Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/06/12/varsity-athletes-admissions-enrollment-top-colleges/?utm_term=.282712c7fa13
The amazing stats that jumped out to me are that 23% of Caltech and 15% of MIT slots are reserved for recruited athletes! So much for their vaunted "pure" race-neutral meritocracy.
Wait, are you implying that all athletes are the same race?! So I really need to tell you that there are successful athletes of all races. A racist rant is. It what I expected of this header.
+1.
What is the proportion of recruited athletes who are black?
I suspect it's higher that the merit-based general student population.
About 2/3 of recruited athletes in the Ivy League are white. This is higher than the overall student population. This means whites are disproportionately benefiting from these lower admission standards.
Nope, it's not higher --- remember the vast majority of Hispanics is racially white/ half white.
I'd like to see the actual stats.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MIT football has been pretty stellar the past couple of years.
And so what, why not take kids who excel in the classroom and on a field or court?
OP makes an assumption that recruited athletes are somehow lesser students.
Why assume URMs are lesser students?
They usually are. Elite schools have a hard time making their quota with URMs with high stats.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It takes a ton of discipline and hard work to excel in athletics and academics. Why wouldn't a top school want someone like this rather than a student who only excelled in academics? As an employer, I would take the scholar/athlete over the scholar (with slightly higher stats) any day of the week because it's simply harder to be excellent at both than to be a little bit better at just academics.
This. The few elite athletes I know have been playing their sport since elementary school for many hours per week and to the exclusion of many other activities. Don't underestimate the drive it takes. That is something that should be considered in college admissions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/06/12/varsity-athletes-admissions-enrollment-top-colleges/?utm_term=.282712c7fa13
The amazing stats that jumped out to me are that 23% of Caltech and 15% of MIT slots are reserved for recruited athletes! So much for their vaunted "pure" race-neutral meritocracy.
Wait, are you implying that all athletes are the same race?! So I really need to tell you that there are successful athletes of all races. A racist rant is. It what I expected of this header.
+1.
What is the proportion of recruited athletes who are black?
I suspect it's higher that the merit-based general student population.
About 2/3 of recruited athletes in the Ivy League are white. This is higher than the overall student population. This means whites are disproportionately benefiting from these lower admission standards.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nah, my kid is the reason he can't get into an elite college.
Amen. I love my kids, but they were not applying to MIT, waste of money and time.
+1 and if by some miracle my kid got in.... he wouldn't thrive there.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Nah, my kid is the reason he can't get into an elite college.
Amen. I love my kids, but they were not applying to MIT, waste of money and time.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/06/12/varsity-athletes-admissions-enrollment-top-colleges/?utm_term=.282712c7fa13
The amazing stats that jumped out to me are that 23% of Caltech and 15% of MIT slots are reserved for recruited athletes! So much for their vaunted "pure" race-neutral meritocracy.
Wait, are you implying that all athletes are the same race?! So I really need to tell you that there are successful athletes of all races. A racist rant is. It what I expected of this header.
+1.
What is the proportion of recruited athletes who are black?
I suspect it's higher that the merit-based general student population.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/06/12/varsity-athletes-admissions-enrollment-top-colleges/?utm_term=.282712c7fa13
The amazing stats that jumped out to me are that 23% of Caltech and 15% of MIT slots are reserved for recruited athletes! So much for their vaunted "pure" race-neutral meritocracy.
Wait, are you implying that all athletes are the same race?! So I really need to tell you that there are successful athletes of all races. A racist rant is. It what I expected of this header.
Anonymous wrote:Nah, my kid is the reason he can't get into an elite college.
Anonymous wrote:Nah, my kid is the reason he can't get into an elite college.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:MIT football has been pretty stellar the past couple of years.
And so what, why not take kids who excel in the classroom and on a field or court?
OP makes an assumption that recruited athletes are somehow lesser students.
Why assume URMs are lesser students?
Who said anything about URM's? Athletes come in all colors and genders.
They have clearly never seen MIT's football roster.
Anonymous wrote:For a school like MIT, they do not lower the admissions standards for recruited athletes. But, if you meet their standards, and are recruited, you will be admitted.
As an example, I know someone who was recruited to elite schools. She got admitted and will be going....And, she used her skills to be admitted, but she had nearly all A's with nearly all honors and AP, and 1500+ on the SATs, and a National Merit Semifinialist. The thing is that is the average student at an elite school. And they could accept 100% 4.0 UW with 1600 SATs. The sport set her apart.