U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-26-2011, 10:59 AM
 
572 posts, read 1,071,470 times
Reputation: 422

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
.

So he was admitted not because sports helped him achieve academic excellence, but DESPITE NOT being academically excellent. Had I been the school, I would have admitted another one with the 4.00 GPA instead. If you ask me, your husband unfairly took the spot of an academically more deserving student.

But good thing I am not the school, right?
Well, in general, those that have 4.0 GPAs don't have the common sense God gave a rock. So I guess it is a good thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-26-2011, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Texas
42,253 posts, read 49,809,717 times
Reputation: 67083
FYI, there are several studies linking exercise and better thinking/better academic/intellectual performance. Just FYI.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 11:23 AM
 
20,793 posts, read 52,410,927 times
Reputation: 10476
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Bet you whatever you wish that those needy athletes on scholarships are not the best academic performers. The topic was whether playing sports will make a child perform better academically. I argue no. Many argue yes. Yet to be convinced.

What makes a child perform better academically are academic-related activities, reading being the most important of them all by many, many miles.



I do - for disadvantaged kids; but I wasn't talking about the disadvantaged kids.




I know. We are already talking about a very special category here that will only accept anything related to schooling if they are allowed to play lots of sports. That is a VERY special category, indeed. The discussion was not about this category.



I could launch into an entirley separate debate over the appropriateness of having such links between sports and institutions of higher learning but I will not. That is a completely different topic. I am con - but I know many people in this country are for. That's OK. This is a separate thread.




Sure. However, I personally do not see any reason why Harvard or whoever should differentiate based on athletics (unless you count commercial interests). In my opinion, institutions of higher learning should be completely separated from commercial models - but I know, they are not in this country.



Define interesting. IMO, colleges should attract highly intelligent, intellectually-inclined students. Not athletes. Colleges are institutions of higher education, not higher athleticism. Have separate institutions for the manifestation of such athletic talents - don't mix them with higher ed. The NFL is a good model. I would even argue the same for music. There should be music schools for that, not Harvard. Yes - colleges are largely about being book-ish.

Now, I do realize that by bringing up the sports issue I have just committed blasphemy in this culture. I do nevertheless maintain that an intense focus on sports is going to take away from academic pursuits. We all have 24 hours in the day - not more, not less.
I think you watch way too much ESPN. First, the VAST majority of athletes in high schools and colleges around the nation ARE the top students in those schools. The exception to that, of course, is plastered all over the news. You don't hear about basketball teams with average GPA's of 3.7's or Cross Country teams with 7 of the 8 kids with 4.0's in college. Being involved in athletics, arts, and other activities teach kids a lot of valuable skills that translate to the workplace, the number one skill is TIME MANAGEMENT. They also teach you how to work as a team member, another hugely important skill to learn. Not something you can learn sitting on the couch reading a book all day.

Colleges DO NOT want bookworms. They want people that can interact with other students, express their ideas, become leaders in and out of school, etc. They do NOT want a 4.0 with no outside activities. They will get declined faster then you think. Now, a 4.0 that is an involved student are sought after.

There was a boy that graduated with our son, BEYOND gifted, 4.0, scored 5's on 27 AP tests....could NOT hold a conversation with the kid because he had ZERO social skills. His parents wanted him to study, so he did, and that is all he did. He is STRUGGLING in college, not academically, but socially. He is in for a VERY long life because of this.

Academics are important, but in the eyes of college recruiters, a 3.7 with a good history of being involved in school and the community is far more prized then a 4.0 that sits and studies and nothing else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
.

So he was admitted not because sports helped him achieve academic excellence, but DESPITE NOT being academically excellent. Had I been the school, I would have admitted another one with the 4.00 GPA instead. If you ask me, your husband unfairly took the spot of an academically more deserving student.

But good thing I am not the school, right?
If you were the school you would have figured out by now that a 4.0 doesn't mean anything and that those 4.0's with no social skills do not represent your school well....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 11:31 AM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
32,131 posts, read 39,225,649 times
Reputation: 40590
Colleges look not only at academics and SAT/ACT scores but also extracurricular activities (which would include after school jobs).

They want a "well-rounded" individual, as was mentioned earlier. The thought, as it's been told to me, is that an applicant that has balanced activities with academics and maintained a fairly good GPA is likely to fit better in a college environment than one who has a 4.0 (or higher if AP scores are weighted) but has done no other activities. Note the sports don't have to be carried into college, let's face it, most high school athletes can't compete on a collegiate level but were able to balance the demands in high school.

