<p>Actually, I do have some specific knowledge of Hamilton. Also some knowledge of Claremont McKenna where I was specifically told by a person with knowledge of the situation that a coach could get in some players who would not otherwise be admitted, but was frustrated because the admissions office would not let him go deeper into the pool.</p>
<p>But in any event, I agree that we may have a different impression of "the list." But I wonder why a coach would submit a list including tips and nontips to the admissions office.With respect to the nontip players, either the coach's recommendation will help or it will not. If it does help, it seems to me that the coach and the admissions office on thin ethical ice because of the limits on tips. If being on the list does not help, then the coach is creating the appearance of impropriety for no purpose.</p>
<p>EMM, are you saying that you believe the only list of names that admissions has from a coach is a list of those kids who need a tip? (edit: or stated another way, that the only kids the admissions department knows about that plan to play ...softball , are those that need admissions help in gaining entry?)</p>
<p>I was told something different. I sure wouldn't want to be a softball coach needing a pitcher and a catcher (not something that can be learned effectively from scratch in college) and have only one tip to give and no way to let admissions know that this 35 ACT val plays catcher or that NMF plays pitcher. LOL.</p>
<p>I haven't spoken to any coaches on this point. But for the reasons I suggested above, I believe that any other practice would be ethically questionable.</p>
<p>I should add, that this claim is based on the assumption that the school is in a conference like the NESCAC, which I believe imposes strict limits on tips.</p>
<p>Nescac does impose strict limits on tips and the schools speak of "bands" of students (or at least did in 2005 when I was looking) . It was interesting to read. It makes sense to me anyway that if a student in the top band is also a ballplayer they were safe. I'll see if I can find something.</p>
<p>Here's a link to an agenda from D-III meeting where they talked about exactly this issue in the wake of the Schulman/Bowen research on the admissions and athletics. Some schools have a "tip sheet" that includees only students who are essentially inadmissible, while others send a broader list of students that the coach would like to see admitted.</p>
<p>A real "tip" (the kind that's capped) can get a student admitted who is basically inadmissible; but being on a more complete list of desirable athletes is more akin to having a supplementary letter of recommendation in the dossier--one that says that the student is bringing athletic talent to campus as part of the mix. I don't see that this is any more unethical than the bassoon teacher who's heard a CD sending a letter noting the musical talent. There's no expectation that the bassoonist (or defensive back) will necessarily gain admission, but it may provide an additional factor that can help distinguish between candiates who are in the same ballpark of "admissibility."</p>
<p>I stand corrected with respect to actual practices. But I continue to believe that to allow coaches to have any influence on the admissions process outside of the tip system is simply a way of circumventing the mandated limits, which are specifically designed to limit the influence of coaches in the process.</p>
<p>The difference with bassoonists is that the chair of the music department has no such mandated limits; no will he have as much influence as a coach in the admissions process.</p>
<p>by the way, I should make it clear (as I have on any number of other occasions) that I have no real problem with the role of athletics in the admissions process. My S (who had a far weaker academic record that curmudgeon's remarkably talented D) was a beneficiary of the current system, but, trust me, he worked for what he got. My only point is that we should be honest with ourselves about how the system works and where rules are in place, coaches and admissions offices should abide by them strictly.</p>
<p>MarathonMan, that's how I understood it also. I joked on the board at the time my D was in the process that unlike some we were hoping her academics would get her on the team, not that her bball would get her in the school. ;)</p>
<p>Curm, just from reading the limited posts I can remember (got CRS disease) I know your D was a standout athlete- didn't her team to go to state tournies? She's no "swimmie". </p>
<p>"..., and the role of "Swimmies," marginally talented players with good grades who help maintain the team's all-important academic standing." (Mark Bowden, from his review of "I Am Charlotte Simmons")</p>
<p>dp, she could have made herself into a "good" D3 ballplayer, but not a standout. Bad gene pool. But I will concede that she was wanted by some schools as a player as well as for her potential GPA so I guess that removes her from "swimmiedom". (Now ST2's kid and condor30's kid? There are your standouts.)</p>
<p>As to your q
[quote]
didn't her team to go to state tournies?
