I hope Schlissel and Hackett read the WSJ
With all the talk about imbalance between academics and athletics it appears Ivy league schools are trending toward wanting excellence in sports. Here is an interesting article in the WSJ today. What I found irritating is the article refers only to Stanford and Notre Dame in discussing excellence in academic reputation and athletics.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/how-harvard-became-the-harvard-of-footba…
November 21st, 2014 at 12:31 PM ^
Harvard's endowment is in the billions I think; it would not substantially change its bank balance by adding "media money" (and yes, "insane" would be the word for media money directed at public interest in Ivy football).
Did you actually READ the article? It describes the change in Harvard athletics as being driven by the school's policy to offer free rides to EVERY student with a family income less than $60,000. This is not a device to buy athletes, it is offered to every single student with that income profile.
Yeah sure money corrupts; in this case, however, the money is being used to offer all kinds of amazing students an opportunity at a debt-free education. At the "big boy" schools the football players get this kind of deal but not the future physicists, teachers, novelists, etc.
November 21st, 2014 at 12:14 PM ^
Is there really a university that holds all athletes to the same academic standards as regular students? There's absolutely no way Vandy baseball, Duke bball, UCLA bball, Texas football hold athletes to the same standards. Does it really matter anyways? They were recruited to play sports just as some students are recruited to the theatre or dance programs. The fact that they're all in knesiology is probably because it corresponds directly to their life passions and not because it's easier. The only problems I really have is if they are committing crimes ala Frank Clark. Who cares if they can't get a 27 on a subjective ACT?
November 21st, 2014 at 12:18 PM ^
I wouldn't say standardized tests are subjective...
November 21st, 2014 at 12:31 PM ^
Scores are determined objectively, but deciding what sorts of questions to put on the test is certainly subjective. Perhaps that's what he meant.
November 21st, 2014 at 1:35 PM ^
Referring to how certain minorities don't know terms like regatta and yacht in the analogies section forcing the TheCollegeBoard to switch to the 2400 format?
Must have worked wonders because they're switching back to the 1600 format haha. Standardized testing is the least subjective way of demonstrating aptitude for students. There is no better method currently. Unfortunately or not.
November 21st, 2014 at 12:23 PM ^
What I remember of the ACT is that all of the questions were pretty easy but they give you like 30 minutes to do a crap load of questions so it's essentially just measuring how fast you can comprehend stuff. I think GPA is a better indication.
November 21st, 2014 at 12:43 PM ^
Depends on the quality of the high school and curriculum, which is why there is a central NCAA clearing house.
4.0 from a high school like the Bloomfield Hills International Academy will carry much greater weight than a 4.0 from a regular public school or one of these private sports "academies", especially if your transcript is chock full of As from "independent studies".
Would put my money on a standardized test.
November 21st, 2014 at 4:15 PM ^
SAT/ACT don't add much value. A growing number of Admissions offices are skipping them altogether because they they aren't all that great at predicting college success.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/02/21/a-tellin…
November 21st, 2014 at 6:39 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 21st, 2014 at 2:18 PM ^
There's no effective standard for the difficulty of a high school curriculum and it'd be impossible to control for, despite our efforts the past couple decades. Yes, standardized tests aren't really indicative of anything other than someone's relative ability to work quickly and effectively, but this is as about as it gets. In an ideal world colleges would have an extensive interview process to actually determine how competent you are, but that of course would take way too much effort.
November 21st, 2014 at 4:29 PM ^
November 21st, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^
Beast Mode went to Cal Berkeley. I'd imagine all schools bend the admission standards for athletes.
November 21st, 2014 at 12:26 PM ^
Where the tragedy happens is where elements in or around that system start to cheat that kid of his opportunity (eg nyc or nd boosters taking tests for the kid).
Most of these kids start a lap down and sports help them be in a situation where they have the chance to catch up. Screw their sat scores.
November 21st, 2014 at 2:22 PM ^
So we're deciding who to drop a rescue rope to by how fast they can run around an oval? Why should elite academic institutions reject anyone? Admission certainly should not and would not be based on oval running ability if we're talking about doing some public good here.
November 22nd, 2014 at 9:34 AM ^
So then musicians and artists shouldn't be admitted based on their abilities?
Usually being good at "oval running," as you deride it, is the result of a lot of hard work, dedication and focus that many "top notch" academic students wouldn't be able to put themselves through.
I'm proud of my UM degrees. I majored in an academically rigorous major (math). I worked very hard and had many campus jobs. I still don't think I worked as hard as D1 athletes have to work.
November 21st, 2014 at 2:21 PM ^
November 21st, 2014 at 3:11 PM ^
is that there is currently no way to gage whether or not a kid has a "willingness to do the work." Kids are just getting admitted purely on their athletic ability
November 21st, 2014 at 4:09 PM ^
I would think coaches - who have met hundreds of recruits - can get a decent sense of who's going to go to class and who isn't. The ones who glaringly are only in it as a stepping stone to the NFL should be encouraged to go elsewhere.
There are non-athletes who don't end up making it in school for a variety of reasons: distractions, never had any freedom before, time management issues, etc...So while it's impossible to predict every success and failure, I would bet the coaches can spot the likely failures and avoid them. I don't know if they do that now or not.
