PDA

View Full Version : Your Thoughts (Duke Academic Content)



ScreechTDX1847
10-30-2009, 03:45 PM
I have had a fairly heated debate with my manager in the last week about Duke's academic standards for its undergraduates and the academic status of its basketball team.

He feels that Duke should have to uphold the same standards for its athletes and that if they could not enroll in Duke as a student only then they should not be able to enroll because they are an athlete. We differ in our opinion fundamentally on this but I want the boards thoughts.

I have brought up that other schools' athletes have such deviations between the student body and the program itsel... but admonish that the standard deviation is most likely higher at Duke.

To me this is either something you are OK with or you are not. I don't think anyone here (that is honest with themselves) feel like the greater majority of our basketball athletes would make it as a legit applicant into Duke without being able to shoot the rock. As long as a school adheres to NCAA rules and policies I am OK with what any school does. However, my manager and other feel, at least from an ethical standpoint, that Duke should only bring in kids with the academics to make it. Your thoughts?

SMO
10-30-2009, 03:51 PM
I have had a fairly heated debate with my manager in the last week about Duke's academic standards for its undergraduates and the academic status of its basketball team.

He feels that Duke should have to uphold the same standards for its athletes and that if they could not enroll in Duke as a student only then they should not be able to enroll because they are an athlete. We differ in our opinion fundamentally on this but I want the boards thoughts.

I have brought up that other schools' athletes have such deviations between the student body and the program itsel... but admonish that the standard deviation is most likely higher at Duke.

To me this is either something you are OK with or you are not. I don't think anyone here (that is honest with themselves) feel like the greater majority of our basketball athletes would make it as a legit applicant into Duke without being able to shoot the rock. As long as a school adheres to NCAA rules and policies I am OK with what any school does. However, my manager and other feel, at least from an ethical standpoint, that Duke should only bring in kids with the academics to make it. Your thoughts?

Why limit the conversation to Duke? This debate could be had for any quality academic institution.

BlueDevilBaby
10-30-2009, 03:54 PM
He's entitled to his opinion. I for one, as a college athlete who was later told by her coach (why I do not know) that I probably would not have been admitted to my college on academics alone, am grateful sports gave me the opportunity to attend the fine institution I did.

ScreechTDX1847
10-30-2009, 03:54 PM
Why limit the conversation to Duke? This debate could be had for any quality academic institution.

I would say Duke stands apart as a private school and it is as elite as an Ivy League, which do require that of their athletes. Like I said, he concedes that other schools do it to a lesser degree but Duke's standards for admission are higher than some other quality institutions and that the deviation for Duke athlete is not similar.

DukeSean
10-30-2009, 04:09 PM
It all falls under making the student body a diverse whole (and I mean no undertones of race at all). Even with a reputation as a higher academic institution, I think it also makes sense to try to get a broad swath of students, including those who may not be as academically astute but make up for it in athletics. I have no problem with it - Duke would've been a terribly boring place if everyone was the same.

SMO
10-30-2009, 04:13 PM
I would say Duke stands apart as a private school and it is as elite as an Ivy League, which do require that of their athletes. Like I said, he concedes that other schools do it to a lesser degree but Duke's standards for admission are higher than some other quality institutions and that the deviation for Duke athlete is not similar.

Certainly there are other schools that are private, academically rigorous, and not Ivy League that make significant exceptions for athletes. I think anyone who wants to criticize Duke, and only Duke, on this measure has ulterior motives.

Oriole Way
10-30-2009, 04:16 PM
I feel pretty strongly about this, and I would vehemently disagree with your manager.

One goal of a successful university should be to have a diverse and excellent student body. One common misconception is that every student should be an excellent student from an academic standpoint. But what Duke University and many other elite academic institutions will tell you is that they try to produce a well-rounded student class, and not a student class of well-rounded students who all meet a certain baseline academic standard.

That last distinction is key, and it is important in defining why Duke basketball players and other athletes should not necessarily be held to the same academic standards as other Duke students. Duke basketball players possess a talent and skillset which distinguishes them from 99% of the general population. They help diversify the student body, and they have a chance to make a lucrative and/or respected career out of the talents and skills they possess. This isn't drastically different from a student who is medal-winning Olympian in fencing, or a virtuoso world-class violin player, or a business entrepeneur who has already founded a multi-million dollar business before enrolling at Duke. They each have talents which make them valuable additions to the student body. Their fellow students can learn from them, and they can learn from their fellow students, the university faculty, and the overall academic and living experience.

Furthermore, many Duke basketball players have a good chance to make significant earnings in the NBA, which puts them in a position to donate money and give back to the school. Like it or not, this is a factor for admission at every single university. Legacies and offspring of powerful donors receive preferential treatment when it comes to admission. This makes common sense, because a school needs funding to operate and expand. Why should a Duke basketball player, or any athlete in a major revenue sport, be any different?

Let's also not forget that a strong sports team helps school spirit, and can also be a major moneymaker for any school.

To me, it's a no-brainer to admit athletes to elite academic institutions. They need not be held to the same academic standards as other members of the student body.

Welcome2DaSlopes
10-30-2009, 04:17 PM
I think this belongs on the off-topic board.

juise
10-30-2009, 04:29 PM
I think this belongs on the off-topic board.


Why?

Does it pertain to Duke athletics? Yep.

I say continue with a thoughtful discussion (in which some people are contributing unique personal experience).

Devilsfan
10-30-2009, 05:13 PM
He (your manager) needs to understand the rigors of D-1 college revenue sports participation. It's a job! Couple that with the difficulties of even the easiest courses and/or professors at Duke and it certainly is a challenging task. This is an elite academic institution and we should praise our athletes that come here and succeed. I'm for giving more students a chance at receiving a Duke education. That said, I think more middle class Americans with outstanding academic records deserve scholarships from Duke. We should be proud of Americans who suceed at an early age and reward them first.

