Home

College admissions cheating scheme
Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  Last >>
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News

View latest: 24h 48h 72h


r1




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 11:35 am
SixOfWands 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).



But not everyone who is white is richer or better off than African Americans, that’s my problem with affirmative action- I think it should be based on socioeconomic background or proven disadvantage....

I have personal experience with this but deleted cuz this thread is not anon enabled.
Back to top

Fox




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 11:56 am
Here's the question that has become overdue:

Apparently versions of this scheme have been going on for some time, and apparently the students admitted under false pretenses are more-or-less able to compete with all those students who were more legitimately qualified.

So exactly what is going on at all these universities such that a highly-unqualified student can be admitted and yet successfully fulfill the requirements for continued matriculation?

I think we all know the answer to that.

And given that answer, is the cachet of an elite school name truly worth the $200K+ price tag being charged?

I think we all know the answer to that, too.

The real scandal, IMHO, is not that people were bumped to the head of the line. The real scandal is that higher education institutions are charging exorbitant prices in comparison to the value they currently deliver.

Reason: Universities Play the Victim
Back to top

DrMom




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 12:24 pm
FranticFrummie wrote:
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)."

Yup. "Disablement (or different ablement) appropriation!"
Back to top

1untamedgirl




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 5:15 pm
FranticFrummie wrote:
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)."

Its not okay for them to have done that if true but how many parents, including frum parents, lie to get special ed services for their children? How many lie to get their kids adhd medication? Maybe we should have a spin on this topic on an amother enabled thread to see what people have to say about it.
Back to top

1untamedgirl




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 5:28 pm
There is now a class action against the schools, maybe this will finally get rid of affirmative action, legacy kids, and any other preferential admissions that schools currently have so that everyone should have the same equal opportunity to get accepted regardless of skin color, wealth, etc-- https://www.bloomberg.com/news.....***-action
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 5:32 pm
1untamedgirl wrote:
There is now a class action against the schools, maybe this will finally get rid of affirmative action, legacy kids, and any other preferential admissions that schools currently have so that everyone should have the same equal opportunity to get accepted regardless of skin color, wealth, etc-- https://www.bloomberg.com/news.....***-action


Do you really think that kids from inner city public schools, whose parents can barely afford food, let alone tutors, have the same chances as students from elite private schools with hot and cold running tutors and prep courses and counselors?
Back to top

1untamedgirl




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 5:37 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
Do you really think that kids from inner city public schools, whose parents can barely afford food, let alone tutors, have the same chances as students from elite private schools with hot and cold running tutors and prep courses and counselors?

Not all minority kids are poor and many do attend private schools. And there are many programs for minority kids from poor neighborhoods to help them succeed. But Asians (and Muslims and even many Latino kids) attend the same public schools and are getting into elite colleges, why can't everyone else do the same thing? That is especially since there are charter schools now where many black kids are succeeding so if they are capable of succeeding in charter schools then why wouldn't they be able to get into elite colleges without getting preferential treatment?
Back to top

Squishy




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 7:22 pm
FranticFrummie wrote:
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)."


This is as disgusting as pretending to be an American Indian to get preferential treatment. Maybe these kids are 1/1024 slow.
Back to top

Squishy




 
 
 


Post  Thu, Mar 14 2019, 7:29 pm
1untamedgirl 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


Thank you for the honestly. I knew my gut was correct when 6 of wands distorted my post and warped the statistics.

The Democrats are suffering from a case of the emperor's new clothes. The population is seeing the antisemitism unchecked and the hypocrisy of their big donors and politicians.
Back to top

1untamedgirl




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 8:32 am
Squishy wrote:
Thank you for the honestly. I knew my gut was correct when 6 of wands distorted my post and warped the statistics.

The Democrats are suffering from a case of the emperor's new clothes. The population is seeing the antisemitism unchecked and the hypocrisy of their big donors and politicians.

You can look up their names at this site (although it may just be for CA, I haven't had a chance to do full research yet) -- https://www.fec.gov/data/recei.....F31%2F2018
Back to top

sushilover




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 9:33 am
Heather Mac Donald's article on the subject is very illuminating and troubling.

