Student-Athlete Academic Challenges

[Verga3]

Tom Emma (Duke '83) writes an interesting and important article, combining his personal insights with plenty of specifics that certainly are applicable at Duke, as well as throughout the NCAA in both revenue and non-revenue sports. http://content.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3749189

Emma was a senior captain in '82-'83 when Coach K brought in that pretty decent recruiting class of Dawkins, Alarie, D. Henderson, Bilas and W. Williams. He is an accomplished author and strength and conditioning specialist, with a master's degree from Columbia University. He is the President of Power Performance, Inc., which he founded in 1991.

Great article, Tommy!

[BCGroup]

An eye-opening article--really puts it into perspective. Thanks for the link.

[Verga3]

I realize most of us know the quality of student-athlete that Duke has historically recruited, and the Tom Emma article to me just put things in perspective. It's really, really hard to maintain the kind of athletic AND academic success that we have sustained through many years, especially given the incredible demands we place on our players.

Here's a quote from the 2007 Athletic Department Annual Report:

"Academically, our student-athletes continue to set the bar for not only other athletic departments around the nation, but other general student populations as well. Our athletes combined to register a cumulative 3.1 grade point average over the past two semesters, and 21 teams had a collective GPA higher than 3.0 during the spring semester. For 18 consecutive years, Duke student-athletes had more members on the ACC Academic Honor Roll than any other league institution."

Here a few other facts from the same 2007 report:

- Duke earned the top APR (Academic Progress Rate) score in the ACC
- Duke led all ACC schools with 362 on the ACC Academic Honor Roll, leading the ACC for the 18th straight year
- Duke Football has won the AFCA Academic Achievement Award 8 out of the last 15 years and 12 times overall, 5 more times than any other school in the nation

Impressive....My hats off to the dedication and efforts of the Duke student-athlete in the face of the terrific challenges that our own Tom Emma has detailed in his article.

I would be interested in others' take and comments, and how much this plays into how we might select a new AD, improve Football, and still maintain our sterling overall student-athlete performance across the board.

[Verga3]

According to the NCAA's just-released academic measurement index for sports teams, Duke has received honor and recognition once again for its student-athletes' Academic Progress Rate (APR). Duke again is the ACC leader.

According to the NCAA, "The APR provides a real-time look at a team’s academic success each semester by tracking the academic progress of each student-athlete. The APR includes eligibility, retention, and graduation in the calculation and provides a clear picture of the academic culture in each sport."

"High-performing teams receiving awards posted APR scores ranging from 965 to a perfect 1,000," said NCAA President Myles Brand.

“Congratulations to these teams and their student-athletes for success in the classroom,” Brand said. “They are setting a great example for their peers and future student-athletes, as well.”

Here are the ACC numbers:

Boston College (10)
Men's Fencing
Men's Skiing
Men's Track, Indoor
Men's Track, Outdoor
Women's Field Hockey
Women's Skiing
Women's Soccer
Women's Tennis
Women's Track, Indoor
Women's Volleyball

Duke (12)
Men's Baseball
Men's Basketball
Men's Cross Country
Men's Football
Men's Golf
Men's Soccer
Men's Track, Indoor
Men's Track, Outdoor
Women's Fencing
Women's Golf
Women's Soccer
Women's Volleyball

Florida State (2)
Men's Golf
Women's Softball

Maryland (2)
Women's Gymnastics
Women's Track, Indoor

Miami (2)
Men's Cross Country
Men's Track, Outdoor

North Carolina (6)
Men's Baseball
Men's Basketball
Women's Fencing
Women's Golf
Women's Swimming
Women's Volleyball

Virginia (3)
Women's Soccer
Women's Softball
Women's Volleyball

Wake Forest (3)
Men's Basketball
Men's Track, Indoor
Men's Track, Outdoor

Clemson, North Carolina State and Virginia Tech were not represented.