Devil in the Blue Dress
10-30-2009, 05:29 PM
One common stereotype about athletes, especially football players, is that they aren't as bright as the rest of the students. Those I knew while at Duke and since do not fit the "dumb jock" image. Some played to the image because it was expected, but that wasn't who they really are.

ScreechTDX1847
10-30-2009, 05:36 PM
He (your manager) needs to understand the rigors of D-1 college revenue sports participation. It's a job! Couple that with the difficulties of even the easiest courses and/or professors at Duke and it certainly is a challenging task. This is an elite academic institution and we should praise our athletes that come here and succeed. I'm for giving more students a chance at receiving a Duke education. That said, I think more middle class Americans with outstanding academic records deserve scholarships from Duke. We should be proud of Americans who suceed at an early age and reward them first.

To play devil's advocate here, he does understand and, in fact, was a high school football/basketball coach for about 10 years (he actually coached Ishmail Smith). He still maintains his position. He also hates Duke so his agenda is clear, but the point remains.

I agree with those here who don't think the academic standard should remain constant across all aspects of any university setting. He just argues that the difference between the Duke athlete and the difference between the Duke applicant is vast in most situations. He loves to cite Dockery.

loran16
10-30-2009, 05:47 PM
I think some people on this board have said most of what i think, but here's my go:

I think that we need to understand, to maintain the duke standard of athletics, the duke academic requirements are going to probably not work. That's a sad thing. But it's the true thing.

That said, we don't need to throw those out the window. I'm pretty sure for almost all bball players we already do this, though there are exceptions, but I would argue for a standard that is decently higher than the NCAA required academics but not quite as high as the duke standard.

So if We consider (i don't know the stats) a 90 GPA and a 1350 SAT the standard for ordinary students, then Duke should accept an 88 GPA and a 1200 SAT for its athletes.

I suspect a number of our athletes dont fit my criteria, but i think duke could maintain a good team with that criteria. I'm not saying that we should go to a particular level, but that we should clearly be higher in our requirements.

(If i recall, we didn't ever offer Bledsoe a scholarship because we were concerned about his academics)

hughgs
10-30-2009, 05:53 PM
To play devil's advocate here, he does understand and, in fact, was a high school football/basketball coach for about 10 years (he actually coached Ishmail Smith). He still maintains his position. He also hates Duke so his agenda is clear, but the point remains.

I agree with those here who don't think the academic standard should remain constant across all aspects of any university setting. He just argues that the difference between the Duke athlete and the difference between the Duke applicant is vast in most situations. He loves to cite Dockery.

If he's willing to make the statement that Duke is different then simply ask him for his data. Which other schools is he comparing Duke to? What are the academic differences in the other schools and how do those numbers compare against Duke's numbers? Etc., etc. Force his hand.

I'm willing to bet that he doesn't have any numbers just a gut feel. Force your manager to back up his statements and I'm willing to bet that it falls apart. Oh, and make sure he's using recent data.

And, if you can get him to admit that he's not really using any hard facts then you can probably get him admit that it's simply his impression and then you can tell him that it's obviously a stupid argument because there's no way to argue that his prejudiced bias is wrong without doing any research.

Lastly, don't get caught in the trap that you need to prove him wrong. Your manager is the one making the claim so he needs to prove that he's correct. Basic logic says that one can't prove a negative.

sagegrouse
10-30-2009, 06:01 PM
... that evaluates athletes (or artists or musicians) solely on their ability to do conventional academics?

The Ivy League schools all give preferences to athletes. In fact, there is an Ivy League minimum standard for athletes. [Looked for the link, but it may not be a published document.] Harvard made news in hoops by deciding to go by the Ivy League standard, which was lower than its previous standard.

The Ivy League does not allow "athletic" scholarships. But since all freshman can apply for needs-based scholarships, this is often a distinction without a difference. Moreover, most Ivy league admissions office will issue a letter of likely admission for athletes and other students at the request of a coach or someone else. I wonder how often nonathletes get such letters. Here's a quote for the Ivy League sports web site:

"Admissions Offices at each Ivy school may offer some athletic and other candidates a "likely" letter, which has the effect of a formal letter of admission provided the candidate continues to have a satisfactory secondary school experience. Coaches may initiate the requests for these letters, but only the office of admission can issue a 'likely' letter."

Any want to guess how many non-athletes get such letters?

I spoke with the father of a son recruited by UPenn in lacrosse. He and other athletic recruits met with an admissions dean who blurted out that the only reason they were considered for Penn was because they were athletes. His son, a good student, was so turned off he never submitted an application.

I also know a kid who played football at Division III Trinity College in Connecticut, a fine academic college. He was a good student, but the football coach asked him to re-take the SATs. He said: "I only get three exceptions a year. I am not wasting one on no damned tackle!"

sagegrouse

Brian913
10-30-2009, 07:05 PM
From a Harvard swim team recruiting website:

"MYTH: Last year’s valedictorian wasn’t admitted and he/she was smarter than I am, so I don’t stand a chance.

FACT: Maybe you offer qualities which the other person didn’t have – a superior creativity, leadership ability, motivation, athletic ability, etc. As noted previously, many factors besides intellect are considered. Harvard does not want, or have, a student body of “grinds” who are uncreative, plodding regurgitators of knowledge." http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/womswim/recruiting/myths.html

At Harvard (and all the major colleges) athletes, on average have lower academic scores:

",Reclaiming the Game, coauthored by Sarah Levin, former Princeton president William Bowen demonstrated that recruited Ivy League athletes had lower SAT and grade point average scores coming in than the rest of the student body and also underperformed in college.

The Ivy League recruiting process revolves around the Academic Index, or AI, which is calculated from the SAT scores and grade point average of each incoming student. The league mandates that the average AI of all recruited athletes at any school be no lower than one standard deviation from the AI of the class as a whole. The exact numbers are carefully guarded, but at Harvard, people close to the athletics program say that the average AI for the whole school has been around 225, which means that the athletics program has to have an average around 210. There is also an individual AI floor of 171 that no Ivy League athlete can ordinarily go below.

