Wed 17 Oct 2007
PTC asks
David- Were you an Athlete in College? A lot of your posts suggest to me that you think sports is given too much emphasis when it comes to getting into Williams? I am just wondering.
1) Whether or not I was an athlete at Williams is fairly irrelevant to this issue. I was.
2) I am pro-athlete but anti-tip, or at least anti the current amount of emphasis on athletics in admissions at Williams. In other words, I think that Williams should place a lot of emphasis on athletics. If anything, I would like to see more done for Eph athletes.
For example, there ought to be a freshmen soccer team. Many male (and female?) Ephs come to Williams loving to play soccer but not skilled enough for either the varsity or JV teams. Such Ephs should have another option, at least for freshman year, a way to wear the purple and gold for the school they love. Even if this were a casual team, coached by a senior, with only a handful of games against local high schools, it would still be a wonderful experience for the Eph athletes involved. Williams should provide that experience. The same goes for JV baseball, freshman basketball and any other sports with enough interest.
3) But, even though I want more done for Ephs who are athletes, I would like to see less emphasis placed on athletics in admission. This has already come to pass in the 6 years since the Report on Varsity Athletics. There are many fewer athletes admitted to Williams with sub-1200 SAT scores than there used to be. Some folks, like former baseball coach Dave Barnard (and even I), predicted (and here) that Williams would no longer be able to compete, at least in the elite men’s sports which have often needed admissions help in the past. Fortunately, that prediction turned out wrong.
If Williams, even with more stringent admissions, can still win the Directors Cup, have football go undefeated and win NESCAC championships in basketball and baseball, there is no reason to think that we need more emphasis on athletics. If anything, I would like to see (and I expect Morty to take) another step in the opposite direction. Right now, there are Academic Rank 4 and 5 athletes who are admitted while AR 1 students, especially foreigners, are rejected. That ought to change, at least on the margin. I bet that it will.
I am pro-athlete and anti-tip.
October 17th, 2007 at 7:46 am
well, since the highest SAT score is now 2400, i would hope that there were less athletes admitted with a sub-1200 score…
October 17th, 2007 at 8:06 am
The writing portion of the new SAT is mostly disregarded in these discussions. It is no more useful in getting in (or predicting how well someone will do once in) than the SAT subject tests, and probably less so. See Jen Doleac’s thesis for details. So, the 1200 above refers to just Math + Verbal (now called critical reasoning).
October 17th, 2007 at 8:07 am
What if because of lack of sufficient tips over time a current sport at Williams becomes an absolute annual door mat (a not impossible scenario)? What if a previously pre-eminent sport becomes regularly downright mediocre from a won/lost standpoint?
October 17th, 2007 at 8:57 am
Is that terrible fall in results really likely? I guess I’m more familiar with women’s sports and with non-”helmet” sports but I don’t sense that most of the teams at Williams are relying on, or even getting much from, the tip system. Maybe I’m naive, but we sensed much, much more of a dip in standards and a reliance on lower-band athletes (some of whom were pretty clearly struggling academically in college) at the Ivys and other D1 schools whose programs we looked at (this was not in a helmet sport, and I know almost nothing about helmet sport recruiting or programs).
October 17th, 2007 at 10:08 am
“Is that terrible fall in results really likely?”
Yeah, it is likely. If you stop pushing for the best jocks in the country to get some tips, you are not going to get many of them into Williams. Hockey, Football, basketball, indeed, all sports will suffer. The reason Williams does well in sports is because it gives athletes a break. I challenge any of you to apply the this to the football team, to use an obvious example. Take away all the athletes given a break on admissions, and I bet YOU GOT NEXT TO NADA left, and a season without a win.
I fall back on my previous point.
Williams without brainy jocks could be a great school, but it would not be Williams, and while there are many great schools, there is only one Williams College.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:09 am
above posted by PTC
October 17th, 2007 at 10:23 am
What about the poor and minorities?