Here's the NCAA link: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4g38nYBSYGYxqb6kW hCjggRb31fj_zcVP0A_YLc0IhyR0VFAABTEJw!/delta/base64xml/L0lDU0lKQ1RPN29na21BISEvb0VvUUFBSVFnakZJQUFRaENFSV FqR0VBLzRKRmlDbzBlaDFpY29uUVZHaGQtc0lRIS83XzBfNVVW LzkyOTA4?WCM_PORTLET=PC_7_0_5UV_WCM&WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/Academics%20and%20Athletes/Education%20and%20Research/Academic%20Reform/

[devildeac]

According to the NCAA's just-released academic measurement index for sports teams, Duke has received honor and recognition once again for its student-athletes' Academic Progress Rate (APR). Duke again is the ACC leader.

According to the NCAA, "The APR provides a real-time look at a team’s academic success each semester by tracking the academic progress of each student-athlete. The APR includes eligibility, retention, and graduation in the calculation and provides a clear picture of the academic culture in each sport."

"High-performing teams receiving awards posted APR scores ranging from 965 to a perfect 1,000," said NCAA President Myles Brand.

“Congratulations to these teams and their student-athletes for success in the classroom,” Brand said. “They are setting a great example for their peers and future student-athletes, as well.”

Here are the ACC numbers:

Boston College (10)
Men's Fencing
Men's Skiing
Men's Track, Indoor
Men's Track, Outdoor
Women's Field Hockey
Women's Skiing
Women's Soccer
Women's Tennis
Women's Track, Indoor
Women's Volleyball

Duke (12)
Men's Baseball
Men's Basketball
Men's Cross Country
Men's Football
Men's Golf
Men's Soccer
Men's Track, Indoor
Men's Track, Outdoor
Women's Fencing
Women's Golf
Women's Soccer
Women's Volleyball

Florida State (2)
Men's Golf
Women's Softball

Maryland (2)
Women's Gymnastics
Women's Track, Indoor

Miami (2)
Men's Cross Country
Men's Track, Outdoor

North Carolina (6)
Men's Baseball
Men's Basketball
Women's Fencing
Women's Golf
Women's Swimming
Women's Volleyball

Virginia (3)
Women's Soccer
Women's Softball
Women's Volleyball

Wake Forest (3)
Men's Basketball
Men's Track, Indoor
Men's Track, Outdoor

Clemson, North Carolina State and Virginia Tech were not represented.


Here's the NCAA link: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/kcxml/04_Sj9SPykssy0xPLMnMz0vM0Y_QjzKLN4g38nYBSYGYxqb6kW hCjggRb31fj_zcVP0A_YLc0IhyR0VFAABTEJw!/delta/base64xml/L0lDU0lKQ1RPN29na21BISEvb0VvUUFBSVFnakZJQUFRaENFSV FqR0VBLzRKRmlDbzBlaDFpY29uUVZHaGQtc0lRIS83XzBfNVVW LzkyOTA4?WCM_PORTLET=PC_7_0_5UV_WCM&WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/Academics%20and%20Athletes/Education%20and%20Research/Academic%20Reform/

Must be 'cuz Duke STILL gets all the calls(grades):D

Wonder if Greenberg is frothing over being left out...

[ohioguy2]

I looked this over rather quickly, but if I am correct, it surprises me greatly that no school has women's basketball in its list. I'll think more on this in the morning.

[Classof06]

When I was reading Dick Weiss' piece on Dawkins leaving for Stanford, he put an interesting stat in there, one that I'm not so sure is correct:

"Duke’s admission standards are more lenient than Stanford. The GPA of the average Duke player is 3.13 while the average GPA of the Stanford player is 3.46. The average SAT of the Duke player is 968 while the average SAT of the Stanford player is 1,123."

Now personally, I find it hard to believe that Duke's average SAT score for basketball players is below 1000, in fact I think this stat is just flat-out wrong. Maybe I'm wearing my royal-blue-tinted glasses but something about that just seems inaccurate.

