鲍恩和莱文发现,即使在这些机构与体育精英学者和小时间,有持久的问题,教育质量妥协。第一,招募运动员招生过程中有很大优势。这个问题在每组院校研究是一致的,但它是常春藤联盟机构最为明显,在新兵四倍更有可能承认相对于类似的申请者。招募运动员标准化考试成绩明显低于不仅同学不参与体育,而且跑龙套的运动员。第二,一旦校园,招募运动员表现在学业上的表现比预期更糟,基于他们的学术和人口特征和差异不存在跨种族和社会经济地位等因素。更多关于是表现不佳并不局限于运动的季节。表现不佳坚持即使在季节和年期间,他们不参与体育运动。在常春藤联盟机构,大多数招募运动员在第三类的底部,强调81%的高调招募运动员第三底部。NESCAC学校看到一个类似的模式。第三,其他组,与运动员不分享某些特征展示运动员一样表现不佳。例如,学生沉重的时间承诺,如音乐家,和那些接受招生偏好,如遗产,不执行比同龄人。同样,未被充分代表的少数民族学生,他们通常会收到一个优势在招生过程中,显示出稳定的改善在缩小绩效差距,而差距扩大的运动员。第四,作者发现了一个单独的文化与体育相关的校园检查在这项研究中,创建一个将整个校园文化负面影响。运动员经常与其他运动员生活,大部分时间都在一起运动的责任外,也很少参与体育以外的课外活动。他们也倾向于集群在某些专业,特别是那些在社会科学和业务。最后,鲍恩和莱文发现学校在大学体育协会(卡内基梅隆大学,埃默里大学,芝加哥大学,圣路易斯华盛顿大学)在很大程度上成功地避免在校际体育与招聘相关的陷阱。这是唯一一群学校招收运动员的研究,有一个游泳池,像他们的同学而言,基于进入资格和学业成绩,同时登记。
澳洲结构学论文代写:招募运动员
Bowen and Levin found that, even at these institutions with elite academics and small time athletics, there are persistent problems that compromise the quality of education. First, recruited athletes have a substantial advantage in the admissions process. This issue was consistent across each group of colleges studied, but it was most pronounced at Ivy League institutions, where recruits were four times more likely to be admitted relative to comparable applicants. Recruited athletes had markedly lower standardized test scores than not only their classmates not participating in sports but also walk-on athletes. Second, once on campus, recruited athletes perform much worse academically than expected, based on their academic and demographic characteristics, and differences did not exist across factors such as race and socioeconomic status. More concerning is that the underperformance is not restricted to the athletic season. Underperformance persisted even in seasons and years during which they were not participating in athletics. At Ivy League institutions, the majority of recruited athletes fell in the bottom third of the class, accentuated by 81% of high-profile recruited athletes in the bottom third. NESCAC schools saw a similar pattern. Third, other groups that share certain characteristics with athletes do not demonstrate underperformance as athletes do. For instance, students with heavy time commitments, such as musicians, and those who receive admissions preference, such as legacies, do not perform worse than their peers. Similarly, underrepresented minority students, who typically receive an advantage in the admissions process, have shown steady improvement in narrowing the performance gap while the gap has widened for athletes. Fourth, the authors identified a separate culture associated with athletics on the campuses examined in the study, creating a divide negatively impacting the overall campus culture. Athletes frequently live with other athletes, spend most of their time together outside of their athletic responsibilities, and rarely participate in extracurricular activities outside of sports. They also tend to cluster in certain majors, specifically those in the social sciences and in business. Finally, Bowen and Levin found that schools in the University Athletic Association (Carnegie Mellon University, Emory University, University of Chicago, Washington University in St. Louis) were largely successful in avoiding the pitfalls associated with recruiting in intercollegiate athletics. This was the only group of schools in the study that had a pool of recruited athletes that resembled their non-athlete classmates based on their entering qualifications and academic performance while enrolled.
