NESCAC

[pcowlax]

Dave is right. a $3500 tutor can raise your score between 100-200 points. You have to be committed to the work though, so in that sense a high score does show some level of commitment to succeeding, but the SAT/ACT is inequitable. Having good grades and being a recruited athlete is the best way to get into A highly competitive school. The smaller NESCACs are 33% recruited athletes - seems like the easiest path. Lacrosse is more fun than getting an A+ in linear algebra.

Wow. That is an interesting take on life. Athletic gifts are "inequitable" too. So is the vastly more that $3500 you will pay for 10 years of clubs and equipment and travel and what not to get your kid to the easiest path into a NESCAC school that others cannot afford. It is extremely hard to compare kids across schools in regards to course work and GPA. everyone doesn't get to get in, applicants must be judged vs each other. I don't think anyone would ever want a test score to be the only or even the dominant factor in getting in (NOTE, this is how is works in much of the world, in India or China everyone takes the test in high school, you get assigned a ranking (literally you might be told your score puts you are 1,231,421 in the class) and your college options are decided by this) but you need something objective to compare across schools. Otherwise it is like recruiting without film. Whoever puts up the best stats gets in, with no way to evaluate the quality of competition. Does that make it "equitable"? Nothing in life is. If you grow up in Manhasset you have a lot easier time using lax to get into a good school than if you grow up in St. Louis. That's life.

[ColonelFastBreak]

Dave is right. a $3500 tutor can raise your score between 100-200 points.

This could be true for an individual (that a tutor was hired and a person's score increased), but it isn't true on average. Read this: https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/uns ... 018-07.pdf .... a summary of the literature by the ACT and then a novel experiment. in their experiment they find marginal improvement comes from test prep (roughly 40 points on the SAT) and that the primary factor involved in improving a person's scores are retaking the test. They do find that private tutoring is the most helpful of the different test preparation activities, but it is still not improving scores at the rate you are claiming.

Here are a couple excerpts of the ACT summarizing the literature for those who do not wish to read the whole thing:

"Despite the growth of the test preparation industry (Barnes Report, 2017), the existing research on the efficacy of test preparation has shown mixed results depending on the approach to test preparation, population tested, or study design/methodology (Lane, Raymond, & Halaydyna, 2015). On average, research shows test preparation has small to moderate positive effects on actual test scores, with average test score gains falling within the margin of error for standardized college entrance exams. A study by Briggs (2001) showed test preparation solutions such as commercial preparation classes and tutoring had very small effects on ACT subject test scores, in which score increases did not exceed a full score point. The National Association for College Admissions Counseling (NACAC) reviewed efficacy studies on test preparation and also found minimal effects on test scores - an average gain of approximately 30 points on the SAT (Briggs, 2009). Meta-analyses on test preparation for the SAT or similar achievement tests show a modest test score gain of 0.25 standard deviations."

&

"Irrespective of engaging in test preparation activities, research has found that students who retest tent to increase their score. A meta-analysis that looked at practice effects found increases in test scores that were approximately 0.25 standard deviations for students who retook a cognitive ability test when assessed between the first and second take (Hausknecht et al., 2007). For the ACT, retesting has shown a 1 to 2 point scale score increase (Andrews & Ziomek). The exact gain associated with retesting is dependent upon a number of factors including the number of times a student has tested, in which grade a student takes the ACT test, and how much time has elapsed between test administrations (ACT, 2017b)."

[FCIAC LAX]

Dave is right. a $3500 tutor can raise your score between 100-200 points. You have to be committed to the work though, so in that sense a high score does show some level of commitment to succeeding, but the SAT/ACT is inequitable. Having good grades and being a recruited athlete is the best way to get into A highly competitive school. The smaller NESCACs are 33% recruited athletes - seems like the easiest path. Lacrosse is more fun than getting an A+ in linear algebra.

Wow. That is an interesting take on life. Athletic gifts are "inequitable" too. So is the vastly more that $3500 you will pay for 10 years of clubs and equipment and travel and what not to get your kid to the easiest path into a NESCAC school that others cannot afford. It is extremely hard to compare kids across schools in regards to course work and GPA. everyone doesn't get to get in, applicants must be judged vs each other. I don't think anyone would ever want a test score to be the only or even the dominant factor in getting in (NOTE, this is how is works in much of the world, in India or China everyone takes the test in high school, you get assigned a ranking (literally you might be told your score puts you are 1,231,421 in the class) and your college options are decided by this) but you need something objective to compare across schools. Otherwise it is like recruiting without film. Whoever puts up the best stats gets in, with no way to evaluate the quality of competition. Does that make it "equitable"? Nothing in life is. If you grow up in Manhasset you have a lot easier time using lax to get into a good school than if you grow up in St. Louis. That's life.

