Rich People loopholes - Felicity Huffman Lori Loughlin charge in college admission scheme

I'm shocked by this, but in a different way. I have always thought that money and/or who you are could get you into ANY college in the world. You could be the dumbest kid on the block but a 5 mil donation to Harvard would get you in. Maybe this was the poorest of the rich method...lol

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: JAGStorm

Doesn’t bother me one bit. It’s a competitive world, not a meritocracy. If you’re talented enough you’ll get in. Alternatively if your family is wealthy that’s another form of competing.

Oh and ivies aren’t about education, most don’t even give failing grades, you auto pass every course. What they’re about is networking.

True.

One of the best lessons to teach your kids is that life isn't fair.
The other lesson, some people know the cost of everyone and the value of nothing...

a reply to: JAGStorm

It would be much worse if life were fair, because then it would mean we deserve all the horrible things that happen to us.

a reply to: Nyiah

But dont they also have to participate in said sport and maintain good grades? I mean they arent just waltzing in and out the door they are contributing to the school even if its just athletics. Do the schools charge admission to the games the athletes play in? If so then the kids are generating revenue for the school.

a reply to: JAGStorm

This was only for admission to the school. They still paid tuition once they were in.

But I agree... rich people problems.... the sports are fencing... rowing ... and polo???
IKR?

a reply to: JAGStorm

Here's another lesson:

The top jobs in government and many other places are stacked with people who have degrees from these places - the so-called best and brightest. Look at Congress and the bureaucracy.

If this is how the best and brightest are determined - who can afford to bribe their way in on one end and who gets a pass on the other through affirmative action, it's no wonder that our so-called elites are such idiots is it?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Nyiah

But dont they also have to participate in said sport and maintain good grades? I mean they arent just waltzing in and out the door they are contributing to the school even if its just athletics. Do the schools charge admission to the games the athletes play in? If so then the kids are generating revenue for the school.

I'm guessing they had to either be from schools that have a non-traditional atheltics structure or they were pretending to be preferred walk-ons. There is no way they were drawing actual athletic grants. The NCAA tracks those closely. We had to sign in and out of actual practice to make sure we were participating and not over-training and stuff. They also watched our actual grades. At most, they used a so-called walk-on bid to get through the door and then "quit" a sport they never intended to take part in.

And this is why people wonder about affirmative action. This is a perfect example of existing privilege getting additional help to attend elite schools, and is the reason things like diversity applicants exist.

originally posted by: Aazadan
And this is why people wonder about affirmative action. This is a perfect example of existing privilege getting additional help to attend elite schools, and is the reason things like diversity applicants exist.

Except both are wrong and ensure the people who are truly qualified don't get in.

Diversity applicants don't make the cut except by checking off superficial boxes and these jokers were bought in and therefore didn't make the cut either.

So how many of the students actually jumped the advertised bars to get their spots?

a reply to: ketsuko

If you don’t have diversity applicants, then existing power structures never get torn down and a school like Harvard is only for the well connected to pass those connections on to their children. With the current system some others get in as well.

Merit is just as much about individual ability as it is about where you’re likely to go in life and what your family has done and who they’ve opened doors with. That’s the whole point of institutions like that... so that your kid can attend class with the next Larry Page.

a reply to: Aazadan

With the current system some others get in as well.

Not if you are Asian and applying to Harvard. I guess that is the wrong kind of diversity..

Higher education just gets more scammy as the days go on!

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Aazadan
And this is why people wonder about affirmative action. This is a perfect example of existing privilege getting additional help to attend elite schools, and is the reason things like diversity applicants exist.

Except both are wrong and ensure the people who are truly qualified don't get in.

Diversity applicants don't make the cut except by checking off superficial boxes and these jokers were bought in and therefore didn't make the cut either.

So how many of the students actually jumped the advertised bars to get their spots?