Legacy admissions exist and they have an advantage, but nowhere near the advantage of black students. It's important to note that the scammer did not only falsify grades and sports qualifications, he falsified the students' ethnicities. Because being of a certain race clearly would give them MORE of an advantage than connections and donations when it comes to college.

She points out that being black quadruples your chances of admission to Harvard. An Asian student would have a 25% chance of admission, while a black student with exact same GPA and test scores would have a 95% chance!

I have a Sephardi friend from a North African country. Her skin is lilly white. She put "African American" on her college application because she knew it would increase her chances of acceptance.
This is not what college is supposed to be about.


"None of this could have happened if higher education had not itself become a corrupt institution, featuring low classroom demands, no core knowledge acquisition, low grading standards, fashionable (but society-destroying) left-wing activism, luxury-hotel amenities, endless partying, and huge expense. Students often learn virtually nothing during their college years, as University of California, Irvine, education school dean Richard Arum writes in Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. They may even lose that pittance of knowledge with which they entered college. Seniors at Princeton, Yale, Cornell, Duke, and Berkeley scored lower in an undemanding test of American history than they did as freshmen, according to a 2007 study commissioned by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. College is only desultorily about knowledge acquisition, at least outside of the STEM fields (and even those fields are under assault from identity politics)..."https://www.city-journal.org/college-admissions-cheating-scandal


Last edited by sushilover on Fri, Mar 15 2019, 10:12 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top

sushilover




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 9:47 am
SixOfWands 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.


That is not true at all. On average, in order to gain admittance to Harvard, whites had to outperform blacks by 193 points. Asians had to outperform blacks by 218 points!

SixOfWands wrote:
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.

So why not base affirmative action on wealth, not race? Top colleges are desperate to have a certain number of minorities (well, SOME minorities. Other minorities are not considered minority enough.) to fill unofficial quotas lest they be deemed "too white" or "too Asian".
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 10:34 am
1untamedgirl 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


I've seen different figures.

Robert Flaxman, CEO of Crown Realty & Development, donated to both parties (most big players do, you know), including $50,000 to Romney Victory Fund in 2012, $2,300 to Romney presidential campaign in 2007, $8,350 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, $10,000 to the California Republican Party Federal Account, $35,800 to the Republican National Committee and $8,350 to the National Republican Congressional Committee. And other Democratic donations.

Gordon Caplan, an attorney, also donated to both sides, including $7,000 to the Republican National Committee, 12,000 to Romney 2012 committees, $2,600 to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

Robert Zangrillo, CEO, Dragon Global only donated to Republicans, but at a much lower level -- $50,000 to Romney Victory Fund in 2012, $30,800 to the Republican National Committee 2012 (distributed through the Romney Victory Fund)

Mossimo Giannulli, fashion designer, and Lori Loughlin, actress only donated to Republicans -- $2,700 to the Marco Rubio senate campaign (via Mossimo Giannulli) and $5,000 to Romney Victory in 2012 (via Mossimo Giannulli)

Bruce Isackson, president of WP Investments, and Davina Isackson were also only Republican -- $2,500 to the Romney presidential campaign (via Bruce Isackson) and
$3,500 to the Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC, in 2017 (via Bruce Isackson)

Michelle Janavs, former executive of a food manufacturer was only Republican -- $5,000 to the Romney Victory Fund in 2012

I haven't listed anyone, and haven't investigated the affiliations of various PACs. Nor does this include everyone indicated, although I've no clue if that's because they didn't donate or because they just weren't listed. https://www.huffpost.com/entry.....d7661ed2fb

BTW, since the list didn't include any contributions to Clinton, and you claimed that EVERYONE except one had donated to her, I went to https://www.opensecrets.org to check a few names. The first 5 I checked did not come up as Clinton contributors, so your information would appear to he inaccurate. They did, collectively, donate $135,525 to the DNC.

ETA -- I don't think that this scandal has anything to do with Democrats vs Republicans. I don't see why this information is even of interest, except to certain conservative agitators who try to turn every event into an opportunity to bash liberals. Unfortunately for them, it doesn't seem to work here.
Back to top

anon for this




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 10:48 am
SixOfWands wrote:
I've seen different figures.

