The Owls finished 12th in grad rates for all student athletes with 91%
Rice was 7th in African-American student athlete graduates with 89%
Rice finished 8th in women grad rates
Rice was 4th in football grads with 94%
Rice was 1st in Texas and in CUSA in football grad rates (94%)
Guess who was last in Texas in football grad rates--UH and UT tied with 58%

Great job, as usual for the Owls.

58% is actually a big improvement for UH, isn't it? I recall seeing a number in the 30's at some point.

(11-15-2016 04:29 PM)bobreinhold1 Wrote:  The Owls finished 12th in grad rates for all student athletes with 91%
Rice was 7th in African-American student athlete graduates with 89%
Rice finished 8th in women grad rates
Rice was 4th in football grads with 94%
Rice was 1st in Texas and in CUSA in football grad rates (94%)
Guess who was last in Texas in football grad rates--UH and UT tied with 58%

Great job, as usual for the Owls.

And the athletic department, coaches and academic advisors as well. The players do the work, but at Rice, they have the support of the whole department.

This is probably the number 1 reason DB still has a job. I suspect it is ranked higher than wins in the BOT list of requirements for the job.

Does anyone know what the graduation rates, on the same basis, are for non-athletic scholarship students at Rice?

(11-16-2016 08:21 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Does anyone know what the graduation rates, on the same basis, are for non-athletic scholarship students at Rice?

~97-98%

(11-16-2016 10:44 AM)ChicagoOwl (BS 07) Wrote:  

(11-16-2016 08:21 AM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  Does anyone know what the graduation rates, on the same basis, are for non-athletic scholarship students at Rice?

~97-98%

The difference between 94% and 97% is one-half of a player graduating per year. And Rice has had years with 100%.

Given red-shirt years we give out about 17 scholarships a year, IIRC

16 graduates - 94%
17 graduates -100%

So I don't see a basis for griping or demanding we 'match' a number that is unmatchable. You're holding them to a 100% standard if that's your point. It's called math.

(11-16-2016 07:36 AM)jhruzek Wrote:  This is probably the number 1 reason DB still has a job. I suspect it is ranked higher than wins in the BOT list of requirements for the job.

This should be the bare minimum for getting a job as HC at Rice and keeping it beyond a couple years. It should not be the bare minimum for keeping your job after 10 years.

Chicago, are you sure?

It was in the high 80's not that long ago (the 5 year graduation rate for all matriculating students) Kids transfer closer to home, struggle with the pressure, have financial issues etc etc.

(11-16-2016 10:59 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Chicago, are you sure?

It was in the high 80's not that long ago (the 5 year graduation rate for all matriculating students) Kids transfer closer to home, struggle with the pressure, have financial issues etc etc.

Here is Rice's data for classes entering in 2005-09:

All have been pretty constant:

4-year graduation rate has been within 78.8%-83.7%; most recent: 80.0%

5-year graduation rate has been within 88.8% & 91.5%; most recent:88.8%

6-year graduation rate has been within 90.5%-92.8% ; most recent: 90.5%

Freshman retention rates are much higher: 95.6 - 98.2% for the five classes entering Fall 2010 - Fall 2014.

Other websites' representation of this info include:

This "CollegeFactual" website says (15-min free preview): "Both the on-time (two or four years depending on the degree) graduation rate of 80.7% and the overall rate of 91.5% rank rank Rice University among the best in the country. Based on the caliber of students that attend Rice University we would have expected an overall graduation rate of 91.1%"

US News has Rice's 4-year graduation rate at 80%. (More details require subscription to U.S. News College Compass.)

That's closer to what I recall Mike....

I remember thinking athletes (for a variety of often non-academic reasons) had a better record than the average student.

That's probably not unusual, but for a school with our academic rating it might be.

(11-16-2016 01:59 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  That's closer to what I recall Mike....

I remember thinking athletes (for a variety of often non-academic reasons) had a better record than the average student.

That's probably not unusual, but for a school with our academic rating it might be.

That's also what I expected and why I asked the question.

I'll add my thanks to Mike for doing the research (as usual)!

(11-16-2016 01:59 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  That's closer to what I recall Mike....

I remember thinking athletes (for a variety of often non-academic reasons) had a better record than the average student.

That's probably not unusual, but for a school with our academic rating it might be.

No surprising. Not sure what the percentage of first year dropouts is today, but back in the '70s, when the will still mandated 33% enrollment to Houstonians and another 33% to Texas residents, over 10% of the entering Freshman year dropped out before their Sophomore year.

(11-16-2016 06:11 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Not sure what the percentage of first year dropouts is today, but back in the '70s, when the will still mandated 33% enrollment to Houstonians and another 33% to Texas residents, over 10% of the entering Freshman year dropped out before their Sophomore year.

Ahem ...

(11-16-2016 01:16 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Freshman retention rates are ... 95.6 - 98.2% for the five classes entering Fall 2010 - Fall 2014.

:-)

(11-16-2016 06:34 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  

(11-16-2016 06:11 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Not sure what the percentage of first year dropouts is today, but back in the '70s, when the will still mandated 33% enrollment to Houstonians and another 33% to Texas residents, over 10% of the entering Freshman year dropped out before their Sophomore year.

Ahem ...

(11-16-2016 01:16 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  Freshman retention rates are ... 95.6 - 98.2% for the five classes entering Fall 2010 - Fall 2014.

:-)

It's obviously gone up considerably. I will say that back in the day it was largely Texans from small, rural towns that had the most difficulty cutting it.

Oh ok, maybe I was thinking freshman retention rates.

Where does DB stand compared to the prior coaches?

Rice football players have been in the 90-96 range for as long as I can remember.

I do not remember all that many non-athletes dropping out after their freshman year in the 1970s. Standards were relaxed a bit about what football and basketball players were admitted so a few did not fit in but most of them did. Also, I do not think there was that much of a difference for Texas and non Texas students. The admits from small towns were usually the valedictorians or close to it of their HS class.

(11-16-2016 06:11 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(11-16-2016 01:59 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  That's closer to what I recall Mike....

I remember thinking athletes (for a variety of often non-academic reasons) had a better record than the average student.

That's probably not unusual, but for a school with our academic rating it might be.

No surprising. Not sure what the percentage of first year dropouts is today, but back in the '70s, when the will still mandated 33% enrollment to Houstonians and another 33% to Texas residents, over 10% of the entering Freshman year dropped out before their Sophomore year.

(11-17-2016 02:31 PM)75src Wrote:  Also, I do not think there was that much of a difference for Texas and non Texas students. The admits from small towns were usually the valedictorians or close to it of their HS class.

I suspect that the folks from small towns who were admitted would be been prepared ... and that those who had suspect academic backgrounds were denied admission.

I gave a campus tour in ~1969 to a wonderful fellow (and his proud parents) from a small town in Arkansas. He wanted to be a chemical engineer. He was a valedictorian and had gotten straight A's since birth, but his high school didn't even offer trigonometry ... while nearly all Rice SEs in those days had taken trig by their junior year in high school and had pre-calc or calc in their senior year. Math 100 & 101 (Freshman math/Calculus) was one of those foundational Rice SE courses that zoomed right along, leaving the unprepared or unmotivated in the dust. I don't recall any lower-content or remedial math courses being offered to SE majors.

I doubt that my Arkansas tour fellow would have been prepared for Rice, but I felt confident he'd do fine at a larger university where he could have made up his math deficiencies in his freshman and sophomore years.