to it. There is not magic number of ECâs that are âbest;â itâs student-specific, IMO.
Colleges that value ECs (and there are many colleges who simply donât care) will not evaluate the ECs in a vacuum; itâs simply one part of the application.
I wonder that as well. Varsity sports here are year round or they play season and then club.Some students play 2 sports year round. Sports are a time consuming EC for sure (but fun!)
@Skieurope, I am asking specifically about Varsity Sports, not other ECâs. My son is not different than the player next to him who is playing in college - in fact my son has received âPlayer of the Gameâ on a top team (as a soph) more times than those getting recruited (seniors). They practice the same, play in the same games, have the same level of commitment which often precludes participation in other activities due to the commitment (time and conflicts).
As I said in my PM, recruited athletes are a different breed. So if your question ultimately is âWill the Kid that works as hard as a recruited athlete and has similar stats be perceived the same by an AO as a kid they are recruiting?â then the answer is no.
The recruited athlete is competing for a specific slot based on sex/sport position. The hard-working varsity athlete is competing as a part of the general pool with the other non-recruits. Is is âfairâ? Maybe not. But then lifeâs not fair.
I would like other perspectives and experiences, not just that of the moderator.
The original question really had to do with whether it was held against them that they donât have time for other ECâs due to time constraints.
IF a Varsity athlete is not seeking to be recruited, then participating in Varsity sports is treated the same as other ECs â it can demonstrate commitment, team work, focus, time management, leadership â all attributes which are valuable in the admissions process. But it wonât likely be seen as a different level of EC than the kid who is equally involved in, for instance, music, who practices and performs with marching band, concert band, and youth symphony, which together often involve 20+ hours a week.
Is a varsity sport treated the same as clubs and other ecs with lower time commitments like the ones that only meet once a week or even less than that? I know a lot of people have tons of different ecs and varsity athletes just canât.
Quality is better than quantity.
Is it better to have a varsity sport that requires 20 hours a weeks and no other ECs versus 2 ECs that each require 10 hours a week. Probably not. Is the applicant who spends 10 hours a week on a bunch of ECs viewed differently that on with a single EC of 20 hours, all other things being equal (which is never the case)? Probably.
Again, it will all be evaluated in context.
A few comments:
âDifferent admissions/colleges officers may view the same set of facts differently. There is no one answer that will cover every single situation, every single college etc.
âYour child should do what he/she enjoys in HS. If that is sports, then great. I donât think anyone should do ECs solely for the sake trying to make the college resume look good. He/she will find the schools that appreciate him/her for the person he/she is.
âThat said if your child does want to expand his/her horizons he/she can seek out a different of activity with a minimal time commitment (ex. volunteering at a soup kitchen one night/month) or look for something non-sports oriented to do over the summer.
âI do agree that in terms of admissions sports for a non-recruited athlete count as a solid EC â nothing more and nothing less. I do think that admissions officers are familiar with the time commitment needed for varsity sports. Additionally, if I remember correctly the applicant does put the number of hours devoted to each activity on the application so the time commitment to the sport will be noted.
âIn terms of having fewer activities with larger time commitments is viewed â the general rule is that depth in a few activities is preferable to having a lot of activities with minimal involvement.
âAnd no matter what your childâs abilities in the sport may be if he/she is not a recruited athlete (regardless of if it is due to personal choice, not being at a high enough level, or any other reason) then he/she will not get the benefit (often called a âhookâ) that comes with being recruited athlete. A âhookâ is when a particular applicant fills an institutional need of the school. In the case of recruited athletes that means filling a position of need on a particular sportâs team. No matter how great your child may be at his/her sport if he/she does not want to play on the college team then he/she will not be filling that need for a player at that sport/position so there is no âhookâ.
I feel the negative part of a non recruited athlete when âcompetingâ against other applicants with different ECs is that sports are not really unique anymore, and the âstoryâ that the typical athlete is telling on his or her application when the theme is varsity athletics (without the recruited part, or for a student who doesnât want to continue sports in college) does not stand out. Its easy to be repetitive and cookie cutter.
Alot of varsity athletes probably assumed they would be recruited right through sophomore year and may not have anything interesting to bring to the app to make them stand out.
1 Like
In our case, what is tough is that DS plays sports that are very hard to get recruited for (ie, baseball, soccer). He chose to stick with what he loves even though some peers switched to Lax b/c numerous students in our area get recruited for Lax. The kids going on baseball and soccer scholarships seem to have to really compromise the quality of school, unless they are almost professional level. Soccer athletes also compete with many international players for the scholarships.
He just wants to find a school with solid club/intramural sports and focus on merit scholarships (academic). Or perhaps he would consider walking on; but he doesnât want the pressure of the recruiting process defining his college search.
Except in the context of filling a specific âtalent bucketâ, say in instrumental or vocal talent, colleges use ECâs as ways of gauging more subjective attributes of candidates â qualities like perseverance, dedication, ability to achieve results, leadership, empathy, teamwork, organization. Participation by itself in varsity sports, clubs, charitable causes, job, family care, indeed any EC is not what is important. What is important is what the candidate can demonstrate as to the quality of that participation and how that is an indication of the positive subjective qualities the college is looking for. The advantage of an âunusualâ EC is that it may initially grab the attention of an AO reader. However, if there is no substance to what the candidate actually did, it will not be of much use.
Recruited athletes and athletes who are using their participation in high school as an EC are two different things. A non-recruited athlete isnât being compared to the athlete who put in just as much time, the non-recruited athlete is being compared to the band member, or debater, or lead in the play. How much time, how involved, leadership, development, commitment. An AO probably is pretty good at assessing those things for a non-recruited athlete, but also good at assessing them for the band member and the actor too.
If sports is the only EC and you arenât using it to be recruited, beef it up. If you play school and club, state that. If you were the captain or state MVP or the newspaper picked you as âfirst team, all countyâ be sure to include that. My niece didnât want to play in college or be recruited, but her application showed she was more than just another member of the team. She was varsity lacrosse 9-12, captain, academic All American (which requires on field and academic stats), coached younger girls in the summer, cheerleader 9-12, and overall was female athlete of the year at her school. She did have other ECs but there was no question that sports took up a lot of her time.
Honestly, if sheâd been recruited she probably would have gotten into schools where she was waitlisted. She was a good applicant, but being a recruited athlete might have been the hook she needed at USC and BC. Being recruited and committing to play is a BIG difference from just being a great athlete in high school. Many of her friends and teammates with the same stats and the same playing experience were recruited to BC, Georgetown, ND (can you tell it was a Catholic high school?) and used the hook and got in. My niece didnât want to use the hook. Certainly didnât change how many hours she put in during high school or how good she was, itâs just that the schools didnât weigh that any more than if sheâd been on student council (she was) or in the choir (she was). Regular old ECs, including sports, are not hooks.