I'm sorry if this is a stupid question, but Google is not answering it for me. I spent several weeks here seeing references about "HA" colleges not knowing what it meant before I read a post in which someone spelled out High Academic. I understand what an Ivy League University is, but can someone explain to me what qualifies a school to be "High Academic"?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Basically any school with a low acceptance rate or a strong program within the school (public college with top business school).
HA has no "term of art" meaning.
While there is broad agreement about certain schools/leagues (e.g., Ivy, Chicago), I believe the agreement breaks down in schools which have radically different admissions standards for athletes when compared to regular students (e.g., UCLA, CAL).
To me, a true HA requires roughly similar admission metrics for athletes and non-athletes (viewed as a group) AND roughly similar course work during college for both subsets (i.e., majors of similar utility).
Using those guidelines, there are many more HAs when viewed purely through a regular student lens than HAs when viewed purely through the lens of the athletes.
HA is in the eye of the beholder. PABaseball and Goosegg did a great job explaining what it is. Here is a list of who is HA from a very good source (his daughter ran track at Harvard and he writes a lot on the topic) http://www.tier1athletics.org/tier-one-colleges/. It is as good a list as any.
fenwaysouth posted:HA is in the eye of the beholder. PABaseball and Goosegg did a great job explaining what it is. Here is a list of who is HA from a very good source (his daughter ran track at Harvard and he writes a lot on the topic) http://www.tier1athletics.org/tier-one-colleges/. It is as good a list as any.
Thanks Fenway, always very generous with the info!
Wechson posted:fenwaysouth posted:HA is in the eye of the beholder. PABaseball and Goosegg did a great job explaining what it is. Here is a list of who is HA from a very good source (his daughter ran track at Harvard and he writes a lot on the topic) http://www.tier1athletics.org/tier-one-colleges/. It is as good a list as any.
Thanks Fenway, always very generous with the info!
BTW, why is there a line through EMORY? Did they do something wrong? lol
When Fenway posted this list before I remember remarking that it had some really odd omissions. Just for one example, UC Davis, but not UCLA? UVA but not UNC? C'mon.
Despite being a few years old now, for D1, I think our user Boeyorpar's list is better.
https://community.hsbaseballwe...ball-college-ranking
And his D3 list is _much_ better.
https://community.hsbaseballwe...ball-college-ranking
And updated here:
If I were going to critique that list, I'd say if Oberlin makes the DIII list, Grinnell should, too. Also, I'd add Vassar and Wesleyan.
As for the D1s, I'm not sure all of them are as good at developing the complete individual. I know of a couple of bright kids who went to some of them and have heard stories about lowered expectations and intense pressure to compromise academically. I also find it interesting that many freshman at these schools start out listing an ambitious major like engineering on their team bio, but by the time they are juniors, they're all sports management majors (or the like). That might work out fine for the kid who gets drafted, but plenty of them will have to go find a real job when their four years are done.
Does anyone think the baseball player coming into the job market from UNC is in a better place than the player coming into the same job market from Harvard?
UNC #5; Harvard #31?
You simply cant invent an equation, run it through excel, and produce anything of value. (E.g., a mix of RPI and academics?)
What jobs does a graduate have available (after controlling for a few wandering years in MILB)? What majors do ball players have compared to the regular student body? Do all students take the same period of time to graduate? If a player wants Investment Banking or International Consulting are his chances really better if he doesn't go to Princeton?
No list substitutes for a parents' deep dive in developing a clear understanding of the tradeoffs a kid makes in attending a school which produces fantastic regular student graduates but (relatively) few similar baseball grads when compared to a school where it's difficult to distinguish between athletes and non-athletes.
(And, in developing your personal model, ignore any listed "majors" from underclassmen; those are mostly aspirational and will eventually fall by the wayside as the realities of a 55 game schedule, 40 hour off season schedules and summer play introduce a dose of reality.)
The list I provided through Tier One Athletics was used to answer a simple & basic question by one of our posters who didn't know HA. The URL made it convenient to answer the question. It was not intended to compete with US News and World reports list. As I said earlier HA is in the eye of the beholder. To take it a step further, everybody's academic and athletic requirements are different. Create your own list or own index (as Bogey did) for things that matter to you and your son. After all, this is the United States! For example if a top engineering school is important, you can hack off 80% of the schools on the Tier One list and add a few more that focus on just the engineering college without regard to baseball level. Essentially, this is what my son did. His list would look very different, and that is the objective!
