Inclusivity for Recruited Athletes

chess

Over a month ago, during his Convocation speech, School President Tomi Lawal ’16 called for inclusion at Choate. In one obvious way, however, we do not live up to this standard. Lack of community togetherness at Choate is undermined by negative feelings that some Choate students have towards recruited athletes.

Postgraduate students (PGs) repeat their senior year at a different highschool. This year, Choate has more than 20 PGs—they are mostly athletes, and some have already committed to colleges.

Some students believe that returning seniors’ chances of getting into outstanding and popular universities are greatly diminished because so many PGs have already committed to these colleges. Whether there is any proof to support this theory or not, it is nevertheless generally accepted, and it does makes sense. Universities tend to look for diversity in their student body, which means that they probably will not admit twenty students from the same school. Once they meet the new group of PGs, many students reconsider applying to schools that they had previously selected as their first choice, since they now do not believe that they have a viable shot of being accepted.

A healthy level of competition pushes students to perform well in school, and it may help students achieve what they did not know was possible. On the other hand, the cutthroat competitiveness that some of our seniors display is something that should worry the student body and the administration. Students are understandably nervous about college, but the desire for one’s own personal success should not conflict with the sincere hope for another’s success. It is horrible to see jealous students tearing apart their peers’ credentials after they have gotten into great schools based on athletic merit.

Another cause of the dislike towards athletic recruits is a sense of entitlement. Some seniors, who believe that PGs are “stealing their spot” at prestigious colleges, assume that their GPAs and test scores make them “better candidates,” while failing to account for hard work and dedication that athletes must put in to succeed in their sport.

Some recognize the difficulty of being good enough at a sport to play in college, but their comments often remain incredibly dismissive of postgraduates’ accomplishments, whether on the field or in the classroom. Such returning students believe that after the hard work that they have put in, the Admission Office is slapping them in the face by bringing in new students who will get into college without having put in the same amount of work. They fail to consider that for every late night that a four-year senior weathered to finish an essay, a PG may have been in the gym working to get better at his or her sport, while also working hard to excel as a student. Athletic recruits are taxed with balancing time-consuming sports with challenging academics, and they too deserve respect for the amount of work that they do.

The underlying problem with inclusivity at Choate here is not that the School has become “too athletic” or whether recruits do or do not deserve to attend amazing schools based on athletic merit. Instead, the issue is that no matter how inclusive we say we are, we do not all support each other. Some seniors see the success of athletic recruits as a detriment to the success of the rest of the class. They separate them from other students. They see the recruits as outsiders who will make it harder for them to get into the colleges they want to get into. They should regard recruited athletes as talented peers who should be commended not only for their athletic prowess, but also for their intellectual strength.

Comments are closed.