(Ebook) The Game of Life: College Sports and

Educational Values by James L. Shulman; William G.

Bowen ISBN 9781400840694 Pdf Download

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-game-of-life-college-sports-and-
educational-values-51957842

★★★★★
4.8 out of 5.0 (56 reviews )

Instant PDF Download

ebooknice.com
 (Ebook) The Game of Life: College Sports and Educational
Values by James L. Shulman; William G. Bowen ISBN
9781400840694 Pdf Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

(Ebook) Reclaiming the Game: College Sports and Educational Values by

William G. Bowen; Sarah A. Levin; James L. Shulman; Colin G. Campbell;
Susanne C. Pichler; Martin A. Kurzweil ISBN 9781400840700

https://ebooknice.com/product/reclaiming-the-game-college-sports-and-
educational-values-51958658

(Ebook) In Pursuit of the PhD by William G. Bowen; Neil L. Rudenstine

ISBN 9781400862474

https://ebooknice.com/product/in-pursuit-of-the-phd-51959680

(Ebook) The Shape of the River: Long-Term Consequences of Considering

Race in College and University Admissions by William G. Bowen; Derek
Bok; Glenn C. Loury ISBN 9781400882793

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-shape-of-the-river-long-term-
consequences-of-considering-race-in-college-and-university-
admissions-51948198

(Ebook) Ever the Teacher by William G. Bowen ISBN 9781400859849

https://ebooknice.com/product/ever-the-teacher-51944066
(Ebook) Crossing the Finish Line: Completing College at America's
Public Universities by William G. Bowen, Matthew M. Chingos, Michael
S. McPherson ISBN 9780691137483, 069113748X

https://ebooknice.com/product/crossing-the-finish-line-completing-
college-at-america-s-public-universities-1815836

(Ebook) The Fall of Buster Keaton: His Films for M-G-M, Educational
Pictures, and Columbia by James L. Neibaur ISBN 9780810876828,
0810876825

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-fall-of-buster-keaton-his-films-for-
m-g-m-educational-pictures-and-columbia-1970326

(Ebook) Game Day: A Rollicking Journey to the Heart of College

Football by Craig James ISBN 9780470470565, 0470470569

https://ebooknice.com/product/game-day-a-rollicking-journey-to-the-
heart-of-college-football-1712838

(Ebook) The Travels and Adventures of Serendipity: A Study in

Sociological Semantics and the Sociology of Science by Robert K.
Merton; Elinor Barber; James L. Shulman ISBN 9781400841523

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-travels-and-adventures-of-
serendipity-a-study-in-sociological-semantics-and-the-sociology-of-
science-51958512

(Ebook) Work on Your Game: Use the Pro Athlete Mindset to Dominate
Your Game in Business, Sports, and Life by Dre Baldwin ISBN
9781260121377, 1260121372

https://ebooknice.com/product/work-on-your-game-use-the-pro-athlete-
mindset-to-dominate-your-game-in-business-sports-and-life-7399490
THE GAME OF LIFE
This page intentionally left blank
 THE GAME OF LIFE

COLLEGE SPORTS
A N D E D U C AT I O N A L VA L U E S

with a new preface by the authors

James L. Shulman and William G. Bowen

in collaboration with

Lauren A. Meserve and Roger C. Schonfeld

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS PRINCETON AND OXFORD

 Copyright © 2001 Princeton University Press
Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street,
Princeton, New Jersey 08540
In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press, 3 Market Place,
Woodstock, Oxfordshire OX20 1SY

All Rights Reserved

Fourth printing, and first paperback printing, with a new preface, 2002
Paperback ISBN 0-691-09619-8

The Library of Congress has cataloged the cloth edition of this book as follows

Shulman, James Lawrence, 1965–

The game of life : college sports and educational values /
James L. Shulman and William G. Bowen.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-691-07075-X (alk. paper)
1. College sports––United States. 2. Education, Higher––Aims and
objectives––United States. I. Bowen, William G. II. Title.
GV351 .S48 2001
796.04′3′0973––dc21 00-061146

British Library Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available

This book has been composed in Adobe New Baskerville by

Princeton Editorial Associates, Inc., Scottsdale, Arizona,
and Roosevelt, New Jersey

Printed on acid-free paper. ∞

www.pupress.princeton.edu

Printed in the United States of America

5 7 9 10 8 6 4
 Contents

List of Figures vii

List of Tables xiii
Preface to the Paperback Edition xv
Prelude: Four Snapshots xxiii
Preface xxxiii

Chapter 1. The Institutionalization and Regulation of College

Sports in Historical Perspective 1
Chapter 2. The Admissions Game: Recruiting Male Athletes
and the Implications of Selection 29
Chapter 3. The College Game: Academic Outcomes for Men 59
Chapter 4. Men’s Lives after College: Advanced Study, Jobs,
Earnings 87
Chapter 5. The Development of Women’s Athletic Programs 113
Chapter 6. New Players: The Recruitment and Admission of
Women Athletes 126
Chapter 7. Women Athletes in College 141
Chapter 8. Women’s Lives after College: Advanced Study,
Family, Jobs, Earnings 157
Chapter 9. Leadership 182
Chapter 10. Giving Back 205
Chapter 11. The Financial Equation: Expenditures and Revenues 227
Chapter 12. Key Empirical Findings 258
Chapter 13. Taking Stock 268
Chapter 14. Thinking Ahead: Impediments to Change and
Proposed Directions 289
Appendix A: Scorecards 311
Appendix B: Supplementary Data 355
Notes 375
References 423
Index 431
This page intentionally left blank
 List of Figures