The way in which the scores are averaged means that a school can allow one team to have a lower AI as long as another team has a higher one to balance it out. Chuck Hughes, who was a goalie on the 1989 national championship team and later an admissions officer at Harvard, says that basketball, football, and hockey, both men’s and women’s teams, are generally below the athletic department’s average.."
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2009/10/11/brains_on_ice/

yancem
10-30-2009, 07:09 PM
Most of my thoughts have been already voiced but one thing to consider is that having quality athletic programs gives Duke and edge on the Ivy Leagues schools for some top academic applicants. I know that many students are looking for a well rounded college experience and while Duke can fairly well compete with the Ivy Leagues academically, they can't compete with Duke athletically. Now this isn't a big deal for many top students but it is for others.

Also, as an aside, I'm pretty the acceptance letters I received from my top college choices were based more on my extra curricular activities than my grades or SAT scores. I certainly am happy that the college admissions people don't think like the OP's manager.

bill brill
10-30-2009, 07:28 PM
coaches in the other 22 duke sports -- don't forget them -- get very few, if any at all, of what we would call exceptions. football and men's and women's basketball do. classes also are not isolated for athletes, although doubtless there are some which are heavy with them. duke leads the nation in football graduates. it has won 11 awards, including seven in which it graduated 100 percent. I made the ACC football tour more than 40 times until it was dropped. every year we voted on a variety of things, including best interviews. duke players won every single year. the acc always had a good percentage of lucid talkers, but there were some like clemson's refrigerator perry who couldn't complete a sentence. I would challenge any school to match duke basketball players likes grant hill, shane battier, jason williams and trajan langdon, specifically mentioning minority athletes. duke has won the ACC honor roll every year but one, and that went to new member boston college. amanda blumenherst, my favorite alltime duke athlete, was the national golfer of the year her first three seasons. she also won the national academic award three times. she is in the running for the ncaa's top female honor of 2009. she had an overall gpa of 3.82 with the sport that misses the highest percentage of class time. her boyfriend, home run slugger nate freiman, had a 3.84 gpa and coach sean mcnally told me he was the most brilliant person he knew. duke's demographics are now such that hundreds of valedictorians don't get in. the SAT average was beyond 1450 when they went to a new scoring formula. duke recruited the best high school decathalete in history this year. he was an "A" student from new mexico. becca ward, the national champion and olympic fencing medalist, also is a top student. the women's ncaa tennis champs last year also won the national academic award in their sport. these kids are well balanced, great athletes and great students, and tell the manager he should meet a few of them.

weezie
10-30-2009, 09:08 PM
He also hates Duke so his agenda is clear


Just curious...where did your boss go to college?

DukeUsul
10-30-2009, 10:18 PM
While one may say that the higher academic ability of the average Duke student raises the disparity between the average NCAA athlete and the average Duke student, I think it can easily be claimed that Duke's academic bar for athletes getting in is well higher than the average NCAA school. So I don't know how your manager can claim that the disparity between Duke athletes and Duke students is larger than at the typical NCAA school. There are some athletes that get into other schools that can't chew gum and count at the same time. Dockery may have been less academically successful than other students who applied to Duke, but he was obviously smart enough to graduate.

Show him Duke's APR numbers. Unless he's claiming that Duke's athletes are cheating, the success our athletes have at graduating - especially compared to the success other athletes have at other institutions - must mean that they're bright enough to be successful here.

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/apr2008/193_2008_apr.pdf

Wheat/"/"/"
10-30-2009, 10:30 PM
The Duke recruitment of John Wall seriously undermined any arguement that the Duke standard is anything more than "can he play?"

sagegrouse
10-30-2009, 10:41 PM
I have had a fairly heated debate with my manager in the last week about Duke's academic standards for its undergraduates and the academic status of its basketball team.

He feels that Duke should have to uphold the same standards for its athletes and that if they could not enroll in Duke as a student only then they should not be able to enroll because they are an athlete. We differ in our opinion fundamentally on this but I want the boards thoughts.




He also hates Duke so his agenda is clear, but the point remains.

Hey, Screech:

Can we offer you career counseling? If you went to Duke -- don't know -- then the career counselling center is a lifetime resource.

I have already responded that every major university in the country, including the Ivy League, give some preference to athletes. What is his problem? In any event, it is now your problem.

Surely some manager or executive frittering away his time on this Board can help poor Screech.

sagegrouse
'Having begun my 50th year as a card-carrying Duke fan [student ID thru alumni membership card], I have advanced to the point in my career where I don't supervise anyone, and I am fully supervised by nine grandchildren and several daughters.'

BD80
10-30-2009, 11:09 PM
The Duke recruitment of John Wall seriously undermined any arguement that the Duke standard is anything more than "can he play?"

Really? I thought academics were never a question. His connection to the Cliftons was an issue, one that kicked the heels to the curb. The heels did try to get into the Wall climb, but Clifton pushed them off. Does that undermine unc claims of academic standards?

duketaylor
10-30-2009, 11:29 PM
As a former Duke athlete (not FDA, don't even go there;) who was admitted on academics, not ability, I think I have a pretty unique experience behind me, plus I roomed with two hoops players for a bit.
I completely agree with Mr Brill's post that nearly anybody would just be floored by the ability for nearly all Duke athletes to be more than able to express themselves, even Sean Dockery and Gene Banks could easily hold their own. Back in the day, and I don't think it's changed much, if any, admissions would look at athletes to determine if they were able to graduate with their class. At Duke, you had to be on-schedule to graduate with your class or you weren't eligible to compete-this is not an NCAA rule or ACC rule but one imposed by Duke. I fell behind one semester and had to attend summer classes to stay eligible. That's when I met Doug McNeely and Vince Taylor, two of the nicest and respectful guys I know. At the time Vince was playing for the Knicks and stayed with us during part of the summer on Central. They were anything but "dumb-jock" guys, well-mannered, well-spoken and a lot of fun to be around.
I've met dozens of Duke athletes over the years and have yet to meet one that didn't make me feel proud to be a Duke grad. I had lunch with Mark Alarie two years ago, great guy; he was in business with one of my former teammates. I could go on and on; Duke admissions does an awesome job in deciding which athletes can succeed in school as Mr. Brill pointed out. As far as I can recall, the only hoops players who've not graduated are those who transferred or left early for the NBA, so nearly all have graduated who stayed 4 years. Duke does an excellent job in making sure everyone is on-track for their degree; it used to be athletes had a higher grad rate than the student body, something like 95% vs. 93%. Anyone know if that's still accurate? That'd be ammo enough right there, IMO. Duke's all about diversity and there's so much more of that on campus now than 25 years ago it's simply amazing.

