How exactly does committing/signing work

[KenBlackfish]

My DD asked me this question, and I had no answer. I'd never even thought of it.

When your DD commits/signs to play softball, does she still have to apply to the college? Like write the essays, put the whole package together, and actually do all the things that a non-athlete does?

My 2024 has a "verbal commitment" to play for a Pac-12 college. During her "official visit", she did go through the admissions process to make sure she was academically eligible, but won't officially be registered until she signs in November of her Senior Year. The SAT/ACT is NOT required "at this time", but if you take it you can submit the scores. She plans to take the SAT, but unless she nails it, we won't be submitting the results. She will not have to do anything else, other than keep her grades up.

My daughter is getting both an academic and athletic scholarship. The coach informed us, "keep your GPA at 3.0 or higher, or she would lose the academic scholarship. She currently has a 4.0, but has dropped to 3.5 a few times.

For us, my 2024 daughter had three official visits scheduled. One was pulled just a few days before the visit because another player (same position), who was that team's #1 2024 pick, didn't end up going to her #1 choice. That school was also the second call on Sept. 1st. Heartbreaking for my daughter, but life goes on. College Softball may be a game and a path to college to us, but in reality, it's a business, and at times harsh and cutthroat.

The other school was an "Ivy League" D-1 in the ACC. After meeting with the Coach, and going over the academic requirements for admission, we felt it probably wasn't the best choice, simply because my daughter hadn't taken enough AP/ Honors courses at that time, and would basically have to ace the SAT/ACT to get through admissions.

Of those schools, all three were in her "top 5". Each school's process was nearly the same. So yes, she has gone through the academic "qualification" process but has not officially been accepted. All that will take place in November. The process of just getting a "verbal" offer was a crazy ride. People who say the process is "fun, enjoy it", I'm not sure how they found it to be "fun". It was extremely stressful for my daughter and my wife and me. I was thankful it was over fairly quickly. About two months. But I still worry, a verbal commitment, is just that. Nothing legally binding. A lot can happen between now and November. "its a business".

 

[uncdrew]

My 2024 has a "verbal commitment" to play for a Pac-12 college. During her "official visit", she did go through the admissions process to make sure she was academically eligible, but won't officially be registered until she signs in November of her Senior Year. The SAT/ACT is NOT required "at this time", but if you take it you can submit the scores. She plans to take the SAT, but unless she nails it, we won't be submitting the results. She will not have to do anything else, other than keep her grades up.

My daughter is getting both an academic and athletic scholarship. The coach informed us, "keep your GPA at 3.0 or higher, or she would lose the academic scholarship. She currently has a 4.0, but has dropped to 3.5 a few times.

For us, my 2024 daughter had three official visits scheduled. One was pulled just a few days before the visit because another player (same position), who was that team's #1 2024 pick, didn't end up going to her #1 choice. That school was also the second call on Sept. 1st. Heartbreaking for my daughter, but life goes on. College Softball may be a game and a path to college to us, but in reality, it's a business, and at times harsh and cutthroat.

The other school was an "Ivy League" D-1 in the ACC. After meeting with the Coach, and going over the academic requirements for admission, we felt it probably wasn't the best choice, simply because my daughter hadn't taken enough AP/ Honors courses at that time, and would basically have to ace the SAT/ACT to get through admissions.

Of those schools, all three were in her "top 5". Each school's process was nearly the same. So yes, she has gone through the academic "qualification" process but has not officially been accepted. All that will take place in November. The process of just getting a "verbal" offer was a crazy ride. People who say the process is "fun, enjoy it", I'm not sure how they found it to be "fun". It was extremely stressful for my daughter and my wife and me. I was thankful it was over fairly quickly. About two months. But I still worry, a verbal commitment, is just that. Nothing legally binding. A lot can happen between now and November. "its a business".

She wouldn't have been happy at dook anyway. No one is.


Go Heels!

 

[Strike2]

You're saying someone who says they're not a good standardized test taker is using it as a cop out. Those are your words, not mine.

As I referenced in a prior post, my niece had a 104 weighted GPA, and was ranked 4th out of 600 in her class. She struggled with the SAT, yet amazingly enough still managed to finish that high in a highly competitive HS. Oh, she also graduated with a perfect 4.0 from Stony Brook University, and she's about to graduate #5 in her PA school class.

Her SAT scores were right around 1200. She prepared as much as anyone, and she took numerous courses to get her score higher. Unfortunately, she just doesn't test well on standardized tests. Is that still a cop out?

I'm baffled by this response. A 1200 is an above-average score. It may not get you into MIT or Harvard, but it's pretty good. That score, in no way, connects to your claim that "she doesn't test well".

 

[LEsoftballdad]

I'm baffled by this response. A 1200 is an above-average score. It may not get you into MIT or Harvard, but it's pretty good. That score, in no way, connects to your claim that "she doesn't test well".

A 1200 is not an above-average score for someone with a 104-weighted GPA.

 

[Strike2]

I would say I studied pretty hard for the SAT. Took a lot of practice tests and a prep class and barely cracked 1000. Went to college for nursing and passed my boards without much trouble. Went on for my Master’s to become a nurse practitioner and passed that board exam with flying colors (no prep class) - oh, and graduated 1st in my class. I guess I debunked that theory.