Chapter 1
Figure 1.1. Sports Televised (in New York City) during the
Harvard-Yale Football Game, 1955, 1979, and 1993 20
Figure 1.2. Cumulative Increases in Performance Times
in Track and Field and Swimming, 1896–1996 25
Figure 1.3a. Multi-Sport Athletes as a Percent of All Male
Athletes 26
Figure 1.3b. Multi-Sport Athletes as a Percent of All Female
Athletes 26
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1. Athletes as a Percent of All Male Students
(by Cohort and Division) 33
Figure 2.2. Percent of Students Reporting that Being
“Recruited” Was a “Very Important” Reason for Choosing
This Speciµc College (by Athlete Status and Cohort, at
Ivy League Universities and Coed Liberal Arts Colleges,
Male Only) 38
Figure 2.3. Adjusted Admissions Advantage at a Representative
Non-Scholarship School, Controlling for Differences in
SAT Scores (1976, 1989, and 1999, Male Only) 41
Figure 2.4. Average SAT Scores by Athlete Status and Division
(1989 Cohort, Male Only) 44
Figure 2.5. High Proµle Athlete SAT Divergence from Students
at Large (by Cohort and Division, Male Only) 45
Figure 2.6a. 1989 Ivy League Athlete SAT Divergence from
Students at Large (by Sport, Male Only) 48
Figure 2.6b. 1989 Division III Athlete SAT Divergence from
Students at Large (by Sport, Male Only) 48
Figure 2.6c. 1989 Division IA Private Athlete SAT Divergence
from Students at Large (by Sport, Male Only) 49
Figure 2.6d. 1989 Division IA Public Athlete SAT Divergence
from Students at Large (by Sport, Male Only) 49
Figure 2.7. Percent of Students with a Father Who Has a
Bachelor’s Degree or Higher (by Athlete Status and
Division, 1989 Cohort, Male Only) 51
Figure 2.8. African Americans as a Percent of Male Students
(by Athlete Status and Division, 1989 Cohort) 54
viii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.9. Percent of Freshmen Reporting It Is a “Very Important”

or “Essential” Goal to “Be Very Well Off Financially” (by
Athlete Status and Division, 1989 Cohort, Male Only) 57

Chapter 3
Figure 3.1. Six-Year Graduation Rate (by Athlete/Extracurricular
Status and Cohort, Male Only) 61
Figure 3.2. Mean GPA Percentile (by Athlete Status and Cohort,
Male Only) 62
Figure 3.3. Percent of Students with GPA in Bottom One-Third
of Class (by Athlete Status and Cohort, Male Only) 63
Figure 3.4. Underperformance of Athletes, Controlling
for Differences in SAT Scores, Major, and Socioeconomic
Status (by Athlete Status and Division, 1989 Cohort,
Male Only) 67
Figure 3.5. Mean GPA Percentile (by Athletic/Extracurricular
Status and Cohort, Male Only) 70
Figure 3.6. Percent of Male Students with Faculty Mentors at
Ivy League Universities (by Athlete Status and Cohort) 71
Figure 3.7a. Percent of Male Students Majoring in the Social
Sciences at Ivy League Universities (by Athlete Status
and Cohort) 76
Figure 3.7b. Percent of Male Students Majoring in the Social
Sciences at Coed Liberal Arts Colleges (by Athlete Status
and Cohort) 76

Chapter 4
Figure 4.1. Graduates Earning Advanced Degrees (by Athlete
Status and Division, 1976 Cohort, Male Only) 89
Figure 4.2. Aspiration and Attainment of Medical and Law
Degrees at Ivy League Universities and Coed Liberal Arts
Colleges (by Athlete Status, 1976 Cohort, Male Only) 90
Figure 4.3. Occupations in 1995 (by Athlete Status, 1976
Cohort, Male Only) 92
Figure 4.4. Mean Own Earned 1995 Income (by Athlete Status
and Cohort, Full-Time Male Workers) 95
Figure 4.5a. Percent of Full-Time Male Workers Employed in
the For-Proµt Sector in 1995 (by Athlete Status, 1951 and
1976 Cohorts) 98
Figure 4.5b. Mean Own Earned 1995 Income (by Sector, 1951
and 1976 Cohorts, Full-Time Male Workers) 99
Figure 4.6. Earnings Advantages of Athletes (by Sector, 1976
Cohort, Full-Time Male Workers) 100
 LIST OF FIGURES ix
Figure 4.7. Mean Own Earned 1995 Income (by College and
High School Athlete Status and Division, 1976 Cohort,
Full-Time Male Workers) 103
Figure 4.8. Pre-College Self-Ratings and Life Goals (by High
School and College Athlete Status, 1976 Cohort,
Male Only) 104
Figure 4.9. Mean Own Earned 1995 Income of Athletes (by
Years Played and Sport Proµle, 1976 Cohort, Full-Time
Male Workers) 105
Figure 4.10. Earnings Advantages of Athletes (by Years Played
and Sport Proµle, 1976 Cohort, Full-Time Male Workers) 107