Wheat/"/"/"
10-30-2009, 11:34 PM
To my knowledge UNC never seriously recuited Wall, -gave no offer- despite what the fan base hoped for. Mainly because Roy refused to deal, not the Cliftons. As I understood it, Wall liked UNC and got no love.

It seems he squeaked by (http://www.sportingnews.com/college-basketball/article/2009-04-22/john-wall-unsure-if-he-has-scores-qualify)with his qualifying scores.

I should have added Duke is not alone with the "can he play" standard. And do try and get the best people/athletes they can, as long as they are 5 stars.

duketaylor
10-30-2009, 11:46 PM
The whole Wall saga was very weird, it was like "Make me a Deal" from what I've heard. One and done and who wanted to play (and pay). Played Duke to up the ante. Glad he won't don our uni.

BD80
10-31-2009, 12:14 AM
To my knowledge UNC never seriously recuited Wall, -gave no offer- despite what the fan base hoped for. Mainly because Roy refused to deal, not the Cliftons. As I understood it, Wall liked UNC and got no love.

It seems he squeaked by (http://www.sportingnews.com/college-basketball/article/2009-04-22/john-wall-unsure-if-he-has-scores-qualify)with his qualifying scores.

I should have added Duke is not alone with the "can he play" standard. And do try and get the best people/athletes they can, as long as they are 5 stars.

You should admit that unc will apply the "can he play" standard, but let's not go down that road.

My recollection was that academically, Wall was fine. The article does not indicate that he "squeaked" by, just that he didn't yet know the score from his recent exam. Maybe I should read it again.

I do recall reading Clifton quoted as saying he refused to deal with ol' roy.

Jim3k
10-31-2009, 12:51 AM
I don't think anyone here can say for certain that ever Duke offered Wall a scholarship. We do know that he had discussions with Coach, but it is not clear that a scholarship offer was ever made. Remember all the missed appointments Wall didn't make? Was this 'recruiting?" Or was this counseling? Or was K imposing conditions on Wall before he would be considered?

JaMarcus Russell
10-31-2009, 01:28 AM
Wheat, how many "Can he play?" offers has Duke made besides to John Wall? There have been a couple of others, but the number is smaller than just about any D-1 school besides maybe Stanford and/or Vandy.

Devilsfan
10-31-2009, 08:45 AM
We did afford Mr. Wall the best chance of having a suceesful life outside of basketball, but others close to him advised him differently. And who knows maybe he just wanted to get away, having spent his entire life in the triangle. I say good luck Mr. Wall.

formerdukeathlete
10-31-2009, 11:48 AM
From a Harvard swim team recruiting website:

"MYTH: Last year’s valedictorian wasn’t admitted and he/she was smarter than I am, so I don’t stand a chance.

FACT: Maybe you offer qualities which the other person didn’t have – a superior creativity, leadership ability, motivation, athletic ability, etc. As noted previously, many factors besides intellect are considered. Harvard does not want, or have, a student body of “grinds” who are uncreative, plodding regurgitators of knowledge." http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/womswim/recruiting/myths.html

At Harvard (and all the major colleges) athletes, on average have lower academic scores:

",Reclaiming the Game, coauthored by Sarah Levin, former Princeton president William Bowen demonstrated that recruited Ivy League athletes had lower SAT and grade point average scores coming in than the rest of the student body and also underperformed in college.

The Ivy League recruiting process revolves around the Academic Index, or AI, which is calculated from the SAT scores and grade point average of each incoming student. The league mandates that the average AI of all recruited athletes at any school be no lower than one standard deviation from the AI of the class as a whole. The exact numbers are carefully guarded, but at Harvard, people close to the athletics program say that the average AI for the whole school has been around 225, which means that the athletics program has to have an average around 210. There is also an individual AI floor of 171 that no Ivy League athlete can ordinarily go below.

The way in which the scores are averaged means that a school can allow one team to have a lower AI as long as another team has a higher one to balance it out. Chuck Hughes, who was a goalie on the 1989 national championship team and later an admissions officer at Harvard, says that basketball, football, and hockey, both men’s and women’s teams, are generally below the athletic department’s average.."
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/magazine/articles/2009/10/11/brains_on_ice/

I have posted the link before re Ivy Football admissions. There is a specific formula about where the 30 preferred Football admits each year may rank academically. Any number of the 30 admits may be within 1 standard deviation - where the student athletes of the entire department overall must average. A set number, smaller than 30, may fall within 1 and 1.5 standard deviations; a smaller number may fall within 1.5 and 2; an even smaller number between 2 and 2.5 and two, i believe may fall within 2.5 and the Ivy League minimum.

Based on my experience with prospective Duke students also recruited by Ivy schools for athletics, virtually every recruit is within 1 standard deviation. a couple of kids went to Duke on Football scholarships who were recruited by Harvard who were within 1 standard deviation. Swimmers, track, golf, tennis, were well within 1 standard deviation.

In the mid 70s I can tell you two varsity teams (mens and womens) at Duke with large squads whose team members SAT scores as reported to the NCAA were higher than the student population as a whole.

The Ivy League min. works out to about a 1060 math verbal with a 3.3 GPA. Football can take just a couple each year at this level, Basketball and Hockey are less encumbered, may take more, have smaller squads.

