Story Poster

Graduation Rates Hit Record Highs For Cal Athletics

October 16, 2019
15,120

BERKELEY – Cal's Graduation Success Rate (GSR) has reached a record high for the school at 85 percent, according to the latest data released by the NCAA on Wednesday. The figure is three percent higher than last year and continues a trend of rising Academic Progress Rate (APR) scores and grade-point averages for Golden Bear student-athletes.
 
Cal's GSR has increased four consecutive years, and the figure is its best since the NCAA began tabulating results in 1998-99. The school's previous high GSR came last year at 82 percent.
 
In addition to the overall GSR score, a school-record seven teams reached 100 percent, a record-tying 11 teams stood at 90 percent or higher, and 15 of 23 measured program were at least 85 percent.
 
"These results clearly show that our student-athletes are highly motivated to excel in their chosen fields of study, and they should be applauded for their level of achievement in the classroom," Director of Athletics Jim Knowlton said. "Maintaining and growing an environment focused on the total student-athlete experience – academically, athletically and developmentally – is our highest priority as an athletic department, and the latest figures are a testament to the hard work and commitment shown by our student-athletes, coaches, staff and the University as a whole. We still have room for improvement and are working every day to help ensure our student-athletes graduate and are prepared for their lives after Cal."
 
The GSR is based on a six-year cohort, meaning that the latest report includes only those student-athletes who received athletic scholarships, enrolled at Cal as freshmen or incoming transfers from 2009-12, and completed their degree within six years.
 
The seven teams that achieved 100 percent GSRs are:

Women's Golf

Women's Gymnastics (3rd year in a row)

Women's Swimming & Diving (4th year in a row)

Men's Tennis (4th year in a row)

Women's Tennis (7th year in a row)

Volleyball (8th year in a row)

Men's Water Polo

Four additional teams posted GSRs of at least 90 percent – men's swimming & diving (92%), women's rowing (94%), field hockey (91%) and women's water polo (90%). Baseball (89%), men's gymnastics (86%), lacrosse (89%) and softball (88%) also surpassed 85 percent for the year.
 
In addition, football's GSR leapt 11 percent over the past year to 75 percent, a record high for the program and a 31 percent increase over the past six years. Men's basketball's rate of 64 percent is up 8 percent year over year and 26 percent higher than six years ago. Other programs with significant gains include baseball (up 21% over the past four years), men's water polo (up 23% over the last five years), women's golf (up 40% over the last four years) and softball (up 25% over the last five years).
 
While the GSR looks at results for student-athletes who enrolled between 7-10 years ago, statistics that focus on more current student-athletes also reveal strong results. The average GPA for all student-athletes during the 2018-19 academic term was 3.081, with 22 of 30 teams posting GPAs above 3.0. The women's swimming & diving team led the way with a 3.399 GPA.
 
In regards to the APR, which provides a more real-time measurement of academic success than the GSR and centers on academic progress within the past five years, Cal had 16 teams score at or above 990 in the most recent release from May 2019. A total of 15 teams equaled or established all-time highs, with seven teams earning NCAA Public Recognition awards with scores of 1,000 (the highest possible) – beach volleyball, men's cross country, women's golf, lacrosse, women's soccer, men's tennis and volleyball. Football's APR of 979 was its highest ever and marks a 44-point increase from just six years ago.

Discussion from...

Graduation Rates Hit Record Highs For Cal Athletics

10,736 Views | 14 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by dimitrig
GBear4Life
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:33p, 10/16/19
do those who transfer out or leave early for the pros count against the score
Reply Quote
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:57p, 10/16/19
Still below average....

The overall D1 average was 89. Cal was 85.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-student-athletes-graduate-record-high-rates

Also, football is tied for 10th with ASU (75). Only OSU (70) is worse.

Cal still has a ways to go.....
Reply Quote
3 edits
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:04p, 10/16/19
Steps in the right direction.
Reply Quote
Big C
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 4:16p, 10/16/19
71Bear said:
Still below average....

The overall D1 average was 89. Cal was 85.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-student-athletes-graduate-record-high-rates

Also, football is tied for 10th with ASU (75). Only OSU (70) is worse.

Cal still has a ways to go.....
Does a school like, say, North Carolina have a higher rate than we do? If so, why might that be? Perhaps because they have "true" student athletes, hold them to the highest standards and give them the proper help and guidance?
Reply Quote
Chabbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:51p, 10/16/19
About leaving Students:

"The GSR formula removes from the rate student-athletes who leave school while academically eligible and includes student-athletes who transfer to a school after initially enrolling elsewhere. This calculation provides a more accurate appraisal of student-athlete success."
Reply Quote
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Big C • 7:41p, 10/16/19
Big C said:
71Bear said:
Still below average....

The overall D1 average was 89. Cal was 85.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-student-athletes-graduate-record-high-rates

Also, football is tied for 10th with ASU (75). Only OSU (70) is worse.

