40% of Williams' classes are athletic recruits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, 60% for actors, artists, musicians, Intel finalists (or semifinalists), mathematicians, politicians, community leaders, entrepreneurs, poets, novelists, etc.? That doesn't make sense.

The kids aren't monolithic. My sons were both recruited athletes at an Ivy, they are also both math majors with significant community service experience. As high school and college students they have held leadership positions in all these areas. Many of their former and current teammates are similarly multi-talented. I can't think of a "dumb jock" among them.

[Anonymous]

I'm not suggesting that they are dumb jocks. I just think it would be great for these colleges to place an equal premium on OTHER activities, such as acting, music, community service, etc. What would have happened to your sons if they had spent as much time focusing on community service as on their sports? For example, if they organized state-wide conferences on a particular issue, wrote editorials, got other students involved, etc.? Or if they developed a product, marketed it, and managed to sell it? Why should those students not get early admission nods like athletes? I have nothing against athletes, I just think our society (and our colleges) places inordinate value on sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not suggesting that they are dumb jocks. I just think it would be great for these colleges to place an equal premium on OTHER activities, such as acting, music, community service, etc. What would have happened to your sons if they had spent as much time focusing on community service as on their sports? For example, if they organized state-wide conferences on a particular issue, wrote editorials, got other students involved, etc.? Or if they developed a product, marketed it, and managed to sell it? Why should those students not get early admission nods like athletes? I have nothing against athletes, I just think our society (and our colleges) places inordinate value on sports.

Ok...but how do you know that the kids did not do anything "worthy in your eyes" in addition to sports? My D3 student athlete received a scholarship based on her academic record AND for her community service work in high school (which was substantial). It was also a community service project that she carried onto the college campus with her and she got an award for it there. You know what? All the girls on her college team had some other hook also. A couple were downright geniuses in science and math. including one who got a fellowship to study in Japan. Another was an ochestra prodigy and played travel orchestra in addition to her sport. Yet another was a published author of a children's book on losing a parent. So...a lot of colleges....especially D3 SLACS (like Williams) place a premium on the OVERALL student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not suggesting that they are dumb jocks. I just think it would be great for these colleges to place an equal premium on OTHER activities, such as acting, music, community service, etc. What would have happened to your sons if they had spent as much time focusing on community service as on their sports? For example, if they organized state-wide conferences on a particular issue, wrote editorials, got other students involved, etc.? Or if they developed a product, marketed it, and managed to sell it? Why should those students not get early admission nods like athletes? I have nothing against athletes, I just think our society (and our colleges) places inordinate value on sports.

You're not getting it. They play sports AND do other things like music, community service, etc. That is what it takes to get into the top LACs. The top schools can afford to pretty much only select "twofers".

[Anonymous]

What about doing community service and playing an instrument? Why does one of their interests have to be sports? Yes, you're right, I don't get it.

[Anonymous]

Colleges are always looking for opportunities to maximize alumni donations, and alums like sports. Gives them a way to stay connected with the college. Raises $$$ for the college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about doing community service and playing an instrument? Why does one of their interests have to be sports? Yes, you're right, I don't get it.

The problem is still finding ways to stand out on a state or national level. Sitting in an orchestra or band or chorus with 100 other kids isn't going to help your kid stand out from all the other kids in all the orchestras and bands in the country. But, if your kid goes to states for music, a college would be impressed, and they do need to fill oboe and trombone slots. I will say that my kid got into an ivy largely on the strength of state- and national-level music accomplishments. Most schools let you submit recordings or links to a YouTube of yourself, which may impress the admissions teams. (Although a music professor friend told me that the admissions folks rarely forward these to the music department for evaluation, at least at his school.) Standing out for volunteer work is tougher, although the kids you hear about getting into selective colleges are the ones who, say, started a foundation that raised thousands of dollars.

For athletes it's the same thing. Simply playing on your high school soccer team isn't enough. You have to be a stand-out player in your league, playing for a team that does well at a state level, and maybe also captain of the team. Rowers and runners have to clock times below certain very difficult thresholds, for example, to be considered by college recruiters.

Although the point about maximizing alumni $$$$ is correct too. The Price of Admission talks about this.