Thoughts?

[pfrduke]

Clemson, North Carolina State and Virginia Tech were not represented.

not particularly surprising there.

[Richard Berg]

When I was reading Dick Weiss' piece on Dawkins leaving for Stanford, he put an interesting stat in there, one that I'm not so sure is correct:

"Duke’s admission standards are more lenient than Stanford. The GPA of the average Duke player is 3.13 while the average GPA of the Stanford player is 3.46. The average SAT of the Duke player is 968 while the average SAT of the Stanford player is 1,123."

Now personally, I find it hard to believe that Duke's average SAT score for basketball players is below 1000, in fact I think this stat is just flat-out wrong. Maybe I'm wearing my royal-blue-tinted glasses but something about that just seems inaccurate.

Thoughts?
Kind of shocked me too. I expect a few outliers to drag down the average, but not well below 1000!

[Verga3]

When I was reading Dick Weiss' piece on Dawkins leaving for Stanford, he put an interesting stat in there, one that I'm not so sure is correct:

"Duke’s admission standards are more lenient than Stanford. The GPA of the average Duke player is 3.13 while the average GPA of the Stanford player is 3.46. The average SAT of the Duke player is 968 while the average SAT of the Stanford player is 1,123."

Now personally, I find it hard to believe that Duke's average SAT score for basketball players is below 1000, in fact I think this stat is just flat-out wrong. Maybe I'm wearing my royal-blue-tinted glasses but something about that just seems inaccurate.

Thoughts?


I question Dick Weiss' facts as well. I can't locate any NCAA published average SAT or GPA numbers from a quick search. But it was fairly simple to locate the following quote.....

"Earlier this month, the San Jose Mercury News, examining data from 1994-97 (the last four-year period the NCAA used for documentation of grades and test scores), found that freshmen entering Duke on basketball scholarships during that period had an average SAT score of 968. The average SAT score for Duke's freshman class as a whole is generally in the high 1300s."

Very interesting coincidence on the 968 number.

Here's the link to the 2001 article as it appeared in Slate.com: http://www.slate.com/id/101920

Or maybe a quick email to Mr. Weiss to inquire would be appropriate? http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/weiss/2008/04/hey-johnny-stanfords-not-duke.html

[dukemomLA]

Thank you for this great thread -- and thank you Tom E. for this great article. It should be published by S.I., ESPNMag, etc. My daughter (class of '01) who had classes with Shane, Elton, Avery, shared some of this with me firsthand.

To ALL Duke athletes, I applaud you. And am honored by your commitment to meet all exhausting challenges on and off the court/field/links/gym/etc.

[Verga3]

When I was reading Dick Weiss' piece on Dawkins leaving for Stanford, he put an interesting stat in there, one that I'm not so sure is correct:

"Duke’s admission standards are more lenient than Stanford. The GPA of the average Duke player is 3.13 while the average GPA of the Stanford player is 3.46. The average SAT of the Duke player is 968 while the average SAT of the Stanford player is 1,123."

Now personally, I find it hard to believe that Duke's average SAT score for basketball players is below 1000, in fact I think this stat is just flat-out wrong. Maybe I'm wearing my royal-blue-tinted glasses but something about that just seems inaccurate.

Thoughts?


Also, interesting that in the latest APR study outlined in the earlier post, Stanford Basketball did NOT qualify.

[Verga3]

Thank you for this great thread -- and thank you Tom E. for this great article. It should be published by S.I., ESPNMag, etc. My daughter (class of '01) who had classes with Shane, Elton, Avery, shared some of this with me firsthand.

To ALL Duke athletes, I applaud you. And am honored by your commitment to meet all exhausting challenges on and off the court/field/links/gym/etc.


Amen....and second the applause to ALL Duke student-athletes. Tom Emma does deserve props for his insightful (and firsthand) article. Surprisingly, I've never seen anything just like it.

Congrats to your daughter.....Go Duke '01!!!