Cal still has a ways to go.....
Does a school like, say, North Carolina have a higher rate than we do? If so, why might that be? Perhaps because they have "true" student athletes, hold them to the highest standards and give them the proper help and guidance?
North Carolina's football GSR (70) was lower than Cal's.

Reply Quote
OdontoBear66
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:23p, 10/16/19
Look, we all know Cal is tuff, tuff, tuff for all students including athletes, but again I flinch at the disparity between all other sports at Cal and FB and BB with regards to academics. I recognize it is a reality, but it really sits in my craw. Student athletes are to be students first, and athletes second. There is just a monstrous disparity. It is not only at Cal. It is everywhere. Not good. So we use the overall University stat for the headline, and then down the page read where it really is.

As much as I don't like it I realize if FB and BB players were having to be at the level of WP, or tennis, etc. we would have a sub Ivy team. I don't know the solution, but I would really prefer if we were close enough to the Ivies we could play in their league and keep our academic integrity. Probably admittedly silly, but the GPAs and test scores for "most" FB and BB players are not qualified for Cal. My grandchildren at UDub and G'town suffer the same dilemma. Why is it that the NCAA has sold out? Why can't we have legitimate students as athletes. Or does no one care. Seems to me when Penn plays Princeton everyone has fun, just at a lower level, but at least with students for the most part.
Reply Quote
packawana
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to OdontoBear66 • 8:51p, 10/16/19
OdontoBear66 said:
Look, we all know Cal is tuff, tuff, tuff for all students including athletes, but again I flinch at the disparity between all other sports at Cal and FB and BB with regards to academics. I recognize it is a reality, but it really sits in my craw. Student athletes are to be students first, and athletes second. There is just a monstrous disparity. It is not only at Cal. It is everywhere. Not good. So we use the overall University stat for the headline, and then down the page read where it really is.

As much as I don't like it I realize if FB and BB players were having to be at the level of WP, or tennis, etc. we would have a sub Ivy team. I don't know the solution, but I would really prefer if we were close enough to the Ivies we could play in their league and keep our academic integrity. Probably admittedly silly, but the GPAs and test scores for "most" FB and BB players are not qualified for Cal. My grandchildren at UDub and G'town suffer the same dilemma. Why is it that the NCAA has sold out? Why can't we have legitimate students as athletes. Or does no one care. Seems to me when Penn plays Princeton everyone has fun, just at a lower level, but at least with students for the most part.


Because if we were to be totally honest, we would have to admit that this is all a lie -- that college athletics is not about this idyllic concept of building well-rounded students and instead about making money.

But it keeps the NCAA's coffers flowing as well as conference offices, coaches, and athletic departments, so who's going to affect change? And clearly we care enough about winning that we're willing to pay for it.
Reply Quote
1 edit
OdontoBear66
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packawana • 5:54a, 10/17/19
packawana said:
OdontoBear66 said:
Look, we all know Cal is tuff, tuff, tuff for all students including athletes, but again I flinch at the disparity between all other sports at Cal and FB and BB with regards to academics. I recognize it is a reality, but it really sits in my craw. Student athletes are to be students first, and athletes second. There is just a monstrous disparity. It is not only at Cal. It is everywhere. Not good. So we use the overall University stat for the headline, and then down the page read where it really is.

As much as I don't like it I realize if FB and BB players were having to be at the level of WP, or tennis, etc. we would have a sub Ivy team. I don't know the solution, but I would really prefer if we were close enough to the Ivies we could play in their league and keep our academic integrity. Probably admittedly silly, but the GPAs and test scores for "most" FB and BB players are not qualified for Cal. My grandchildren at UDub and G'town suffer the same dilemma. Why is it that the NCAA has sold out? Why can't we have legitimate students as athletes. Or does no one care. Seems to me when Penn plays Princeton everyone has fun, just at a lower level, but at least with students for the most part.


Because if we were to be totally honest, we would have to admit that this is all a lie -- that college athletics is not about this idyllic concept of building well-rounded students and instead about making money.

But it keeps the NCAA's coffers flowing as well as conference offices, coaches, and athletic departments, so who's going to affect change? And clearly we care enough about winning that we're willing to pay for it.
But the differential, of course, is in the sports that pay. The other sports athletes are maybe not exactly the same as the general student body in admission credentials and/or performance while in college, but they are very close. There remains a feeling on campuses that if one is "a jock" they are there in preferential treatment. Slightly so in the Olympic type sports but definitely so in FB and BB (with a number of exceptions, but the exceptions are just that, exceptions).
Reply Quote
eastbayyoungbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to OdontoBear66 • 8:27a, 10/17/19
OdontoBear66 said:
packawana said:
OdontoBear66 said:
Look, we all know Cal is tuff, tuff, tuff for all students including athletes, but again I flinch at the disparity between all other sports at Cal and FB and BB with regards to academics. I recognize it is a reality, but it really sits in my craw. Student athletes are to be students first, and athletes second. There is just a monstrous disparity. It is not only at Cal. It is everywhere. Not good. So we use the overall University stat for the headline, and then down the page read where it really is.