People are giving you pro tips here. If your kid can't hack the academics, he won't get in. The coaches have a little pull depending where your son lines up, but be aware Paul Rabil with a B+ average in HS doesn't get in, nothing inequitable about that.

$3,500 sounds a little light, like only 2 seasons of club ball.......lol

Invest in a college counselor, that maybe inequitable as well but well worth the price considering the sticker price for the NESCAC is around 75k per year now.

[ah23]

My general opinion is this: standardized testing should be mandatory, because more data is always better.

It's obviously true that some students don't test well or lack the resources to prepare for standardized testing. That same argument applies to high school education and individual GPA, and IMO applies far better to GPA than to standardized testing. Some students don't process traditional classroom education well, or have issues with structured assignments, or have a difficult home life that makes consistent academic achievement difficult. Many students do not have access to good teachers who put in extra work to reach struggling students or tutors to help out with difficult subjects. Furthermore, some high schools are laughably easy while others are far more challenging. So...should colleges stop accepting high school transcripts because millions of students are advantaged or disadvantaged by their school and home environments? Of course not; GPA is just one subjective part of the bigger picture.

I'm generally suspicious of any argument that says having more information about a student is somehow a bad thing, as if it is unfair to ask students to display aptitude in more ways than one. Standardized testing obviously should not be the defining factor of an application...but neither should GPA, or extracurriculars, or community service, or personal essays, or anything else. They are all just one data point among many that serve to create a balanced profile of every student. I get that this is a losing battle and lowering standards in the name of equity is sort of inevitable at this point (for context, I am a former teacher), but I think this discussion is worth having anyway.

[MA Lax Fan]

Well said

[UpperCorner]

Has anyone during this entire debacle ever reach out to a coach, AD or school president to voice frustration? If so - what, if any, was the response?

[WoodStick]

Am really looking forward to seeing some games this weekend that quite frankly I did not expect to see.

Wanted to weigh in on the topic that was discussed a few days ago, and that is the comparison between the two divisions. I do agree that there are probably a few kids on each of the upper-level D3 teams that could make a roster and even contribute in a meaningful way at the DI level. But to think that the RIT's, Tufts, or Salisbury's of the world could compete in a full season as a DI entity is nuts. The depth at the DI level is insane and I am not just referring to the ACC and Big 10 schools. I know of several Patriot League kids who I saw play in HS and club ball who dominated and they are getting little to no run in college their first couple of years. Yes, back in the day W&L, Washington College would play UVa, Hopkins and Maryland and compete and Hobart basically played a DI schedule but those days are long gone. We should be more than happy and content that the NESCAC is the best that D3 has to offer and not try to over-inflate our brand of lacrosse.

[JumboFan4]

Jumbos 2021 roster is up
https://www.gotuftsjumbos.com/sports/ml ... -21/roster

[Superlite2]

meh..top 10-25 in D1 def for Tufts/Salisbury...below that your top 15-20 roster slots are pretty similar kids...and while the top 25-50 D1 will get a few "big" name recruits Tufts has the extra year in recruiting to make sure the kids they are getting have a better chance of panning out. Same kids that are All state/All Metro DC/All New England......NEC, CAA, lower patriot, jump ball if they played in the league..

facilities, coaching breadth and strength, training professionals all on par and the level of education is equal to better..

Am really looking forward to seeing some games this weekend that quite frankly I did not expect to see.

Wanted to weigh in on the topic that was discussed a few days ago, and that is the comparison between the two divisions. I do agree that there are probably a few kids on each of the upper-level D3 teams that could make a roster and even contribute in a meaningful way at the DI level. But to think that the RIT's, Tufts, or Salisbury's of the world could compete in a full season as a DI entity is nuts. The depth at the DI level is insane and I am not just referring to the ACC and Big 10 schools. I know of several Patriot League kids who I saw play in HS and club ball who dominated and they are getting little to no run in college their first couple of years. Yes, back in the day W&L, Washington College would play UVa, Hopkins and Maryland and compete and Hobart basically played a DI schedule but those days are long gone. We should be more than happy and content that the NESCAC is the best that D3 has to offer and not try to over-inflate our brand of lacrosse.