I would also like to point out that something very important has been lost in this discussion. Breaks for athletes is often a way that the less fortunate in our society find an avenue to excell and get into a place like Williams. I would be willing to bet that a lot of the students athletes are less fortunate than their classmates. I know at the big schools, student athletes get full rides to play sports. I am curious if there is some kind of financial atachment to this, and if the coaches consider socio economic background when recruiting?
October 17th, 2007 at 10:36 am
At Williams coaches consider athletic talent and the expenditure of their influence at the Admissions Office in recruiting - that is all. A poor kid, who can’t play, or a URM, who can’t play, or a legacy, who can’t play, is merely another kid, who can’t play, to them, despite the kid possibly being admirable or otherwise desirable in certain respects.
October 17th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
PTC: It’s entirely untrue that student athletes are less well-off than other students. In fact, almost all of the athletes are among the highest income bracket of students at Williams. While I don’t remember the exact percentage of athletes who are on financial aid, I do remember that it’s very, very low.
So rather than sports being a pathway for poorer kids to get into Williams, they actually take away some of the spots available for kids with lower SATs. Consider, for example, a team like hockey, which I would be willing to bet has very few athletes on financial aid. These guys, who are generally pretty privileged, are getting in with considerably lower SAT scores than kids who are in the same demographic (generally wealthy and white) but aren’t hockey players. The emphasis on sports decreases the amount of room left for low-income kids who might have lower SAT scores but who Williams would want to take a chance on. You might think it’s a fair trade off, or you might think it’s not, but it’s definitely not true that athletes are less privileged than the average Williams student.
October 17th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
How many sports are actually dependent on tips? Tips are a small proportion of varsity athletes, and smaller still if you factor out football, so I imagine they don’t matter particularly much to most sports. For example, I imagine we would continue to have a great cross-country team even if all tips were eliminated.
Also, PTC: you keep talking about “brainy jocks” as an ideal. Why do you support a practice (tips) that inherently compromises that by lessening the “brainy” requirement? As long as tips are in place, the average Williams athlete will almost certainly be less academically qualified than the average non-athlete, which just perpetuates the unfortunate “dumb jock” stereotype.
October 17th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
There seem to be so many assumptions being made here that I thought I would post a comment based on personal experience.
As a parent of a recently admitted student/athlete I can tell you that:
A. This student’s SATs were high enough to be considered for admission regardless of the student’s athletic accomplishments.
B. This student was interested in Williams before the Varsity coach showed interest.
C. We are paying full tuition.
D. It was never revealed whether this student was tipped or not.
E. Although this student is passionate about a sport, this student is also academically motivated.
I think you all need to step back and give the Williams Admissions office the benefit of the doubt. Considering the statistics on student success and graduation, it seems they know what they are doing.
October 17th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
As for the following:
A. This student’s SATs were high enough to be considered for admission regardless of the student’s athletic accomplishments.
#Coaches have a limited number of tips they can give out. They are scarce. If your child received a tip, the coach probably thought that (s)he could not get in without one.
B. This student was interested in Williams before the Varsity coach showed interest.
# Williams is #1 college in the US. A lot of people express interest.
C. We are paying full tuition.
# Irrelevant.
D. It was never revealed whether this student was tipped or not.
# See the comment under A.
E. Although this student is passionate about a sport, this student is also academically motivated.
#Good to know. This is a college, right?
October 17th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
ckb: No one’s making assumptions about any particular kids, just speaking in generalities and averages. Williams has a lot of brilliant athletes, but that doesn’t change the mathematical fact that tips result in an athlete population with lower average academic credentials than non-athletes.
Also, it’s my understanding that coaches generally tell you if they’re using a tip, so if you’re unsure it probably means your kid wasn’t tipped.
October 17th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
No one answered my question about minorities and poorer students.
October 17th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
or my statement that the football team would suck if you took all the tips off of it.
Good to know that the cross county team would still be great… now, you tell me, if you could have just the football team or the cross country team beat Amherst, which would you choose?