[/quote]
er...uhhh...ahem.....to be historically accurate that would be state champions . ;)</p>
<p>I've always wondered why so much money is put into college admissions. My school has a bare bones admissions office that sorts almost exclusively on scores. I haven't noticed anything different from my school and comparable schools with huge admissions departments. I'd guess any school could look at 15 variables (scores, gpa, race, parental income, awards, etc) (no essays) and get a class which is virtually indistinguishable from their current one.</p>
<p>"At the same time, other parts of the admissions process shown are less idealistic. Money is discussed openly and frequently, as in whether the students have enough money to pay tuition and, in some cases, whether students parents have the potential to become major donors. One student discussed also not a clearcut admit is evaluated in part because her father is a major donor to Dartmouth College. The admissions officers feel that if the student is rejected for early decision, shell apply and be admitted to Dartmouth (her sister, with weaker credentials, has been admitted). Hes generous with Dartmouth, who knows, he might be generous with the college, too, one admissions officer says.</p>
<p>Something Stevens stresses, however, is that even in cases like this, multiple factors are at play. The admissions team didnt doubt that the student could do the work at the college...."</p>
<p>Cur - Thank you for the mention - not sure it is deserved, but always appreciated. I guess that I refrained from commenting on this thread because there often seems to be an academic bashing of student athletes. Just from our situation, that hardly seems fair. On my D's team there are 5 HS vals, 9 players made the Conference All Academic team and every team member was in the top 10% of their HS class. This is at a top school that is very competitive athletically. Unfortunately old stereotypes die hard and as a result very deserving student athletes are perceived in a lesser light.</p>
<p>EMM
Music Dept Chairs do have constraints to work under. Normally, a music dept will "seat" an orchestra and need players to fill those chairs. They won't for example, admit 6 bassoonists and no violists. They also need to adhere to the wishes/needs of thier studio (insturment) teachers who may not need anyone new to fill their roster for that academic year, or may need extra bodies to keep up their roster (due to graduations,drop outs,etc) so they can keep their teaching position. The more prestigious the studio teacher, the more the dept chair needs to cater to their needs.
There's just no Federal/state governing body overseeing their decisions!</p>
<p>A strictly anecdotal example: D's sal. was an outstanding student and a gifted athlete (track). Both were important to him. His average was outstanding and had many talents, science research, music, art, in addition to his other qualities. He's a kind of golden boy, and an extremelly nice (as well as prodigiously) handsome kid to boot. He met with track coaches at all his prospective colleges. The Amherst coach told him he could only be a tip if his SAT's were over 1400 (old system, obviously). At that time, end of junior year, they were 1380 I think. He eventually raised his scores to 1500+ but was turned off by Amhert's hawking of numbers. He went to Brown and competes on the track team.</p>
<p>The situation in music is different in another way. At most LAC's music is an academic discipline, whereas phys. ed. is not. To provide an appropriate pedagogical experience an adequate orchestra must be seated, particularly for those schools that offer a performance major. Without other talented musicians a young musician cannot progress. So the school should tip academically prepared musicians, just for the sake of the their other admits.</p>
<p>In addition, music does not bring in the alumni contributions in the way sports does. Sports are more separate from the academic mission of the college than music. </p>
<p>That said, I am not a sports basher and tremendously admire the student-athletes we are discussing. I also have no problem with their leg up in admissions -- they are serving the entire student population of the school by bringing in money that can be used to enhance the offerings for all students. They also provide school spirit and entertainment. They are serving the entire college community, not just themselves and their coaches. And even if they weren't, so many factors are taken into account with admissions that the process is not "fair" in an abstract sense. At least student-athletes have worked hard for their prowess and success. God speed.</p>
LOL. Yep. They are dumbing down THAT school aren't they? How embarrassing.;)</p>
<p>ST2 I may have mentioned this before but D's district in high school had 3 very good teams in the playoffs their state chapionship year. At the area round (round 3 - or top 32 team) we beat the team that came in third in our district. In the regional finals (5th round - or top 8 team) we beat the team that finished second in our district to get to Austin and the state tourney. I bring this up only to say that the teams shared something else. The vals at each of these schools (and in Texas public schools there is only one per school for tuition waiver purposes) were starters on their teams. I still find that pretty dang impressive. </p>
<p>I'm sure the "jocks are not worthy" crowd will consider it an exception that proves the rule, just like your D's college team ;). Sure seems like there are a lot of exceptions to that rule.</p>
<p>Many college applications, indeed MOST of them, ask you point blank where your parents went to college and what they do for a living. Plus, they have the FAFSA information. If you believe in need blind admission.......</p>