Test scores and grades alone do not predict future success. You are over simplifying how merit / qualifications is determined at this level. Yes, they are important to a point, but the elite schools have never solely used test scores / gpa for admissions. Even if they did, they still don't have enough seats. You are also fooling yourself if you don't believe test scores / gpa also aren't gamed. The admissions committees know it. This is why you now have high schools with like 20 valedictorians. Grade inflation is rampant. A 4.0 at some schools is the equivalent of a 3.0 at others.

At many schools, they are looking for certain types of people. First, they are trying to "build a class" that they believe will enrich the learning experience for everyone. This is why something as simple as being from Iowa will exponentially increase your chances of gaining admission over NYC.

Second, they want students they believe will go on to be successful. That drive is not always measured by test scores.

To be frank, if it were just test scores and GPA, then white people would need affirmative action too. All the seats would go to Indians and Asians. They have a conformist culture that values performance on these tests often to the detriment of other qualities. None of these schools want a class full of stressed out kids on the verge of killing themselves because they got an A-. They also want students who will think outside the box (ignoring political bias discussion).

a reply to: JAGStorm

Sorry but I do not give two donkey turds about this because it is something that will not stop with this cast to many of the elites are involved. The justice department has just gotten incredibly lazy why are they not going after I don.t know foreign countrias paying of politicians for classified Intel, or all the heroin being brought in from Afghanistan and Pakistan, or some other much more dangerous crime?

a reply to: JAGStorm

Sorry but I do not give two donkey turds about this because it is something that will not stop with this cast to many of the elites are involved. The justice department has just gotten incredibly lazy why are they not going after I don.t know foreign countrias paying of politicians for classified Intel, or all the heroin being brought in from Afghanistan and Pakistan, or some other much more dangerous crime?

a reply to: IAMTAT

Boo boo. What about the real violent crimes like I don't know murder ,sex slave trafficking ,narcotics trade and the like.

originally posted by: JAGStorm

Not if you are Asian and applying to Harvard. I guess that is the wrong kind of diversity.

Basically, yes. Asians broke the glass ceiling through hard work and are every bit as influential in the US as white people, at least in terms of financial success and business influence.

Admissions policies do their best to limit that influence. They aren’t always successful because they know even better than we do that wealth will buy its way in. So they compensate for that.

If all you’re interested in is education, then a mid tier state school in a low cost of living area is your best path to a quality education.

More prestigious places are about social experiments as much as they are about teaching.

originally posted by: Edumakated
You are also fooling yourself if you don't believe test scores / gpa also aren't gamed. The admissions committees know it. This is why you now have high schools with like 20 valedictorians. Grade inflation is rampant. A 4.0 at some schools is the equivalent of a 3.0 at others.

I think a lot of people don’t realize how worthless GPA is as a metric. Past roughly junior high it ceases to have any meaning at all. Educations aren’t standardized, grading isn’t standardized, and neither is class difficulty. At my high school the cutoff for a D- was a 92%. To stay enrolled in the school you had to maintain a B- average of 97%. Our 2.7 GPA before accounting for the harder classes was equal to a public schools 4.0, and that definitely had an impact on scholarship opportunity.

University is very similar, there is rampant grade inflation at some places and others who compensate with deflation. A 2.0 and a 4.0 can indicate equal effort. Finally grades are more a reflection of ones ability to say what the professor wants to hear. Not all subjects and professors are like this, but a lot simply want students to research others opinions and regurgitate them without any original thought.

As such I put a lot of stock in people attending class but not so much in the grades they got.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: IAMTAT

Boo boo. What about the real violent crimes like I don't know murder ,sex slave trafficking ,narcotics trade and the like.

I care about all those crimes you mentioned, but I can also be concerned about unfair admissions. Some people are complex like that.

How did a blithering idiot like Chelsea Clinton get into Stanford, Oxford and Columbia?

originally posted by: IAMTAT
How did a blithering idiot like Chelsea Clinton get into Stanford, Oxford and Columbia?

Being as child of a President has it's advantages.