Again, no one right answer especially when you factor in different standards for athletes, but this is how collegedata.com categorizes "Entrance Difficulty".
Fenway's "eye of the beholder" caveat in regard to defining "HA," high academic is important. Important as to, from whose perspective it's being viewed?
Considering also whether from a regular student/non-athlete applicant? Or, from the perspective of a highly recruited athlete?
Son is transferring from I would call a HA university due to the fact that their average ACT score is around a 31, and that they reject some 75% of those who apply. A player can be recruited by this type of school who does not have the #s close to those required of a regular applicant, and gain admission. A different student with those same #s would not stand a chance.
So, one could say, there's HA schools for baseball recruits and regular students alike (read: Ivy) but then there's also HA just for the regular applicant but not the recruited athlete, say Big State U (Michigan, Virginia, Cal, etc, etc.). So yeah, eye of the beholder for sure.
Perhaps another baseline reference would be the list of D-1 and D-3s that attend such recruiting events as Headfirst, or Showball? Both those events are in the "HA" market of recruiting events. At least HF is.
#1 Assistant Coach posted:Fenway's "eye of the beholder" caveat in regard to defining "HA," high academic is important. Important as to, from whose perspective it's being viewed?
Considering also whether from a regular student/non-athlete applicant? Or, from the perspective of a highly recruited athlete?
Son is transferring from I would call a HA university due to the fact that their average ACT score is around a 31, and that they reject some 75% of those who apply. A player can be recruited by this type of school who does not have the #s close to those required of a regular applicant, and gain admission. A different student with those same #s would not stand a chance.
So, one could say, there's HA schools for baseball recruits and regular students alike (read: Ivy) but then there's also HA just for the regular applicant but not the recruited athlete, say Big State U (Michigan, Virginia, Cal, etc, etc.). So yeah, eye of the beholder for sure.
Perhaps another baseline reference would be the list of D-1 and D-3s that attend such recruiting events as Headfirst, or Showball? Both those events are in the "HA" market of recruiting events. At least HF is.
Poor form, I know, replying to my own post, but I’m wondering if “HA P-5” is an oxymoron?
Goosegg says it well above. From my son’s experience at a P-5, if the HC wants you, and you’re NCAA eligible? You’re pretty much in. Yes, there is a “basement level” of what’s academically acceptable, even for the HC. But for most part, for the baseball recruit, there’s really no obstacles for a baseball recruit to gain admission to any P-5, that I can think of. Yet from the lay person’s POV, the regular student, there’s plenty of obstacles to gain admission to P-5s that that have high academic standards.
Ivys, UChicago, Johns Hopkins, Middlebury, etc, the baseball recruit is not that different from the average student. Hence why they, and others like them, are HA.
From a regular student’s POV hard not to call UCLA, Cal, Michigan, anything but HA though as well.
It is all very confusing!
#1 Assistant Coach posted:#1 Assistant Coach posted:Fenway's "eye of the beholder" caveat in regard to defining "HA," high academic is important. Important as to, from whose perspective it's being viewed?
Considering also whether from a regular student/non-athlete applicant? Or, from the perspective of a highly recruited athlete?
Son is transferring from I would call a HA university due to the fact that their average ACT score is around a 31, and that they reject some 75% of those who apply. A player can be recruited by this type of school who does not have the #s close to those required of a regular applicant, and gain admission. A different student with those same #s would not stand a chance.
So, one could say, there's HA schools for baseball recruits and regular students alike (read: Ivy) but then there's also HA just for the regular applicant but not the recruited athlete, say Big State U (Michigan, Virginia, Cal, etc, etc.). So yeah, eye of the beholder for sure.
Perhaps another baseline reference would be the list of D-1 and D-3s that attend such recruiting events as Headfirst, or Showball? Both those events are in the "HA" market of recruiting events. At least HF is.
Poor form, I know, replying to my own post, but I’m wondering if “HA P-5” is an oxymoron?
Goosegg says it well above. From my son’s experience at a P-5, if the HC wants you, and you’re NCAA eligible? You’re pretty much in. Yes, there is a “basement level” of what’s academically acceptable, even for the HC. But for most part, for the baseball recruit, there’s really no obstacles for a baseball recruit to gain admission to any P-5, that I can think of. Yet from the lay person’s POV, the regular student, there’s plenty of obstacles to gain admission to P-5s that that have high academic standards.
Ivys, UChicago, Johns Hopkins, Middlebury, etc, the baseball recruit is not that different from the average student. Hence why they, and others like them, are HA.