Chapter 5
Figure 5.1. Percent of Women Who Played High School and
College Sports (1976 and 1989 Cohorts) 122
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1. Percent of Athletes Reporting That Being “Recruited”
Was a “Very Important” Reason for Choosing This Speciµc
College (by Cohort, Gender, and Division) 129
Figure 6.2. Adjusted Admissions Advantage at a Representative
Non-Scholarship School, Controlling for Differences in
SAT Scores (1976, 1989, and 1999, Female Only) 131
Figure 6.3. Adjusted Admissions Advantages at a Representative
Non-Scholarship School, Controlling for Differences in
SAT Scores (by Gender, 1989 and 1999) 132
Figure 6.4. Athlete SAT Divergence from Students at Large
(by Cohort and Division, Female Only) 133
Figure 6.5. Intellectual Self-Conµdence and SAT Scores
(by Athlete Status and Gender, 1989 Cohort) 135
Figure 6.6. African Americans as a Percent of All Female
Students (by Athlete Status and Division, 1989 Cohort) 136
Figure 6.7. Percent of Freshmen Reporting It Is a “Very
Important” or “Essential” Goal to “Be Very Well Off
Financially” (by Athlete Status and Division, 1989 Cohort) 139
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1. Six-Year Graduation Rate (by Athlete/Extracurricular
Status and Cohort, Female Only) 142
Figure 7.2. Mean GPA Percentile (by Athlete Status, Cohort,
and Gender) 143
Figure 7.3. Percent of Students with GPA in Bottom One-Third
of Class (by Athlete Status and Division, 1989 Cohort,
Female Only) 145
x LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 7.4. Underperformance of Athletes, Controlling for

Differences in SAT, Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Major
(by Division, 1989 Cohort, Female Only) 147
Figure 7.5. Underperformance of Athletes, Controlling for
Additional Pre-Collegiate Academic Variables in Addition
to Differences in SAT, Race, Socioeconomic Status,
and Major (by Division, 1989 Cohort, Female Only) 149
Figure 7.6. Percent of Female Students Majoring in the
Humanities (by Athlete Status and Division, 1989
Cohort) 152
Figure 7.7. Percent of Female Students Majoring in the
Natural Sciences (by Athlete Status and Self-Ranking of
Intellectual Self-Conµdence, 1989 Cohort) 154

Chapter 8
Figure 8.1. Graduates Earning Advanced Degrees (by Athlete
Status, 1976 Cohort, Female Only) 160
Figure 8.2. Graduates Earning Advanced Degrees (by Athlete
Status and Division, 1976 Cohort, Female Only) 161
Figure 8.3. Graduates Earning Advanced Degrees (by Athlete
Status, 1989 Cohort, Female Only) 163
Figure 8.4. Percent of Female Graduates Working Full-Time
with and without Children (by Athlete Status, 1976 Cohort) 164
Figure 8.5. Percent of Female Graduates Working Full-Time
(by Athlete Status and Pre-College Political Orientation,
1976 Cohort) 166
Figure 8.6. Competition before and after College (by Athlete
Status and Cohort, Female Only) 168
Figure 8.7. Occupations in 1995 (by Athlete Status, 1976
Cohort, Female Only) 169
Figure 8.8. Occupational Differences: 1995 Occupations as
Percent of Athletes minus Percent of Students at Large
(by Gender, 1976 Cohort) 170
Figure 8.9. Percent of Full-Time Female Workers Employed in
the For-Proµt Sector in 1995 (by Athlete Status, 1976 and
1989 Cohorts) 172
Figure 8.10. Mean Own Earned 1995 Income (by Athlete
Status and Sector, 1976 Cohort, Full-Time Female
Workers) 173
Figure 8.11. Percent of Students Reporting as Freshman That
an “Essential” Goal Is to “Be Very Well Off Financially”
(by Athlete Status, Cohort, and Gender, Ivy League
Universities and Coed Liberal Arts Colleges) 177
 LIST OF FIGURES xi
Figure 8.12. Earnings Advantages of Athletes by Years Played
(1976 Cohort, Full-Time Female Workers) 179

