- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
it all boils down to the fact that the "best and brightest" don't need remediation.
'Best and brightest' article from hometownannapolis.com
- Thread starter cabarle
- Start date
- Status
it all boils down to the fact that the "best and brightest" don't need remediation.
Just_A_Mom
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2006
- Messages
- 4,774
Nope. They don't need 'remediation' if you are talking about basic classes. They might need teaching though. They might need an opportunity to be in an environment where they get academic support.
I know this may surprise a lot of people but high school educations are not equal. Far from it. While many high schoolers graduate with a year (or more) of college credits due to many AP or dual enrollment credits; there are still many kids who don't have the opportunity to take Calculus or Chemistry II. Some high schools barely have laboratories for science classes. Some kids do not have SAT prep opportunities or even the opportunity to retake the SAT's numerous times. You only need to look a different school profiles to see glaring differences in education.
I see the role of Prep schools as a great equalizer - in that the Academies are America's service academies and should be open to all; not simply the select few from great suburban high schools or elite boarding prep schools. Prep schools give bright and capable kids a door.
If you are talking about remediation at the academy in Calc III - I beg to differ. The Academies are famous for bragging about their rigor. They brag that these kids take the most difficult college curricula of nearly any college in the country - yet people are upset when these same kids might need help? Can't have it both ways.
Finally, in the phrase 'the best and the brightest' -- notice how "the best" always comes first. "The best" might need a boost and might need help.
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2007
- Messages
- 9,295
I had plenty of NAPSter classmates, and have worked with others, Coast Guard and Navy. They had a leg up in Swab Summer because they knew what to expect. That said, the BEST didn't need another year, and those who didn't weren't especially impressed by what NAPS had to offer.
So what is NAPS really for? Football players not qualified? Do you think there are not thousands who are not accepted to USNA but are more qualified than NAPSters?
So what is NAPS really for? Football players not qualified? Do you think there are not thousands who are not accepted to USNA but are more qualified than NAPSters?
If the SAs were open to all then why would candidates need to go through a competitive process to apply? Perhaps when you say "open to all" you really mean open to those that are not academically competitive with the other candidates.
I'm sure after a year in the prep school and a "C" average these academic deficient candidates suddenly blossom into "The best and brightest".
Of course after gaining admittance to the USNA via the back door they are ready for the academic challenges of the USNA.
Sorry,I wasn't clear in my threads in that I was not talking about all D1 athletes. That would be a broad generalization. I was only referring to the the athletes I personally know that are D1 bound. To be a D1 athlete takes alot of talent, ability, and hard work. Power to those capable. Yet, is there really any way to have supporting facts/data to measure leadership ability? I guess that is what this thread is trying to figure out since that is part of the qualification for USNA and NAPS- future possible leadership ability.
In the spirit of the above post did you want to respond to post #208?
Again, I could only speak for my personal experience of dealing with prep students and my observations of other MOC panel members. I have to say, or like to think, that we evaluated candidates on their accomplishments. We didn't really question their committment to a SA because they are attending prep schools. I don't recall giving any nominations to any prepsters if they didn't have the minimum SAT scores (around 550 across). Our thinking was that we could give him the nomination, but more than likely he will fail out and if the SA wanted this kid really bad the SA will use one of their nominations. We realized our primary interest was to nominate most qualified candidates from our district, not kids SA want. On a flip side, when we had nominations left over (i.e. only 5 kids wanted nomination to West Point) we will give out "nomination" to make some applicant feel better and increase their chance of getting picked up for prep school (my understanding is that SA sometime don't even consider you for a prep school if you don't have a nomination)
Last edited:
According to the College Boards, and they warn against any other usage, the sole purpose of the SATs is to determine how a high school student will perform his FIRST year in college. NAPS substitutes for that first year in college and precludes the necessity of a SAT input. However, USNA penalizes ALL candidates with below a 600/600. They simply recommend this score in order to maximize their WPM total.
Last edited:
Thanks MemberLG! I really appreciate you helping me understand how this process works from a MOC nomination panel member's perspective.
What are considered minimum SAT scores for NAPSters to receive a nom from your MOC?