From a regular student’s POV hard not to call UCLA, Cal, Michigan, anything but HA though as well.
It is all very confusing!
I know and know of kids who where dumber than a tree stump who got into what what otherwise be considered High Academics. These schools were P5 conferences. One of the kids was in remedial courses all through high school. Another kid didn’t become NCAA eligible on his SAT scores until the last testing period the spring of his senior year. He “failed” the SAT from an eligibility standpoint several times.
I had never heard the term "high academic" before going through baseball recruiting; non-athlete parents don't know what you mean when you say it.
anotherparent posted:I had never heard the term "high academic" before going through baseball recruiting; non-athlete parents don't know what you mean when you say it.
I never heard that term used except here.
TPM posted:anotherparent posted:I had never heard the term "high academic" before going through baseball recruiting; non-athlete parents don't know what you mean when you say it.
I never heard that term used except here.
One term I saw recently that I couldn’t figure out is HYP. Stands for Harvard/Yale/Princeton.
Which is one of the many reasons I didn’t attend HY or P.
TPM posted:anotherparent posted:I had never heard the term "high academic" before going through baseball recruiting; non-athlete parents don't know what you mean when you say it.
I never heard that term used except here.
I believe part of the reason is that recruited athletes are going through the college process a lot earlier than non-athletes. Sometimes months or even years. So, the non-athlete parent or student is not familiar with the terms and language that the recruited athlete has been using for some time. Trust me, the lingo is used on other sites as well.
Certainly the term is used outside of this site - I only meant that it is specific to athletic recruiting. I have an older non-athlete son, we never heard that term in his college application process. But, we did hear it early on about our baseball son, "he'll go high-academic".
I agree that it generally means "non-P5 school that might not be that great at baseball, but is excellent at academics, and is only available to baseball players with great grades and test scores." Beyond that, it means what you (or the school, or Headfirst, etc.) want it to mean.
https://www.headfirsthonorroll.com/confirmed-coaches/
https://www.perfectgame.org/Ev...ault.aspx?event=9778
https://showballbaseball.com/c...amp-june-23-24-2020/
Links here from Headfirst Baseball, Perfect Game, and Showball camp websites using either the term "High Academic camps," or just "Academic camps." The term "HA" was new to me as well, when I first began trying to understand it all. Still learning.
To me, all places of higher learning should be considered "academic," and even "high academic," and they are. But I think both terms have become synonymous with descriptors like, "highly selective," and "highly competitive," mostly in regards to academic admissions standards. Terms highly selective and highly competitive, I honestly feel are more accurate, as anyone going out of their way to attain more, or higher knowledge, after their secondary education is clearly an "academic," no matter what the institution.
Like it or not, it's the term used to describe the type of schools you'll see listed in links above on Headfirst's and Showball's websites. PG usually does not post the "academic" schools who attend their academic showcases until the day of the camp, I believe. Never seen their schools attending list online.
To be noted, as always Fenway's, "Eye of the beholder," caveat here. The eye being Headfirst and Showball marketers, and the players and families who pay the fees to attend.
PG's site actually uses phrases, "better academic schools," and "top academic schools," attend their camps.
That Showball list is all over the spectrum IMO.
Fenway has pretty much nailed this one. Of the various lists, the one he posted comes closest to a list of true high academic schools. (IMHO). And even that list could probably be shortened a bit. Can't say that I'm a fan of Bogey's list. For example, the three S.C. schools, Clemson, Furman, and Wofford are all good schools, but I wouldn't put any of them in an elite, high academic category.
Frankly, I'm not sure any of this matters if your kid's not a STEM major, or something equally rigorous. Even some of the true high academics have some version of Jock Major.
PG does not post lists of coaches attending any of their events. This includes showcases and tournaments. I can't say they haven't in the past but they have not done it in the last 4 or 5 years for sure.
My son attended a fall academic camp at Lakepoint in 2018 and I am pretty sure there weren't many (perhaps NONE) coaches present. I do remember a fall academic showcase at Lakepoint in the fall a few years ago that was on the same weekend as the first official "freshman" WWBA tourney. I am sure some coaches (P5's) attended both just because they were there on-site. My son was playing the in WWBA and there were many coaches present. I have to think some of them took a walk down to the other end of the complex to check out the academic showcase.
I'm not saying it isn't worth it; just be aware that you are attending for two main reasons:
1. You want updated metrics (both reliable and uniform in how they are collected)
2. You want to see how you stack-up and have your metrics compared to other players that are interested in the HA route
I can't say the PG Academic Showcase is your ticket to a HA academic school--just take a look at the history of these events and browse the Top Prospect lists. You can see where these "top prospect" players ended up commitment-wise.