[WoodStick]

Will not argue the academics, NESCAC offers up some of the best academic institutions in the country. In terms of facilities without going down the list one by one am not sure you are on target and many of the schools in the conferences you mentioned, especially the CAA have way better facilities and strength programs where most have their own dedicated strength and nutrition specialists.
In terms of on the field am not sure anyone in the NESCAC is handling Hofstra, UMAss, Delaware, Albany, Bryant, Bucknell etc etc

[Dave]

bunch of rosters up...no schedules yet.

Besides Trinity and Conn - any other teams have games this weekend?

[Ddw1]

I think Bates has a game against another Maine school -- not Colby.

[Dave]

looks like it just got posted...4pm v St. Joseph's

[Ddw1]

Thx. Sounds good. It is a start!

[nehslaxfan]

Now that we are getting started what are people’s predictions. NE Lax Journal listed Colby as a sleeper and had Conn College and Colby 4 and 5 in Conf. Anyone have any insight on those two teams?

[UpperCorner]

Now that we are getting started what are people’s predictions. NE Lax Journal listed Colby as a sleeper and had Conn College and Colby 4 and 5 in Conf. Anyone have any insight on those two teams?

Do not get that publication... can you post their rankings? Are we certain yet of who is/is not playing? Seems it may be a strange season as some roster players may be missing?

[pcowlax]

Now that we are getting started what are people’s predictions. NE Lax Journal listed Colby as a sleeper and had Conn College and Colby 4 and 5 in Conf. Anyone have any insight on those two teams?

Do not get that publication... can you post their rankings? Are we certain yet of who is/is not playing? Seems it may be a strange season as some roster players may be missing?

NE LAX Journal reports Bowdoin, Amherst and Middlebury are out. The remaining 8 have teams with diminished rosters due to withdraws to save eligibility. The 8 will likely split into 2 groups for a bifurcated schedule. The top team in each group would play for the CAC championship and the NCAA autobid (edit- would really need to see where and how the tourney is set up before believe NESCAC team will be allowed to travel overnight to play in this). They note Tufts brings back most of its 2020 roster. Colby noted as sleeper as the team that perhaps had the least COVID interruptions, all 47 players on campus and practicing since February. They only rank 5 teams for pre-season CAC rankings, not sure if this is due to there still being uncertainty at the other 3 or what.

1. Tufts
2. Williams
3. Wesleyan
4. Conn
5. Colby

Pre-season ALL-CAC rankings (includes players on teams not playing?)

Attack
Bredahl- Tufts
Jacoby- Wesleyan
Haase- Williams
Lund- Williams

Mid
Rutter- Conn
Herrick- Amherst (???)
Treiber- Tufts

SSDM
Penney- Wesleyan

FO
Helfrich- Tufts

LSM
Hall- Tufts

Defense
McTieran- Tufts
Sullivan- Amherst (???)
Donahue- Tufts
Burdick- Williams

Goalie
Bass- Midd (???)

[kramerica.inc]

Posted above, but an interesting nugget, worth reporting again:

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/m ... ens-top-20

OUT
Amherst (was No. 13)

The Mammoths’ first season under new head coach Rashad Devoe will have to wait, as they’re confronting a lack of numbers. "Given the option for students to study on-campus or remotely this semester, at this point we do not have enough student-athletes on campus to participate in NESCAC lacrosse competition," Amherst Athletics told US Lacrosse Magazine.

[georgeoar394]

Posted above, but an interesting nugget, worth reporting again:

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/m ... ens-top-20

OUT
Amherst (was No. 13)

The Mammoths’ first season under new head coach Rashad Devoe will have to wait, as they’re confronting a lack of numbers. "Given the option for students to study on-campus or remotely this semester, at this point we do not have enough student-athletes on campus to participate in NESCAC lacrosse competition," Amherst Athletics told US Lacrosse Magazine.

Interesting take the article writes about. You wonder how many players actually just are od done with Rashad and Amherst after this past fall and 2020 spring. I bet a lot dipped

[FCIAC LAX]

Form what I'm hearing:

NESCAC schedule out today, 2 conferences, games 4/10 to 5/1, East conference: Colby , Bates, Tufts, Conn, West Conference : Trinity, Williams, Wesleyan, Hamilton .

Some teams play each other twice, most likely winner of East plays winner of the West for Championship.

Single round robin with additional game after 5/1

other games possible.

no overnights.