Kind of like Army Navy…
October 17th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
“Williams without brainy jocks could be a great school, but it would not be Williams, and while there are many great schools, there is only one Williams College.” — PTC
Again, please put it on the quote wall.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Admissions has an in incredibly challenging job. They are making decisions based on pieces of paper. And in this day and age, students have become all to savvy in how to pump up a transcript.
So, given all this, how does an Admissions board read between the lines?
SAT’s are one way, perhaps a unique letter of recommendation can be telling…but a history of committment and success in a given area can say a lot about a student. And from a practical standpoint, Williams needs students that have many of the traits that a committment to sports exhibits. They are probably more likely to do well and stay happy on a small, out of the way campus like Williams…provided, of course, that they are academically motivated as well….this is after all COLLEGE!!!
And NO. 1!!!!!
Geez, cut the attitude ANON. I bet you had a beautiful transcript that just couldn’t express all aspects of your personality.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
PTC: I did answer your question about poorer students (12:08 p.m.).
October 17th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Sure, commitments to sports, music, etc. are a positive thing, and admissions already rewards them. I played four years of varsity soccer in high school, and I’m sure it helped my app. That’s not the same thing as a tip.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
Probably not. If you are not good enough to play for Williams, then 4 years of varsity soccer is no better than 4 years of any other activity with a similar time commitment. And, as a rule of thumb, such activities don’t matter since almost everyone does something outside of school work. So, for those without a hook (tip, URM, wealth, legacy, local), 90% of the decision is driven by academic ranking.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:42 pm
David: Any way that PTC’s quote above makes the quote wall? It’s a pretty good one. Are decisions on quote wall worthiness unilateral decisions? If not, count mine as a vote for PTC.
CKB: I apologize on behalf of ANON. As a recent alum, I can attest to the fact that much like the claim that athletes are not representative of the intelligence of the student body as a whole, ANON is certainly not representative of the social tact of the student body as a whole. Enjoy your time at Williams watching your son/daughter compete as a Williams athlete — it is truly a singular pleasure.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
As far as a student’s outside activities…many of those factor into their GPA and ranking. Not sports. So, maybe a little tipping is okay as long as the SATs show the ability to handle the academics.
And really,this entire conversation is based on a lot of factors (SATs, ranking, income level) that only Admissions would know.
But I seriously doubt that any “dumb jocks” are being admitted.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
1) I have added the quote. Suggestions are always welcome!
2) Background material on this debate here, here and here. Lots of good stuff.
3) Are there any EphBlog readers who want to go back to the admissions policies of the 90’s, with many more tips and more low-band tips than we have now? If so, what sorts of students would you like to reject but who are currently admitted?
October 17th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Thanks so much for the apology on behalf of ANON. I was just trying to offer some facts concerning my student’s admissions experience that seemed to relate to some of the issues being discussed.
I have enjoyed the blog (my first, and what is URL?) and now must sign off and go to work in order to pay for the tuition bill that sits on my kitchen counter…worth every penny of it as my student is happy and stimulated and loving Williams!
October 17th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
These kinds of discussions are interesting but a little misleading. You get around 7000 very high quality apps for 532 spots so of course you need a sifting mechanism, a slant, a rubric, some form of bias(es) in order to determine admission. Which bias should you choose? Legacy, wealth, sports, sat, GPA, skin color, artistic talent, whatever when you favor one you are diminishing the others. I am working on the assumption that diversity of some kind is desirable so you would not select only from one aspect. I think that all these anti-jock arguments are simply there to substitute one form of bias for another. Doing away with athletes and filling the school with oboe players might be as good as system as any, the resulting school would just not be Williams, which is ok I guess. I’ve got an idea, do away with sports and merge with Amherst. None of these kids who work so hard to represent Williams on the playing fields are going pro in sports and they know it, but the character and commitment that participation engenders will serve them well in life.