Amen.
Just to clarify...NAPSters with scores 500 and above were able to receive a nom from your MOC? Did that same range of SAT scores also earn non-NAPSter candidates a nom? How many candidates apply for a nom from your MOC that have scores below 500? For some reason I thought 600 in both Math and CR were considered the minimum score to be considered qualified. Thanks again for you patience and help.
I'm confused. Are you now saying that:
1. NAPS does not require it's students to retake the SATs?
2. They are retested but not by an "official" College Board testing process and therefor the results would at best be considered "un-official"?
3. NAPS is actually using an official College Board testing procedure (including using College Board for scoring) despite the fact that College Board warns against any other usage?
OK, Let me make sure I understand this. The Navy uses NAPS to further it's racial diversity goals (58% of AA go through NAPS). The USNA then tests and grades the NAPSters and decides internally (without regards to racial goals) who is academically prepared for the USNA. A "C" average during NAPS is good enough in almost all cases for a NAPSter to gain admittance to the USNA because that "C" average is good enough to off-set the points given for a 600/600 SAT score. If any SAT scores are given during NAPS, those scores are not considered for admissions into the USNA. And if any of the Mids in the USNA don't like the fact that they need to help the NAPSters survive academically then they aren't suited to be officers in the USN.
Admissions basically does two things, decide if one is qualified and awards WPM points to determine ranking of those qualified. Success in NAPS coursework basically determines academic qualification. The WPM points system is standardized to avoid any favoritism. I have heard it explained by Admissions staff several different ways but any SAT score below 600/600 will penalize a candidate's total WPM score. Therefore a 550/550 with satisfactory grades would be qualified but his overall ranking might be jeprodized whereas a 600/600 might improve his chances of obtaining a MOC, Presidential, etc nomination in lieu of having to rely on a SecNav. And MOCs really should not use SATs for NAPsters and other candidates coming from college. I have sat on a couple of MOC boards but it never came up or I would have highly recommended this approach.
And again, NAPS requires all those below 600/600 to retake the tests.
And again, NAPS requires all those below 600/600 to retake the tests.
MakeItHappen
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2010
- Messages
- 155
It's a simple baseline question:
In your estimation, how many "undeserving" URMs are being admitted per year?
Hint: in raw numbers, not percentages. After 200+ posts your answers should be quick to come by, or ask someone more learned , say cmdr. salmdr.
"The louder the whine, the more sour the grapes"-- Ben Franklin
In your estimation, how many "undeserving" URMs are being admitted per year?
Hint: in raw numbers, not percentages. After 200+ posts your answers should be quick to come by, or ask someone more learned , say cmdr. salmdr.
"The louder the whine, the more sour the grapes"-- Ben Franklin
MakeItHappen
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2010
- Messages
- 155
Huh??!! You mean NAPS has students above 600/600. Surely you jest.
These persons simply do not exist. I was just about convinced they were all ********s.
http://www.serviceacademyforums.com/showthread.php?p=126664#post126664
Luigi59 said:
Mongo said:
MakeItHappen said:
MakeItHappen: ^^^Did you forget about the previous conversation you and Mongo had about this subject?Mongo said:
Dumbas*** is IMHO a rather coarse way to refer to the academically unqualified.Huh??!! You mean NAPS has students above 600/600. Surely you jest.
These persons simply do not exist. I was just about convinced they were all ********s.
Last edited:
Yep. One of the five main criteria for consideration is high SATS/Low grades. See the link on the first page. The average for the entire chart is 580(M)/562(V). Looks like many years there were a few perfect scores. The reason Asians aren't included is that they were not considered a targeted minority until the CNO directive back in 2007.Huh??!! You mean NAPS has students above 600/600. Surely you jest.
These persons simply do not exist. I was just about convinced they were all ********s.
Are you having difficulty reading the original article linked in post #1 of this thread? I believe those numbers are there for you if you would bother to get them and are actually interested.
And again, who administers these SAT tests and scores them? Is it College Board?
Of course. Whe else would do it? And, since I could care less, you can Google College Boards as well as I to see if NAPS is a qualified administering facility.
- Status