Yale athletes discuss their SAT/ACT scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ha! My kid got a 29 in math the first time he took the ACT. Even though he had 5s on both AP Calc exams, As honors geo, etc

He ended up getting a 35 the next time he took it^, but ACT math is weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjMrRUM2/

What do yall think?

My son was invited to Yale for an official visit with the rowing team last fall. His 2k time was just shy of recruitable and he was captain/MVP, BUT they wanted them because of his academics. He had a 1560 SAT, 4.0, 4.6 weighted with 14 APs (8 fives on the tests he had taken at the time) and was a merit scholar. The dirty secret is that the teams have an academic index (AI) and they have to maintain it. So what happens is they can let in kids with lower stats, but they have to be balanced by academic athletes. This was the case for my son, but after the visit realized that he had no interest in rowing at the D1 level (20 hour a week+ commitment and he was honestly worried about prioritizing it over academics).

Yes - they are balancing kids who have SAT's in the 1000 level. I know a few.

The recent ivy athletes from our private have 1180, 1220, 1280. Their majors are interesting to say the least. No physics or engineers among them that is for sure. They are there for the athletic skill and get balanced by not-quite-top but good enough 1480-1500 white rich boarding school kids.

[Anonymous]

My son was invited to Yale for an official visit with the rowing team last fall. His 2k time was just shy of recruitable and he was captain/MVP, BUT they wanted them because of his academics. He had a 1560 SAT, 4.0, 4.6 weighted with 14 APs (8 fives on the tests he had taken at the time) and was a merit scholar. The dirty secret is that the teams have an academic index (AI) and they have to maintain it. So what happens is they can let in kids with lower stats, but they have to be balanced by academic athletes. This was the case for my son, but after the visit realized that he had no interest in rowing at the D1 level (20 hour a week+ commitment and he was honestly worried about prioritizing it over academics).

This is correct. My DC was a recruited athlete at Yale, nationally ranked in their sport and a National Merit Scholar. Several of DC’s teammates has similar test scores, and these kids pulled in a couple of kids with lower scores for AI purposes. For helmet sports like football/lacrosse, there tends to be a greater discrepancy between top and bottom academic resumes, but there is a minimum index number for every athlete and an average that must be met by each team. A kid with a 19 ACT would be a very big exception and would need an extremely high GPA to balance the test score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, if people really want major college sports to operate like the way college club sports work, where you select a student body sports blind and the students self-organize into teams, you could have student bodies that seem to match the major sports teams in terms of admissions.

Since that is not what America wants, it is not what America gets.

So PLEASE think of D1 stadium sports alumni the same way some people think of affirmative action admits, except worse. They didn't earn the degree. They gave the kids bread and circuses and were supported far enough to not fail out. Their degrees should have asterisks and all that.

Why do you care? Elite US colleges are educating young people to be leaders in society in many different areas. They are looking for students who are outstanding in numerous areas, not only pure academics.

Test scores and GPAs don’t necessarily show how “meritorious” an applicant is. Leadership qualities, in particular, are not measured by test scores.

Again, I am puzzled as to why so many people appear to be confused about this.

This doesn't explain why athletes in NCAA sports are given preference over those in non-NCAA sports. The former are an institutional priority, while the latter is not.

Yes, and that is fine. The school has their reasons for wanting to create a class community of a particular composition, and that is their right.

I don’t understand why people have a problem with this.

I don't have a problem with it, I have a problem with people making up false rationalizations for why, such as "leadership".

It’s odd that you think that “leadership” is some sort of rationalization. It is not at all uncommon for athletes, particularly those involved in team sports, to be good leaders- they tend to go on and use those leadership qualities as adults in their jobs and also in giving back to their communities as volunteers. (And, sure, non-athletes can also be leaders, but we’re talking about athletes here. Team sports really bring out and enhance natural leadership qualities.)

Athletes are an addition to the mix of types of students at a school. No one would want a class to consist entirely of musicians or theatre kids or math whizzes or history buffs or . . . athletes. Schools want kids with a mix of interests and talents. And that’s who the admissions people work on bringing together.

Can you please explain why someone with an excellent 10k time but mediocre marathon time is so much of a better leader than someone with a mediocre 10k time and excellent marathon time that the former deserves a special admissions advantage that the latter does not get? Why are those who wrestle such better leaders than those who practice Jih Jitsu or Judo that the former deserve a special admissions advantage the latter do not get, above and beyond what the AOs would normally give them for such an activity?

If it was really about leadership, there would be no need for privileging some sports over others, and AOs could instead holistically view all sports based on the perceived leadership value they provide without needing to be biased in favor of some sports over others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjMrRUM2/

What do yall think?

The football team is not representative of the typical athlete at Yale.

A friend’s son is at Yale right now playing another sport, one that no one at Yale cares much about. He got in with a 1200.

What sport? Do tell

No they didn’t. You are just stirring the pot. But I personally know a girl who lost her commitment to Yale because she couldn’t break 1400 on her SAT. She’s at Northwestern.

She was probably an Academic Index counterweight at Yale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTjMrRUM2/

What do yall think?

The football team is not representative of the typical athlete at Yale.

A friend’s son is at Yale right now playing another sport, one that no one at Yale cares much about. He got in with a 1200.

What sport? Do tell

No they didn’t. You are just stirring the pot. But I personally know a girl who lost her commitment to Yale because she couldn’t break 1400 on her SAT. She’s at Northwestern.

She was probably an Academic Index counterweight at Yale.

Interesting… my sister was at brown and was basically told to get a 1500 for admissions from the coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then there is the unicorn who is the kid with the top grades and scores who is also a star athlete.