[RPS]

I would be interested in others' take and comments, and how much this plays into how we might select a new AD, improve Football, and still maintain our sterling overall student-athlete performance across the board.I can offer some insight both from my student days and as a parent. One of my best friends at Duke ("back in the day") was a basketball player who was also an outstanding student. Through October 15, he was in great shape academically. He would only slip a little between the start of practice and when games started (the Big Four then). But he would really struggle (comparatively -- he graduated with a GPA in the 3.4 range) between Thanksgiving and the end of the semester. That process would reverse itself during the Spring semester. I had trouble sleeping after a big game at Cameron and couldn't get much (if any) studying done afterwards. His situation was much, much tougher.

As a parent of an incoming D1 athlete this coming fall (football at Cal), I spent a great deal of time during the recruiting process evaluating how the various schools my son was considering handled academics. My son is fortunate in that he's close to the level of the Berkeley student body as a whole (2080 SAT). He will go to mandatory summer school before fall camp to get two courses completed before official practices start. That will allow players to begin to acclimate themselves to college in a "softer" and more controlled environment. It will allow students who may not be as well prepared as they ought to be to ease into the rigors of college and will allow all the freshman to get ahead so that they need "only" take four courses during the fall semester rather than the usual five. It's a great idea and one that other schools should emulate. That it provides for some great bonding for an incoming class of players and allows for these players to get some otherwise routine but significant matters (e.g., who to room with) dealt with and some good habits established before the campus is crawling with students in the fall is an added bonus.

Moreover, the academic support program at Cal is incredible. Players are required to meet with their academic support leader five days a week when at school. All of a player's classes, tests and assignments are laid out for the semester in advance and he will be held accountable for each item specifically. Work is checked. Professors are called regularly and consistently. Each player also has a weekly meeting with his position coach to monitor academic progress throughout the school year. Study time is mandated. Tutoring is provided and many football-friendly profs offer regular review classes and sessions for players.

I assume (without knowing) that Duke has a similar program, but many schools (as I know from first-hand investigation) do not. My son's day will begin with weight-training at 6:30am followed by classes. Practice and meetings come in the afternoon followed by training table. He'll be done around 8pm -- to get after his schoolwork. Fortunately, football games are played on Saturday, so missed classes are less frequent than in other sports.

The amount of effort it takes to play a D1 sport is amazing. Non-revenue and lesser-to-no scholarship sports take even more effort because the scholarship benefits aren't there nor are the public attention and accolades at all similar. That's why I have so often commented upon the lack of fan (and particularly student) support of football at Duke. For players to work as hard as they do to represent Duke with so little support (especially from their peers) is incredibly disheartening. I'm hopeful that Coach Cutcliffe will be able to get that culture changed even before the winning comes (as I'm confident it will).

[Verga3]

Kudos to Duke for demonstating such a strong commitment to our student-athletes while there are in school and for preparing them for their lives after athletics and after Duke. Here are a couple of examples of that commitment that you may not have heard about....pretty impressive.


The CAPE Program......A unique program that prepares female athletes for careers in medicine. http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=563707&SPID=1841&SPSID=22634

Emily Waner blog from Guatemala with CAPE. http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1136544&SPID=1846&SPSID=22760


The Coach for College Program.....A pilot program with the goal to enable student-athletes to use sports to bridge cultural divides and help program participants in Vietnam develop academic and life skills that will ultimately make higher education a more accessible option for them. http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1406002&SPID=1841&SPSID=22634

Duke student-athlete blogs from Vietnam with Coach for College. http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?&DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1411641&SPID=1841&SPSID=22634

[topps coach]

This is probably an eyeopener for many people who always say that a student athelete has it made in comparison to other students. The reality is that most of them must be extremely focused in order to maintain their eligibity while competing at high level at their sport. These kids more than earn the money that their scholarships provide them.

[jma4life]

I definitely have a new found respect for Paulus. It's remarkable to get a 3.9+ at Duke for anyone. The fact that he's playing ball at the same time, crazy.

