Athletes have such an edge

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly—playing team sports prepares you for the real world and weeds out snowflake tendencies.

Well that’s one of the excuses given. There is no justification for the superior treatment athletes get in college admissions. It’s done only for money and yo appease the alums who played sports. The non money making sports had to be included after Title IX. I think it all should be abolished. The football players at my Division III Slac we’re terrible students and lent a toxic environment to the campus. Fortunately their fest was shut down after some young athlete men got killed during rush.

Did they rush the football team? Or a fraternity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm just hoping for my high school junior's sake there is some truth to it. DC works incrediby hard at a very intense private school. Gets okay grades, but definintely in the lower middle of the pack in the school. Beloved by most for being an all-around great kid and is a strong athlete. Not quite strong enough for the top D1 programs, but lower D1 and very competitive DIII are coming after them fairly hard. But is now just waiting for the other shoe to drop when they see their mid-year grades--they're fine, but below admissions standards for the high academic schools that want him. We're hoping just one of them has one of those "coveted" spots that can land them admission!

I'm curious why you want your child to go to a "high academic school" when he isn't a highly academic kid. Does HE want this?
I have two kids at Big3 schools. One loves the pressure and the academics and does extremely well. She wants a highly academic college where she can be surrounded by extremely driven
kids and work really hard.

My second kid is not an academic. He is around the 50% mark for the Big3 school. He has ZERO interest in going to a highly academic college after 4 years at a highly academic high school.
I know many, many kids like him. Does your son really want 4 more years of academic stress in a class of "gunners? My son can think of nothing worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He won’t feel that way when he’s in school. We openly discourage our kids from being student athletes. DH and I were both professors at a university with great athletes. My athlete students were terrible. They missed too much due to sports schedules. It was a waste! So few go on to make any money as pros. They waste their time on sports instead of what matters - an education!

I was a professor for a couple of years at a prominent Midwestern private university. My friend always used to scan the class roster immediately before the semester started, looking for athletes and "building names". When he found those names, he stressed in the first class how difficult the course was going to be and that it would be really tough to succeed if you had to miss class frequently. No one from either category ever remained once Add/Drop ended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

An orchestra is an orchestra.

A play has a cast.

neither is a team, so they cannot teach teamwork.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly—playing team sports prepares you for the real world and weeds out snowflake tendencies.

if that's true, then the admissions hook should be given to anyone who plays team sports and not just those who are good at them. it's the participation that matters.

Participation is not it. It is the commitment. And by commitment, I mean the vastly increased hours, management, effort and focus that an elite athlete that plays on a high level select team puts in over an athlete that plays in a rec league. There is simply no comparison and college admissions recognize this.

On that same high level select team are athletes who put in the same hours, management, effort and focus, they just aren't as good. Those kids are learning the exact same lessons and no one is bending admissions criteria for them. Why not? If the reason to recruit athletes is because they (and only they) are learning these lessons, then your actual ability shouldn't matter.

"hours, management, effort and focus" and your 'commitment' are all tied to participation, not skill.

Nope. I completely disagree.

I have a son who plays on a rather elite lacrosse team. He is pretty good and he does put in a lot of time training and traveling to games and tournaments. But he is not like the top players on his team. Those boys are all in, 100% devoted to their sport. They arrive at practice first and leave last, they do fitness on their own time and work with coaches on their off days. They travel to local colleges to watch games there. They live and breathe their sport and they are different. It is hard to explain but while my son is a very good player and is on the same team as them (but is not a starter) he is not the same. My son has not looked to play in college next year and that is of course a decision we support. He has had a great time and learned much from his sport.

The other boys, though, they are impressive in ways that I can not exactly articulate and I would think that a college would value the traits they possess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

An orchestra is an orchestra.

A play has a cast.

neither is a team, so they cannot teach teamwork.

Both are a team. Jeez.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly—playing team sports prepares you for the real world and weeds out snowflake tendencies.

if that's true, then the admissions hook should be given to anyone who plays team sports and not just those who are good at them. it's the participation that matters.

Actually the reason athletes get a hook is not because of what they learned on the field, though that is valuable, Just like arts/music/theater provide value.

The reason they were given a hook is because research showed that students who only had good grades did not perform as well in college as athletes/artist/actors (minus the top 20% of the class)

The hook admissions started because schools ran into a problem with graduation rate and job placement when top students who were never anything but the top of their class end up at the bottom 3/4. Athletes/artist did not have this issue in the study so they decided to take athletes and artists to resolve this issue.

Share the research.

It’s really not hard to find. You should just use Google.

Here is one but there are many so good luck educating yourself but you sound too small minded to be open to the idea.

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-education-study-provides-new-evidence-big-fish-little-pond-effect-students-globally

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly—playing team sports prepares you for the real world and weeds out snowflake tendencies.

if that's true, then the admissions hook should be given to anyone who plays team sports and not just those who are good at them. it's the participation that matters.

Participation is not it. It is the commitment. And by commitment, I mean the vastly increased hours, management, effort and focus that an elite athlete that plays on a high level select team puts in over an athlete that plays in a rec league. There is simply no comparison and college admissions recognize this.

On that same high level select team are athletes who put in the same hours, management, effort and focus, they just aren't as good. Those kids are learning the exact same lessons and no one is bending admissions criteria for them. Why not? If the reason to recruit athletes is because they (and only they) are learning these lessons, then your actual ability shouldn't matter.

"hours, management, effort and focus" and your 'commitment' are all tied to participation, not skill.

Nope. I completely disagree.

