Posts: 6,588
Threads: 30
Joined: Oct 2016
Based on the wording of the article, Fran may have applied to a grad program at Stanford, not the medical school. Medical school isn't a one year program, even best case :-). The description in the article doesn't match that IMO. Obviously I don't actually know. She may well have been willing to spend another year at Stanford in a specific graduate school program, get another degree and then go to med school at Harvard. However, given that wasn't an option she moved on.
The "Listen to Tara" argument doesn't resonate for me. IMO the preference athletes get in undergraduate admissions is borderline. It can be justified by arguing that athletics is a character builder and that it should count for something academically. A contributing argument in the past was that academic success at Stanford was not that much of an "exact science" and admissions were somewhat arbitrary. While the latter is still true, the former is not. It is actually pretty hard to "fail" at Stanford these days if your only goal is to stay eligible. Granted, some have managed to fail, but it takes (lack of) effort
Graduate school admission has always been the prerogative of the department itself. Changing that in any way is going to generate a ton of pushback that will make SLAC vs. the Physics Department look like patty-cakes. Changing this process by overlaying some kind of fiat from the administration seems to me to be academically dishonest. Much like the athletic coaches, the academic faculty chooses the "players" they want. Why should the former trump the latter? Raising awareness within the academic faculty of a given athlete's value to the University on the field of play may or may not have an effect on their admission chances. I suspect generally the latter, but YMMV.