From my experience I'd say the Showball Head Coach Academic camp is one of the better camps for exposure to HA schools.
I grew up with the term “top academic” since everyone in the family attended one. I never heard “HA” until this site. I got the “what are you doing?” family treatment when I chose a state university to play baseball over being 7th gen at a HA. The state university is a top 20-25 US News. My saving grace was my father had the nerve to attend a Big Ten to play football until he got injured and transferred to the family college of choice.
Clemson, Wofford and Furman may be quality colleges. But they are hardly high academics. There’s one on the first list in this thread that gives me pause. It has a 31% acceptance rate. It’s popular because. Catholic colleges are in. The school has very little reputation for known scholars. But hitting the work force in an area with a large Catholic work force the college is a great connection.
What is starting to be looked at in terms of the quality of a college is how much you pay, the average debt at graduation, starting pay in the work force and pay after five and ten years.
What’s the sense of coming out of college with 100K+ debt and a job as a social worker? Even a person with a MSW only makes 40-60K. That’s another two years of paying for college.
fenwaysouth posted:TPM posted:anotherparent posted:I had never heard the term "high academic" before going through baseball recruiting; non-athlete parents don't know what you mean when you say it.
I never heard that term used except here.
I believe part of the reason is that recruited athletes are going through the college process a lot earlier than non-athletes. Sometimes months or even years. So, the non-athlete parent or student is not familiar with the terms and language that the recruited athlete has been using for some time. Trust me, the lingo is used on other sites as well.
I know the term is used, now a days. I don't visit other sites.
When I first came to the HSBBW, IL schools were the high academic programs. And FWIW, back then, you couldn't play baseball and major in engineering at Clemson.
MTH,
As to your comment about whether it matters, I agree. I never considered Clemson a high academic school, however if one is considering the engineering program, it is excellent, so I have heard.
I agree with you, it really shouldnt matter. As I said to someone yesterday, what should matter is that a program gives you an opportunity to attend their school, play baseball and have your education paid for so you don't have to walk away with a huge debt.
Couple of things I would like to add (a whole lot of great information here):
1. Boeyorpar's list is at least 2 years old and if one reads the first couple of sentences they will see this, "the baseball ranking is from NCAA D1 Baseball website's RPI ranking. Academic ranking is still WSJ; Academic-baseball weighting is still 70-30." This does NOT mean that all schools ranked are "high academic" but higher rated according to ONE of the many ranking services.
2. My daughter was recruited to play women's hockey and had tours/meetings with coaches from many of the schools on these lists from Ivies to NESCAC's to higher ranking State U's. Albeit a much smaller list of schools for a niche sport like womens hockey but there are significant differences in the education experiences at the full range of schools at Division 1 and D3. There is a HUGE difference in the academic, financial, and other demographic factors at these extremely selective schools. While my kid is a 3.65 (no weighting at her school) and a 30 ACT student at most likely the top prep school in our part of the country, there is almost no way that she would have been able to get in to an Ivy or top 4 NESCAC school without hockey. There are kids with 35's and 3.8 or better that are NOT accepted A LOT at those schools. We heard from an Ivy that a 27 was doable and a 28 at a top NESCAC. Both coaches said a higher score was better for multiple reasons including the academic index (Ivy) and allowing coaches more flexibility on other recruits. The range of accepted students to Ivy's on my kids HS team is from a 2.8/26 to a 3.95/35.
3. There are many stories here on this site about kids that could have played D1 baseball yet chose a lower level baseball experience for a different type of college experience. Different strokes for different folks.
4. Not every student athlete at Vanderbilt, Michigan, Northwestern, UNC, or USC is a 3.75+ with a 33 ACT. Many are but most are not. Those are a few great schools that are all difficult to get into without special circumstances.
5. Lastly there are schools like MIT and others where being an athlete is a bonus and holds little weight in the application process. Williams, Middlebury, and a few other HA D3 schools want "well rounded" students and being an exceptional athlete and a good enough student (which is a well above average HS student) is ok with them. Those schools want to be elite in everything that they do from academics to arts to athletics and beyond.
Fenway. What would be your top engineering w baseball ranking? General engineering sense. Not degree specific. 50-50% ratio between education and sports. Pick from:
MIT
Cornell
Cal tech
Georgia tech
Stanford
Cal
Rose hulman
Rennselaer
Worchester poly
Cal poly slo
Columbia
Harvey mudd
CO school of mines
Swarthmore
Penn
Ucsd
Hmm. Forgot Illinois and purdue
A more narrow question would be: where can you play AND get an engineering degree.