November 21st, 2014 at 6:26 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 22nd, 2014 at 9:10 AM ^
You can attend class without going to class?
November 21st, 2014 at 12:31 PM ^
If it makes you feel better, Michigan was mentioned with Stanford as peer research institutions at my Northwestern employee orientation yesterday. So that's something.
November 21st, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
My son was lucky enough to receive an Academic Scholarship when he was attending Uof M. Because it was an "academic" scholarship we were concerned and questioned would there be a required GPA he must maintain in order to keep the scholarship. At that time we were told he must maintain a "C" average, which was the same requirement for any sports related scholarships. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
November 21st, 2014 at 1:48 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 21st, 2014 at 3:31 PM ^
We both went to Michigan at the same time, so I was a bit envious that I had to take out a bunch of loans while everything was free for her...But mostly I was just bitter that she inherited a hell of a lot more smarts than I did.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 21st, 2014 at 12:57 PM ^
I actually did like reading about Tim Murphy transforming Harvard football into a thing, if you will, by geting the school to provide the means to expand its recruiting footprint (with help from The Friends Of Harvard Football, of course), adding spring practices, getting investment in facilities and so on.
Also, the dude in the comments section that thought Tufts was in the Ivy League....ouch.
November 21st, 2014 at 1:13 PM ^
Standardized tests especially the MEAP are hot garbage. In the education sector, we spend 95 percent of the time teaching what's on the test instead of teaching what we should be teaching.
November 21st, 2014 at 1:53 PM ^
November 21st, 2014 at 6:16 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
November 21st, 2014 at 10:23 PM ^
You're full of crap. Really. You have no idea what you're talking about. Your Happy Gilmore name is apt.
What's going to be on the test does not fully cover the subject. It weights things not by importance or by relevancy, but simply by what's going to be covered on an exam.
So to have to "teach to a standardized test" means that lots of stuff that should be taught to give the student a more well-rounded background simply doesn't get taught.
November 22nd, 2014 at 9:38 AM ^
For one, we're teaching "test taking skills" which have no real-world application whatsoever. When you spend days or weeks practicing how to quickly answer standardized test questions, you're NOT teaching math, vocab, science, data interpretation.
November 21st, 2014 at 1:54 PM ^
Attempting to make this relevant to POTUM's plans seems a stretch. The Ivies have fudged their admissions standards significnatly more the last several years than they used to, and "need based" financial aid is routinely turned into scholies under the table, but it's still a very different model than the I-A model. As mentioned above, with the possible exception of Stanford, I-A admissions standard are, and will continue to be, clearinghouse minima. Schlissel doesn't mean changing that significantly when he talks about "balance."
Off topic FWIW, I think the deemphasis of athletics comes at a serious cost to campus life. I was at a campus bar for both tournament games this year and no one was watching. I had to ask one place (think downscale Ashley's or upscale Jug) to change just one TV away from the other games to Harvard/Cinnci; no one else was aware they were playing. We'll go to the game tomorrow because we need an excuse to drink in the morning, but sports are completely invisible even when sucessful here. As a result there is almost no reason for iteraction between studnets from schools and programs.
November 21st, 2014 at 3:01 PM ^
Sports can be a huge impetus to improving academics at a school as well. I think it goes widely overlooked but if you've been on the campus at Alabama lately you'd clearly see the impact that Saban has had on the school. He could arguably have done more for the academics at Alabama than anyone in the last 50 years. The amount of investment in school buildings and growth of academic programs spurred on by an improved and much more diverse applicant pool is astounding. Imagine the influx of dollars if Michigan was able to go to 50/50 instate out of state and the additional revenue that was generated and could be invested by the kids who are paying three times the instate tuition. Bama traditionally drew the large majority from instate--as recently as 2007 the incoming freshman class was 67% in state. 2013 it will be 40%. if you don't think that has enormous financial impact you're nuts. The key is do they squander the opportunity or do they turn it into a highly regarded research university. I guarantee you that there are kids applying to Michigan right now who are looking at a place like Bama as a fairly decent option and was not the case 5 or 10 years ago.
http://www.al.com/news/tuscaloosa/index.ssf/2014/07/is_the_university_o…
November 21st, 2014 at 3:14 PM ^
I was recruited to play soccer for UM varsity as a preferred walk on.
My father, mother, and uncle graduated from UM.
I scored a 27 on my ACT, 1260/1600 on SAT (low i know, but only took it once).
I was waitlisted by normal UM admissions, and after I told the soccer coach this - one day later I received my admittance letter.
Sports carry a lot of weight - and I was a SOCCER player.
/my cool story bro
November 21st, 2014 at 10:19 PM ^
And well-deserved it is! Go Blue!
November 22nd, 2014 at 12:58 AM ^
. . . shutout victory at Ohio State.
That's all I needed to hear. Well done!
You're going to talk to Devin about how to do this, right?
November 21st, 2014 at 3:50 PM ^
UM is an academic institution first and foremost. The entire athletic department is bloated and out of control. Hopefully Schlissel takes care of this and hires a coach with a low-ball offer. The last thing I want to see is UM paying top dollar for an old guy like Miles or another whiff like Hoke.
November 21st, 2014 at 8:03 PM ^
Welcome?