OT Stanford's "Academic Narrative"

[Pentagon Cane]

So Stanford blows a lead and the well worn excuse comes back out in another thread, namely "But look at their academic requirements!!"

Okay, lets look at what their own student newspaper reported:

https://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/02/22/the-price-of-athletics-at-stanford/

"Stanford’s senior associate athletic director responded: “I beg to differ on that. We haven’t lowered our academic standards.” Football coach David Shaw has repeated this mantra: Responding to critics claiming that Stanford had relaxed its academic standards to achieve football success, he claimed, “We have the same academic standards.” But this is not actually true. Although we do not have comprehensive statistics comparing athletic admits to regular admits, some data does exist. Looking at a group of 10 elite colleges and using SAT scores (on the 1600 point scale) as a proxy for academic ability, Princeton researchers found that being a recruited athlete gave an admissions boost equivalent to scoring 200 points higher on the SAT. We can also look at high school scouting reports for football players. Looking at the Stanford recruitment class of 2009 (this year was quite typical in terms of test scores), the median football player who reported scores got an 1800 out of 2400 on the SAT and 26 on the ACT. Based on university statistics, this puts the football median comfortably in the bottom quartile..."

So what do these student athletes take when they get to Stanford?

Most Popular Academic Majors for 2015 Power 5 Conference Football Players | Bleacher Report

So do you think that "Science, technology and society" is going to make you a tech pioneer or rocket scientist? Sounds more like you write a paper that says "Steve Jobs was great, he co-founded Apple and my Iphone is great for selfies." and you get a B (Yeah, I know, A+ work at UNC!)

Heck, seems like Arkansas, LSU, Tennesee, Miami and even O$UCK are allowing the majority of their athletes to major in something they may find useful after graduation (i.e. it enhances their already evident skill set)

The Stanford narrative on their athletes' academic prowess is false and needs to be put to bed.

LoL, you realize that a 26 on the ACT is in the 83 percentile. The normal student body average is a 33. I know this for a fact because my son's choices are the United States Air Force Academy to play lacrosse or Stanford on a Type I to study aeronautical engineering and go to undergraduate pilot training from there. Sorry for bragging.

Now give me the average ACT scores for the Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma or Georgia football teams.

Sure do realize a 26 score's percentage; I work as a volunteer in college admission efforts and that 26 is a good, but not great score for college admission. Miami's (since we are on a 'Cane board) 50% range, i.e. 50% of the enrolled student are in the score range, 25% are above or below, is 28-32. I would have to make an inquiry to the CFP school's admissions department to get that range for their football teams, though Clemson's "Parks, recreation and tourism management" major sounds more like a sitcom than something to build a career on...

Point is, they are not the "Einstein's playing football" Stanford and a sycophantic media makes them out to be; indeed, Stanford has a lot to answer for recently when it comes to transparency in boosting one of it's most respected school's:

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/12/04/stanford-lied-about-business-school-scholarships

All that aside, congrats on your son's (ACT 33, AFROTC Type 1) fantastic achievements; it's not bragging whan it's true. To help decipher for the masses, here is something helpful to explain what a AFROTC Type 1 scholly is:
https://www.afrotc.com/scholarships/types

You have probably worked long enough just at the Five Sided Puzzle Palace to know that if your son wants to fly and make the USAF a career, the academy is the place to go to increase their chances of UPT and promotion. Stanford is the choice if the USAF/Civilian career is in Science and Technology (AFRL/AFOSR) or Lockheed, NG, Boeing, etc.

I graduated from the Air Force Academy. Grew up in Miami and was headed to UM until the USAFA came through. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up at Miami and do just the opposite of me. He wants to major in aeronautical engineering. As he said Miami doesn't have a great aeronautical engineering program, but other than that what is not to like dad? He is a **** of a lot smarter than me. I raised him right.

 

[CaneFan79]

So Stanford blows a lead and the well worn excuse comes back out in another thread, namely "But look at their academic requirements!!"