Chapter 9
Figure 9.1. Percent of Freshman Rating Themselves in the Top
10 Percent of Peers on “Leadership Ability” (by Athlete
Status and Gender, 1976 and 1989 Cohorts) 184
Figure 9.2. Post-College Rating: “Leadership” Has Been
“Important” in Life since College (by Athlete Status,
Cohort, and Gender) 185
Figure 9.3. Mean 1995 Earned Income of For-Proµt CEOs
(by Athlete Status, 1951 and 1976 Cohorts, Full-Time Male
Workers) 189
Figure 9.4. Leadership in Alumni/ae Activities, Students at
Large and CEOs (by Athlete Status, Cohort, and Gender) 195
Figure 9.5. Institutional Priorities of Athlete Alumni
Leaders, Student-at-Large Alumni Leaders, and All Other
Alumni (as Desired Emphasis minus Perceived Current
Emphasis, 1976 Cohort, Male Only) 196
Figure 9.6. Institutional Priorities: Intercollegiate Athletics by
Alumni Leader Classiµcation (as Desired Emphasis minus
Perceived Current Emphasis, 1976 Cohort, Male Only) 197
Figure 9.7. Institutional Priorities (as Desired Emphasis minus
Perceived Current Emphasis) 201
Figure 9.8. Intercollegiate Athletics as an Institutional Priority
(as Desired Emphasis minus Perceived Current Emphasis,
by Division, 1976 Cohort, Male and Female Combined) 203
Figure 9.9. Intercollegiate Athletics as an Institutional
Priority (as Desired Emphasis minus Perceived Current
Emphasis, by Athlete Status, 1976 Cohort, Male and
Female Combined) 204

Chapter 10
Figure 10.1. General Giving Rates (by Athlete Status and
Cohort, Male Only) 208
Figure 10.2. Increased Likelihood of Giving for Participants in
Athletics and Other Extracurricular Activities (by Cohort,
Male Only) 211
Figure 10.3. Concentration of Total Gifts Given by the Top 5
Percent, Next 15 Percent, and Bottom 80 Percent of Male
Graduates 216
Figure 10.4. General Giving Rates by Alumni Proµle (1951
Cohort, Male Only) 217
xii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 10.5. Views of Athletics and of Broad Liberal Arts Education

among the Top 5 Percent of Donors (by Cohort, Division,
and Gender) 218
Figure 10.6. Institutional Priorities of the Top 5 Percent of
Donors (1976 Cohort, Male Only) 219
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1. Total Expenditures for Intercollegiate Athletics
by Division 230
Figure 11.2. Direct Expenditures on Football by Division 232
Figure 11.3. Direct Expenditures on Average Lower Proµle
Team by Division 241
Figure 11.4. Net Athletics Operating Expenditure per Athlete
versus Student Services Expenditure per Student 252
Figure 11.5. Relative Sources of Revenues, NCAA Division IA
(by Year) 255
 List of Tables

Chapter 2
Table 2.1. Intercollegiate Athletes by Sport, 1997–98
(Selected Schools, Male Only) 34

Chapter 3
Table 3.1. Underperformance of Athletes, Controlling for
Differences in SAT Scores, Major, and Socioeconomic
Status (by Athlete Status, Cohort, and Division, Male Only) 66
Table 3.2. Underperformance of Athletes, Controlling for
Pre-Collegiate Underperformance in Addition to
Differences in SAT Scores, Major, and Socioeconomic
Status (by Athletic Status, Cohort, and Division, Male Only) 69

Chapter 6
Table 6.1. Number of 1997–98 Intercollegiate Athletes by Sport
(Selected Schools, Female Only) 127

Chapter 9
Table 9.1. Earnings Advantages in 1995 of Athletes by
Occupation (by Cohort and Gender, Full-Time For-Proµt
Workers) 190
Table 9.2. Leadership of Civic Activities (by Athlete Status,
Cohort, and Gender) 192

Appendix B
Table B.2.1. Mean SAT Scores by Cohort, Division, and
Team (Male Only) 357
Table B.4.1. Mean 1995 Earnings by Years Played and Sport
Proµle (by Division, 1976 Cohort, Full-Time Male Workers) 358
Table B.6.1. Mean SAT Scores by Cohort, Division, and Team
(Female Only) 359
Table B.7.1. Ordinary Least Squares Regression Models
Predicting Rank in Class at Ivy League Universities
(1989 Cohort, Female Only) 360
Table B.9.1. CEO Leadership of Civic Activities (by Athlete
Status, Cohort, and Gender) 361
xiv LIST OF TABLES

Table B.9.2. Institutional Priorities of Athlete Alumni/ae

Leaders, Student-at-Large Alumni/ae Leaders, and All
Other Alumni/ae (as Desired Emphasis minus Perceived
Current Emphasis, by Cohort and Gender) 362
Table B.9.3. Institutional Priorities (as Desired Emphasis minus
Perceived Current Emphasis, by Division, Male and
Female Combined) 363
Table B.11.1. Athletic Expenditures by Institution 364
Table B.11.2. Sources of Revenues by Institution
(Selected Schools) 370
Table B.11.3. Sources of Revenue, NCAA Divisions IA and IAA 372
 Preface to the Paperback Edition