[Anonymous]

But do these musicians get recruited early by the school?

[Anonymous]

And do they learn early on that they will be admitted? I think the bottom line is money. That's a shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about doing community service and playing an instrument? Why does one of their interests have to be sports? Yes, you're right, I don't get it.

The problem is still finding ways to stand out on a state or national level. Sitting in an orchestra or band or chorus with 100 other kids isn't going to help your kid stand out from all the other kids in all the orchestras and bands in the country. But, if your kid goes to states for music, a college would be impressed, and they do need to fill oboe and trombone slots. I will say that my kid got into an ivy largely on the strength of state- and national-level music accomplishments. Most schools let you submit recordings or links to a YouTube of yourself, which may impress the admissions teams. (Although a music professor friend told me that the admissions folks rarely forward these to the music department for evaluation, at least at his school.) Standing out for volunteer work is tougher, although the kids you hear about getting into selective colleges are the ones who, say, started a foundation that raised thousands of dollars.

For athletes it's the same thing. Simply playing on your high school soccer team isn't enough. You have to be a stand-out player in your league, playing for a team that does well at a state level, and maybe also captain of the team. Rowers and runners have to clock times below certain very difficult thresholds, for example, to be considered by college recruiters.

Although the point about maximizing alumni $$$$ is correct too. The Price of Admission talks about this.

The students at Williams aren't majoring in sports like some D1 programs. They do have to have a level of proficiency. The smaller the school the higher % of those in sports. Apply to schools without football.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And do they learn early on that they will be admitted? I think the bottom line is money. That's a shame.

Yes, the bottom line probably is alumn money. Alums don't usually donate because of the music program, unless it's a hall with their name on it, and I don't see how fix this. But don't forget that alumn money benefits all students.

[Anonymous]

I'm a Williams alum who played a varsity sport. I was also on the editorial staff of the newspaper and worked in admissions. Athletics is a big part of life at Williams and really draws the student body together. There are certainly many Williams students who don't play sports, but the school will always draw lots of applicants who were high school athletes and who want to continue playing in college. And, yes, as many posters have noted, these applicants have other accomplishments and interests that they bring to the college community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Williams alum who played a varsity sport. I was also on the editorial staff of the newspaper and worked in admissions. Athletics is a big part of life at Williams and really draws the student body together. There are certainly many Williams students who don't play sports, but the school will always draw lots of applicants who were high school athletes and who want to continue playing in college. And, yes, as many posters have noted, these applicants have other accomplishments and interests that they bring to the college community.

As someone who worked in the admissions office, could share share with the board some of things you looked for in applicants besides sport particiaption?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Williams alum who played a varsity sport. I was also on the editorial staff of the newspaper and worked in admissions. Athletics is a big part of life at Williams and really draws the student body together. There are certainly many Williams students who don't play sports, but the school will always draw lots of applicants who were high school athletes and who want to continue playing in college. And, yes, as many posters have noted, these applicants have other accomplishments and interests that they bring to the college community.

As someone who worked in the admissions office, could share share with the board some of things you looked for in applicants besides sport particiaption?

A PP here from a couple of pages ago.

If the PP answers this question, he/she is better person than I am. I have 2 kids in college (one is an athlete and the other is not) and it is insulting some of the assumptions people here are making about student athletes – especially D3 athletes. Frankly, it reeks of misinformation and sour grapes. At about this time every year around the acceptance period, people get on here and complain about how recruited athletes get an unfair advantage, ruining higher education, blah blah. Well, Williams and Amherst have big sports and arts vibes and it has been that way for a while. That is the way it is and it seems to working for them and the students that matriculate there. If you do not like that aspect of those schools, go to College Confidential and research top SLACs that do not have a big sports presence on campus – there are plenty of them. Apply to those schools and call it a day. But please stop sermonizing about it.

[Anonymous]

I don't know why you're getting so defensive. I don't think anyone is sermonizing. We are just challenging the prevailing notion that sports are of utmost importance and that athletes should receive admission "tips" not granted other students. Why not send likely letters to the best all-around students instead of the best athletes? And by the way, I'm not arguing this from some "sour grapes" point of view. DD has received likelies from two schools, including an Ivy, and she's not an athlete.