Okay, lets look at what their own student newspaper reported:

https://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/02/22/the-price-of-athletics-at-stanford/

"Stanford’s senior associate athletic director responded: “I beg to differ on that. We haven’t lowered our academic standards.” Football coach David Shaw has repeated this mantra: Responding to critics claiming that Stanford had relaxed its academic standards to achieve football success, he claimed, “We have the same academic standards.” But this is not actually true. Although we do not have comprehensive statistics comparing athletic admits to regular admits, some data does exist. Looking at a group of 10 elite colleges and using SAT scores (on the 1600 point scale) as a proxy for academic ability, Princeton researchers found that being a recruited athlete gave an admissions boost equivalent to scoring 200 points higher on the SAT. We can also look at high school scouting reports for football players. Looking at the Stanford recruitment class of 2009 (this year was quite typical in terms of test scores), the median football player who reported scores got an 1800 out of 2400 on the SAT and 26 on the ACT. Based on university statistics, this puts the football median comfortably in the bottom quartile..."

So what do these student athletes take when they get to Stanford?

Most Popular Academic Majors for 2015 Power 5 Conference Football Players | Bleacher Report

So do you think that "Science, technology and society" is going to make you a tech pioneer or rocket scientist? Sounds more like you write a paper that says "Steve Jobs was great, he co-founded Apple and my Iphone is great for selfies." and you get a B (Yeah, I know, A+ work at UNC!)

Heck, seems like Arkansas, LSU, Tennesee, Miami and even O$UCK are allowing the majority of their athletes to major in something they may find useful after graduation (i.e. it enhances their already evident skill set)

The Stanford narrative on their athletes' academic prowess is false and needs to be put to bed.

LoL, you realize that a 26 on the ACT is in the 83 percentile. The normal student body average is a 33. I know this for a fact because my son's choices are the United States Air Force Academy to play lacrosse or Stanford on a Type I to study aeronautical engineering and go to undergraduate pilot training from there. Sorry for bragging.

Now give me the average ACT scores for the Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma or Georgia football teams.

Sure do realize a 26 score's percentage; I work as a volunteer in college admission efforts and that 26 is a good, but not great score for college admission. Miami's (since we are on a 'Cane board) 50% range, i.e. 50% of the enrolled student are in the score range, 25% are above or below, is 28-32. I would have to make an inquiry to the CFP school's admissions department to get that range for their football teams, though Clemson's "Parks, recreation and tourism management" major sounds more like a sitcom than something to build a career on...

Point is, they are not the "Einstein's playing football" Stanford and a sycophantic media makes them out to be; indeed, Stanford has a lot to answer for recently when it comes to transparency in boosting one of it's most respected school's:

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2017/12/04/stanford-lied-about-business-school-scholarships

All that aside, congrats on your son's (ACT 33, AFROTC Type 1) fantastic achievements; it's not bragging whan it's true. To help decipher for the masses, here is something helpful to explain what a AFROTC Type 1 scholly is:
https://www.afrotc.com/scholarships/types

You have probably worked long enough just at the Five Sided Puzzle Palace to know that if your son wants to fly and make the USAF a career, the academy is the place to go to increase their chances of UPT and promotion. Stanford is the choice if the USAF/Civilian career is in Science and Technology (AFRL/AFOSR) or Lockheed, NG, Boeing, etc.

I graduated from the Air Force Academy. Grew up in Miami and was headed to UM until the USAFA came through. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up at Miami and do just the opposite of me. He wants to major in aeronautical engineering. As he said Miami doesn't have a great aeronautical engineering program, but other than that what is not to like dad? He is a **** of a lot smarter than me. I raised him right.

Yes you did, and it's one of the greatest feelings in the world to know all your hard work paid off!

 

[Meat]

Back in my day, the SAT only went up to 1600

 

[CaneFan79]

Back in my day, the SAT only went up to 1600

It has gone back to that scale, the articles qoute the 2400 scale that was in place at the time.

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/03/05/college-board-sat-will-return-to-1600-point-scale-drop-essay-requirement

 

[CaneSince4Ever]

I graduated from the Air Force Academy. Grew up in Miami and was headed to UM until the USAFA came through. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up at Miami and do just the opposite of me. He wants to major in aeronautical engineering. As he said Miami doesn't have a great aeronautical engineering program, but other than that what is not to like dad? He is a **** of a lot smarter than me. I raised him right.

Did you & your son look at UND (North Dakota)?...they have a pretty good aviation program. My son went there for ATC (Air Traffic Control), but He's since changed His major to pre-med.

 

[Tetragrammaton Cane]

So Stanford blows a lead and the well worn excuse comes back out in another thread, namely "But look at their academic requirements!!"

[blah, blah, blah and inferiority complex run amok]

The Stanford narrative on their athletes' academic prowess is false and needs to be put to bed.