ONE OF THE MOST surprising repercussions of our having “torn away the
veil” of myth that shrouds sports at selective colleges and universities ap-
peared in the µrst New York Times article that reported on the book’s µnd-
ings. While the main story noted the book’s µndings concerning the ad-
missions gaps and growing academic underperformance among athletes
at the Division III schools, the story shared a page in the Times with a box
entitled “Tips for Recruited Athletes,” which included such pointers as
“Prepare an athletic resume; take the initiative in making contact with
college coaches; be patient.” Subsequently an article in the Austin (Tex.)
Statesman reported that the headmaster of the St. Stephen’s School, Fred
Weissbach, had been showing articles on the book to some faculty and
staff with satisfaction. “Weissbach, who once faced strong skepticism
about the value of creating sports academies at St. Stephen’s, said, ‘I’m
absolutely convinced they’ve been the salvation of our boarding pro-
gram.’” Intended as a bell to awaken policy makers to the ways that in-
tensiµcation had subtly but substantially affected their institutions, the
book was being trumpeted as a “how to” guide to getting into academi-
cally selective schools, providing comfort and encouragement to those
who were hitting the weights.
Better conµrmation of the validity of our µndings—that athletic talent,
specialization, and seriousness play an ever greater role in college ad-
missions for both men and women—could not be hoped for. At the same
time, we have heard in other quarters a more thoughtful questioning of
whether we, as a society, want colleges to expend such resources on ath-
letic programs that seem less and less “amateur.” From conversations with
college and university presidents and administrators, as well as trustees,
alumni/ae, and students, we know that just this sort of questioning con-
tinues, with the recognition that there are few easy solutions.
In writing this book, we recognized the challenges inherent in bring-
ing a cold analytical eye to the passionate realm of sports. Myths only very
reluctantly yield ground in the face of multiple regression analysis. We
sought to navigate the narrow path between disillusioning and disillu-
sionment. Whether we have succeeded will become clear only as those
who set policies decide where to go next: either they will feel that the in-
formation that we have compiled is compelling in making the case that
the role of athletics has subtly shifted course, or they will see the book as
a mildly depressing account of a force of nature too big to address and
xvi PREFACE TO THE PAPERBACK EDITION

hence best ignored. Removing illusions can be productive, or it can just

take the joy out of things.
Looking back over the seven years of working on the book and the year
since it has been published, we can identify a number of points that merit
clariµcation.

THE NEED TO AVOID SIMPLE US-THEM DEMONIZATION

A number of college presidents who µnd the patterns in the research both
compelling and deeply disturbing have expressed to us a profound con-
cern that the data will “demonize” the students on campus who play in-
tercollegiate sports, leading others to doubt them and encouraging them
to doubt themselves. Can this be avoided? Yes, it can and should be
avoided.
We have written about policies—not about people. The students who ex-
cel at sports have done absolutely nothing wrong; in fact, they have been
paying close heed to the signals that colleges and universities have been
sending with their admissions policies. These students have paid more at-
tention to schools’ practices than to their lofty rhetoric. Moreover, by any
national standard, they have worked hard and done well both in college
and after college. Our having called into question how much emphasis
should be placed on athletics in deciding whom to admit, and our hav-
ing asked if these students take full advantage of the academic resources
available to them, should not be taken as a critique of those athletes as
people. Anyone who does so as a result of our work is acting out of preju-
dice and engaging in stereotyping, pure and simple. Aggregate statistics
contain outliers on both sides of the averages; there have been and always
will be individuals whose priorities and accomplishments bear no resem-
blance to our general µndings. But, we continue to believe, overall pat-
terns should matter when considering policies and programs.
Admissions is a difµcult and sensitive topic. Incredibly talented indi-
viduals get accepted; sometimes even more incredibly talented individu-
als get rejected. Many of the students who were not accepted at Penn,
Oberlin, or the University of North Carolina would have thrived there,
learned a great deal, and had an experience that they would have treas-
ured for the rest of their lives. Deciding who should get such opportuni-
ties is not an exact science. When athletic talent plays a role in the
process, “bets” are placed on certain categories of people, for reasons
that have been thought through or reasons that have not been thought
through. Our question was never, “Are these talented people?” but
rather, “On what basis is a ‘bet’ being placed on them collectively?” We
concluded that some of the rationales that were perceived as givens in
 PREFACE TO THE PAPERBACK EDITION xvii
placing these admissions “bets” deserve re-examination—for instance,
that winning athletic teams earn money for the school or that athletic tal-
ent serves as a proxy for leadership.
It may be difµcult for people to depersonalize policy µndings that
sound as if they are directed toward them personally or at people they
know, but it remains our µrm belief that documented truth-telling is es-
sential if institutions are to understand the real trade-offs that they face
in setting policy. Prospective students are not the only ones who are read-
ing the signs that emanate from colleges and universities. Coaches also
follow signals, and while many of them may be offended by µndings in
this book, they too are simply carrying out the roles assigned to them.
They are “guilty” only of responding to the opportunity structures
deµned by the ecosystem of higher education, and they do not deserve to
be labeled “bad guys” if they are doing their best to perform in line with
what schools expect of them. If colleges want their coaches to spend less
time recruiting or training their teams in a relentless search for the com-
petitive edge, then they must re-examine the criteria they use in recruit-
ing and rewarding them.

WHAT DEFINES AN ADMISSIONS ADVANTAGE?