Yep.

I have one of those and the results are what one might expect.

Not sure what "one might expect," but I guess it would be somewhat sport-dependent. I "might" expect Duke, Stanford, Michigan, or Notre Dame, though they don't have to have the very best academics/scores if they're a better athlete.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone aware of an Ivy or Patriot league football showcase/combine or camps? As opposed to going to individual camps or visits at each school, which requires more travel? Thanks in advance.

I think that you might be able to catch a a random Ivy or Patriot team at a showcase, but I'm unaware of specific showcase like you are asking about. Looks like you have lots of driving this summer.

Thank you...Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, if people really want major college sports to operate like the way college club sports work, where you select a student body sports blind and the students self-organize into teams, you could have student bodies that seem to match the major sports teams in terms of admissions.

Since that is not what America wants, it is not what America gets.

So PLEASE think of D1 stadium sports alumni the same way some people think of affirmative action admits, except worse. They didn't earn the degree. They gave the kids bread and circuses and were supported far enough to not fail out. Their degrees should have asterisks and all that.

Why do you care? Elite US colleges are educating young people to be leaders in society in many different areas. They are looking for students who are outstanding in numerous areas, not only pure academics.

Test scores and GPAs don’t necessarily show how “meritorious” an applicant is. Leadership qualities, in particular, are not measured by test scores.

Again, I am puzzled as to why so many people appear to be confused about this.

This doesn't explain why athletes in NCAA sports are given preference over those in non-NCAA sports. The former are an institutional priority, while the latter is not.

Yes, and that is fine. The school has their reasons for wanting to create a class community of a particular composition, and that is their right.

I don’t understand why people have a problem with this.

I don't have a problem with it, I have a problem with people making up false rationalizations for why, such as "leadership".

It’s odd that you think that “leadership” is some sort of rationalization. It is not at all uncommon for athletes, particularly those involved in team sports, to be good leaders- they tend to go on and use those leadership qualities as adults in their jobs and also in giving back to their communities as volunteers. (And, sure, non-athletes can also be leaders, but we’re talking about athletes here. Team sports really bring out and enhance natural leadership qualities.)

Athletes are an addition to the mix of types of students at a school. No one would want a class to consist entirely of musicians or theatre kids or math whizzes or history buffs or . . . athletes. Schools want kids with a mix of interests and talents. And that’s who the admissions people work on bringing together.

Can you please explain why someone with an excellent 10k time but mediocre marathon time is so much of a better leader than someone with a mediocre 10k time and excellent marathon time that the former deserves a special admissions advantage that the latter does not get? Why are those who wrestle such better leaders than those who practice Jih Jitsu or Judo that the former deserve a special admissions advantage the latter do not get, above and beyond what the AOs would normally give them for such an activity?

If it was really about leadership, there would be no need for privileging some sports over others, and AOs could instead holistically view all sports based on the perceived leadership value they provide without needing to be biased in favor of some sports over others.

It does not make sense. College sports actually make no sense at all. But they are absolutely a part of University culture and tradition for a great many universities in this country.

[Anonymous]

I can always pick out the recruited athletes in the med school class. They take shortcuts and fail their OSCE first year. Somehow, they expect special treatment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Then there is the unicorn who is the kid with the top grades and scores who is also a star athlete.

Yep.

I have one of those and the results are what one might expect.

Not sure what "one might expect," but I guess it would be somewhat sport-dependent. I "might" expect Duke, Stanford, Michigan, or Notre Dame, though they don't have to have the very best academics/scores if they're a better athlete.

There is a kid from a local private who was recruited to one of the schools you listed who didn't break a 1400 on their SAT.

[Anonymous]

Did they actually submit their scores though?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can always pick out the recruited athletes in the med school class. They take shortcuts and fail their OSCE first year. Somehow, they expect special treatment.

This makes no sense. It's not easy to get into med school, so they already made that cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can always pick out the recruited athletes in the med school class. They take shortcuts and fail their OSCE first year. Somehow, they expect special treatment.

This makes no sense. It's not easy to get into med school, so they already made that cut.

Agree - I'm the first to bash recruited athletes who get in with subpar stats, but this doesn't make sense and seems trollish...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what? The school wants to put together an interesting class with lots of different types of talents. A class filled entirely with people with high standardized test scores may not necessarily be as interesting for the members of said class.

Being with and around young people with many different types of talents leads to a better overall education for everyone in the class. College is about more than just the classroom.

Well yes scores are not everything. But I have a kid with a 26 and 3.5 uw and no AP. And I can assure you they don't belong at Yale or any top 50 school.

True, not every kid has a strong enough talent in one area to be recruited by a school. Schools like Yale know what they’re looking for, and it involves a mix of students who show an impressive talent in many different areas. Leadership is important and the fact is that many athletes are good leaders.

They’re creating a whole class, a community. College is about so much more than the classroom. How is it that so many parents don’t appear to understand this anymore?

Why don't so many parents understand that their students need to come out of school with a job offer? Low GPA athletes don't get very good jobs. Well, maybe they get a job that is good for them.

That's what i used to think but at DS's ivy - many end up with Wall Street jobs.

Going in they know that an ivy degree will get them a better job. Years ago the old Princeton lacrosse who left for Denver said the Princeton recruits were different. They knew that they were headed to Wall Street after college. The Denver recruits had no idea what they were doing after lacrosse ended.




Ivy athletes make up to $220k more than non-athletes.

https://www.businessinsider.com/sporty-students-college-jocks-earn-more-than-nerds-study-2023-10