October 17th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Obviously this is all a matter of degree. No one supports admitting idiots for their football talent, and no one opposes admitting the next Peyton Manning with a 2300 over some random kid with a 2310. Still, I would argue that there’s no particular reason to value athletics more than other forms of talent and commitment.
Consider the hypothetical that Brett Favre and Itzhak Perlman both apply to Williams with similar borderline academic ratings. In the current system as I understand it, Favre would receive a tip and get in, and Perlman would not. I don’t think that’s right.
October 17th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
But wouldn’t Perlman stand a better chance at Juilliard than Favre? Is that fair?
Sports seems to be a big part of what is unique about Williams. And, I bet it has been deemed a big part of what makes the campus life appealing, even though it is small and off the beaten track. Given the academic standing that it has, the balance it gets from Sports is good. “All study doth a boring person make” (I forgot where I heard that….)
And if you want to talk about fairness, what about all the students not ever considered because of lower SAT’s and/or not great GPA’s?
October 17th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
anon@4:09: “dumb jock” is of course a relative term, since everyone at Williams is at least above-average. But there’s still quite a bit of variation in the intelligence of Williams students - some are clearly brilliant while others are, well, not (and a lot more, probably including myself, are in the middle somewhere). Since Williams rejects a lot of very smart applicants, the students on the lower end of that scale are here for some other reason: tipped athlete, URM, “development”, etc. Sure, they can handle the work to a certain degree, but these are (for example) generally not the students who stay up having late-night conversations about politics/philosophy/literature/etc. So in that sense, Williams’ admissions decisions do contribute to forming a less intellectually stimulating environment.
anon@4:46: Williams doesn’t get 7000 “very high quality” applications per year. Maybe we get a couple hundred. The rest of the pile are, I’m sure, all compelling in various different ways, but there are definite tradeoffs to me made. You’re right that in the end it’s really matter of which bias you prefer. We could increase tips (not that anyone’s suggesting this) and define ourself as Amherst’s slightly stupider cousin that always wallops them in football, or we could decrease tips and do the opposite. I’d prefer that we do more to emphasize an intellectual student body, since that benefits me most personally (and Williams’ athletic emphasis actually harms me pretty directly because the general level is so high that I have no opportunity to become involved), but it seems that’s not the general feeling of the community.
October 17th, 2007 at 6:04 pm
Regarding the role of athletics in defining Williams, I did not play sports at Williams, or even watch that many games. However, having an active sports culture really made Williams stand out against its peer schools and the Ivies, and it played a key role in my choosing Williams over those other schools.
October 17th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Mens sana in sano corpore.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
Your coach tells you if you ask them. Williams coaches are much better people than to tell a student they are a tip.
No one tells you if you got in for being rich either.
October 18th, 2007 at 12:38 am
That’s easy: Cross-country.
Of course, it’s almost a given that (mens) XC beats Amherst. Something like a 2-decade win streak in Little Threes. So it would be really disappointing to end that streak, y’know?
October 18th, 2007 at 12:58 am
That sounds suspiciously like tempting fate. My point was, or should be, this:
XC wins quite a lot. On a national level we’re consistently better than football. It’s easy to take consistent success for granted.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:47 am
As an old school lefty, this is one of the few topics that I totally agree with David Kane on. I see very little purpose to having tips for athletes, although I played sports while there.
Having or not having a strong sports culture made negative difference in my book when I applied, although the lack of frats was a huge plus. However, it’s debatable whether sports teams took over the role of frats.
To link this tangentially to the poo debate, I will say that the only people I ever saw urinate in public, whether that was on someone’s car, in Greylock or the Frosh Quad or in a total stranger’s bed, were athletes, some of whom were recruits. I will not name which sports, though. And yes, I can’t believe I witnessed all this either.