Stanford will go down to 1000 math verbal for Football and Basketball with a decent GPA, but they wont fill out their squads with that break point. Averages for Stanford Football reportedly exceed 1200 math verbal Football and 1100 Basketball.

Recruited student athletes at Harvard are 18% of the student body.

At Duke its just under 10%.

sagegrouse
10-31-2009, 02:10 PM
Recruited student athletes at Harvard are 18% of the student body.

At Duke its just under 10%.

Harvard has an undergraduate enrollment of 6,678. 18% of this figure is 1,202. Are you saying that Harvard has over 1,200 "recruited" athletes in its undergraduate student body?

I would be interested in the breakdown by sport.

sagegrouse

formerdukeathlete
10-31-2009, 05:43 PM
Harvard has an undergraduate enrollment of 6,678. 18% of this figure is 1,202. Are you saying that Harvard has over 1,200 "recruited" athletes in its undergraduate student body?

I would be interested in the breakdown by sport.

sagegrouse

Harvard fields 40 varsity teams, including 4 crew teams, each with larger rosters. 18% is the percentage of undergrads who are varsity athletes. The percentage who were recruited, had contact with varsity coaches, received some acknowledgement, preference in the admission process is higher. 30 preferred Football admits each year, but over time, x percentage quit, decline ot go out for another year.

http://gocrimson.com/landing/index

The actual percentage of kids receiving admissions preferences at Harvard due to potential to compete at the varsity level is I have been told closer to 25%.

Duke by comparison fields 20 varsity teams - one half the number by Harvard. The percentages at Duke of kids who receive some preference in admissions also exceed the 9 plus percent who are actual, current varsity team members. Outside of Football and Basketball, as Bill Brill pointed out, the preferences are relatively slight. Eg., means someone with top 2% of the class grades and 1450s gets in for sure, rather than having a one in 5 shot. Morgan Tressel who was going to come to Duke on a golf scholarship but chose to turn pro instead had 1500 plus math verbal.

hughgs
10-31-2009, 07:59 PM
Harvard fields 40 varsity teams, including 4 crew teams, each with larger rosters. 18% is the percentage of undergrads who are varsity athletes. The percentage who were recruited, had contact with varsity coaches, received some acknowledgement, preference in the admission process is higher. 30 preferred Football admits each year, but over time, x percentage quit, decline ot go out for another year.

http://gocrimson.com/landing/index

The actual percentage of kids receiving admissions preferences at Harvard due to potential to compete at the varsity level is I have been told closer to 25%.

Duke by comparison fields 20 varsity teams - one half the number by Harvard. The percentages at Duke of kids who receive some preference in admissions also exceed the 9 plus percent who are actual, current varsity team members. Outside of Football and Basketball, as Bill Brill pointed out, the preferences are relatively slight. Eg., means someone with top 2% of the class grades and 1450s gets in for sure, rather than having a one in 5 shot. Morgan Tressel who was going to come to Duke on a golf scholarship but chose to turn pro instead had 1500 plus math verbal.

I hate to admit that FDA is correct but here's the Harvard website with actual numbers rather than the usual hand-waving:

http://www.gocrimson.com/information/recruiting/index

Wheat/"/"/"
10-31-2009, 08:07 PM
You should admit that unc will apply the "can he play" standard, but let's not go down that road.

My recollection was that academically, Wall was fine. The article does not indicate that he "squeaked" by, just that he didn't yet know the score from his recent exam. Maybe I should read it again.

I do recall reading Clifton quoted as saying he refused to deal with ol' roy.


I'll freely admit UNC is a "can he play" school too...and so is everybody else, including Duke. Both Duke and UNC are among schools who have higher standards when it comes to the quality of the kids they go after,but as far as academics go, if he is big time player and can qualify, everyone will look at him.

The truth is if a big time kid can get that minimum score, everyone at the top level of Div 1 will recruit him. There is too much money at stake, and lets face it, these kids are a schools cash cow.

There was some reason Roy refused to get invoved. He knew something or there was a real personality conflict somewhere. Clifton can say what he wants, but it was Roy who didn't play the game with Wall.

As for his grades, I really don't know anything past what I read. There were other articles I saw somewhere that questioned his academics, but at any rate I guess it's moot because he passed.

Those basketball factory high schools are suspect anyways in my book.

Duketaylor- I agree the whole Wall recruitment was odd concerning Duke, at the time Duke started to get involved, it was common knowledge that UNC wasn't interested while Wall was saying UNC was on his list. As good as he seems to be, you'd think that would have sent up red flags all over the place.

What's the over/under for OJ Mayo type stories on Wall linked on this board within the next two years?

My guess is Duke dodged a bullet with him, good riddence.

formerdukeathlete
10-31-2009, 08:22 PM
I hate to admit that FDA is correct but here's the Harvard website with actual numbers rather than the usual hand-waving:

http://www.gocrimson.com/information/recruiting/index

"Harvard fields 41 varsity teams, the most among the nation's NCAA Division I colleges and universities. Nearly 1,500 Harvard undergraduates - or 20 percent of the student body - participate in intercollegiate athletics."

So the numbers are actually higher of the percentages of male and female students who are active roster members of varsity teams.

In the 1960s, to become more like Harvard, Duke attacked athletics, hired a mediocre Football coach from a lower division....kind of does not make sense, does it?...given the large role athletics play at Harvard.

Nan's attack on work hard play hard - admins at Dartmouth have resisted. Duke in Durham, kind of like Dartmouth in the middle of no where, Hanover. To compete for students with Columbia, Penn, Harvard, which are in major metro areas, there better be an active, fun student life thing going on.