[Verga3]

I definitely have a new found respect for Paulus. It's remarkable to get a 3.9+ at Duke for anyone. The fact that he's playing ball at the same time, crazy.


Incredible......According to this link, Greg has a cumulative 3.3 as a Political Science major. Not too shabby. http://www.wral.com/sports/story/2491545/

He's in good company, joining Mike Dunleavy (2002), Shane Battier (2000-01), Quin Snyder (1989), Mike Gminski (1978-80), Jim Spanarkel (1978-79), Bob Fleischer (1974-75), Gary Melchionni (1972), Dick DeVenzio (1971) and Jay Buckley (1963-64) as Duke’s Academic All-Americas.....Proud of you, Greg!

[Verga3]

Our student-athletes are recognized once again. Duke has been a "Top 2" Division I school in this study for the last 4 years. Here's the NCSA combo power criteria:

"The Collegiate Power Rankings from NCSA are calculated for each college and university at the NCAA Division I, II and III levels by averaging the U.S. News & World Report ranking, the U.S. Sports Academy Directors' Cup ranking and the NCAA student-athlete graduation rate of each college/university. The collegiate power rankings are based off of the U.S."

Is there a better total package anywhere? Duke does it the right way..... http://www.goduke.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=4200&ATCLID=1568162

[Lord Ash]

As a former athlete in a non-basketball, non-football way I have to say we spent a LOT of weekends on buses and in hotel rooms, and a LOT of hours on the x-country trail and in the weight room and at practice. I cannot imagine how the guys who are even more invested, for example basketball, do it.

[phaedrus]

As a former athlete in a non-basketball, non-football way I have to say we spent a LOT of weekends on buses and in hotel rooms, and a LOT of hours on the x-country trail and in the weight room and at practice. I cannot imagine how the guys who are even more invested, for example basketball, do it.

I question your assertion that basketball players are more "invested" than other sports. They certainly get more publicity but I would never concede that they are more focused or dedicated than my (non-revenue) team was and is to our sport.

[sagegrouse]

When I was reading Dick Weiss' piece on Dawkins leaving for Stanford, he put an interesting stat in there, one that I'm not so sure is correct:

"Duke’s admission standards are more lenient than Stanford. The GPA of the average Duke player is 3.13 while the average GPA of the Stanford player is 3.46. The average SAT of the Duke player is 968 while the average SAT of the Stanford player is 1,123."

Now personally, I find it hard to believe that Duke's average SAT score for basketball players is below 1000, in fact I think this stat is just flat-out wrong. Maybe I'm wearing my royal-blue-tinted glasses but something about that just seems inaccurate.

Thoughts?

I saw this a while ago and believed it applied to the men's basketball team. The comment at the time was that awarding a couple of schollies to walk-ons with 1500 SATs does an awful lot for the team average (out of 13 schollies). Giving a couple of walk-ons in football a free ride does very little to an average of 82 scholarship players.

As a recovering statistician and economist, I used to think the way to control for outliers is to use medians (the midpoint) not means (averages).

sagegrouse

[formerdukeathlete]

I saw this a while ago and believed it applied to the men's basketball team. The comment at the time was that awarding a couple of schollies to walk-ons with 1500 SATs does an awful lot for the team average (out of 13 schollies). Giving a couple of walk-ons in football a free ride does very little to an average of 82 scholarship players.

As a recovering statistician and economist, I used to think the way to control for outliers is to use medians (the midpoint) not means (averages).

sagegrouse

About SATs - today, though there are 3 sections, schools mostly pay attention to the Math and Verbal scores, perfect for both is still 1600.

The SAT was recurved about 1993, where a 1200 pre re-curve became about/ very close to a 1400. Today, many more kids get 1400s - low 1400s or very high 1300s are around 90th percentile. (Math and Verbal, exclusive of the writing section).

Stanford's football team SAT average today is about 1220, which is about 1100 pre 93 - this is about 80th percentile.

