College admissions cheating scheme

nchr

Tue, Mar 12 2019, 11:17 pm

1untamedgirl wrote:

So they can definitely get rid of affirmative action, rich legacy kids, athletes, and scholarships for minorities and only accept students who actually qualify and can pay for it out of pocket. Running a school like that is expensive, how long do you think their $35 billion dollar endowment would last?

No. It is illegal to discriminate based on race, national origin, age, color, religion, s-e-x, gender identity, handicap or disability, familial status, religious belief, s-e-x-u-a-l orientation, marital status, military status or other protected class status in accordance with federal and state law.....

1untamedgirl

Tue, Mar 12 2019, 11:21 pm

nchr wrote:

How is it discrimination if they accept all students who qualify and can pay for it without regard to race, national origin, age, color, religion, s-e-x, gender identity, handicap or disability, familial status, religious belief, s-e-x-u-a-l orientation, marital status, military status or other protected class status in accordance with federal and state law?
So no preferential treatment for anyone, everyone is equal under the law and only those that qualify and can afford to pay out of pocket gets in. That is especially since this is a private school so they have some leeway in who they can accept or reject as shyshira mentioned. How long do you think the $35 billion endowments would last?

DrMom

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 2:55 am

ora_43 wrote:

I don't want to get this into a discussion of racism, because that's a banned topic here, but - come on, this is not at all true.

I know people who've worked in admission at top colleges in the states. Colleges absolutely do not "lower their standards" for minorities. Any minority student who gets in, deserves to be there.

What does sometimes happen is that if there are 10,000 qualified candidates, and only 2,000 spots, the university will give slight preference to candidates who help fill their diversity goals. This means racial diversity, but also all kinds of other diversity - a diverse range of languages spoken, a diverse range of skills (an oboe player if they mostly have violin players, and vice versa), etc.

It's fine to oppose affirmative action, but it's not right or fair to say that minority students at top schools haven't met the same absurdly high standards as everyone else.

I absolutely disagree with your assertions.

When necessary to meet their target recruitment rates, colleges absolutely do lower standards. They will say, "Okay, instead of setting our minimum SAT score at 1300, we'll say it's 1100." But the SAT scores for accepted students from earmarked minorities will be a lot lower on average than that for white students they accept.

In other words: If you're African American you can get by with a 1100 SAT and still be considered, but if you are White, you'd better have at least a 1250 or your application will end up in the shredder.

And the standards are even stricter if you are Asian.

This was the finding and the basis for the class action lawsuit that Asian applicants have filed against Harvard University. The differences between standardized test scores was not "slight."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/har.....icans

1untamedgirl

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 9:42 am

Orchid wrote:

I know they are saying the kids didn't know, and for now no kids are being charged, but in many of the cases, the kids got in on athletic teams that they weren't qualified for, and then immediately claimed injury so as to get out of the team. I really strongly doubt those kids weren't in on the scheme. Or kids having no idea they didn't actually take the SAT but had someone do it in their name. C'mon.

I was thinking about it then I realized something. Illegal aliens are considered to be "good" parents for bringing their children to the country illegally and congress now wants to reward them by passing a bill devoted just to reward them but American citizens are considered "bad" parents for wanting to give their children a better life and people want to punish the kids for the actions of the parents. This double standard is appalling.
Why should illegal aliens get a pass and be rewarded for breaking the laws but American citizens penalized for breaking the laws?

ectomorph

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 9:49 am

1untamedgirl wrote:

Google hierarchy of victimhood.

jerusalem90

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 10:23 am

1untamedgirl wrote:

Then they should have used all that money to sue for discrimination and/or get rid of affirmative action instead of committing criminal activity and bribe their way into college.

If you're a poor white (or Asian) kid then the cards are even more stacked against you. Not only do you have minorities who get in instead of you just because they're minorities, but you also have white kids who get in because of you just because they're rich.

This is why rich white people can act so thrilled about affirmative action -- it doesn't affect them at all, just widens the gap between poor and rich whites.

33055

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 10:38 am

WhatFor wrote:

Thanks six. I was about to come here to post about that. So sad.

ETA: I don't understand the concept of trying to pay your kid's way into an institution that they're otherwise unqualified for.

What do you think is going to happen when they have to keep up with kids who are far more advanced than they are? Or are you going to pay for their diploma too? Ugh never mind. I think I have my answer.

It's not so hard to keep up. They get special considerations once they are in school. Also in a school like Yale, 90% of the kids earn honors degrees. At least this was the percentage when my friend from HS attended. The courses were no harder than my school. We often took similar courses and ironically ended up with the same graduate degrees.

Yale, at least at that time, had a lovely curve. The difference was you were going to school with Anne Dupont and Jodie Foster.

33055

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 10:45 am

jerusalem90 wrote:

I bet the large majority of these rich white cheating folks are hypocritical Democrats. Kellyanne Conway would not have gone after them.

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 11:56 am

DrMom wrote:

For elite schools, at the very least, while they might be "lower" they will not be "a lot lower."

So maybe the average for non-minority students might be 1500, but for minorities might be 1450.

The other thing that everyone needs to remember is how much of an advantage richer students already have in the process.

Richer parents can afford to pay $150 an hour to SAT or ACT tutors, and to have someone help edit essays. Private schools and selective public schools have college counselors who work with students, who have relationships with colleges, and who actually call and advocate for students. This is all legal. But its not available to poorer students, and students from non-elite public schools.