Robert Flaxman, CEO of Crown Realty & Development, donated to both parties (most big players do, you know), including $50,000 to Romney Victory Fund in 2012, $2,300 to Romney presidential campaign in 2007, $8,350 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, $10,000 to the California Republican Party Federal Account, $35,800 to the Republican National Committee and $8,350 to the National Republican Congressional Committee. And other Democratic donations.

Gordon Caplan, an attorney, also donated to both sides, including $7,000 to the Republican National Committee, 12,000 to Romney 2012 committees, $2,600 to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

Robert Zangrillo, CEO, Dragon Global only donated to Republicans, but at a much lower level -- $50,000 to Romney Victory Fund in 2012, $30,800 to the Republican National Committee 2012 (distributed through the Romney Victory Fund)

Mossimo Giannulli, fashion designer, and Lori Loughlin, actress only donated to Republicans -- $2,700 to the Marco Rubio senate campaign (via Mossimo Giannulli) and $5,000 to Romney Victory in 2012 (via Mossimo Giannulli)

Bruce Isackson, president of WP Investments, and Davina Isackson were also only Republican -- $2,500 to the Romney presidential campaign (via Bruce Isackson) and
$3,500 to the Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC, in 2017 (via Bruce Isackson)

Michelle Janavs, former executive of a food manufacturer was only Republican -- $5,000 to the Romney Victory Fund in 2012

I haven't listed anyone, and haven't investigated the affiliations of various PACs. Nor does this include everyone indicated, although I've no clue if that's because they didn't donate or because they just weren't listed. https://www.huffpost.com/entry.....d7661ed2fb

BTW, since the list didn't include any contributions to Clinton, and you claimed that EVERYONE except one had donated to her, I went to https://www.opensecrets.org to check a few names. The first 5 I checked did not come up as Clinton contributors, so your information would appear to he inaccurate. They did, collectively, donate $135,525 to the DNC.

ETA -- I don't think that this scandal has anything to do with Democrats vs Republicans. I don't see why this information is even of interest, except to certain conservative agitators who try to turn every event into an opportunity to bash liberals. Unfortunately for them, it doesn't seem to work here.


Thanks for that SixOfWands. I appreciate reading your posts because I know that you do your research and don't post hearsay as fact.
Back to top

SixOfWands




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 11:15 am
anon for this wrote:
Thanks for that SixOfWands. I appreciate reading your posts because I know that you do your research and don't post hearsay as fact.


Thanks, but you obviously missed my falling for a hoax about Judith Light!

People make mistakes, myself included.
Back to top

Cheiny




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 1:07 pm
[quote="1untamedgirl"]Its not okay for them to have done that if true but how many parents, including frum parents, lie to get special ed services for their children? How many lie to get their kids adhd medication? Maybe we should have a spin on this topic on an amother enabled thread to see what people have to say about it.[/quote

C
Back to top

Squishy




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 1:17 pm
sushilover wrote:
So why not base affirmative action on wealth, not race? Top colleges are desperate to have a certain number of minorities (well, SOME minorities. Other minorities are not considered minority enough.) to fill unofficial quotas lest they be deemed "too white" or "too Asian".


It's fairly easy to hide wealth in different vehicles to defeat college aid applications. I am not advocating fruad, but there are ways to hide ownership of assets. You won't level the playing field if lack of wealth is grounds for admission. I can think of half a dozen different vehicles that would serve this purpose.
Back to top

Squishy




 
 
 


Post  Fri, Mar 15 2019, 1:20 pm
anon for this wrote:
Thanks for that SixOfWands. I appreciate reading your posts because I know that you do your research and don't post hearsay as fact.


You're a riot. I would be calling out a conservative if they did to a liberal what she did to me on this thead. She distorted my words and then had the nerve to say she proved me wrong.

Don't you people have integrity? Can't you call put dishonesty wherever it is?
Back to top

imasoftov




 
 
 


Post  Sat, Mar 16 2019, 3:01 pm
Squishy wrote:
You're a riot. I would be calling out a conservative if they did to a liberal what she did to me on this thead. She distorted my words and then had the nerve to say she proved me wrong.

Don't you people have integrity? Can't you call put dishonesty wherever it is?