I think 97 ws the last time team SAT averages were released by the NCAA. At the time, Stanford's basketball team average was considerably higher than Duke's basketball average. However, Stanford's football team average was about (just) 25 points higher than Duke.

Basketball averages can take some big swings, with walk-ons or the signing of a kid like zoubek who has 1490 SATs. Football team averages are also helped by walkons.

In the days of Brodie and Nan, the Duke Football team had targets or ranges in the recruiting process. About the last year of Franks and or beginning with Roof, this changed whereby Duke players needed to just meet the Duke min., and if they did not, then Duke might stretch a certain distance. Team targets were dropped. Because of this, the difference between Duke and Stanford in Football averages is greater today than it was in 97. Conversely, the basketball teams are probably closer than they were back then (the figures quoted) with zoubek, paulus, scheyer and othe players who are known to have good SATs. - IN FACT, I would even go so far as to say that Duke's current basketball team average might be higher than Stanford's.

The Ivy League has a good system for football, where football players may be admitted within ranges of standard deviations of the student population. Only 1 or 2 players a year (out of 35 I believe permissible preferred admits) may be at or just above the Ivy League minimum. Then a few more are permitted within 2.5 and 2 standard deviations, more are permitted within 2 and 1.5 standard deviations, even more within 1.5 and 1, and no restrictions on numbers within 1 standard deviations. I think Stanford employs something like this, with team targets, though not quite as onerous as the Ivies.

[Lord Ash]

I question your assertion that basketball players are more "invested" than other sports. They certainly get more publicity but I would never concede that they are more focused or dedicated than my (non-revenue) team was and is to our sport.

Sorry, I should have been more specific; more invested, time-wise. The basketball team in particular plays and travels a LOT.

[phaedrus]

Sorry, I should have been more specific; more invested, time-wise. The basketball team in particular plays and travels a LOT.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm not convinced that basketball players put more time in than other athletes. Baseball, for instance, plays more games than basketball. Golf teams can be out of town for 4-5 days at a single tournament, and they play up to a dozen tournaments a year. Basketball travels a lot in March (most of the time!) but so do all teams during their championship season. And while all teams must abide by an NCAA rule restricting maximum practice time and limiting summer contact from coaches, the cross country and track teams can train largely on their own (more so than basketball, at least) and thus can far exceed those limits. I'm sure other teams have their own stories too.

Point is basketball players do commit a lot of time, maybe even more than other sports, but certainly not an amount of time that's incomparable with other athletes.

[hughgs]

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I'm not convinced that basketball players put more time in than other athletes. Baseball, for instance, plays more games than basketball. Golf teams can be out of town for 4-5 days at a single tournament, and they play up to a dozen tournaments a year. Basketball travels a lot in March (most of the time!) but so do all teams during their championship season. And while all teams must abide by an NCAA rule restricting maximum practice time and limiting summer contact from coaches, the cross country and track teams can train largely on their own (more so than basketball, at least) and thus can far exceed those limits. I'm sure other teams have their own stories too.

Point is basketball players do commit a lot of time, maybe even more than other sports, but certainly not an amount of time that's incomparable with other athletes.

Having tutored students from every sport at Duke I've found that scheduling non-basketball and non-football players has been easier. Whether that relates to the amount of time invested by the different sports I leave to the reader (I've always wanted to write that part).

[Duke09]

non-revenue athetes are given more freedom with their time. Football and basketball manage their athlete's time much closer, just one instance would be mandatory study hall which some non-revenue sports do not require. There are also no photo shoots for team posters in track and xc.

[hughgs]

non-revenue athetes are given more freedom with their time. Football and basketball manage their athlete's time much closer, just one instance would be mandatory study hall which some non-revenue sports do not require. There are also no photo shoots for team posters in track and xc.

Actually most non-revenue sports have mandatory study halls. Just off the top of my head: baseball, lacrosse, wrestling and crew.