They may have a point, they want people not drones.

The Service Academies are no different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 12:13 PM
 
572 posts, read 1,071,470 times
Reputation: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
.

So he was admitted not because sports helped him achieve academic excellence, but DESPITE NOT being academically excellent. Had I been the school, I would have admitted another one with the 4.00 GPA instead. If you ask me, your husband unfairly took the spot of an academically more deserving student.

But good thing I am not the school, right?
And FWIW, 3.75 is excellent. It's an A-/B+ average, that's nothing to sniff at, especially when my husband and I were both in AP and HP classes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 12:30 PM
 
4,044 posts, read 5,947,709 times
Reputation: 3819
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfgal View Post
I think you watch way too much ESPN. First, the VAST majority of athletes in high schools and colleges around the nation ARE the top students in those schools. The exception to that, of course, is plastered all over the news. You don't hear about basketball teams with average GPA's of 3.7's or Cross Country teams with 7 of the 8 kids with 4.0's in college. Being involved in athletics, arts, and other activities teach kids a lot of valuable skills that translate to the workplace, the number one skill is TIME MANAGEMENT. They also teach you how to work as a team member, another hugely important skill to learn. Not something you can learn sitting on the couch reading a book all day.

Colleges DO NOT want bookworms. They want people that can interact with other students, express their ideas, become leaders in and out of school, etc. They do NOT want a 4.0 with no outside activities. They will get declined faster then you think. Now, a 4.0 that is an involved student are sought after.

There was a boy that graduated with our son, BEYOND gifted, 4.0, scored 5's on 27 AP tests....could NOT hold a conversation with the kid because he had ZERO social skills. His parents wanted him to study, so he did, and that is all he did. He is STRUGGLING in college, not academically, but socially. He is in for a VERY long life because of this.

Academics are important, but in the eyes of college recruiters, a 3.7 with a good history of being involved in school and the community is far more prized then a 4.0 that sits and studies and nothing else.



If you were the school you would have figured out by now that a 4.0 doesn't mean anything and that those 4.0's with no social skills do not represent your school well....
Again, I read lots of hyperbole-s here.

You accuse me of looking at the exceptions to the rule but you turn around and assume that anyone who has excellent academic credentials will be a weirdo social hermit who can't hold a conversation? How come?

In my experience, it is children raised on "teams" who can't hold a real conversation. They ARE awfully good at small talk and social butterflying as adults, but are hardly good conversationalists; but I agree, THIS IS exactly what the corporate world is looking for.
They want to see the bee-hive syndrome - you learn to function well in teams, in large, organized, goal-oriented groups that maintain superficial and strictly functional relationships; but you grow up having no clue what a personal, one-to-one, intimate relationship looks like. You are hardly an individual - you have joys in a team, you "converse" in a team, you weep in a team.

Between raising kids on "team skills" and shuffling them from one grade to another every year, they never get to know what a real friendship feels like...or what a real conversation sounds like!

It is sad that we have to regiment our kids to build "team skills" early on so they will be ripe and ready for corporate work asap. As a human, I prize authentic social interaction much more than "team skills".
Teams are by definition impersonal and goal oriented, not humanizing. I would much rather have my child discuss a good book with a close friend than learn to become the perfect bee in the success-oriented bee-hive.

I do however understand your argument that colleges look for "team players". Personalized humans is not exactly what the markets need nowadays. After all, colleges are the mills supplying labor force to the market and not institutions of "higher learning".

That being said - team skills is hardly a good enough argument for me. If any college worth its salt around here will turn their nose up at my children's hopefully high academic performance simply because they show no signs of having built "good enough team skills", there are plenty of other colleges in the EU (where they have citizenship) who will be all too happy to take them without the bee-hive/team-based extra-curricular syndrome.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 12:36 PM
 
572 posts, read 1,071,470 times
Reputation: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Again, I read lots of hyperbole-s here.

You accuse me of looking at the exceptions to the rule but you turn around and assume that anyone who has excellent academic credentials will be a weirdo social hermit who can't hold a conversation? How come?

