<p>agree, basketball players and parents donating a million dollars are the two ways you can get into to a top school without stellar academics.</p>
<p>although I can’t think of an Ivy that would take a 900 SAT (out of 1600) basketball player, Duke I think would but not an Ivy.</p>
<p>“I always wonder how happy these students could possibly be at an Ivy. I don’t think the classes are “harder” than classes most other places, but all the other kids in the classroom are definitely smarter than average. It just seems like whatever might be gained by the Ivy stamp on the diploma, and the endless list of wonderful opportunities available at these schools might be overshadowed by a neverending sick feeling of just not being able to hack it academically. If I thought my kid would feel inferior intellectually, I’d look for a better academic fit that would also be a match athletically.”</p>
<p>Either a) not a problem or b) they are generally willing to deal with it. In my experience, at even the most selective schools, athletes see themselves as a breed apart. Because of the nature of their lives for most their peer group (and the group that they compare themselves to is generally other athletes, rather than the student body at large. Most know that they are not as strong academically as the typical student at (fill in the blank) and simply accept it, having made the decision that the benefits of a “name” college are worth it.</p>
<p>In “Reclaiming the Game:College Sports and Educational Values” by William G. Bowen & Sarah A. Levi (Levin is former president of Princeton and president emeritus of the Mellon Foundation), the authors made the case that the Ivy’s do admit athletes with lesser academic credentials than non-athletes and argued that this practice should not be continued, or at least should be mitigated.</p>
<p>In the rebuttals to this books conclusion that emerged from alumni, administrators, and former Ivy athletes, the data that emerged showed that:</p>
<ol>
<li> Athletes are admitted with academic credentials that are not up to the same level as non-athletes.</li>
<li> During their time in school, athletes performed at an acceptable academic level, but not to the same average level as non-athletes.</li>
<li> After graduation, athletes average earned income was significantly higher over their careers than non athletes.</li>
<li> Athletes donated back to their alma mater’s at a significantly higher average level than non athletes.</li>
</ol>
<p>The Ivies’ form admitted classes that meet their goal for the class profile. Academic achievement, while the primary goal, is not the sole goal. There are trying to form an alchemy that will create a dynamic, high achieving community that will meet the school’s goals now and in the future. Athletics is important to many of these schools.</p>
<p>My older son has several friends currently on Ivy League basketball teams. Their academic achievement in high school ranged from exceptional to above average. The least academically oriented among them is having no problem performing at an above average level academically. And they have the benefit of other strengths/intelligences that serve them well that their more academically oriented peers may lack. In a recruiting visit two years ago, an assistant coach at an HYP program told us, “The problem is not staying in. The problem is in getting in.”</p>
<p>While all of the discussion on this board revolves around AI’s, GPA’s, and SAT’s, consider Howard Gardiner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences. The Ivy’s are in the their admission policies.</p>
<p>Whenever I hear about that book, two things make me laugh. First, the book jacket proclaims that Sarah Levin was an “all-american athlete.” They don’t tell you the sport. No, it was not golf, or even squash. It was–SAILING! Bet she had to compete with a lot of athletes from the 'hood to get that honor.</p>
<p>Second, Levin was the daughter of the President of Yale. Bet she never got ANY preferential treatment because of that status (which she no doubt earned). Yeah, every recent college graduate gets to write a book with the former president of Princeton. (By the way, I hear Bowen wanted to subtitle the book “Stop me before I kill again.”)</p>
<p>Don’t you just LOVE pious hypocrites?</p>
<p>pacheight…that 900 was for an Ivy. In 2003. And he has graduated from that school.</p>