As much as I don't like it I realize if FB and BB players were having to be at the level of WP, or tennis, etc. we would have a sub Ivy team. I don't know the solution, but I would really prefer if we were close enough to the Ivies we could play in their league and keep our academic integrity. Probably admittedly silly, but the GPAs and test scores for "most" FB and BB players are not qualified for Cal. My grandchildren at UDub and G'town suffer the same dilemma. Why is it that the NCAA has sold out? Why can't we have legitimate students as athletes. Or does no one care. Seems to me when Penn plays Princeton everyone has fun, just at a lower level, but at least with students for the most part.


Because if we were to be totally honest, we would have to admit that this is all a lie -- that college athletics is not about this idyllic concept of building well-rounded students and instead about making money.

But it keeps the NCAA's coffers flowing as well as conference offices, coaches, and athletic departments, so who's going to affect change? And clearly we care enough about winning that we're willing to pay for it.
But the differential, of course, is in the sports that pay. The other sports athletes are maybe not exactly the same as the general student body in admission credentials and/or performance while in college, but they are very close. There remains a feeling on campuses that if one is "a jock" they are there in preferential treatment. Slightly so in the Olympic type sports but definitely so in FB and BB (with a number of exceptions, but the exceptions are just that, exceptions).


You hit the nail right on the head there. There will be more allowances to deviate from the standard because of the money. The money is just too good if you're planning to stay in the business of big-time college athletics.
Reply Quote
1 edit
HearstMining
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 8:52a, 10/17/19
71Bear said:
Big C said:
71Bear said:
Still below average....

The overall D1 average was 89. Cal was 85.

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-student-athletes-graduate-record-high-rates

Also, football is tied for 10th with ASU (75). Only OSU (70) is worse.

Cal still has a ways to go.....
Does a school like, say, North Carolina have a higher rate than we do? If so, why might that be? Perhaps because they have "true" student athletes, hold them to the highest standards and give them the proper help and guidance?
North Carolina's football GSR (70) was lower than Cal's.

And it's worth pointing out that during most/all of the time periods reported, the UNC African American Studies program was handing out A's for essentially no work at all. I believe the only reason the NCAA didn't sanction them was that this academic farce was available to non-athletes as well as athletes. What the GSR rate would have been without this program is anybody's guess.
Reply Quote
dimitrig
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:51a, 10/17/19
"In addition, football's GSR leapt 11 percent over the past year to 75 percent, a record high for the program and a 31 percent increase over the past six years. Men's basketball's rate of 64 percent is up 8 percent year over year and 26 percent higher than six years ago."

I consider this great progress and I hope it continues because one reason our teams have underperformed is that we did try to focus more on academics. If the teams did poorly AND the academics were not there I would consider that a problem. However, this is a trade I can live with.
Reply Quote
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to dimitrig • 11:39a, 10/17/19
dimitrig said:
"In addition, football's GSR leapt 11 percent over the past year to 75 percent, a record high for the program and a 31 percent increase over the past six years. Men's basketball's rate of 64 percent is up 8 percent year over year and 26 percent higher than six years ago."

I consider this great progress and I hope it continues because one reason our teams have underperformed is that we did try to focus more on academics. If the teams did poorly AND the academics were not there I would consider that a problem. However, this is a trade I can live with.
Yep, it is progress. However, I believe touting how much progress the program has made to get back from abysmal to below average is rather disingenuous. I think a measured tone would have been more appropriate. In essence, it is easy to make headway when you are far, far, far behind. It is tougher to make progress when you get within hailing distance of average. I suggest holding off the cheerleading until Cal moves into the top quartile of the conference. That would be progress worth cheering about.
Reply Quote
dimitrig
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 9:43p, 10/17/19
71Bear said:
dimitrig said:
"In addition, football's GSR leapt 11 percent over the past year to 75 percent, a record high for the program and a 31 percent increase over the past six years. Men's basketball's rate of 64 percent is up 8 percent year over year and 26 percent higher than six years ago."

I consider this great progress and I hope it continues because one reason our teams have underperformed is that we did try to focus more on academics. If the teams did poorly AND the academics were not there I would consider that a problem. However, this is a trade I can live with.
Yep, it is progress. However, I believe touting how much progress the program has made to get back from abysmal to below average is rather disingenuous. I think a measured tone would have been more appropriate. In essence, it is easy to make headway when you are far, far, far behind. It is tougher to make progress when you get within hailing distance of average. I suggest holding off the cheerleading until Cal moves into the top quartile of the conference. That would be progress worth cheering about.

If the football GSR is a record high (since it started in 2005) that is a worthy accomplishment and not quite as disingenuous as basketball increasing from 38 percent to 64 percent. It means - whatever other teams are doing - Cal has never done better. That is worth cheering about!
Reply Quote
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.