Table of Tables Part I: Longitudinal Analysis for the 2005-2006 Cohort, Year 1 and 2: NESCAC vs. All CSP Institutions Table 1.1: Participating CSP Institutions, 2005-06 Cohort, Year 2………………………………………………....7 Figure 1.1: Percentile Class Rank by Gender and Athletic Status………………………………..…………......…..9 Figure 1.2: Two-Year Comparison of Average Percentile Class Rank for Men’s Sports…………………….….....11 Figure 1.3: Two-Year Comparison of Average Percentile Class Rank for Women’s Sports………………….…....13 Figure 1.4: Two-Year Comparison of Percentage of Withdrawals…………………………………………….…...15 Figure 1.5: Differences in Average Percentile Class Rank Between Athletes and Non- Athletes………………………………………………………………………………………..….......17 Figure 1.6: Two-Year Comparison of Average Percentile Class Rank among Male and Female Athletes and Non-Athletes…………………………………………………………………...…..…..19 Background Information for Estimated Underperformance……………………………………………….........21 Figure 1.7: Differences in GPA and Estimated Underperformance for Athletes and Non-Athletes By Gender………………………………………………………………………………………….…23 Part II: Overview of 2006-07 Entering Cohort: NESCAC vs. All CSP Institutions Table 2.1: Participating CSP Institutions, 2006-07 Cohort, Year 1……………………………..………….……...27 Table 2.2: Overview of 2006-07 Cohort, Year 1…….…………………………………………………………….29 Figure 2.1: Comparison of Racial/Ethnic Distribution by Athletic Participation…………………………….……31 Figure 2.2: Comparison of Racial/Ethnic Distribution by Recruited Status……….……………………………....33 Figure 2.3: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for the First-Year College GPA……………………..………...35 Figure 2.4: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank by Athletic Participation and by Gender……………..……….37 Figure 2.5: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for Athletes by Recruited Status……………………..………..39 Figure 2.6: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for Men’s Teams……………………………………..………..41 Figure 2.7: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for Women’s Teams…………………………………..……….43 Figure 2.8: Comparison of Percentage of Withdrawals by Athletic Status………………….……………..……...45 Figure 2.9: Comparison of Average SATCR + SATM Scores (1600-Point Scale)………………………………...47 Figure 2.10: Comparison of Average HS Percentile Class Rank by Gender & Athletic Status…………………...49 Table of Tables (continued) Part III: Overview of 2006-07 Entering Cohort: Hamilton College vs. NESCAC Table 3.1: Overview of 2006-07 Cohort, Year 1……………………………………………………..…………….53 Figure 3.1: Comparison of Racial/Ethnic Distribution by Athletic Participation…………………………….……55 Figure 3.2: Comparison of Racial/Ethnic Distribution by Recruited Status……….……………………………....57 Figure 3.3: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for the First-Year College GPA……………………..………...59 Figure 3.4: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank by Athletic Participation and by Gender……………..……….61 Figure 3.5: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for Athletes by Recruited Status……………………..………..63 Figure 3.6: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for Men’s Teams……………………………………..………..65 Figure 3.7: Comparison of Percentile Class Rank for Women’s Teams…………………………………..……….67 Figure 3.8: Comparison of Percentage of Withdrawals by Athletic Status………………….……………..……...69 Figure 3.9: Comparison of Average SATCR and SATM Scores (1600-Point Scale)……………………..……….71 Figure 3.10: Comparison of Average HS Percentile Class Rank by Gender and Athletic Status…………...……..73 2 Introduction This report provides an analysis of the data submitted to the College Sports Project between November 2007 and June 2008. It is divided into three parts. The first is an update on the 2005-06 cohort, which was first reported on last year. The update includes information about underperformance among athletes in their second year of enrollment. The second and third parts of the report provide initial information about a new cohort: those who initially enrolled in 2006-07. 3 4 Part I: Longitudinal Analysis for the 2005-2006 Cohort Year One and Year Two 5 Table 1.1 provides a list of all institutions that have submitted two years of data for the 2005-06 cohort. It also includes the number of students in the cohort who were enrolled at each institution for at least part of the second year. Complete data files were received from 77 institutions, with a total of nearly 42,000 students. Institutions that first joined the project this year and also provided the prior year’s data are shown in bold. The data for this report were received between November 2007 and June 2008. Participating institutions submitted data electronically using a secure FTP site protecting both student and institutional confidentiality. Three colleges, Cabrini, Lebanon Valley, and Lewis & Clark, discontinued participation in the project, but may re-join at a later date. Several additional institutions will be joining the next round of data collection, and will be asked to provide data for all previous years. 