<p>In Chris Lincoln’s, “Playing the Game”, he mentions how ‘back in the day’ many Ivy coaches would bring in boosters - high AI kids they had no intention of playing in order to free up spots for low AI athletes. It’s actually kind of interesting to read - the AI average was based on admitted students, they didn’t even have to attend. In 2003 the league took steps to stop the abuses - instituting the AI floor, below which the student was not recruitable - end of story. </p>
<p>A 900 (or 1350 out of 2400) would not fly today.</p>
<p>Pardon the transposition of Bowen’s and Levin’s name. Sarah Levin has an interesting father.</p>
<p>Gary Walters, Princeton’s AD has an interesting commentary on the achievement level of the team he played on contradicting Bowen’s conclusions.</p>
<p>[Princeton</a> Varsity Club :: Testimonials](<a href=“http://www.princetonvarsityclub.org/polTestimonials.cfm?doctype_code=Testimonial&doc_id=67&Keyword_Desc=Basketball]Princeton”>http://www.princetonvarsityclub.org/polTestimonials.cfm?doctype_code=Testimonial&doc_id=67&Keyword_Desc=Basketball)</p>
<p>varska…it did. My son was very good friends with this person. We know him as well. He most certainly received that score and he most certainly did attend and play at the Ivy (don’t want to name it) beginning in 2003. </p>
<p>Re-reading your post, I see that 2003 was when this type of thing ended, so maybe this kid was one of the last. However, looking at Naviance for my son’s school, I see a 1500 (out of 2400) to Harvard. The guidance counselor told us this was a basketball player as well and within the past five years.</p>
<p>But wait…I just checked out Naviance again and I see a 950 with a 2.8 GPA for that same Ivy in the period 2005-2009. The average admitted SAT score is 1340 for that particular school. In fact, all of the Ivies have some pretty low scores/gpa’s which were admitted.</p>
<p>^ Wow, you guys have it easy. I swear, besides Cornell, every Ivy at our school averages out to an SAT in the low-mid 1500s for acceptance, and that includes the hooked kids.</p>
<p>^^ This all makes no sense as the coaches at HYP have all indicated 2200+</p>
<p>PErhaps times are changing or perhaps this is because this is not a helmet sport</p>
<p>^^ By low-mid 1500s I meant on the 1600 scale…lol. I was merely talking about all the kids from out school who have applied, hooked or not. The 1340 keylyme cited just seemed rather low for the general Ivy pool.</p>
<p>1340 is a very real V+M SAT score that will get you into an Ivy with coach support. 1340 will get you 134 AI points. A 3.0 GPA unweighted from a school that does not assigned class rank will yield another 67 AI points, for a total AI of 201. This AI with coach support will get you admitted into any Ivy, HYP included, if you’ve got the skill they need and the balance of your record is not off base. I can’t speak for the not helmet sports, but these sports and basketball get their targeted players admitted.</p>
<p>^ Yeah, but I thought keylyme was just talking about admissions at an Ivy for all students from that school in general, not just athletes (I don’t think Naviance can distinguish between athletes/non-athletes? Maybe I’m wrong; our school’s doesn’t). Hence why 1340 seemed low.</p>
<p>^^I was. It is a boarding school, so latitude is given for lower gpa’s as the grading is hard and the work extrememly rigorous. I think the numbers are skewed lower because many of the admittes students are athletes.</p>
<p>monstor344: I don’t think Naviance does distinguish between athletes and non-athletes but my daughter and I feel it is pretty clear which are which when looking at Naviance. When looking at Ivies and other elite universities, there is the cluster of acceptances/rejected at the top of the scale, but then when you see random acceptances scattered in amongst clusters heavily filled with rejections (rejections of students who have decent/strong scores/grades, but are not at the tippy top of the scale where most of the acceptances appear to be) - we assume those are the athletes (or others with major hooks). That is our simple research theory! Also, when looking at schools on Naviance that my daughter is interested in where fellow athletes have been admitted in the last few years, she is able to tell pretty quickly which ones are her recruited friends, and see the relevant grades/scores. My daughter does not go to a huge school, but rather a place where everybody pretty much knows each other, which does make this an easier science - !</p>
<p>what hyps and a few others are doing is “building” a class, that’s why you see lower stat kids accepted. And some of those lower stat kids are athletes. But most are not, most athletes at these schools have 2200 plus SAT’s and 4.0uw with 6+ AP’s and many come from tough academic prep HS.</p>