Goosegg posted:A more narrow question would be: where can you play AND get an engineering degree.
I’ve looked at quite a few of these rosters for Lefty while he/we build his list of schools that might be a good fit. Surprisingly few have actual STEM majors in their junior/senior years. It was quite disappointing.
I havent checked the rosters but it doesnt surprise me Lefty. I suspect it is REALLY hard to do engineering or STEM. Kudos to fenways boy at an ivy.
Goosegg posted:A more narrow question would be: where can you play AND get an engineering degree.
Some schools will actively discourage engineering majors. However, IMO, viability of the engineering major usually depends more on the player than the school.
Eastco,
Not an easy question to answer and I agree with Goosegg and MTH's point...it is really about the kid. It is very difficult to generalize, so I'll let US News and World Report do that. For my son it was more about where he could have the opportunity to get an engineering degree (in 4 years) and play competitive college baseball. It was not a 50/50 decision between academics and baseball. It was more like 90/10 or 95/5, and my son told me he was willing to drop baseball if his studies became an issue. I emphasize the word "play" in the previous sentence because he was not willing to invest baseball time as an engineering major if he was not going to play. He had an academic scholarship offer to be an engineering major (+honors college) at an SEC school. He declined because he thought best case he'd make the field by his junior year in a part time role at best. In his mind, he thought this was a waste of time to his engineering studies.
He was a Mechanical Engineering major with a minor in Material Science. Very few schools offered that minor so that had a significant weighting to his decision as well. What this meant after a lot of research (and many recruiting mistakes) was that Ivy, Patriot, or D3 was going to be the best engineering/baseball fit for my son due to a reduced number of games (~42) , doubleheaders on the weekend, reduced practices compared to traditional D1, and reduced travel time over a traditional D1 school that plays 56 games. Ivys were going to be able to offer competitive D1 baseball and a great education. I looked it at like it was a hybrid between D1 and D3. He had been told (through travel coach) by a couple D1 coaches and players, that engineering was a non-starter for baseball recruiting at many traditional D1 schools. So, from my son's list of interested schools with engineering programs my son narrowed it down to 5 schools. Also, keep in mind my son had very little interest in becoming a professional baseball player. All of these facts came together in HIS final decision. My son had stack ranked his engineering schools based on Mech Eng and Material Science: Cornell, Tufts, Harvard, Lafayette, Case-Western. My wife and I asked him to explain his list to us. He defended it, and he committed. There were other schools and other opportunities. Through all of this he did stay true to himself and what he wanted to get out of the 4-year investment
So your list is a good one, but there were only a couple from list that he considered or was recruited by. West coast was not in the cards for him, although I did try to get him to look at some of those schools. 3+2 was not an option for him as well, but we did look into it. As a parent, you have to know what battles to fight. West coast and 3+2 was not one of the battles I wanted to fight. ;-)
Feel free to ping me if you want to chat.
Here are five colleges which regularly produce engineers who are athletes:
West Point (D1)
Air Force (D1)
Annapolis (D1)
Coast Guard (D3)
Merchant Marine Academy (D3).
USMMA does not require active national service (you're in the reserves and need to fulfill that annual requirement). Any kid who played HS baseball will make its team. Not for every kid; it's free (if you complete your reserve requirement), its graduates are certified engineers, a few classes away from an ME, have world wide employment opportunites starting in six figures, promotions are rapid (start at third mate, and within a decade can become a chief engineer), can immediately go into any branch of the service (if desired), has a powerful and close knit alumni organization.
This question is a bit subjective. Without debating specific colleges at what percentage of US News do you cut off High Academic? Top 10%? Top 20? US News rates about 350 national universities.
US News has four categories; national universities, national liberal arts colleges, regional universities (focus on undergrad) and national colleges (focus on undergrad, less than 50% liberal arts.
i went to UCLA. I’ve always explained it to people as the next level below the Ivies, Stanford, Vanderbilt and Duke. I consider it an excellent school that is not in the top group. For D3 I consider NESCAC and similar the top schools. They set their best up for top grad schools.
While I got my #1 job choice out of college this major corporation also hired people who attended Cal State universities. While I knew I had placed myself in the best place for me to succeed this surprised me. Three years later all that mattered was have you succeeded, not where you attended college. However, alumni networks can be beneficial.