Athletic requirements have nothing to do with academic “prowess”. You’re conflating your own foundation-free narrative and I suspect you’re doing it on purpose. (If you’re not doing it on purpose then you’re an idiot...I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt).

There are athletes/football players that will be admitted to most state schools and Miami that would never be admitted to Stanford. Ever. Full stop. Period. And you know this (again, if you don’t know this then you’re an idiot...I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt).

Academic “rigor” of scholarship athletes is not usually what enhances a school’s academic reputation. (You probably don’t know that)

TCU’s an alright school, Miami’s a good school, Florida’s a better school, Stanford’s a lot better than all 3 - according to USNEWS, and of course, “the narrative”.

 

[CaneFan79]

So Stanford blows a lead and the well worn excuse comes back out in another thread, namely "But look at their academic requirements!!"

[blah, blah, blah and inferiority complex run amok]

The Stanford narrative on their athletes' academic prowess is false and needs to be put to bed.

Athletic requirements have nothing to do with academic “prowess”. You’re conflating your own foundation-free narrative and I suspect you’re doing it on purpose. (If you’re not doing it on purpose then you’re an idiot...I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt).

There are athletes/football players that will be admitted to most state schools and Miami that would never be admitted to Stanford. Ever. Full stop. Period. And you know this (again, if you don’t know this then you’re an idiot...I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt).

Academic “rigor” of scholarship athletes is not usually what enhances a school’s academic reputation. (You probably don’t know that)

TCU’s an alright school, Miami’s a good school, Florida’s a better school, Stanford’s a lot better than all 3 - according to USNEWS, and of course, “the narrative”.

You provide not one shred of factual evidence to back up your claim ("...that would never be admitted to Stanford. Ever. Full stop. Period. ") and have the pomposity to call me an idiot?

Go look in the mirror, dumbass, you'll find your idiot.

 

[deleted3746]

ADAT

 

[Tetragrammaton Cane]

So Stanford blows a lead and the well worn excuse comes back out in another thread, namely "But look at their academic requirements!!"

[blah, blah, blah and inferiority complex run amok]

The Stanford narrative on their athletes' academic prowess is false and needs to be put to bed.

Athletic requirements have nothing to do with academic “prowess”. You’re conflating your own foundation-free narrative and I suspect you’re doing it on purpose. (If you’re not doing it on purpose then you’re an idiot...I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt).

There are athletes/football players that will be admitted to most state schools and Miami that would never be admitted to Stanford. Ever. Full stop. Period. And you know this (again, if you don’t know this then you’re an idiot...I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt).

Academic “rigor” of scholarship athletes is not usually what enhances a school’s academic reputation. (You probably don’t know that)

TCU’s an alright school, Miami’s a good school, Florida’s a better school, Stanford’s a lot better than all 3 - according to USNEWS, and of course, “the narrative”.

You provide not one shred of factual evidence to back up your claim ("...that would never be admitted to Stanford. Ever. Full stop. Period. ") and have the pomposity to call me an idiot?

Go look in the mirror, dumbass, you'll find your idiot.

Wait a minute! Was that not you wailing about ad hominem attacks?

You sadly don’t realize that you haven’t provided evidence for your own “narrative”, and others (who aren’t idiots, of course...giving them the benefit of the doubt...yes, you failed - terribly) don’t have the energy to play while you practice.

Harder to get into Stanford than any other P5 school, even as an athlete. And, it’s a “better” degree. Just more “narrative”.

Weird. My mirror is reflecting back an unfamiliar face.

 

[CaneFan79]

"don’t have the energy to play while you practice."

AKA, I don't have any facts to dispute yours, so I am taking my marbles and going home to Mommy...

 

[TemplarCane]

While Shaw and HCs at major universities with similar academic reputations may be able to have admission standards relaxed for the right athlete are these prospects going to be able to survive in the classroom? Do rigorous majors like ‘public recreation management’ exist at these elite universities, like they do at large state schools? I’ve not heard Stanford referred to as a football factory where players can get by doing just enough to maintain eligibility, or worse, have their academic work done for them. I could be wrong.

It should also be noted Stanford has more alumni on current NFL rosters than TCU.

Stanford just blew the game last night. Or, TCU came back and took the game.