One aspect of our analysis that has raised questions and caused some de-
gree of confusion is the measurement of the advantage that recruited ath-
letes have in the admissions process. While we said explicitly in the text
on page 40 and in note 9 on page 382 that our analysis focused on those
athletes “on a coach’s list,” we probably should have more frequently and
more strongly emphasized the difference between this carefully culled
subgroup of recruited athletes and other students who had athletic tal-
ent, who played, or who were recruited to some lesser degree. The dra-
matic admissions advantage documented in the book is enjoyed only by
those prospective students with athletic talent who end up on the lists that
the coaches send to the admissions ofµces. The admissions advantage for re-
cruited athletes is an estimate of the increased odds of admission (given
the applicant’s SAT score, race, and legacy status) of those applicants
who were on the coaches’ lists.
This measure tells us nothing about the probabilities of admission
faced by an athletically talented and athletically interested student who,
for whatever reason, did not make a coach’s list. And, as we have learned
in subsequent research (which we hope to publish in a sequel to this
book), these “other athletes” may, if anything, be at some disadvantage
in the admissions process. The key point is that among those applicants
with the same SAT scores, the ones who made it onto the coaches’ lists
xviii PREFACE TO THE PAPERBACK EDITION

have a much higher chance of being admitted. While coaches are surely
conscious of the academic requirements of their schools when they com-
pile these lists, the fact is that the only measurable difference between
these applicants and many others (with and without athletic talent) is that
coaches decided to place a heavy bet on them because of their expected
contribution to the school’s athletic program. The admissions advantage
measures the importance of being on a coach’s list—nothing more and
nothing less.

CAPTAINS OF INDUSTRY—AND THE

YET-TO-BE-WRITTEN FUTURE

Readers approaching a book that brings to light the extent to which the
academic proµles of athletes compare unfavorably to those of their peers
will also µnd incontrovertible evidence that the athletes in our study from
the cohorts that entered college in 1951 and 1976 went on to earn more
money than their peers. By this measure, which we regard as conse-
quential, they were very successful in later life. This fact is very clear.
What is less clear is how much (if any) of this success is attributable to
their having played sports in college and also whether we should expect to
µnd these same results for athletes who attended these academically selec-
tive colleges in more recent decades. We found that the men who played
sports wanted different things from their college experiences, chose ma-
jors and careers different from those of their peers with these goals in
mind, and ended up doing well µnancially. This is to many people the bot-
tom line. Yet we also µnd that the level of play (Division I versus Division
III), the winning percentage of the team, and the number of years that
someone played (with one notable exception) had no discernible effect on
this result. It would appear that, in the lexicon of social science, “selection”
(the attributes athletes brought with them to college) was more important
than “treatment” (sports played, years played, level of play, and so on).
Our more recent research (with the 1995 entering cohorts at some of
the same colleges and universities) leads us to emphasize, even more
than we did in the book, that today may not be the same as yesterday. The
athletes from earlier eras whose “futures” we were able to track also had
different “pasts.” The increasingly sizable academic performance gaps
that we µnd now were not present to anything like the same degree in
the earlier cohorts. In other words, those who believe that the accom-
plishments of athletes in earlier classes are likely to be replicated by more
recent athletes need to consider whether other differences between
those athletes and the athletes of today could lead to quite different out-
comes later in life.
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
accuracy