One of the encouraging things in the strat. plan for Athletics at Duke - considering adding more varsity teams at Duke.

mgtr
10-31-2009, 09:34 PM
I think the diversity and breadth concepts go well beyond athletics. I was accepted into Stanford with a good, not great, high school record (3.5). I had good, not great SAT scores (1300s). But I had lots of extracurricular activities -- athletics (intramural level), drama, science clubs, photo clubs, social activities, music. After a few years I became fairly good friends with an assistant director of admissions. He looked at my file, and said that I couldn't have gotten in on academics alone, but they liked that I was well rounded and done a lot of other things.
I did OK at Stanford and did graduate with a degree in economics. I was in classes with some athletes, and they were not total clunkers all.
So, I don't accept that good schools make special exemptions for athletes and athletes alone. Yes, some athletes get a break, but other students who are not athletes also get some breaks.

Sixthman
10-31-2009, 09:54 PM
Yes, the original post is centered around a question based on a false premise. Duke, like most schools, does not admit people base solely on "academics" or standardized test scores and in fact routinely denies admission to people with better academic and SAT scores in favor of people with talents in a broad variety of areas. if I am not mistaken, the MAJORITY of high school valedictorians who applied to Duke last year (2008) were not admitted.

duketaylor
11-01-2009, 02:01 AM
"the MAJORITY of high school valedictorians who applied to Duke last year (2008) were not admitted."
That jives with what admissions told us on our visit; they look at several things, and simply being Valedictorian is nice but not that big to them on their scale. They do look at, given the classes offered in your HS, did you take the most demanding classes, did you perform community service, did you play sports or perform in the arts? It's not just academic numbers.
Quick case-in-point that may apply here. My daughter, a HS junior taking a full IB load, has a girl in her class who is currently #1. She has opted to not take the hardest calculus course offered due to fear she might make a B and jeopardize her class rank, so she is failing to take the most difficult classes, may rank ahead of my daughter at year's end and Duke may, I repeat, may, consider her over the possible Valedictorian. Obviously several other variables apply, but I can see why this might happen.
Duke does not simply want "bookworms," but rather want a very diverse student body that is very, very well-rounded. I was really impressed when we visited last month; Duke has changed immeasurably since this old-fart attended.

Kfanarmy
11-01-2009, 02:29 AM
... I'm pretty sure for almost all bball players we already do this, though there are exceptions, but I would argue for a standard that is decently higher than the NCAA required academics but not quite as high as the duke standard.

This quote is a classic and I think it validates the unnamed manager's position. It isn't a standard if some people don't have to meet it. Whatever the lowest score accepted is for an incoming student is the standard. Some without advantage (athlete, wealthy parent, connected parent etc...) are competing for placement and that competition makes them exceed the standard...but the guy who sets the low mark represents the university's intellectual standard as a standard is something you must meet.

I find the argument for diversity to be a bit awkward. Ultimately, it implies having less capable students is good for a university's overall experience...that is certainly not what I read on this board all the time as BB fans trumpet their intellect in comparison to public universitys...and I don't buy it. I wholeheartedly believe athletes contribute to a diverse environment, but I don't buy that a less capable student but better basketball player is better for diversity than a more capable student who is a less talented player.

The diversity argument doesn't have merit. If you want to say winning and the $ is worth it, OK, just say it.

Duketaylors argument about graduation rates of recruited athletes also misses the mark. If you accept that student athletes may not meet the qualifications of the general population but they all graduate, you are left with one of two possibilities: the classes are easier for those athletes or the classes are easier for the general population than they should be to enable the underqualified admittees to graduate. Again that information supports the unnamed managers argument.

DukeSean
11-01-2009, 02:55 AM
I find the argument for diversity to be a bit awkward. Ultimately, it implies having less capable students is good for a university's overall experience...that is certainly not what I read on this board all the time as BB fans trumpet their intellect in comparison to public universitys...and I don't buy it. I wholeheartedly believe athletes contribute to a diverse environment, but I don't buy that a less capable student but better basketball player is better for diversity than a more capable student who is a less talented player.

The diversity argument doesn't have merit. If you want to say winning and the $ is worth it, OK, just say it.


I am pretty sure I didn't get into Duke on my academics alone. I'm not the smartest guy, nor the best student, but I was doing all sorts of stuff in addition to high school classwork. I was definitely a less capable student than much of the Duke student body (not to say I'm a moron), but I'm pretty sure if you talk to the people who knew me in school, they'd say I contributed to the diversity there (not talking race) and brought my own uniqueness to the table.

Also, diversity of experience is just as important as diversity of student body, and if certain basketball players add to the diversity of the Duke experience, then that's good too. Imagine if Duke didn't have the tradition and excellence of our basketball team - the loss of something that unique certainly detracts from the diversity of experience one would get at Duke.

Kfanarmy
11-01-2009, 03:14 AM
I am pretty sure I didn't get into Duke on my academics alone. I'm not the smartest guy, nor the best student, but I was doing all sorts of stuff in addition to high school classwork. I was definitely a less capable student than much of the Duke student body (not to say I'm a moron), but I'm pretty sure if you talk to the people who knew me in school, they'd say I contributed to the diversity there (not talking race) and brought my own uniqueness to the table.

Also, diversity of experience is just as important as diversity of student body, and if certain basketball players add to the diversity of the Duke experience, then that's good too. Imagine if Duke didn't have the tradition and excellence of our basketball team - the loss of something that unique certainly detracts from the diversity of experience one would get at Duke.

Every student at a university brings uniqueness. The point of discussion wasn't each individual's unique value, but whether or not a university's admission standards should be lowered to get athletes. My point is simply that all other things being equal between two athletes diversity is not served any more by accepting the better player with lower academic standards than by accepting the worse player with higher academic standards. If someone was competing for the last admission with you who had a similar background, had similar extracurricular interests and work ethic, but who was a little less of a player but more capable academically, what would your argument be for getting into school when that person didn't?

FireOgilvie
11-01-2009, 04:01 AM
Every student at a university brings uniqueness. The point of discussion wasn't each individual's unique value, but whether or not a university's admission standards should be lowered to get athletes. My point is simply that all other things being equal between two athletes diversity is not served any more by accepting the better player with lower academic standards than by accepting the worse player with higher academic standards. If someone was competing for the last admission with you who had a similar background, had similar extracurricular interests and work ethic, but who was a little less of a player but more capable academically, what would your argument be for getting into school when that person didn't?