 

[HurricaneHauk]

While Shaw and HCs at major universities with similar academic reputations may be able to have admission standards relaxed for the right athlete are these prospects going to be able to survive in the classroom? Do rigorous majors like ‘public recreation management’ exist at these elite universities, like they do at large state schools? I’ve not heard Stanford referred to as a football factory where players can get by doing just enough to maintain eligibility, or worse, have their academic work done for them. I could be wrong.

I'm going to assume Stanford has some amazing academic tutors who's sole job is to make sure these guys can at least pass. You have to be a complete moron to fail out of class or least maintain a C with the amount of support an athlete gets

 

[TemplarCane]

While Shaw and HCs at major universities with similar academic reputations may be able to have admission standards relaxed for the right athlete are these prospects going to be able to survive in the classroom? Do rigorous majors like ‘public recreation management’ exist at these elite universities, like they do at large state schools? I’ve not heard Stanford referred to as a football factory where players can get by doing just enough to maintain eligibility, or worse, have their academic work done for them. I could be wrong.

I'm going to assume Stanford has some amazing academic tutors who's sole job is to make sure these guys can at least pass. You have to be a complete moron to fail out of class or least maintain a C with the amount of support an athlete gets

I don’t believe for a minute every Stanford player would have been granted admission purely on their high school academic record. Stanford has an excellent academic support program, clearly.

There’s a difference between supporting student-athletes and a unwritten (pun intended) program of pushing players through a system for the sole purpose of playing football.

A few years ago, maybe more recent, there was a series of articles about FSU’s ‘win-at-all-costs’ philosophy. Professors encouraged, even intimidated, to provide players with passing grades. Players have others complete their course work. FSU enjoyed quite a scandal near the end of the Bowden era.

Has that happened at Stanford? Maybe it has, I’m asking.

 

[Ethnicsands]

OP would not get into Stanford with the logic displayed in this thread.

 

[Cortez55403]

79,

You offer assertions and opinions but no facts in support of your weak narrative.

My experience with Stanford admissions and the football program is first hand. Five graduates of my high school graduating class (average, fairly large public school) were admitted to Stanford. A record for our school.

*Two received football scholarships. Their grade points were 3.4/3.5 on the strict 4 point system where 4.0 was perfect. Their test scores were in the 85 percentile range. They both graduated in 4 years and played in two Rose Bowls. Post college they had very successful careers.
*Two were women with 3.7 gpa’s who were outstanding classical musicians. Stanford also looks for and recruits outstanding artists in addition to athletes
*The fifth was an all around excellent student, leader and high school athlete. Not good enough to be a scholarship athlete. His grades and test scores were the best of the five. He chose to go to Harvard instead.

In all cases, Stanford felt that they could handle the academic load. They did. Stanford balances its admitted classes with students of special talents and interests rather than taking just those with the highest grades and scores. It makes for a more interesting and varied student body. It works.

 

[CaneFan79]

79,

You offer assertions and opinions but no facts in support of your weak narrative.

My experience with Stanford admissions and the football program is first hand. Five graduates of my high school (average, fairly large public school) were admitted to Stanford. A record for our school.

*Two received football scholarships. Their grade points were 3.4/3.5 on the strict 4 point system where 4.0 was perfect. Their test scores were in the 85 percentile range. They both graduated in 4 years and played in two Rose Bowls. Post college they had very successful careers.
*Two were women with 3.7 gpa’s who were outstanding classical musicians. Stanford also looks for and recruits outstanding artists in addition to athletes
*The fifth was an all around excellent student, leader and high school athlete. Not good enough to be a scholarship athlete. His grades and test scores were the best of the five. He chose to go to Harvard instead.

In all cases, Stanford felt that they could handle the academic load. They did. Stanford balances its admitted classes with students of special talents and interests rather than taking just those with the highest grades and scores. It makes for a more interesting and varied student body. It works.

Thanks for the examples, but my "weak argument" is sourced and you provided just two (football-relevant) anecdotal cases.

In the vein that Tad Footeball posted earlier, but turned 180 degrees, there are good football players who will self-select (to use an admissions term) to Stanford because of it's academic reputation. They are great in academics and athletics (Pentagon Cane's son comes to mind: 33 ACT/D1 Lacrosse recruit) and so Stanford is a more desirible location. But these players may also self-select to Northwestern or Vandy or an Ivy.