I have a son who plays on a rather elite lacrosse team. He is pretty good and he does put in a lot of time training and traveling to games and tournaments. But he is not like the top players on his team. Those boys are all in, 100% devoted to their sport. They arrive at practice first and leave last, they do fitness on their own time and work with coaches on their off days. They travel to local colleges to watch games there. They live and breathe their sport and they are different. It is hard to explain but while my son is a very good player and is on the same team as them (but is not a starter) he is not the same. My son has not looked to play in college next year and that is of course a decision we support. He has had a great time and learned much from his sport.

The other boys, though, they are impressive in ways that I can not exactly articulate and I would think that a college would value the traits they possess.

that's sentimental claptrap. a college should value someone who plays lacrosse because they 'live and breathe their sport?" the only trait they're exhibiting is monomania.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

An orchestra is an orchestra.

A play has a cast.

neither is a team, so they cannot teach teamwork.

Both are a team. Jeez.

sorry - no. you can only learn team work and dedication from playing a sport. sports are so amazing that even a primarily individual sport, like swimming, teaches teamwork, where your stupid orchestra, play or robotics doesn't teach anything of the sort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly—playing team sports prepares you for the real world and weeds out snowflake tendencies.

if that's true, then the admissions hook should be given to anyone who plays team sports and not just those who are good at them. it's the participation that matters.

Actually the reason athletes get a hook is not because of what they learned on the field, though that is valuable, Just like arts/music/theater provide value.

The reason they were given a hook is because research showed that students who only had good grades did not perform as well in college as athletes/artist/actors (minus the top 20% of the class)

The hook admissions started because schools ran into a problem with graduation rate and job placement when top students who were never anything but the top of their class end up at the bottom 3/4. Athletes/artist did not have this issue in the study so they decided to take athletes and artists to resolve this issue.

Share the research.

It’s really not hard to find. You should just use Google.

Here is one but there are many so good luck educating yourself but you sound too small minded to be open to the idea.

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-education-study-provides-new-evidence-big-fish-little-pond-effect-students-globally

DP here. Respectfully, the study you show is tangential at best, and speaks only of the self-esteem of high achievers when among others of the same caliber, and says nothing about their performance or grades, their success, or either relative to athletes, and certainly no evidence of any of this type of data being used to create college admissions policies.

So, you posted a link, but I do not believe it supports your point in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Exactly—playing team sports prepares you for the real world and weeds out snowflake tendencies.

if that's true, then the admissions hook should be given to anyone who plays team sports and not just those who are good at them. it's the participation that matters.

Actually the reason athletes get a hook is not because of what they learned on the field, though that is valuable, Just like arts/music/theater provide value.

The reason they were given a hook is because research showed that students who only had good grades did not perform as well in college as athletes/artist/actors (minus the top 20% of the class)

The hook admissions started because schools ran into a problem with graduation rate and job placement when top students who were never anything but the top of their class end up at the bottom 3/4. Athletes/artist did not have this issue in the study so they decided to take athletes and artists to resolve this issue.

Share the research.

It’s really not hard to find. You should just use Google.

Here is one but there are many so good luck educating yourself but you sound too small minded to be open to the idea.

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-education-study-provides-new-evidence-big-fish-little-pond-effect-students-globally

DP here. Respectfully, the study you show is tangential at best, and speaks only of the self-esteem of high achievers when among others of the same caliber, and says nothing about their performance or grades, their success, or either relative to athletes, and certainly no evidence of any of this type of data being used to create college admissions policies.

So, you posted a link, but I do not believe it supports your point in any way.

it does because if you let in enough dumb athletes and legacies rather than all smart kids, the smart kids can feel like the big fish in the small pond. So letting those dumb athletes in actually helps the self esteem of kids who are actually qualified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

An orchestra is an orchestra.

A play has a cast.

neither is a team, so they cannot teach teamwork.

Both are a team. Jeez.

sorry - no. you can only learn team work and dedication from playing a sport. sports are so amazing that even a primarily individual sport, like swimming, teaches teamwork, where your stupid orchestra, play or robotics doesn't teach anything of the sort.

I hope this is sarcasm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

An orchestra is an orchestra.

A play has a cast.

neither is a team, so they cannot teach teamwork.

Both are a team. Jeez.

sorry - no. you can only learn team work and dedication from playing a sport. sports are so amazing that even a primarily individual sport, like swimming, teaches teamwork, where your stupid orchestra, play or robotics doesn't teach anything of the sort.

I hope this is sarcasm.

absolutely not. I hire for a big tech company and I only hire people who have been on sports teams because only they truly understand teamwork, commitment and time management. I've had applicants with stellar credentials and who aced the technical interview try to claim that working with others to build a rocket constituted teamwork and I always have to tell them, "sorry, if it isn't a sport, I just don't count it."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are talking about all sport like lacrosse or crew or field hockey, these recruits statistically will presumptively be successful in their chosen careers.

I’m not but what does this have to do with anything?

This. Assuming a solid GPA, external pursuits (sports, music, arts) that demand a lot of time, energy and some degree of achievement offers insight into that person’s work ethic and ability to power through…. Especially useful in covid. This is the kid I’d hire.

PP And even more so if the activity was not an individualistic sport but rather a team sport/activity in which an individual works hard and each member must be aware of and support the whole, which is the team I require.

You mean like in an orchestra or a play?

An orchestra is an orchestra.

A play has a cast.

neither is a team, so they cannot teach teamwork.

Both are a team. Jeez.

sorry - no. you can only learn team work and dedication from playing a sport. sports are so amazing that even a primarily individual sport, like swimming, teaches teamwork, where your stupid orchestra, play or robotics doesn't teach anything of the sort.

I hope this is sarcasm.

absolutely not. I hire for a big tech company and I only hire people who have been on sports teams because only they truly understand teamwork, commitment and time management. I've had applicants with stellar credentials and who aced the technical interview try to claim that working with others to build a rocket constituted teamwork and I always have to tell them, "sorry, if it isn't a sport, I just don't count it."