Let's say you have those two guys you mentioned. One is a possible NBA prospect, and one is going to be a decent college player, but that's about it. The coach evaluating them knows that both have the personality that he is looking for. The NBA prospect is undoubtedly going to represent his school in a positive manner, while giving credit to the university he graduated from (after coming back and taking summer classes) for giving him a great education. He had a below average GPA. The decent player is going to graduate with an average GPA, and will never represent his university in a highly public manner. Like the other recruit, he is not going to set the curve in any of his classes. It's pretty obvious to me which one you offer the scholarship to in this situation. Ideally, you go for the recruits that have talent and intelligence, and will work hard and represent the university in a positive manner. I feel that Coach K has been more successful than any other coach in the country at this.

Also, extraordinary and unique athletic talent brings a great deal of diversity to a university. How many people at small New England liberal arts schools can say they are friends with several high school or college All-American athletes? It takes an incredible amount of hard work, dedication, and focus to achieve that status. I know several people who had great success at Duke (academically and athletically) despite what some would consider less-than-acceptable academic credentials coming out of high school. I also know a few people who failed out despite very high academic credentials, but due to a lack of desire and focus.

Kfanarmy
11-01-2009, 08:34 PM
Let's say you have those two guys you mentioned. One is a possible NBA prospect, and one is going to be a decent college player, but that's about it. The coach evaluating them knows that both have the personality that he is looking for. The NBA prospect is undoubtedly going to represent his school in a positive manner, while giving credit to the university he graduated from (after coming back and taking summer classes) for giving him a great education. He had a below average GPA. The decent player is going to graduate with an average GPA, and will never represent his university in a highly public manner. Like the other recruit, he is not going to set the curve in any of his classes. It's pretty obvious to me which one you offer the scholarship to in this situation. Ideally, you go for the recruits that have talent and intelligence, and will work hard and represent the university in a positive manner. I feel that Coach K has been more successful than any other coach in the country at this.

Also, extraordinary and unique athletic talent brings a great deal of diversity to a university. How many people at small New England liberal arts schools can say they are friends with several high school or college All-American athletes? It takes an incredible amount of hard work, dedication, and focus to achieve that status. I know several people who had great success at Duke (academically and athletically) despite what some would consider less-than-acceptable academic credentials coming out of high school. I also know a few people who failed out despite very high academic credentials, but due to a lack of desire and focus.



I have no issue with an argument that says greater athletic achievement = greater university exposure + more BB money + more alum money. My point was simply that the diversity argument is flimsy. I think that yours is a potentially valid argument if it can be shown that greater athletic achievement yields more $ and influence than the increase in academic achievement (research, alum performance, etc) would yield if standards were solely dependant upon competition for admission...which would mean a higher standard.

Your second point seems to suggest that degree of athletic performance is a measure of diversity...If you believe that having Kyle Singler at the university if he weren't quite as good a BB player, even if he worked as hard, would somehow hurt the university's diversity. I can accept your point of view...but it suggests your value of others depends upon their athletic prowess.


I'm not sure that this is extremely important to most graduates: "How many people at small New England liberal arts schools can say they are friends with several high school or college All-American athletes?"

formerdukeathlete
11-02-2009, 07:56 AM
I have no issue with an argument that says greater athletic achievement = greater university exposure + more BB money + more alum money. My point was simply that the diversity argument is flimsy. I think that yours is a potentially valid argument if it can be shown that greater athletic achievement yields more $ and influence than the increase in academic achievement (research, alum performance, etc) would yield if standards were solely dependant upon competition for admission...which would mean a higher standard.

Your second point seems to suggest that degree of athletic performance is a measure of diversity...If you believe that having Kyle Singler at the university if he weren't quite as good a BB player, even if he worked as hard, would somehow hurt the university's diversity. I can accept your point of view...but it suggests your value of others depends upon their athletic prowess.


I'm not sure that this is extremely important to most graduates: "How many people at small New England liberal arts schools can say they are friends with several high school or college All-American athletes?"

I think of this more in the context of my background interviewing for Duke in New England, where we competed for kids also admitted to the Ivy League.

Landing the 1500s math verbal prep school kid on the fence among Penn, Dartmouth, Duke - whether that student is a recruited student athlete, or interested in watching games in Cameron - Athletics at Duke are important factors.

Bob Steel had something in mind about Duke Athletics when he picked Brodhead to be President. At Goldman, Steel worked with a number of former Ivy athletes, witnessing how well they did in life, and Brodhead was very involved in the academic development of student athletes at Yale. So much so that a Yale student athlete award was named after him.

"The men's cross country team and the men's fencing team both earned the Brodhead Award for highest team grade point average..........The Brodhead Award is named in honor of Richard H. Brodhead '68, Ph.D. '72, who served as Dean of Yale College from 1993 through 2004 and was on the faculty of the department of English for more than 30 years."

http://www.yalebulldogs.com/sports/w-fenc/spec-rel/052409aaa.html

Here's hoping we continue to rebound, improve in US News and in relative yields of applicants also admitted by the Ivies, as well as MIT, Cal Tech and Stanford. Support of Duke Athletic programs and campus social life will be key.
btw, elite small New England colleges also recruit student athletes and offer some preference in the admissions process, for pretty much the same reasons as the Ivies.

Brian913
11-02-2009, 08:45 AM
Here's a link to an article about the athletic admission policies of New England LACs and HYP. The chart below shows the number of special athlete admits per school. This doesn't include the athletes who would be admitted without special consideration.

http://www.ephblog.com/archives/images/its_all_about_who_gets_in.htm



School Frosh Sports Ath. Slots % of Frosh Slots/Sp.