Again, the narrative is that Stanford has academic all-americans playing at most every position. The truth is something different:

http://cosida.com/documents/2017/12/14//2017_D1_AAA_Football.pdf?id=2526

I'll give the Burkett kid out of St Augustine majoring in Japanese / Symbolic Systems major props, but the other is doing a Science, Technology & Society / Sociology major/minor (like the majority of the team) Heck, Dayton and Drake (Austin's other team) have as many on the list. It's not like the athletes at Stanford don't have help either:

https://undergrad.stanford.edu/advising/getting-started/athletic-academic-resource-center-aarc

Your argument is weak because you only provide two anecdotal examples than cloud the argument with Stanford's overall undergrad admissions policy.

Again, as I posted before, give me Stanford's two deep with their corresponding ACT/GPA, proving to me how superior they are and how much it is a disadvantage Shaw has because of it. I think you would be quite surprised by the results.

 

[Cortez55403]

79,

Neither Shaw, nor me or anybody is arguing that Stanford has a disadvantage. Rather, the point is that Stanford recruiting requires a uniquely difficult national focus on academically strong football players. That’s a challenge, not an excuse.

Shaw and the entire Stanford community accepts that challenge.

 

[CaneFan79]

79,

Neither Shaw, nor me or anybody is arguing that Stanford has a disadvantage. Rather, the point is that Stanford recruiting requires a uniquely difficult national focus on academically strong football players. That’s a challenge, not an excuse.

Shaw and the entire Stanford community accepts that challenge.

Again, no facts, just opinion.

 

[spacenegroes]

some salty *** mother****ers in this thread.

i actually went to stanford undergrad and had a lot of friends on the football team. sure, on average they were less qualified than non-athletes, but they beat the **** out of the kind of kids who start at most state schools, miami, etc. from my anecdotal and subjective perspective, they were smart, clever, hardworking guys. they weren't all myron ****** rolle but in general they were of that type. lotta nigerians coming from good families, smart white boys, clever mouthy ***** like richard sherman, etc.

also, keep in mind success and high achievement outside of academics (in any random domain) are valued by admissions committees. so a kid who, to use a tired trope, flew to africa and helped build up a charity would need lower demonstrated academic achievements than a kid who just did the usual high school stuff - just like an elite football player, or a legacy kid, or a kid who put out his own album, or a kid who built a huge youtube following.

this doesn't explain all of the gap between "regular" kids and recruited scholarship athletes (esp in money sports like men's basketball and football), but if you keep that in mind, it takes away a lot of the discrepancy. and hopefully wipes away some of that salt.

 

[Cane15]

I really wanted to leave this alone, but it is so agenda driven and you are so desperate to advance the argument.

I should note that one of the main sources you repeatedly rely on is a student newspaper. Anyone who has had experience dealing with student reporters should know that this would not be among the most reliable sources. Furthermore, I am not sure what data set the students used for their analysis, but it sure seems limited as they have only used data that some prospective students self-reported and their subsequent analysis was solely based on standardized test scores without the use of GPAs and other activities used in the admissions process. There is always difficulty getting this type of student data because of student privacy laws at both the federal and state levels.

Yes Stanford athletes have academic advisors located in a place that is convenient for them, but similar resources are available for all Stanford students. That is a good thing for all.

The number of Academic All-Americans doesn't prove that Stanford athletes didn't achieve in their high school coursework or are not achieving in the classroom as college students.

The average GPAs of Stanford athletes are higher than the rest of the student body.

One of the things that really gets me is that you repeatedly criticize a particular major. You might take a look at the courses in that major including the required courses--loads of science courses https://sts.stanford.edu/. While there are some options in the social sciences (not that there is anything wrong with taking courses in the social sciences) the major is not what you describe it to be. Take a look at the core courses and understand that individual courses of study have to be approved. Additional courses have many excellent offerings and outstanding faculty. And many of these kids will go to grad school and the major seems like a good foundations for any number of educational and career paths.

As for football, the record shows that Stanford football competes at a very high level and you will never find Shaw or other Stanford folks using academics as an excuse for occasional losses. The kids are smart and academics is an advantage for the football team not a disadvantage.

Your thread is more evidence that the most insufferable people are those who have the greatest differential between how smart they think they are and how smart they actually are.

Go Canes!

79,

Neither Shaw, nor me or anybody is arguing that Stanford has a disadvantage. Rather, the point is that Stanford recruiting requires a uniquely difficult national focus on academically strong football players. That’s a challenge, not an excuse.

Shaw and the entire Stanford community accepts that challenge.

Again, no facts, just opinion.