The Fox article is very misleading. It refers to students who receive "recruitment letters." These are not college acceptances. These are letters urging students to apply to particular schools. We've received dozens from schools we've never even heard of. So students with significantly lower scores receive RECRUITMENT letters. But it doesn't say that they receive ACCEPTANCES. Frankly, I doubt very many people with the 1350 to 1380 referred to for recruitment letters to Asians actually get into Harvard. The 25th percentile SAT score for admission to Harvard is 1460, and the 75th percentile is 1590. (The AVERAGE SAT for admitted students is 1520 out of 1600).

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 12:03 pm

Squishy wrote:

I bet the large majority of these rich white cheating folks are hypocritical Democrats. Kellyanne Conway would not have gone after them.

The people indicted have donated at least $131,800 to committees benefiting or controlled by then-presidential candidate and current U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah); at least $73,600 to the Republican National Committee; $8,350 to the National Republican Campaign Committee; $8,350 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee

But honestly, is there anything that you don't view as a good opportunity to attack Democrats?

33055

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 1:02 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

And how much did they give Democrats? It would be nice if you gave both sides.
Please show me your citations for those numbers?

I don't think I am wrong about the hypocrites, I mean the Democrats. They drove poltics to the current polarization. The rioting and screaming at the sky does not show them to be reasonable.

SixOfWands

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 1:10 pm

Squishy wrote:

It doesn't matter what was given to Democrats. You claimed they were all Democrats, so I proved you wrong. I (OTOH) never claimed that all of those indicted belonged to any one group.

But, of course, you took that as an opportunity to attack Democrats again, while at the same time claiming that it isn't people like you -- constantly on the attack -- that have created polarization. And taking something that has little or nothing to do with politics and using it as an opportunity to attack.

Raisin

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 1:17 pm

1untamedgirl wrote:

Really? Living in a war torn or drug gang ridden country with extreme poverty is EXACTLY the same as (gasp) not getting into Harvard and going to some slightly less prestigious university instead?

33055

Wed, Mar 13 2019, 1:50 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

Don't get this wrong again. I said "large majority" not "all". "All" is your word. My gut says your statistics prove my hypothesis which is why you had to distort my statement. This is why you won't post them either.

This has to do with our society and our values. It has everything to do with politics. I didn't bring up the point about who supports affirmative action because it didn't effect their kids. I expanded on this.

I think it is a great point that those who push affirmative action do so as long they can exempt their kids even if they have to cheat their way in.

Donating large sums to the institution itself to get preferred admission is noy the same thing as bribing individual coaches for consideration. One is legal and one is not.

33055

Thu, Mar 14 2019, 8:14 am

Squishy wrote:

Still waiting for the apology for gaslighting me with my own words.

Still waiting for the cite for your statistics, so I can prove how you warped them.

I saw a great meme of Felicity Huffman protesting in the women's March for equality. And you wonder why I think the left is made up of hypocrites?

1untamedgirl

Thu, Mar 14 2019, 10:06 am

Raisin wrote:

Really? Living in a war torn or drug gang ridden country with extreme poverty is EXACTLY the same as (gasp) not getting into Harvard and going to some slightly less prestigious university instead?

Illegal aliens are not escaping persecution from their govt and gangs are prevalent in America. They are coming for the economic opportunities, the free benefits that citizens are paying for I.e. free school, free food, free medical treatment, etc. and to try to give their kids a better future. All this is fine but it should be done legally. Except they have somehow been given a pass and have learned that they are above the laws.
The irony is that L.A. is a "sanctuary city" that protects illegal aliens from the feds while citizens are not being protected from the feds at all. The homelessness, gangs, drugs, etc is so high in some of the states but the govt is only concerned about helping the illegal aliens instead of ensuring that every citizen has a safe place to live free from drugs and gangs. Illegal aliens are taking away jobs, housing, college spots, etc from citizens and now congress wants to pass a law to protect them even more while the lives of citizens are being destroyed. BTW, this is a violation of the 14th amendment and I hope that every single citizen affected will sue for discrimination if they do get penalized for breaking the laws.

1untamedgirl

Thu, Mar 14 2019, 10:09 am

Squishy wrote:

This is from another forum, I have no further information about it but apparently 32 out of the 33 were big donors to the DNC and many of the Democrat candidates. Only 1 out of the 33 donated to a Republican candidate, and that 1 also donated to Democrats also. The other 32, when their donations were combined, which included the two actresses Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin, gave an astronomical amount to Hillary Clinton's Campaign of 2016

FranticFrummie

Thu, Mar 14 2019, 10:45 am

Something I haven't heard mentioned here yet, is that the kids were told to "act slow" so that they could be labeled learning disabled and get more time on their tests.

This could have some very bad repercussions for people who actually ARE in need of extra time, for whatever reason.

Playing the disabled card when you don't need it, is just as reprehensible as parking in the handicap space because you don't want to have to walk in the rain on your way to the mall.

"What actually happened, per the affidavit: Kids would apply to get extra time on the SAT and ACT by faking learning disabilities. (The kids are kind of in on this part: The witness advises parents to coach kids to “be stupid,” and “be slow” during the evaluation.) Granted extra time, the parents also make up a reason that they need to take the exam out of town—say, because they’ll be at a wedding. This all acts as an excuse to both test administrators and the kids as to why they need to take the test at one of the Singer’s designated test centers (often located in another state)."