Reply to I feel like we don't talk enough that top LACs are 40%+ recruited athletes.

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "I feel like we don't talk enough that top LACs are 40%+ recruited athletes. "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My recruited athlete has a 35 on his ACT, and a wGPA of 4.8. Why not recruit high stats athletes if their scores fall in the range of accepted students? Better than a legacy or child of a big donor. [/quote]

Because if you fill 35% of a class with recruited athletes, it decreases the diversity of the class. And by diversity I include artists, musicians, poets, scientists, scholars, and yes, athletes. Sure, you can be both. But most recruited athletes spent a large chunk of their teenage years studying and playing their sport. They didn’t spend 25 hours per week on something else. And they are disproportionately wealthy, reducing another metric of diversity. And they tend to stick together, having a polarizing impact on campus akin to the Greek system, if the percentage is high. [/quote]

Believe it or not, there are kids who are both athletes and play instruments and/or act. Why are you assuming these kids are one-dimensional and being admitted to these elite schools?[/quote]

You're funny, because being a recruited athlete means you were literally admitted to college based on that one dimension.

Of course many kids can do sports and also have other talents. The PPs are only arguing that athletes should not be allowed to skip the line simply because they have some specific technical skill in some obscure segregated sport.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics