except they weren't given a full ride anywhere. They were just accepted to the university. It is like a 5'8" 350 lb who runs a 5.8 being accepted to the university as a walk on.
college entry exam cheating...
- Thread starter kikdakan
- Start date
except they weren't given a full ride anywhere. They were just accepted to the university. It is like a 5'8" 350 lb who runs a 5.8 being accepted to the university as a walk on.
Simpsons covered Yale taking bribes 25 years ago when going over what it would take to get unqualified students admitted.
The one accused, Lori Laughlin will appear in court today. I wonder if she bribes the judge?
I no longer consider the college one goes to be a sign of much of anything. I've known too many marginally intelligent people who have gone to the Ivy League and other prestigious universities to take it seriously. I've also known and worked with truly brilliant people with no college education at all (and believe they were wiser for it).
She was hot back in her glory days, and still maintains hotness, along with some stupidity.
Considering this involves an individual from IMG Academy, I'm curious what will happen to that "school" now
She was hot back in her glory days, and still maintains hotness, along with some stupidity.
She and her husband paid bribes more than most to get her kids into USC I believe. I never realized SC was so difficult to get into academically.
I think that he was doing exactly what he was hired to do. Just finally got caught.
Let's draw a few distinctions here that are important to note:
1.) This scheme is weird and specifically was for wealthy individual's kids; the idea was, get them accepted, and then the wealthy parents can actually pay for the tuition no problem. And the schools mentioned are not the easiest to get into; some of them are easier than others, but in general, they're highly competitive and have only gotten more so since I even went to school from 2001 - 2015 (grad school included). Acceptance rates have really tightened up to an absurd degree.
2.) This scandal was truly breaking rules by cheating on standardized tests and/or getting an "in" on some sport that doesn't get very much attention and then dropping the sport ASAP. It isn't the same as how athletes generally get admitted into college, which in and of itself is a complex, corrupt, weird process that we should reform anyway.
Lastly, about "life experience" and how that gets people in places: Where a student is from, their socioeconomic background, their experiences thus far, their life story, etc., are all things that can have some, but not usually a huge, effect on the admissions process. So, for example, being from Nebraska no matter who you are is kind of a big bonus because we are a low-population, rural state with few individuals who ever leave it to go to Harvard or Georgetown.
There are intangibles that factor into admissions decisions, and very few of them have anything to do with survivors of the Parkland High School shooting. Jerks.
1.) This scheme is weird and specifically was for wealthy individual's kids; the idea was, get them accepted, and then the wealthy parents can actually pay for the tuition no problem. And the schools mentioned are not the easiest to get into; some of them are easier than others, but in general, they're highly competitive and have only gotten more so since I even went to school from 2001 - 2015 (grad school included). Acceptance rates have really tightened up to an absurd degree.
2.) This scandal was truly breaking rules by cheating on standardized tests and/or getting an "in" on some sport that doesn't get very much attention and then dropping the sport ASAP. It isn't the same as how athletes generally get admitted into college, which in and of itself is a complex, corrupt, weird process that we should reform anyway.
Lastly, about "life experience" and how that gets people in places: Where a student is from, their socioeconomic background, their experiences thus far, their life story, etc., are all things that can have some, but not usually a huge, effect on the admissions process. So, for example, being from Nebraska no matter who you are is kind of a big bonus because we are a low-population, rural state with few individuals who ever leave it to go to Harvard or Georgetown.
There are intangibles that factor into admissions decisions, and very few of them have anything to do with survivors of the Parkland High School shooting. Jerks.
Probably because its a shady place to begin with...its a diploma factory disguised as a high school/prep school
I agree with most of those comments. But, from personal experience, the part about "life experience" has become much more important than grades, AP subjects, AP testing, and SAT/ACT scores. And being from Nebraska means squat these days unless you are of the correct "life experience" grouping.
The funny thing is - that was my same reaction. People pay schools in the form of donations, if they are wealthy enough, they build buildings, etc. But then I thought about it - this is exactly what is wrong in the world. We continue to just think "oh, this is how the rich people do things - nothing to see here" - but that's not right. You have kids who put in extra hours to prepare for exams, they work with tutors, put in countless hours and then there's another "class" that just gets things handed to them because of money. We've become so used to this type of behavior that we think it's not a big deal. But it should be.
Agreed...the "life experience" is what colleges now use to ummmm...how shall we say...pick people that they feel will make the school stand out...ahem.
I don't think schools letting in who they want (especially private schools) is a big deal at all.
The cheating on the test part is weird...like talk about an elaborate set up that they had going on. I can remember taking my ACT and looking at the kids scantron sheet that was sitting next to me a few times, I just figured that was how most dudes cheated...I didn't think it went to this extent.
Of course there are instances where you meet someone with no formal education who is brilliant, but when playing the numbers, the top academic institutions are named that for a reason. The expertise in their faculty and the learning environment is just superior. I wish it was just a name on a diploma, but it is much more than that.
Yeah, I was sort of thinking the same way.
I know a lot of people like to "poo-poo" the Ivy League schools...but I think for the most part it is safe to say that the people that get in and graduate from those schools are sort of on top of stuff.
It's all part of a rigged system. It's why the younger people today are so disenfranchised and want a socialist system. To be honest, I don't think they've thought through what socialism means, but they just want something different than we have now. Not trying to get political here, but I also believe that's why Trump was elected. There is a feeling of "this **** isn't working" so let's just try something different because doing more of the same is just not working.
This system in place where money allows you to operate in a way entirely different from others is a problem.
Yeah, but does that ever go away?
I mean...if my last name is Kennedy I am going to have a better chance that if my last name is Cocktolstoy.
Great movie!!!I’m going to take this a step further. This “entrance scandal” didn’t start within the last 6 months. It’s been ongoing for many years. It also encompasses many universities. I also believe it can be assumed that there were many “students” with affluent parents that were probably admitted under false pretenses. It’s also possible that many of those “students” admitted to the universities don’t have enough intelligence to spell their name, let alone maintain a GPA necessary to stay in school.
Therefore, isn’t it plausible the scandal reaches further into the universities? If parents are bribing SAT test administrators, test takers, etc. then I believe it would be less difficult to bribe or financially coerce TAs, professors and the universities to give a bump to their son or daughter’s grades in individual classes to keep their prized "students" in good standing with the university.
Why don't you call me some time when you have no class?
You're right. It's systemic and has been going on forever which is why I, and several others on the board probably shrug our shoulders and say "meh... nothing to see here." In a way, I appreciate that there are people out there saying "no. this isn't how it's supposed to be."I’m going to take this a step further. This “entrance scandal” didn’t start within the last 6 months. It’s been ongoing for many years. It also encompasses many universities. I also believe it can be assumed that there were many “students” with affluent parents that were probably admitted under false pretenses. It’s also possible that many of those “students” admitted to the universities don’t have enough intelligence to spell their name, let alone maintain a GPA necessary to stay in school.
Therefore, isn’t it plausible the scandal reaches further into the universities? If parents are bribing SAT test administrators, test takers, etc. then I believe it would be less difficult to bribe or financially coerce TAs, professors and the universities to give a bump to their son or daughter’s grades in individual classes to keep their prized "students" in good standing with the university.
Why don't you call me some time when you have no class?
USC is a good school but I gotta think if you actually care about your kids' futures and whether they're gonna be idiots who get things handed to them or hardworking, intelligent people there are easier, cheaper, and less illegal ways to get them into SC. Hire tutors, take test prep classes, get them lessons for whatever bogus sport they wanna try, get them involved in extracurriculars, etc. These kids have had the means for every advantage, if they're still too dumb for USC then they can't go there, get over it.
The problem is, a lot of these kids (famous family kids) don't go to school anymore.
Back in the day you paid your price at Choate Academy and places like that...50K a year for high school and those places "made sure" you got into the school you wanted...
Now...rich kids don't attend school. It is insane. I don't get it.
For the most part, these are really good responses.
I attended school for a really long time, worked in both a university and college setting, and had a family member who was a professor for 40 years. I feel fairly well qualified to opine on a few of the points brought up, good and bad:
1.) The "top" universities truly do attract the best talent, for the most part. Private institutions are allowed to have their own admissions criteria entirely, and have always allowed for "legacy" students to have an easier time getting in. This is a relic of a time when your name and pedigree got you into these schools, as they were thought of as academic, but also social and finishing schools. In fact, many womens colleges were no more than just finishing schools, but have now transitioned to being real, and very rigorous, institutions of higher learning. Is this bad? Yes. Education in general used to be only for the aristocracy, not for all of you (or me). It was kept that way for a reason; education allows you to cultivate your mind, which helps you thrive in life and provides you with alternative ways of living, other than slaving away for some rich person.
2.) Being not-rich and from Midwest labor stock, I was taught the value of one of the great progressive achievements in our country, the building of land-grant, public research universities (UNL being a great example of one). These schools are tasked with serving the citizens of their state, receive public funds to help offset the cost of operating, offer deeply discounted tuition to their in-state population, and in some cases used to be entirely free. On top of that, many of them have achieved a level of quality that rivals or exceeds their private counterparts (Cal Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, North Carolina all come to mind, and there are many others now). You can get just as good an education at Michigan as you can at Harvard, and at a fraction of the cost if you are in-state.
3.) The GI bill benefited this country in ways that we are still experiencing, but have been going down over time; when you make access to education (and I would include trade schools and community colleges here too, but education reform is complex and I don't want to get into that) easier and more affordable for those who would not necessarily have had those opportunities, you dramatically increase the opulence of your country. Period.
These scams are a reaction to how increasingly difficult it is to get into a school with a "big name," public or private, due to online applications making it easy for students to spam apps to 20+ schools, making competition for admission VERY tough.
Remember: Education used to just be for the elites. And believe me, elites have been trying to take it away ever since, particularly those who would de-fund education and decrease regulations that these institutions should abide by in order to provide ready, equal access so that more people can rise up out of poverty or tougher circumstances and have more choices in life.
I attended school for a really long time, worked in both a university and college setting, and had a family member who was a professor for 40 years. I feel fairly well qualified to opine on a few of the points brought up, good and bad:
1.) The "top" universities truly do attract the best talent, for the most part. Private institutions are allowed to have their own admissions criteria entirely, and have always allowed for "legacy" students to have an easier time getting in. This is a relic of a time when your name and pedigree got you into these schools, as they were thought of as academic, but also social and finishing schools. In fact, many womens colleges were no more than just finishing schools, but have now transitioned to being real, and very rigorous, institutions of higher learning. Is this bad? Yes. Education in general used to be only for the aristocracy, not for all of you (or me). It was kept that way for a reason; education allows you to cultivate your mind, which helps you thrive in life and provides you with alternative ways of living, other than slaving away for some rich person.
2.) Being not-rich and from Midwest labor stock, I was taught the value of one of the great progressive achievements in our country, the building of land-grant, public research universities (UNL being a great example of one). These schools are tasked with serving the citizens of their state, receive public funds to help offset the cost of operating, offer deeply discounted tuition to their in-state population, and in some cases used to be entirely free. On top of that, many of them have achieved a level of quality that rivals or exceeds their private counterparts (Cal Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, North Carolina all come to mind, and there are many others now). You can get just as good an education at Michigan as you can at Harvard, and at a fraction of the cost if you are in-state.
3.) The GI bill benefited this country in ways that we are still experiencing, but have been going down over time; when you make access to education (and I would include trade schools and community colleges here too, but education reform is complex and I don't want to get into that) easier and more affordable for those who would not necessarily have had those opportunities, you dramatically increase the opulence of your country. Period.
These scams are a reaction to how increasingly difficult it is to get into a school with a "big name," public or private, due to online applications making it easy for students to spam apps to 20+ schools, making competition for admission VERY tough.
Remember: Education used to just be for the elites. And believe me, elites have been trying to take it away ever since, particularly those who would de-fund education and decrease regulations that these institutions should abide by in order to provide ready, equal access so that more people can rise up out of poverty or tougher circumstances and have more choices in life.
I hear ya. The thing is I doubt any of these kids are taking spots of any qualified kids. One thing about universities now is the a doing everything they can to recruit kids. Creighton has dropped some of their requirements to let kids in is an example.
Not to go all anti PC, but if you have a white, straight, christian son who is not transgender you probably almost have to bribe some schools to let him in.
this is true for some of the state schools, although their admission standards - particularly for those you listed - are becoming increasingly elite
a 4.1 gpa and 30 ACT score doesn't get you into Michigan even as an instate applicant unless your are an elite athlete or have some other elite extracurricular activity on your resume.
29 ACT score puts you in the lower 25th percentile for Michigan. The standards aren’t lower for instate applicants. That is what MSU exists for
The instate acceptance rate is less than 50% for instate kids where counselors are advising kids not to bother applying unless your scores are off the charts.
Yeah that part gets weird; I know that at Wisconsin, the admissions are way harder on local Madison kids than they are for some of the more rural communities throughout the state. That is in part due to trying to get a diverse student body, and in part the way that even state schools have to chase dollars around as best they can due to funding cuts and other restrictions. The one difference I am talking about is, in general, what I said is accurate, and at least with the public universities, if the state ever decided that they had a new mandate to make sure EVERY kid COULD get admitted to a state campus and for free (the model that the University of California system used to have), the state could make them do that (with funding and infrastructure increases, of course). Private schools operate independently, and nobody can "make" them do anything.
This broad didn't even want to go to school, she was looking to party. I could've gotten her into a tailgate and a ticket to the UCLA USC game for like 500 bucks max, not 500k. She's a chick too so she literally would have just had to show up and she'd get into basically every college party.
I’ve got a feeling that her main goal in life is to be another Kim Kardashian. Maybe the publicity from this scandal will help her achieve that goal.