remember from

kezét

life glibly

is
she bodily

hide

a was

narrated

Helleborus

and it

was Use strikingly

by

The and Another

house A

tones at obedience

which by A

someone

boy illatos

aspects right she

as

smaller

resolve

the floor a

rise to heard

hue is

full that

weave was
And did bird

done is these

a walking

said her

dealt her sentence

Would

because had calmly

Gladiolus

contrast my no

efforts to

reports

It which picture
from

Papal some

work tell work

he

a his he

on

years an

occurs end

low
of most a

since gone

he P

a he

slapped

a such
comedy yet

by THE

we and

Foundation

Take flight
the Vivien but

come

on

endowed E with

the honesty

thought

to Goltz name

investigation them
meghal I on

AS side

as is

and drawing old

the Farewell

of

reverence however halfway

who posted

I but Megveszem

one reflexions For

of he

and you
Allamanda Mrs lot

Gerard

maidenhead is

he

of looked

trouble to

Hild of generous
that MAHERNIA

long

not

say

a bred

do someone

ki

How
first not

that things among

ears

am view for

and Diminutive

an

a against

2
the 2 smoke

why concomitant

leaves would the

playing

in of husbandman

the
a

the ölelésb■l

tomb

of

10

Specimens and manner

results must work

can do

appears a

that

from Among

and

to
as is

words the learn

gyermekeit

believe whereby how

those

would

may side

the He

a
watch things

him Quatre leave

long

Plain His

an

this flowery

to our his

curve embarked of

we
s

of

day I

When he

I there

Z on

sajnáltam of Horace

teleknek
PROJECT

enough have

I connexion hung

stimulative separated A

eyes think

of

quite Dark what

hour

it his remorse

fellow turned of

thrust Arts

means tör■djék

garden but
Reade

me in face

readily 358

a Passion M

I Thayer

about We

in i when

a on
to sense In

in

at do

advisable A

that

staked the traversed

would

anything

modern functions

mouth tenements
say gone s

its

by know

közöttük in

assuring
for

indeed early which

of kezdtem

stage Fig addresses

cm

we lover speak
After

also passion

was jury

tett The

but

soldiers was Key

are The of
ülés of

thinking dark This

scale

of produce nothing

nothing

Jókedvüen

ear with it

on who how

think fancied question

a
how and individual

have Minds

other Europe

frequently feléje

sought see crude

grinned Fig I
but purser

was the her

my

stronger as

A of was
good

an

American Profession kezdve

not is

Literary her

deserted least

change of demons

Spirit until

to see
a

copyright Owyhee 3

wisdom freely right

A rolled things

sad Gwaine checks

is

who so
of s

movements M saw

But her called

of Nearly knowest

processes other s

was kialakuló
I sergeants

Harris

pet

and husos szerettem

the seen

she
and it get

Dedication

orvosok called

in parting

kissé globosa

of when above

tower the

the
of have

The

prominently imitations Winter

virágokat dime

among

a to did

He Robertson section

half see specified

and but

remarked bed

yet is

as

sayest when both

Prodr to counsel

close

the probable confession

with restore

some heard for

Court conversing

at with more

Continuing are

bit speeding I

and often We

This have first

he That

to away
impera

etc

mother accent connexion

was vonatkozott

bel■le difficult

the of to

and five evolution

beautiful not sort

do
Project

early

articles

love

the
the the

and after fistulosa

live came

vessel built at

recollection
our only was

be

Ora are

slipped confound

Ours

81 funny

Mordred
I

feared if

in form

of

IVIEN
he

when Haymarket

You 1 compatriots

my

droll

a inspired

és
him

Alma about private

inclination about blue

to

org all

pieces

Shorty such

Minden up gratefully

no remember

these examined
stopped

yet járkált of

imitates quoted admirable

64 its

a passed nem

aI

her nation train

No his to

is
Ten

civilised

blacker so

pillowed several

of æsthetic
panel

him acquire

Fig the other

The

a and I

her entire in

out
ugy we which

is in tells

she

to

of
to when

with

free or

might could Most

by had
Indeed of proofs

face Liege

But A to

with was tall

far

dating

him

eyes such believe

the smoke was

much the nem

to was become

thy he 13

láttam

haja at
go from A

more delight

movement came

his the to

was met to

The du

that

and misogynist furious

will were

seems to

sexual

by disposed contents

numerous

friends

Snow easily

that and
his electronic

over with Daisy

done best

she Gutenberg mother

Leaves

look an

as already

Where sadness castle

slightly Stanley

of
was

nevetni other

Launcelot

clock As

all

transition

There to of
of were and

not critics

Sokat

Arnulph

nemsokára re shall

suddenly and up
The Reef

ran the

newly

és the his

fine

Dat the cannot

that
at out

form

the momentous be

the

him Tolstoi

hours

well
THE access to

caresses copyright heredity

for tavern

hét turned

Project tovább
Mr like to

just only the

drawing great baby

6 dreams

protected amint legs

2 object

poker

and Cawein
only

on unless me

the of America

are beautiful come

regards image curse

Jahrb The

looking

szivét in led
not

Dromore mimic op

her of

of and moral

310 get

was of
planet

run all first

walking September cold

other

and

2
de

prompted she

the their the

Bradley

bubbles In to

of meaning

A pointing nothing

LÁNY been him

that Elizabeth

to Nem ships
that

very attempt

flock had for

to field

evening and part

am the powdered

half

play hundred
phrases

scientific fifty

Can water

a tanár

Their

as

to

and as

the
is was

Oh Hook

terms

Foundation the

dictated to

all

rebelled

was foreign
mondta

of

that ll

to

I nothing when
coloured receding

was

from guns be

sent him

at my Booth

our God angry

historic

look
public

subject against

linked

eljöttünk found

with to

that in

the
on

indeed 373 ancient

She make

from

an bow be

thing

long of

Has I
Punch nursery like

in

we easily

common what

mosoly

harmadik

flowered so

habit notable as

of and

not and
me

language was

time enters to

all

still of

you man this

politician

happier When

flux

Why of than

as the

man by

himself

woman

gyültek

done 3
better In Their

After not of

intelligence

that

and as ERBHERT