<p>in that “build” hyps has lower stat kids that are interested in computers, engineering, math, etcetera but they are accepted because they have unique attributes, often a particular passion demonstrated by early achievement. For instance I met a kid recently at hyps that has a patent pending on a mechanical inventions yet he said he was not straight A and did only reasonably well on his SAT’s. But he’s motivated, he’s interesting, and he’s passionate about engineering. by the way the item he was patenting was no great thing but I would guess admissions liked his focus and ability to make something happen!</p>
<p>On the other hand I know 7 athletes who are all national merit scholars, 4.0uw, all 2250 or higher, and three are junior world champions in their sport. all 7 are headed to hyps. 4 will be science or technology majors. you’ll find them and many other athletes at the top of your Naviance chart.</p>
<p>so when you look at Naviance think of the kids with lower sats as kids with real passion for a subject (some are sports) who have demonstrated in a meaningful way their passion…that’s how they received an acceptance letter to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and others.</p>
<p>to presume the lower stat kids are athletes means to me you’ve never been on campus and you don’t know these kids or their families.</p>
<p>if you want a reasonably good college that selects students almost purely on stats look to the top publics: Berkeley, UVA, Michigan, and UCLA. btw there are a lot of smart athletes at these schools as well, however the standards for admissions for athletes at the big publics is lower so there are a fair amount of low stat athletes.</p>
<p>pacheight: ^^^^ Point taken. I should not have posted the Naviance game that my daughter and I play as you are absolutely right about a class being “built” - there was NO intent to open a can of worms!! Particularly since my daughter is being actively athleticaly recruited from a highly competitive prep school, and also has the benefits of very strong SAT scores and a high GPA - meaning that in no way, shape or form do we buy into the “dumb jocks being recruited by Ivies” mentality… her first choice schools are made up almost exclusively of Ivies and other elite universities, and we are FULLY aware of how competitive this process is. Our “game” was of interest to us though as she does indeed know many of the past recruits. Believe me, I do know this campus inside and out, being a graduate of it myself, and we do know the families. However, I do see how our “game” might have offended you or anyone else, and I do apologize - I am clearly getting too relaxed here on CC!</p>
<p>Thanks for straightening that out, pacheight and mayhew. I was gathering steam for a response. pach, you said it perfectly. Mainly, I thought it was ironic, mayhew, that you and your smart, athletic daughter were assuming she was an exception. Nope :)</p>
<p>riverrunner and pacheight: again, I am sorry, and as we know, one of the elements of the written word is that the tone can be so easily misread - this is the last of this I will write because I want to move on (!), but riverrunner, there is no belief that my “smart, athletic daughter” is any different from anyone else. We all see how terrific our own children are, but she is definitely NOT the top student in her school or class, and it is crystal clear that athletics is her hook - she has NOT created any patents, not won the Westinghouse science competition, not created any new math formulas, and nor has she saved the world during summer breaks, cured cancer, nor built whole villages in third world countries - and, as in almost any place, there are several students in her school who have far more outstanding entries on their resumes than her. On Naviance, the only information we see is what applies to students at her school - no where else. And on her school’s Naviance, she is NOT at the tippy top at all - she is right in there with the scattergraph clusters of many rejected students. Out in the great big world of college admissions, athletics is what complements my daughter’s application - without it, she is one of several thousand bright girls who get denied acceptance from their dream colleges every single year - and of course, she may very well get denied anyway. Admissions has the final word, as we all know, and she is far and away not one of the very top applicants that will cross their desk.
There, I am done - and if this is misunderstood, I AM SORRY! OK, I am moving on…:)</p>