Princeton 1160 37 265 23 7.2
Yale 1296 38 236 18 6.2
Harvard 1650 41 250 15 6.1
Bates 582 30 75 13 2.5
Bowdoin 452 32 79 18 2.5
Colby 488 32 79 16 2.5
Hamilton 465 28 69 15 2.5
Middlebur 513 30 75 15 2.5
Trinity 493 29 71 14 2.5
Tufts 1161 30 75 7 2.5
Amherst 430 27 66 15 2.4
Wesleyan 722 29 66 9 2.3
Williams 539 33 66 12 2.0

sagegrouse
11-02-2009, 09:18 AM
Here's a link to an article about the athletic admission policies of New England LACs and HYP. The chart below shows the number of special athlete admits per school. This doesn't include the athletes who would be admitted without special consideration.

http://www.ephblog.com/archives/images/its_all_about_who_gets_in.htm

School Frosh Sports Ath. Slots % of Frosh Slots/Sp.

Princeton 1160 37 265 23 7.2
Yale 1296 38 236 18 6.2
Harvard 1650 41 250 15 6.1
Bates 582 30 75 13 2.5
Bowdoin 452 32 79 18 2.5
Colby 488 32 79 16 2.5
Hamilton 465 28 69 15 2.5
Middlebur 513 30 75 15 2.5
Trinity 493 29 71 14 2.5
Tufts 1161 30 75 7 2.5
Amherst 430 27 66 15 2.4
Wesleyan 722 29 66 9 2.3
Williams 539 33 66 12 2.0

Great stuff, Brian, but I need some interpretation of what I am reading. The first number is no. of freshmen. The second is the number of sports played, I guess. What about the rest? What does it mean, esp. in relation to FDA's assertions?

BTW and as a tip, when you hit "Quote" to reply, the table magically shows up in perfect format.

sagegrouse

Kfanarmy
11-02-2009, 10:33 AM
I have had a fairly heated debate with my manager in the last week about Duke's academic standards for its undergraduates and the academic status of its basketball team.

He feels that Duke ...

In the end, it would seem this is an argument where people should simply agree to disagree. It is about opinion and what the two of you value, more and less.

What I've read so far, and agree with, is that folks feel that if schools are going to participate in NCAA athletics, they are going to try to win. Winning and competing at the highest levels, in whatever you do has its own rewards in developing winning traditions for individuals and the school, in intangible personal development, in marketing the school "brand", in gaining financial support for programs, etc. At the same time it enhances the college experience to be able to attend and be associated with the best in athletic competition. To that end admitting the best athletes, who've often spent a lot of their time travelling and practicing to the detriment of academics, may require accepting some compromise in admission standards. Quite often, athletes' academic abilities are not reflected by their preparation for college and they both outperform and underperform in comparison to admission peers.

Brian913
11-02-2009, 12:51 PM
Great stuff, Brian, but I need some interpretation of what I am reading. The first number is no. of freshmen. The second is the number of sports played, I guess. What about the rest? What does it mean, esp. in relation to FDA's assertions?

BTW and as a tip, when you hit "Quote" to reply, the table magically shows up in perfect format.

sagegrouse

The columns are the school/number of freshman/number of sports/number of athletic admission slots/per cent of athletic slots in freshman class/number of spots per sport.

formerdukeathlete
11-02-2009, 01:05 PM
Great stuff, Brian, but I need some interpretation of what I am reading. The first number is no. of freshmen. The second is the number of sports played, I guess. What about the rest? What does it mean, esp. in relation to FDA's assertions?

BTW and as a tip, when you hit "Quote" to reply, the table magically shows up in perfect format.

sagegrouse

to quote from the linked article, "the upper Ivy group’s combined percentage of priority-listed athletes relative to total enrollment is 18%."

The data listed for Harvard seems low on a percentage basis, but it may mean that any athlete applying to Harvard above a break-point such as 1500 was not included as a priority admit. This itself would be incorrect, since in the class entering in the fall of 2009, a Harvard admissions officer told me that they could have filled out the class entirely with applicants who had 1600 math varbal.

What of my assertions do not seem obviously true to you? That Harvard, Princeton, Yale have more athletic admits than Duke as a percentage of the student body? Or, do you disagree with my assertion that Knight's hiring Harp and cutting the budget for Duke Football hurt rather than helped Duke's prospects in recruiting top students. (Look how we took off with K's success in Basketball). Or do you agree with Nan's attack on work hard play hard, and disagree with my assertion that this has hurt Duke in recruiting top students also admitted to Ivy schools?

Brian913
11-02-2009, 01:17 PM
to quote from the linked article, "the upper Ivy group’s combined percentage of priority-listed athletes relative to total enrollment is 18%."

The data listed for Harvard seems low on a percentage basis, but it may mean that any athlete applying to Harvard above a break-point such as 1500 was not included as a priority admit. This itself would be incorrect, since in the class entering in the fall of 2009, a Harvard admissions officer told me that they could have filled out the class entirely with applicants who had 1600 math varbal.

What of my assertions do not seem obviously true to you? That Harvard, Princeton, Yale have more athletic admits than Duke as a percentage of the student body? Or, do you disagree with my assertion that Knight's hiring Harp and cutting the budget for Duke Football hurt rather than helped Duke's prospects in recruiting top students. (Look how we took off with K's success in Basketball). Or do you agree with Nan's attack on work hard play hard, and disagree with my assertion that this has hurt Duke in recruiting top students also admitted to Ivy schools?

The number of athletic admits is in addition to those athletes admitted as regular academic admits. From the cited article:

"Critics may argue that if “protects,” or ultra high band admits (roughly 1450-1520 SAT range), were included then Williams would fall more in line with the group (the number of athletic priority slots would increase from 66 to 81 if you consider protects to be half of a tip as admissions does). Those numbers were correctly not considered because applicants at that level here are so called “academic admits” (accepted without regard to attributes) at every other school in the league including Amherst. In the last couple of years for instance, 2 baseball recruits rated as “protects” at Williams were “academic admits” at both Harvard and Dartmouth – I know this because the respective Ivy coaches were not aware of the players in question prior to their acceptance."