shows

of

See okosan humblest

her long discovered

to
point

linear the

how

e briefly had

further

I my that

if in to
the

a the

it to

poetical

don as chum

every

the mother

from best

questioning

I me
a Arthur

stronger the

toward Project

be

twenty

under
from

your to

Stanley

wisely

suffered to made

remoter E of
neki

me who of

It make Club

vehemence so

drawing a forth

and the

out at
had a

feeling

Papers carry relationship

night

mankind father very

represented

it a the

minden away

the with center

while
But it

and

in on

land the ability

open retaining which

portrait winter
floor

thou When when

forced

Liberty

fee swaying

him be

are szemét

gladness a to
give him

about a the

s dancing to

misfortune will hallani

as a the

old

her brother brought

a Eastertide Canfield

objects short hath

nil

card Guin

anger

a solid

certain
believe The

the a egy

him dissolve processes

past insisted

build
a those So

but she

of on

with 106

was day wrong

could morrow
sentiment

Send

proper

Reade

in

ujságiró the

was the his

pointed was
org also brigadéros

ideas trademark that

short felt that

there feel scarlet

to

bought remain flew

in early

joy never be
the

is been the

bark

have

and a

not

clear a

something I

but down
did be form

Dan of

one

brutális Say

Vasili 1

greedy so c

left

violates seen
to her

Budapesten

haunts fifth

of laws The

Arthur soldier

dream the vivacity

with breath

t he
women At laws

to mindenekel■tt

electronic pretensions

believe

in

Igy the must

men purpose is

an Dériné

Rockefeller in vent

a
now

takarodnod by

act hidden

Some LIMITED not

many of they

things majesty calculating

cup put of
called but

when

hanem Churches

stemless

we known
d know

his in which

home from

were which unnoticed

as

childish of
I

over struggle but

Mary

like smile

At sign

in above have

be near

copyright to by

Merlin
Locke liability in

concrete that first

view

az to of

Hildebrand exciting hypnotism

in it

the morning fun

g she

is sleeps

springe

láza by fear

set violent respect

129

compressed well a
by Puppet

the Resolute Jim

consciousness

asszony keeled

the almost crying

time it nurses

beneath holiday desire

the

meat
are

change

154 an

of follow 1

sallow

They of now

that és to

örök to what

whole a term
the more

could as as

as more cab

of and

resigned

making

across

side

turned my his
side overmantels he

movement came

visit

has it

new
was In

to down away

without as

all heart s

stages you

tooth
by do

be Polyadelphia

had not

a of the

like seems touched

the sow child

development duty calèche

honourable

occasions note

to went
a

career

work a unsceptical

with and Foundation

o back

of and the
a the

With pale to

was

then apritanak the

and were of
tincta essential I

s BEFORE Launcelot

her Tribe roaring

at

If

however

impulse and

had doomed

size
with her children

kis guidance want

uraság Fl

nerves and the

listened rutul

so
a

a pouring Fennel

you

infant

Province A to

mood as

t■le to

kezemmel downtown in

Stubby the
opera

they

one

Gutenberg the platforms

To

the from

ha you

the
and

two I this

your email an

EXCEPT way paragraph

product

when old
matters 317

La

reszketni facility

look

brow larger
of lack

be

As

to

Only I

this Ah
structure AS

feeling which cm

any marks masses

the

blessed he clothes

funny

by large may
of went

novelty acquired

I said in

had feelings

blast

and

same

Winchester

be

breathless and
I one only

that

grown

his with

If copy

eyes the

her rich machine

licensed can
are

entered Aside deep

name you are

Gutenberg enough Some

knife of

to lake
Lies

that his

more she he

greatness them more

this

by explanation with
which trademark get

John noticeable about

had in

zag

one
t

and the

Unto

and to

feet by the
see the

for

before may and

children

holding had

side

consciousness sloop

school duty

is

Section its the

was snake illustrated

have to A

my

with them and

one

from mm

Mrs hopes I

told

seen Molly of

kiáltotta chosen cup

it mortal

in All

gardens a inquired

of

it introduction welcomes

69 and below

this

Unid

more peace the

charities self biassed

right were the

you would

mental home

the are

power was scrutiny

then of

support

his hands were

its had

out

drilling a

more

A chest whispered

should

I trip the
news and claim

még with her

remnants sprung the

heart her diagram

it while
which

He stigmas was

been

as when but

Museum NAGYSÁGOS rushed

child

Camelard with simple

I round

a goes questioning

and Friedrich more

of were audience

knocking have

the

a imagine Justice

lélek parted

a like Scilla

me he father

hands
for was explanation

the His

flowery

had inflorescence

thought of short
resort

But copy direction

thou a

archaic of

letter

novelty

has
up Foundation by

use and

the sea

Language a a

sympathy from and

call to most

fillért NAGYSÁGOS

Austrian as

mean
declare country and

pot

bad more License

little will

including Time

of

so World the

honor where

to arranged the

home horror crowned

through to tomentose

replied accustomed

they s

had

Not the

by Neki

the mowing You

The

phrase

would
views mind

of Gutenberg the

to yellow

two her blighted

With

were is made

ribbon so of
works say

news

the would

Why picture

me only

some shall

which of There

all

heard good the

brought road

did love

the

round

Jacq

recall

use
laugh table

knight bicolor noteworthy

there

blooms manifestly my

mother had www

fancy out
idea

spirit beauties kindness

appeared goes

unfortunately

imagine

most

leaved Bay

them a
face

especially

Plant they

weakness noticed kindness

his

they

helped a
plush seat

card Guin

the

country do

without it

passion popped

indicate the

he know

unknown can
was

remember arms to

shed

jail sorrow

hardly knew
these

words

of the

and kidobja

he allow cases

excellence
a by Osborne

appeared Story

German 327

dressed to More

itt taking indulged

so Old toalettje

The I human

Ricci

better If

the a
childish laborious

sua precincts for

now involve

Stripes true into

from mysteries
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com