6 Table 1.1: Participating CSP Institutions, 2005-06 Cohort, Year 2, Continuing Students # of # of # of Institution Name Students Institution Name Students Institution Name Students in Cohort in Cohort in Cohort Albion College 529 Haverford College 318 St. Lawrence University 549 Allegheny College 587 Hiram College 236 St. Olaf College 800 Amherst College 447 Hobart and William Smith Colleges 488 SUNY - New Paltz 1225 Austin College 364 Hope College 835 Susquehanna University 484 Bates College 517 Illinois College 226 Sweet Briar College 399 Beloit College 384 Illinois Wesleyan University 589 The University of Texas at Dallas 2081 Bowdoin College 478 Juniata College 417 Thomas More College 194 Bridgewater College 448 Kenyon College 425 Transylvania University 314 Bryn Mawr College 359 Lawrence University 430 Trinity College 581 California Institute of Technology 239 Lynchburg College 568 Trinity University 668 Carleton College 544 Macalester College 512 Tufts University 1393 Centre College 339 Middlebury College 646 Union College 592 Claremont McKenna College 307 Millsaps College 293 University of Minnesota Morris 385 Clark University 593 Moravian College 417 University of Puget Sound 758 Colby College 559 Mount Holyoke College 582 Ursinus College 414 College of Saint Benedict 559 Muhlenberg College 582 Vassar College 661 Connecticut College 505 Oberlin College 773 Washington & Jefferson College 367 Denison University 611 Occidental College 471 Washington and Lee University 488 Earlham College 346 Pomona College 387 Waynesburg College 326 Emory & Henry College 366 Rhodes College 460 Wellesley College 654 Franklin & Marshall College 606 Rockford College 278 Wesleyan University 762 Goucher College 384 Saint John’s University 438 Westminster College (MO) 265 Guilford College 416 Sewanee: The University of the South 415 Whitman College 391 Hamilton College 519 Skidmore College 732 Williams College 543 Hampden-Sydney College 319 Smith College 751 Wittenberg University 530 Hartwick College 419 Southwestern University 354 7 Figure 1.1 presents the percentile class rank for the cumulative GPA at the end of the first year and at the end of the second year, for athletes and non-athletes by gender. The percentile class rank re-expresses the GPA ranking on a scale from 0 to 100. A student group with a percentile class rank of 55, for example, has a group average GPA that is above the GPAs of 55% of students and below that of 45% of students in that institution’s cohort. In general, differences in the percentile class rank between the first and second year of college are modest. The short line associated with each group represents the percentile class rank in Year 2 for all CSP participating institutions. The horizontal red and blue lines represent the average for all men and for all women at NESCAC. 8 Figure 1.1: Percentile Class Rank by Gender, Athletic Status, and Year NESCAC vs. All CSP Institutions, 2005-06 Cohort 80 70 60 56 56 56 55 53 53 50 50 49 50 50 46 47 46 47 43 43 40 37 38 34 34 30 20 Average Percentile Class Rank (%) 10 (4843) (2217) (2174) (1202) (905) (297) (2669) (1015) (701) (314) 0 (4620) (2330) (2062) (1263) (886) (377) (2558) (1067) (690) (377) Non-Athletes Athletes Male Non- Male Athletes Recruited Non-Recruited Female Non- Female Recruited Non-Recruited Athletes Male Athletes Male Athletes Athletes Athletes Female Female Athletes Athletes ( ) = Number of Students in Category Year 1, NESCAC, 2005-2006 Cohort Year 2, NESCAC, 2005-2006 Cohort All Men, Year 2, at NESCAC All Women, Year 2, at NESCAC Average not reported if 3 or fewer students in category All Institutions, Year 2, 2005-2006 Cohort 9 Figure 1.2 presents the cumulative average percentile class rank for men’s sports and for male non-athletes for years 1 and 2. The Year 2 cumulative percentile class rank for all 77 CSP participating institutions is represented by the short lines associated with each group. Note that a few students leave teams and others join teams in the second year, so that the students represented in the two years are not identical. 10 Figure 1.2: Two-Year Comparison 80 70 60 Men's Sports in NESC 50 50 50 40 30 Average Percentile Class Rank (%) of Average Percentile Class Rank 20 34 36 53 54 AC, 2005-06 Cohort 10 31 32 0 42 44 (2174) Male Non-Athletes (2062) (83) Baseball (85) (55) 28 38 29 40 Men's Basketball (44) (65) 37 Year 1, NESCAC, 2005-2006 Cohort (58) Men's Cross Country 35 All Men, Year 2, at NESCAC (69) (69) 34 Men's Crew 34 (246) 36 (215) Football 34 41 (23) 48 39 Men's Golf (29) 43 (88) Men's Ice Hockey (69) 39 (133) ( ) = Number of Students in Category 44 49 Men's Lacrosse (132) 37 (34) 45 (24) Year 2, NESCAC, 2005-2006Men's Cohort Skiing 44 (82) All Institutions, Year 2, 2005-2006 Cohort 46 (84) Men's Soccer 46 (52) Men's Squash (48) (74) Men's Swimming (66) (59) Men's Tennis (46) 23 (86) 27 32 Men's Track, Indoor (98) (102) Men's Track, Outdoor (104) (3) Men's Water Polo (5) Average not reported if 3 or (16) fewer students in category Men's Wrestling (13) 11 Figure 1.3 presents the cumulative average percentile class rank for women’s sports and for female non-athletes for years 1 and 2.