October 18th, 2007 at 8:20 am
‘10 at 5:20…My own feeling is that the problem of a diminished intellectual student body is separate and apart from the “jock” non “jock” admissions issue. Having been at college during the Vietnam era (was tear gassed…they actually hit my car with a canister, try explaining that to your father) and having returned to complete a masters recently (things to do before one dies list) I can not convey the difference in the kind of dialog that is the present norm. Everyone is afraid to talk, afraid to say the wrong thing, but what they forget is that coming to the right conclusions (for one’s self whatever that might be) takes practice, the same as learn to walk, or read, or write. In the old days (I mean back to the Greeks not just my era) open discussions were an essential part of the learning process. Those days are gone and I am convinced you could have a school of all 2400 sats or all 1200’s and you would still find a small number of people to talk to (probably inversely proportional the 2400’s would say less but with more meaning and visa a versa) . A friend of mine is the dean of a well regarded NE school and they know that in the overwhelming majority of cases the students are simply there for the grades, not the student’s fault just the way it works.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:08 am
October- First of all, not having a draft definately plays huge in the climate you are speaking about. That one thing, makes comparing your generation to this one apples and oranges. Remember, these kids were told to go shopping while others faught the war.
This is a tough time to be a young person in College. Most people believe that we should be fighting a war, but realize that it is being mismanaged and poorly run. That makes it tough to define how to fix the problem. In Vietnam, most people were black and white on the issue, in Iraq, you have to mix with Afg and the general “War on Terror”.. it is not so simple. I think most young people are searching for a way to do some service towards the common good, but strrugling under this current divisive, yet ambivalent climate, to do so.
It is looming out there. Everyone feels it. From the economics to the way in which divisive politics has splintered America. I bet the next election is going to be an ass woopin of historic proportions. I think if you take the time to sit down and talk with these kids, they will have a very quiet discussion with you about where they think we have gone wrong, and who they are going to vote for. Which is very different than the massive sub culture of rebellion which was the norm of your era.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:14 am
Now that I have caught up with all the entries, It seems that the athletes, tipped or not, could be the ones responsible for;
taking admissions spots away from Iztak Perlman types
being of the “lower end of the scale” of intelligence and
“contributing to forming a less intellectually stimulating environment”
and possibly the ones that
“urinate in public”!!!!
And girls are part of this tipped group as well, right?
Wow! Note to self, must enlighten my recently accepted, possibly tipped student athlete…especially sense s/he probably falls into the category of “well, not brilliant”.
It is a good thing that Williams is a “College” and “No.1″. Now, if they would only make it an Admissions priority to accept only students that can “stay up having late-night conversations about political/philosophy/literature,etc”…then they would really be on the right track! Maybe they could find more “brilliant athletes” who just don’t get tired or need to relax after winning those dumb games….
Thank goodness for this blog or I wouldn’t have learned all this!
October 18th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Remember to light your “jock-o-lantern” at the end of this month and “tip” it so that we all can see.
Exercising “bias” is an athletic process requiring that nimble touch as we head down to Cole field to savor passes to victory.
Hail and Farewell.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Above posted by CKB
…very worried parent of “possibly tipped”, possibly “not brilliant”, recently accepted student probably not participating in “late night discussions about political/philosopy/literature,etc”….well, maybe “political” discussions.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:30 am
to 11:15
Didn’t mean to take credit for your entry..
but
Where can one pick up a “jock-o-lantern”… or do only the special “tipped”, “brilliant athletes” get one of those?
October 18th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
ckb: calm down, no one said anything specific about your son/daughter. Or, for that matter, anything about non-tipped athletes in general.
October 18th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
wonky: I wonder whether you have the foggiest about the time of fraternities at Williams and their pros and cons.
October 18th, 2007 at 12:29 pm
Phew!
Actually, I am calm and have quite enjoyed this.
And I am not worried about my son/daughter…S/he is fitting right in and enjoying Williams…..
and will definitely benefit from being around someone like you who could inspire her/him to have a few more of those intellectual discussions.
Keep on trying ‘10, but give the athletes (tipped or not) the benefit of the doubt….or you might just miss something.
I bet one of them could probably help you find a way to get involved in a sport since you expressed that interest.