To the parents of D3 recruit athletes or athletes themselves, did they help you “find” additional merit scholarships and/or FA to entice you to apply? I know D3 do both have athletic scholarships but there has to be a carrot on a stick to make you want to come to the school other than because it’s what your choice was regardless of aid.

Anonymous wrote:Amherst grad here. Academics by far dominates over athletics. Not even close. Hell, the a capella group at Amherst is more popular than the athletic teams.

Hmm, really? I actually know someone from Amherst who complained about this very issue that OP is raising.

Anonymous wrote:Amherst grad here. Academics by far dominates over athletics. Not even close. Hell, the a capella group at Amherst is more popular than the athletic teams.

+1. Four years at Amherst. I went to two football games my whole time there, one of them was to protest the Iraq war and I think the other one I spent outside the stadium at a tailgate party. I did go to lots of a capella show though! I had some friends that played sports but I don’t think I ever went to their games or anything.

Anonymous wrote:Williams grad. I felt out of place NOT being an athlete. Especially true freshman year when the teams had been together already for two weeks. I started a sport just to try to make some friends. Honestly it was a bit hard.

If I may ask, where do you wish that you had attended college/university if you were accepted to any school of interest to you ?

I ask because I think that Williams College deserves its top ranking among LACs, and I am attracted to many aspects of the school, but I also attended a rural LAC and really regret the experience (even though I was very athletic).

Anonymous wrote:Williams grad. I felt out of place NOT being an athlete. Especially true freshman year when the teams had been together already for two weeks. I started a sport just to try to make some friends. Honestly it was a bit hard.

I hear & read similar comments quite often. I love the location & the education offered, but the reality may be uncomfortable for a non-athlete.

Williams grad. I felt out of place NOT being an athlete. Especially true freshman year when the teams had been together already for two weeks. I started a sport just to try to make some friends. Honestly it was a bit hard.

It varies by school. Amherst and Swarthmore are not dominated by athletics despite pretty positive results (for how good the teams are, attendance is often terrible beyond rivalry games). Some like Swarthmore and Haverford don't have football at all, which helps. I think Conn College might be the only NESCAC school that doesn't have a football team.

My sibs and I all played a sport at Middlebury. Among our spouses and kids we have three more Middlebury grads, two Wesleyan grads and one each from Williams and Swarthmore -- all played a sport. IME SLAC athletes and non-athletes hang out together and support one another's interests and activities. My two closest friends from college were not athletes, but we all studied abroad for a semester and had the same major. They came to my games and I went to their concerts. I see the same pattern with my kids, nieces and nephews and their friends.

Anonymous wrote:The short answer is no, not in the least....academics dominate. I graduated from a Nescac and I have a DC at one currently and we were/are both on sports teams and whilst we took athletics seriously, everything was subordinate to academics. Socially the teams tend to be tight because of the amount of time spent with one another but every student has a diverse group of friends and the overall atmosphere is one of inclusivity.

I have an athlete at one of these schools and I think the team is a large part of my child's life. He takes classes, practices, lives and socializes with his teammates.

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to help my kid compile a list of colleges to explore. She's a top student at a magnet public school, with some regional and national level awards. She says she doesn't think she wants to go to a small school, but is willing to look at them. I've come across a few indicators that athletics dominates SLAC's like Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin (e.g., this article: https://www.gazettenet.com/Amherst-college-assesses-athletics-in-report-7871942). She's not an athlete. I'm not sure why a small school of about 2,000 people, where 40% of them are athletes who dominate the social scene and she is not part of that, would be a good fit for her. On the other hand, I keep hearing what a great education SLAC's provide. Anybody have any experience to offer about life for non-athletes at these sorts of schools?

OP: Athletes do dominate the social scene at many elite LACs (SLACs = selective liberal arts colleges). And you are right to consider this aspect of the college experience in advising your daughter. Although I would like to write that this aspect varies from LAC to LAC, I am not confident of doing so based on my knowledge & experience--certainly not for the SLACs specifically mentioned by you.

Anonymous wrote:The biggest thing to consider when applying to a college with a high percentage of students participating in interscholastic sports is that the school needs to fill those teams.

Not all of the athletes are recruited, but many are and they get an admissions bump. Makes it a little harder for non-athletes to get in.

Much harder. 90% of the applicants are vying for half the seats....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Academics definitely dominate at LACs. And the proper term is "LACs," not "SLACs."

Amherst 31% of students are varsity athletes, Bowdoin is 36%. Similar numbers at other NESCAC schools. Definitely a sporty set of schools, and has students in sports at percentages similar to HS. Big state schools by comparison are low single digits.

I am well acquainted with LACs, private National Universities, and public National Universities. The above poster is correct regarding percentage of athletes at small versus large schools. I noticed another difference. At LACs the athletes form cliques that often dominate the social scene. LAC athletes are akin to the BMOC (big man on campus) similar to high school. The large university D 1 scholarship athletes that I knew, although confident when competing in their respective sport, were humble and aware that they could lose their scholarship. I hesitate to use the word fear--or afraid--but they were very aware of the need to remain healthy and to perform at an extremely high level in their sport.

I have read several parents claim that their D3 athlete could have gone D1. And the claim gets extended to the position that some D3 teams are as good as D1 because several of the athletes on the D3 team could have gone D1. While I agree that some D3 athletes have the talent for D1, they do not have the drive and commitment regarding their sport to continue at the D1 level. Progressing to and competing at a higher level develops one skills to a level well beyond that of a D1 talent playing at the D3 level.

D3 athletics is great for one who is a 2 sport athlete without professional athlete aspirations as well as for one whose primary focus in life is not athletics.

My point is that there is a noticeable difference between the campus impact of a D1 athlete versus a D3 athlete with the D3 athlete having a greater impact on the social life of the small school (LAC).

MHC grad here…no sports was not a big deal at all. More something you did to stay healthy if you wanted to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The short answer is no, not in the least....academics dominate. I graduated from a Nescac and I have a DC at one currently and we were/are both on sports teams and whilst we took athletics seriously, everything was subordinate to academics. Socially the teams tend to be tight because of the amount of time spent with one another but every student has a diverse group of friends and the overall atmosphere is one of inclusivity.

Really interesting response, thank you. I totally believe that the athletes are scholars and that is most important to them, but I think the rest of your response may actually confirm my concern -- 40% of the student body has a group that they are tight with, and they are inclusive of others, but that could still mean that the non-athletes feel like they are tagging along with the nice athletes who are willing to include them in the group -- rather than having a group they feel 100% a part of and central to. Not because the athletes are doing anything wrong, but just because of the normal dynamics at play regarding who you spend the most time with and therefore get closest to.

My son is a 4.0uw/4.5w; 35 ACT at a private HS. He is an athlete that wants to play his sport in college. Academics are very important to him so a lot of the schools he is looking at are smaller SLACs or D3 and the privates- not big state schools.

Most of the kids that have been on the 'invite' official visits he's met have similar academic profiles to him. With schools that don't award scholarships and have high academic standards, the athletes have to meet a higher academic threshhold than is typical for your star basketball or football recruit to a big conference school.

This is all just a numbers game...how many sports does a school offer, which sports and how large is the student body at large.

If a SLAC has a football team it is basically the same size as the Alabama football team and needs to recruit the same number of players. A football team (when you include 2nd string recruits) is easily 100 kids right there. If the entire school is only 2000 kids, that is 5% of the student body.

If you add up all the various sports teams and think about the total rosters they are allowed (e.g., baseball I think has 35 roster spots for an entire team), the %age of the student population can get fairly significant.