Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Are you at the same school as the PP? How would this apply to your student? Do you think different schools approach this differently?

It doesn’t matter. The fact is some people like to place athletes into a dumb jock category to make themselves feel better when the reality is these athletes are competing in the classroom and the sports field/court. Americans value athletics. It’s been that way since at least the beginning of Olympics.

The fact is that parents of athletes like to pretend their kids are competing in the classroom. They’re not. And it’s been that way since the beginning of the Olympics.

I’m sorry you feel that way. My 4.0, bilingual, 99% HSPT child would disagree with you on that. Good luck on the waitlist.

Oh I’m so wounded. My kids are already in and see firsthand how the athletes fall behind.

Which school?

Is rather have a well rounded student that can do well in the classroom as well as show they sacrifice a lot of their time and bodies for their sport. Shows they are well-rounded and can deal with adversity. Many superior athletes spend 40+ hours a week on their sport. If they are also maintaining academic quality, that kid is going to be superior to a regular student any day of the week. Yes, even a regular student that can paint well. Those are not the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Are you at the same school as the PP? How would this apply to your student? Do you think different schools approach this differently?

It doesn’t matter. The fact is some people like to place athletes into a dumb jock category to make themselves feel better when the reality is these athletes are competing in the classroom and the sports field/court. Americans value athletics. It’s been that way since at least the beginning of Olympics.

The fact is that parents of athletes like to pretend their kids are competing in the classroom. They’re not. And it’s been that way since the beginning of the Olympics.

I’m sorry you feel that way. My 4.0, bilingual, 99% HSPT child would disagree with you on that. Good luck on the waitlist.

Oh I’m so wounded. My kids are already in and see firsthand how the athletes fall behind.

There are plenty of fab athletes who are also super bright. There are schools that recruit athletes and those students do not have to be as strong on academics as students who are not athletes. Maybe not at your school but there are.

Why are athletes valued more than artists?

Money money money.

Americans are sports obsessed. Look at the attention being given to the baseball season. Look at the behavior some athletes and teams get away with. Priorities are all wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

What is the European approach? I agree it needs to change.

What I just described. The schools don’t sponsor athletics. Kids can, should and do play sports, but all the leagues are run independently of schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

What is the European approach? I agree it needs to change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Are you at the same school as the PP? How would this apply to your student? Do you think different schools approach this differently?

It doesn’t matter. The fact is some people like to place athletes into a dumb jock category to make themselves feel better when the reality is these athletes are competing in the classroom and the sports field/court. Americans value athletics. It’s been that way since at least the beginning of Olympics.

The fact is that parents of athletes like to pretend their kids are competing in the classroom. They’re not. And it’s been that way since the beginning of the Olympics.

I’m sorry you feel that way. My 4.0, bilingual, 99% HSPT child would disagree with you on that. Good luck on the waitlist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Are you at the same school as the PP? How would this apply to your student? Do you think different schools approach this differently?

It doesn’t matter. The fact is some people like to place athletes into a dumb jock category to make themselves feel better when the reality is these athletes are competing in the classroom and the sports field/court. Americans value athletics. It’s been that way since at least the beginning of Olympics.

The fact is that parents of athletes like to pretend their kids are competing in the classroom. They’re not. And it’s been that way since the beginning of the Olympics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

You are welcome to send your kid to boarding school in Europe. I like being able to root for our school for sports.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Are you at the same school as the PP? How would this apply to your student? Do you think different schools approach this differently?

It doesn’t matter. The fact is some people like to place athletes into a dumb jock category to make themselves feel better when the reality is these athletes are competing in the classroom and the sports field/court. Americans value athletics. It’s been that way since at least the beginning of Olympics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it matter if the child plays for the HS or if they are on a club team not affiliated with the HS?

you kinda want kids playing for the schools

I wish the US would adopt a European approach to scholastic sports. Schools should have nada to do with it, it just detracts from their missions. Leave the sports to clubs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holton very much values the arts — music, dance, and visual arts and often students win significant awards for their talent. The top privates want exceptional students that fit the schools mission. But I don’t think athletes is a new “must”. I believe it is growing asset.

Do they recruit artists?

What I see is good schools jumping on the sports bandwagon earlier and earlier. It’s part of MS admissions now. And ADs are given a seat at the admissions table. Is the faculty strings ensemble director there as well?

No. Why would they be? Haven’t you read why athletics are more important?

Besides the money, why?

It’s not just money. There are no violin contests that are going to get you media attention, fame. When you only have 100 kids per grade you need at least 3-3-4 decent athletes to even try to compete for the notoriety that sports brings. A violinist is not going to pack the stands and elicit school pride etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Are you at the same school as the PP? How would this apply to your student? Do you think different schools approach this differently?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money

I wasn’t talking about the OP. I was referring to PP that said, “This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

This implies that the athletes are only there for athletics and not for academics. I am the PP that has stated my kid is a 4.0 student that is also a very strong athlete.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t true at either single sex school my kids attend. At the 9th grade level, you get a handful of kids there for athletic ability (maybe 4 at all girls, less than 10 at all boys ) and the rest of the new admits are solely there for their academic records.

The problem with this statement is that it implies academics and athletics are mutually exclusive. For the most part, the athletes are also strong academic applicants and their sport is what sets them apart from the next kid that only has academics going for them.

The OP recognizes that good academics and good athletics are not mutually exclusive. The question is, where academics are equal, why are athletics more highly valued than other ECs. Answer: money