I'm sure you would, but perhaps an example of an actual post that you call out would be illustrative?
Back to top

1untamedgirl




 
 
 


Post  Sat, Mar 16 2019, 9:15 pm
SixOfWands wrote:
I've seen different figures.

Robert Flaxman, CEO of Crown Realty & Development, donated to both parties (most big players do, you know), including $50,000 to Romney Victory Fund in 2012, $2,300 to Romney presidential campaign in 2007, $8,350 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, $10,000 to the California Republican Party Federal Account, $35,800 to the Republican National Committee and $8,350 to the National Republican Congressional Committee. And other Democratic donations.

Gordon Caplan, an attorney, also donated to both sides, including $7,000 to the Republican National Committee, 12,000 to Romney 2012 committees, $2,600 to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)

Robert Zangrillo, CEO, Dragon Global only donated to Republicans, but at a much lower level -- $50,000 to Romney Victory Fund in 2012, $30,800 to the Republican National Committee 2012 (distributed through the Romney Victory Fund)

Mossimo Giannulli, fashion designer, and Lori Loughlin, actress only donated to Republicans -- $2,700 to the Marco Rubio senate campaign (via Mossimo Giannulli) and $5,000 to Romney Victory in 2012 (via Mossimo Giannulli)

Bruce Isackson, president of WP Investments, and Davina Isackson were also only Republican -- $2,500 to the Romney presidential campaign (via Bruce Isackson) and
$3,500 to the Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican super PAC, in 2017 (via Bruce Isackson)

Michelle Janavs, former executive of a food manufacturer was only Republican -- $5,000 to the Romney Victory Fund in 2012

I haven't listed anyone, and haven't investigated the affiliations of various PACs. Nor does this include everyone indicated, although I've no clue if that's because they didn't donate or because they just weren't listed. https://www.huffpost.com/entry.....d7661ed2fb

BTW, since the list didn't include any contributions to Clinton, and you claimed that EVERYONE except one had donated to her, I went to https://www.opensecrets.org to check a few names. The first 5 I checked did not come up as Clinton contributors, so your information would appear to he inaccurate. They did, collectively, donate $135,525 to the DNC.

ETA -- I don't think that this scandal has anything to do with Democrats vs Republicans. I don't see why this information is even of interest, except to certain conservative agitators who try to turn every event into an opportunity to bash liberals. Unfortunately for them, it doesn't seem to work here.

Regarding the bolded, I made no such claims, please do not put words into my mouth. Note that 50 people were charged and it seems that the person only did research on some of them but not all. Just like you only posted some of it so did someone else.

As for donations to Hilary, I looked up some of the names myself and this is what I have so far (note that this does not address all of the people charged)-

Robert Flaxman donated $50,000 to the Hilary victory fund in 2016 and $33,400.00 to the DNC Services Corp/Dem Natl Committee in 2016 (with a memo stating that its for Hilary Victory Fund).

Gordon Caplan donated $25,000 to the Hilary Victory Fund in 2016, $2,700 to Hilary for America in 2016, 2,700 to Hilary for America in 2015, $22,300.00 to the DNC Services Corp/Dem Natl Committee in 2016 (with a memo stating that its for Hilary Victory Fund).

Agustin Huneeus gave $33,400.00 to Hilary Victory Fund, $2,700.00 to Hilary for America, $30,700.00 to the DNC Services Corp/Dem Natl Committee in 2016 (with a memo stating that its for Hilary Victory Fund)

These are just a few of those charged who donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Hilary. Feel free to research the rest on your own-- https://www.fec.gov/data/recei.....F31%2F2020
Back to top
Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  Last >> Recent Topics

Page 4 of 5 View latest: 24h 48h 72h


Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> In the News

Related Topics Replies Last Post
DD wants to move to Israel and change her college degree
by amother
24 Wed, Mar 13 2019, 6:04 pm View last post
United negro college fund is it racist?
by amother
29 Thu, Mar 07 2019, 10:49 pm View last post
Summer classes at Touro - Lander's College for Women
by 1091
0 Tue, Feb 26 2019, 12:50 pm View last post
by 1091
York college OT program
by amother
0 Mon, Feb 25 2019, 1:42 am View last post
Touro College scholarship for girls
by amother
12 Tue, Feb 12 2019, 8:58 am View last post

Jump to: