I was taking a look at the West Point class profile ......

[MidCakePa]

I teach at our flagship state university. The undergrad school I’m part of is top 20, according to US News (if you’re into that sort of thing). Each semester, about a quarter of my students earn a C or worse. The culprit is usually not a lack of brains or low high-school GPA or sub-par SAT/ACT. On those counts, our students are above average and getting stronger every year.

The biggest culprit I’ve seen is poor discipline, poor time management, poor focus and poor attention to detail. High GPA and SAT/ACT are nice, but they only get you so far.

 

[Cookiemom]

Sports....if you are a good football player the SA will push you through. Different rules. Just like every other college and life itself.

 

[usmadata]

Also, for comparison purposes note that few prestigious colleges publish the full range of test scores, rather relying on the 25th, 50th, 75th percentiles. Look closely enough and you will find equally eye-popping stats at other top colleges. Even the Ivies have to fill football and hockey rosters.

We did some research into this as well here: https://usmadata.com/2020/04/27/west-point-is-not-selective/

While the Ivies have to fill football and hockey teams, the disparity in class profile statistics is stark.

at the risk of navel-gazing, we quote ourselves for the reader's convenience:

Harvard College admitted about 5% of its 43,300-strong applicant pool for the class of 2024. A profile is available here. We only have 3rd-party sources for talent/aptitude profile of its applicant pool or its admitted class , and look to testing for standardization purposes. Those 3rd-party sources indicate that 30% of applicants had SATs over 1400, and that the average SAT score for admittees is 1520, which is in the 99.5th percentile of test takers. 30% of applicants is about ~13,000 high-performing kids. So they’re taking 10% of what might be reasonably called “qualified” compared to the class profiles, and most (90%-ish) in the very top decile of their high school classes. This is selective indeed!

Similarly, at Stanford, we see ~47,451 applicants (wow, that’s gone up in recent years!) and 1,706 enrolled, for 3.6% admissions. The SATs of that group are between 1500-1600 on average. The historical class profiles helpfully let us know that: 60% of applicants had high school GPAs over 4.0, 78% were in the top 10% of their high school classes, 58% had SAT math scores between 700-800, and 46% had SAT Critical Reading scores between 700-800. Again, that’s the applicant pool, not the admitted class.

Of the admitted class, 95% was in the top 10% of their high school classes, and 77% had Math SATs between 700-800, etc. Very selective. Compare that to USMA below.

it is really not even close in the quality and quantity of candidate pools that the ivies attract vs west point. even the 5% of Stanford's class that wasn't in the top 10% of their high school class can't be all rock athletes. here is where someone chimes in about leadership and athletics and the WCS, but since OP was asking about test scores, we present some contrast.

 

[jl123]

We did some research into this as well here: https://usmadata.com/2020/04/27/west-point-is-not-selective/

While the Ivies have to fill football and hockey teams, the disparity in class profile statistics is stark.

at the risk of navel-gazing, we quote ourselves for the reader's convenience:



it is really not even close in the quality and quantity of candidate pools that the ivies attract vs west point. even the 5% of Stanford's class that wasn't in the top 10% of their high school class can't be all rock athletes. here is where someone chimes in about leadership and athletics and the WCS, but since OP was asking about test scores, we present some contrast.

My point was that highly competitive civilian colleges, including Ivies, do accept a small percentage of applicants with extremely low test scores. I know of specific instances of applicants accepted to prestigious civilian schools with sub 500 SAT scores, but you will never see that in published data.

Also, West Point has a goal of 30% scholars, whereas Ivies select a majority of their classes on scholarship. There is no doubt that admission to these schools is far more difficult than appointment to West Point, when solely looking at academic performance and test scores, but the top 20% of a West Point class compares favorably with the profiles of the most prestigious civilian schools.

 

[FiveByFive]

My point was that highly competitive civilian colleges, including Ivies, do accept a small percentage of applicants with extremely low test scores. I know of specific instances of applicants accepted to prestigious civilian schools with sub 500 SAT scores, but you will never see that in published data.

Also, West Point has a goal of 30% scholars, whereas Ivies select a majority of their classes on scholarship. There is no doubt that admission to these schools is far more difficult than appointment to West Point, when solely looking at academic performance and test scores, but the top 20% of a West Point class compares favorably with the profiles of the most prestigious civilian schools.

I think that those scores would be "in" the published data as they are still part of the overall SAT/ACT average, no?

 

[Small Team Bacsi]

Football

What a terrible thing to say

I’d add basketball and even some other minor sports

But a sports recruit for sure.

Fair?

In ground combat I’d always opt for the SA varsity type as a mission leader if I knew nothing else about them.

That may not be fair but it’s better than basing my decision on their SA gpa IMO.

 

[NJROTC-CC]

In ground combat I’d always opt for the SA varsity type as a mission leader if I knew nothing else about them.

That may not be fair but it’s better than basing my decision on their SA gpa IMO.

I agree with you that high SAT scores have very little to do with leadership. On the other I am not sure that 300 lb linemen would fit my vision of a mission leader. But, quarterbacks, yes. LOL.

 

[shock-n-awe]

I agree with you that high SAT scores have very little to do with leadership. On the other I am not sure that 300 lb linemen would fit my vision of a mission leader. But, quarterbacks, yes. LOL.

Everyone must meet Army standards to graduate from USMA. There are many challenges that SA football players must overcome other than just academics. PT and weight standards are just a couple of them.

 

[NavyHoops]

I agree with you that high SAT scores have very little to do with leadership. On the other I am not sure that 300 lb linemen would fit my vision of a mission leader. But, quarterbacks, yes. LOL.

Same thing for USNA. Those 300 lb lineman become 240 by graduation and pass the USNA PRT before graduating. Oh and many of them become Marines and take the PFT multiple times before graduation to ensure they are ready for TBS. I know many great lineman that are great Marine Officers.

 

[A1Janitor]

Same thing for USNA. Those 300 lb lineman become 240 by graduation and pass the USNA PRT before graduating. Oh and many of them become Marines and take the PFT multiple times before graduation to ensure they are ready for TBS. I know many great lineman that are great Marine Officers.

Do you know any midshipmen that had the academics … and also were great athletes but weren’t D1 athletes that became great leaders?

I know of midshipmen that have top grades, top scores on the marine fitness test, and leadership positions at the academy. I hope they have a chance at being great leaders despite not playing D1.

 

[USMCGrunt]

Yawn. All this back forth from well-entrenched positions (often uninformed) isn't changing anyone's minds. In the end, you either trust the process or you don't. Why argue about the inputs? I suggest you focus on the outputs. The Academies have been successfully pumping out Officers for a long time.

 

[NavyHoops]

Do you know any midshipmen that had the academics … and also were great athletes but weren’t D1 athletes that became great leaders?

I know of midshipmen that have top grades, top scores on the marine fitness test, and leadership positions at the academy. I hope they have a chance at being great leaders despite not playing D1

Yes, dozens and dozens of them. Marines probably care less about grades than many. They want someone smart enough that can handle the job, but care more about leadership abilities than anything else. Just because one has a 4.0 and was a Trident scholar, doesn’t mean they posses the skills the Marines are looking for. One of the best Marines from my class was a football player. Terrible Mid by all standards. Smart enough guy and did okay academically, but football was his focus. Once he graduated he was top grad at IOC, won numerous junior Officer awards, highly decorated in combat and out, and is still serving today post command. Our Valedictorian was a total flop by many standards and highly disliked by many of us (still is). Our next to anchor man, is post command today, highly successful. Anchor Man is probably one of the most successful of our class outside of service.

 

[FiveByFive]

Yes, dozens and dozens of them. Marines probably care less about grades than many. They want someone smart enough that can handle the job, but care more about leadership abilities than anything else. Just because one has a 4.0 and was a Trident scholar, doesn’t mean they posses the skills the Marines are looking for. One of the best Marines from my class was a football player. Terrible Mid by all standards. Smart enough guy and did okay academically, but football was his focus. Once he graduated he was top grad at IOC, won numerous junior Officer awards, highly decorated in combat and out, and is still serving today post command. Our Valedictorian was a total flop by many standards and highly disliked by many of us (still is). Our anchor man, is post command today, highly successful.

Good points, but I am pretty sure @A1Janitor was being (mostly) sarcastic!

 

[jl123]

I think that those scores would be "in" the published data as they are still part of the overall SAT/ACT average, no?

They are in the averages - almost all schools publish a lowest 25th percentile, but that does not reveal the lowest of the low scores. It hides those scores.

I have never seen published data for civilian schools breaking it down to the bottom 3% as seen in the USMA profile posted.

 

[A1Janitor]

Good points, but I am pretty sure @A1Janitor was being (mostly) sarcastic!

I actually wasn’t.

I agree with @USMCGrunt.

My son and his friends might go Marines. They are doing very well in all aspects at USNA.

I would hate to think people assume they won’t be as good of leaders as a D1 player. They earned their place at USNA and are developing leadership skills.

While I would not deny that D1 athletes can be great leaders despite low grades, I would not suggest they would be better leaders.

The military knows what they are looking for. Diversity involves more than skin color, grades, D1 sports, gender, etc.

My son’s class includes all.

 

[jl123]

I agree with you that high SAT scores have very little to do with leadership. On the other I am not sure that 300 lb linemen would fit my vision of a mission leader. But, quarterbacks, yes. LOL.

Alejandro Villanueva, Left Tackle Baltimore Ravens
Height: 6′ 9″
Weight: 320 lbs

 

[usmadata]

Yawn. All this back forth from well-entrenched positions (often uninformed) isn't changing anyone's minds. In the end, you either trust the process or you don't. Why argue about the inputs? I suggest you focus on the outputs. The Academies have been successfully pumping out Officers for a long time.

80% graduation rates (class 2021) is "successful"? What would failure look like? What if the Academy could achieve 90% graduation rates with an unchanged program by changing their admissions approach and practices? Would that possibility be enough to question what they're doing?

("80% is needed because it's hard to graduate"... ok, so why is 80% right and 70% is too little and 90% is too much? etc)

The process deserves scrutiny since so much is at stake for the military, the nation, and not the least the cadets and soldiers. "Take our word, we're doing it right" isn't enough.

 

[A1Janitor]

80% graduation rates (class 2021) is "successful"? What would failure look like? What if the Academy could achieve 90% graduation rates with an unchanged program by changing their admissions approach and practices? Would that possibility be enough to question what they're doing?

("80% is needed because it's hard to graduate"... ok, so why is 80% right and 70% is too little and 90% is too much? etc)

The process deserves scrutiny since so much is at stake for the military, the nation, and not the least the cadets and soldiers. "Take our word, we're doing it right" isn't enough.

Do you know the breakdown of who graduates and who doesn’t?

Do you know the graduation rate the military needs?

 

[Small Team Bacsi]

A1, I believe I said better combat leader not better leader and I mentioned ground combat . And I was thinking infantry or recon.

I admit I am prejudiced by what I saw in a recon unit in VN many decades ago with my officers and nco s who often did the work of officers.

Most of the officers I had (and it was a very small unit so it’s not a large number of people) were college sports types.

Many of the enlisted had been recruited for or had attended college for sports. Although their stay may have been short.

We had All Marine Corps boxer (who allegedly fought C Clay)

We had guys who shot in competition for the USMC

The majority of the MOHs I am aware of in our unit and 1st bn went to NAPSTERs and or college sports types.

Its not required but IMO it sure helps on the ground in combat under fire.

Good luck to yours

 

[usmadata]

Do you know the breakdown of who graduates and who doesn’t?

Do you know the graduation rate the military needs?

1) We were insufficiently user-friendly in earlier posts. Here is the class year data, and yes you can see who graduated and who didn't (and why they didn't): https://usmadata.com/2018/07/27/class-year-data/

2) how many officers the Army needs is not relevant as it changes year to year and has to be considered with ROTC. what should be discussed is the fact that USMA is knowingly and deliberating admitting, over other qualified candidates it could admit, cadets that it knows are more likely to struggle and fail. and it is doing this for purposes that are not obviously related to winning wars.