Wow, that sure did shatter the theory! So you achieved an average score on the SAT that you took in HS. At what point did I ever claim that an average score, or any particular score, was a barrier to later success? Through your 6-7 years as a college student, did you enter every exam with a "I don't test well" mantra rattling through your head? My guess is no.

The barrier to success is a belief, often coming from parents, that a student can't effectively take a test...ANY test...measuring what they've supposedly already learned.

It's such a strange position to take as the parent of a kid who plays competitive sports.

 

[Strike2]

A 1200 is not an above-average score for someone with a 104-weighted GPA.

Lol...what??? GPAs aren't an "apples to apples" comparison across schools. That's why tests like the SAT/ACT gained traction to begin with...everyone takes the same test nation-wide. Regardless of what a "104-weighted" GPA means, there's nothing wrong with a 1200 score. Your argument is veering into the absurd.

 

[LEsoftballdad]

Lol...what??? GPAs aren't an "apples to apples" comparison across schools. That's why tests like the SAT/ACT gained traction to begin with...everyone takes the same test nation-wide. Regardless of what a "104-weighted" GPA means, there's nothing wrong with a 1200 score. Your argument is veering into the absurd.

You claim to be allergic to BS, yet you always spew it on here.

You do realize that a 104 *weighted* GPA requires AP/IB courses, right? It also requires high grades in those courses to achieve a higher average above 100. I will guarantee you that anyone with a weighted GPA that high would be disappointed in a 1200 on the SAT. Is it a bad score? Of course not. But it's not what such a high achiever would expect.

You can say my argument is "veering into the absurd" all you want. I have forgotten more about the college education process for admissions and aid than you will ever know. I will no longer waste my time with someone whose only interest is arguing with everyone else.

 

[Strike2]

You claim to be allergic to BS, yet you always spew it on here.

You do realize that a 104 *weighted* GPA requires AP/IB courses, right? It also requires high grades in those courses to achieve a higher average above 100. I will guarantee you that anyone with a weighted GPA that high would be disappointed in a 1200 on the SAT. Is it a bad score? Of course not. But it's not what such a high achiever would expect.

You can say my argument is "veering into the absurd" all you want. I have forgotten more about the college education process for admissions and aid than you will ever know. I will no longer waste my time with someone whose only interest is arguing with everyone else.

This is a forum for the exchange of opinions. Sorry you have so much trouble with one that doesn't line up with yours. It's absurd that you're arguing against my original premise about how the "doesn't test well" excuse is just that...an excuse...with an example of a strong student getting a good SAT score.

I guess when the strawman or red herring is ineffective, the next step is the ad hominem.

 

[_MIA_]

This is a forum for the exchange of opinions. Sorry you have so much trouble with one that doesn't line up with yours. It's absurd that you're arguing against my original premise about how the "doesn't test well" excuse is just that...an excuse...with an example of a strong student getting a good SAT score.

I guess when the strawman or red herring is ineffective, the next step is the ad hominem.

The doesn't test well is relative to their performance in other measures of academic success. You used College as an example previously and the fact that timed exams are given all the time. Well over the years I have seen many students who a) do much better in their HW assignments then they do on in-class exams and b) do much better if I give take home exams vs in-class exams (lets assume they were not cheating.. ). The simple fact is that some kids take longer to process the information needed to solve problems and then to develop a problem solving strategy based upon that information. I actually was someone who did better (relatively speaking) on take home assignments then in class exams. That isn't necessarily a knowledge thing. The SAT was developed based upon an IQ test.

 

[Strike2]

The doesn't test well is relative to their performance in other measures of academic success. You used College as an example previously and the fact that timed exams are given all the time. Well over the years I have seen many students who a) do much better in their HW assignments then they do on in-class exams and b) do much better if I give take home exams vs in-class exams (lets assume they were not cheating.. ). The simple fact is that some kids take longer to process the information needed to solve problems and then to develop a problem solving strategy based upon that information. I actually was someone who did better (relatively speaking) on take home assignments then in class exams. That isn't necessarily a knowledge thing. The SAT was developed based upon an IQ test.

We could debate the origins, but I'm not sure how that matters. The SAT/ACT is a measurement, however imperfect, of current knowledge. Regardless of one's IQ, there are plenty of SAT/ACT questions that can't be answered if the test taker has never seen the material before. Further, you can take the SAT/ACT as many times as you can muster the energy for.

Untimed tests do allow the taker the opportunity to "figure it out"...maybe. However, the timed test measures proficiency, and that is still the foundation for every professional licensing exam that I'm aware of. I know I'm not telling you anything new here.

The engineering profession favors the correct answer over speed, but that doesn't stop university professors, probably including yourself, from putting time stress on students during exams. My kids have encountered professors in a variety of STEM courses who purposefully put more on a timed exam than can be completed by many, if not most students. Is that unfair? I'll bet your take-home exams are no picnic, but there's something to be said for putting students in a traditional testing environment and seeing what they've really learned. The administrators of the professional engineering exams seem to agree.

There are professions outside of engineering where rapid recall and application under pressure is required and expected. In 20+ years in military aviation, I never encountered someone who "didn't test well".