In my experience, it is children raised on "teams" who can't hold a real conversation. They ARE awfully good at small talk and social butterflying as adults, but are hardly good conversationalists; but I agree, THIS IS exactly what the corporate world is looking for.
They want to see the bee-hive syndrome - you learn to function well in teams, in large, organized, goal-oriented groups that maintain superficial and strictly functional relationships; but you grow up having no clue what a personal, one-to-one, intimate relationship looks like. You are hardly an individual - you have joys in a team, you "converse" in a team, you weep in a team.

Between raising kids on "team skills" and shuffling them from one grade to another every year, they never get to know what a real friendship feels like...or what a real conversation sounds like!

It is sad that we have to regiment our kids to build "team skills" early on so they will be ripe and ready for corporate work asap. As a human, I prize authentic social interaction much more than "team skills".
Teams are by definition impersonal and goal oriented, not humanizing. I would much rather have my child discuss a good book with a close friend than learn to become the perfect bee in the success-oriented bee-hive.

I do however understand your argument that personalized humans is not exactly what colleges look for nowadays. After all, they are the mills supplying labor force to the market.

That being said - team skills is hardly a good enough argument for me. If any college worth its salt around here will turn their nose up at my children's hopefully high academic performance simply because they show no signs of having built "good enough team skills", there are plenty of other colleges in the EU (where they have citizenship) who will be all too happy to take them without the bee-hive/team-based extra-curricular syndrome.
Your "experience" isn't the norm. Most children I know who are on teams actually are capable of making friends for life. I am still in contact with nearly every member of my athletic teams both in high school and in college. These are lifelong, deep relationships. I met my spouse on an athletic team. Most of the kids I was in AP/HP classes with, who were not involved beyond athletics had lots of issues going forth with their lives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 12:48 PM
 
4,044 posts, read 5,947,709 times
Reputation: 3819
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo61397 View Post
Your "experience" isn't the norm. Most children I know who are on teams actually are capable of making friends for life. I am still in contact with nearly every member of my athletic teams both in high school and in college. These are lifelong, deep relationships. I met my spouse on an athletic team. Most of the kids I was in AP/HP classes with, who were not involved beyond athletics had lots of issues going forth with their lives.
Go figure. So the only way to achieve self-fulfillment in this country is to be on a sports team. Everyone else is doomed. Now...there is something to be said about self-fulfilling prophecies, so I wouldn't put it past this cultural environment.

Allow me to the liberty to remain skeptical about the depth and quality of the bonds and conversations that can develop in a large team environment.

Otherwise, I believe we severely deviated from the initial topic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 02:10 PM
 
572 posts, read 1,071,470 times
Reputation: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Go figure. So the only way to achieve self-fulfillment in this country is to be on a sports team. Everyone else is doomed. Now...there is something to be said about self-fulfilling prophecies, so I wouldn't put it past this cultural environment.

Allow me to the liberty to remain skeptical about the depth and quality of the bonds and conversations that can develop in a large team environment.

Otherwise, I believe we severely deviated from the initial topic.
No, but I don't think you can be well rounded and be a pure academic. Having been a manager in a hiring position, I would not hire someone who had no interests outside of academics, and I would more likely hire a person who was active, whether it be an athlete or someone who participates in athletic endeavors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-26-2011, 02:21 PM
 
11,614 posts, read 19,729,031 times
Reputation: 12046
Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Bet you whatever you wish that those needy athletes on scholarships are not the best academic performers. The topic was whether playing sports will make a child perform better academically. I argue no. Many argue yes. Yet to be convinced.
If we are talking about needy athletes on scholarship at private schools I would say that athletics makes them MUCH better students then they would have been without sports. Not just better MUCH better. They may not be the top students in the school, but they are much better off than they would be had they not had a chance to attend a school where academics is stressed (compared to their inner city public schools).

Quote:
Originally Posted by syracusa View Post
Now, I do realize that by bringing up the sports issue I have just committed blasphemy in this culture. I do nevertheless maintain that an intense focus on sports is going to take away from academic pursuits. We all have 24 hours in the day - not more, not less.
This is precisely why a kid with a 3.9 who plays 3 sports is more impressive than a kid with a 4.0 who does nothing other than his schoolwork. Remember-everyone who applies to the top universities in this country is smart. They all got good grades, took hard classes and did well on their standardized tests. It is the other stuff that differentiates the ones that are worthy of admission and the ones that are not. Right now the top schools have way more qualified students than they can admit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top