College Cheating Scandal part II

www.nbcnews.com...

U.S. NEWS College cheating scandal: First lawsuits filed by students at elite schools

Well that didn't take long. Here comes the lawsuits. There is a student that had a 4.2 that wasn't accepted.
There are also students that don't think their degrees are worth as much now due to the scandal. It has devalued the prestigue.
There are many industries that recruit from certain schools. I wonder if this will change how they look at those schools. If so, these
students are right.

This article talks about Stanford, but I wonder how all the other ivy league schools will fare?
How far does this go? Are we talking about all schools or only prestigeous ones.
Will this fizzle out or with this cause sweeping changes?

originally posted by: JAGStorm
www.nbcnews.com...

U.S. NEWS College cheating scandal: First lawsuits filed by students at elite schools

Well that didn't take long. Here comes the lawsuits. There is a student that had a 4.2 that wasn't accepted.
There are also students that don't think their degrees are worth as much now due to the scandal. It has devalued the prestigue.
There are many industries that recruit from certain schools. I wonder if this will change how they look at those schools. If so, these
students are right.

This article talks about Stanford, but I wonder how all the other ivy league schools will fare?
How far does this go? Are we talking about all schools or only prestigeous ones.
Will this fizzle out or with this cause sweeping changes?

These schools reject 4.0 GPAs all the time. In fact, most will openly state a 4.0+ GPA don't mean sh*t. There are students with 4.0 GPAs who need remedial english and math classes freshman year. I don't see that lawsuit going anywhere.

I can see why some current students might believe the value of their degree being devalued, but you can make that argument about any negative info tied to a university. I mean if the PC police blocking open debate and freedom of speech isn't devaluing their degrees, why should this scandal?

Sue happy culture.

Yes, people buy their way into college. Yes, that affects some's approval. This doesn't mean every student in the history of that school's rejection should get a handout. A 4.2 isn't very impressive. Also, GPA is 1 out of 2743059237 things that colleges look at.

originally posted by: headorheart
Sue happy culture.

Yes, people buy their way into college. Yes, that affects some's approval. This doesn't mean every student in the history of that school's rejection should get a handout. A 4.2 isn't very impressive. Also, GPA is 1 out of 2743059237 things that colleges look at.

Yeah, people don't get that schools look at more than grades / test scores. The grades / test scores are just an easy measuring stick but not the be all end all for qualifications. Never have been.

a reply to: odzeandennz
Actually, I wonder if Coulter is still a First Amendment darling with the Trump set now that she's shifted her aim?

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: JAGStorm

This will cause sweeping changes.

Why, because the cult45 will move the goalposts once one of the horsemen of the great orange one becomes implicated. ..

i.e. this:

onservative political pundit Ann Coulter ripped President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner on Tuesday by asking whether he will be taken down for his father “buying” his Harvard University admission before getting indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller.
“BLIND ITEM: Which top presidential advisor could be in hot water over his father buying his Harvard admission SOONER than he'll be indicted by Mueller?” Coulter tweeted, along with the hashtag #CollegeCheatingScandal.

So if J-Kush wasnt qualified before, hes really not qualified now... fortunately he's banging the prez's daughter

...but was he indicted?

a reply to: Edumakated

They do look at more, but at the same time, now these schools will have to prove that kids with better GPAs weren't rejected in favor of kids who bribed their way in. It's an embarrassing mess.

First college b-ball and now college college?

One might think rampant cheating and corruption was the norm in the U.S. lately, or something.

We really will turn into a rotten banana republic if we don't grow some morsel of morals.

Meritocracy? Hah, that was so 1770's.

originally posted by: Baddogma
First college b-ball and now college college?

One might think rampant cheating and corruption was the norm in the U.S. lately, or something.

We really will turn into a rotten banana republic if we don't grow some morsel of morals.

Meritocracy? Hah, that was so 1770's.

There have been articles out there that showed that kids since the '90s have had a very relaxed attitude toward cheating.

This is one example I found easily encouraging it.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

They do look at more, but at the same time, now these schools will have to prove that kids with better GPAs weren't rejected in favor of kids who bribed their way in. It's an embarrassing mess.

How can you prove that if other factors determine admission...

Again... almost 40,000 kids applied to Harvard for admission into 2020 class. They only gave offers to 5.9%... so 2,360 kids out of 40,000.

I'd venture at least 10,000 of the applicants are well qualified to attend meaning that vast majority would still get rejected. This is why that suit won't go anywhere because I am sure these schools can easily show that even if they excluded the students who "weren't as qualified" the plaintiff still would not have been accepted.

Put another way, let's just assume 25% of the admits don't deserve to be there, so 590 slots that would go to another kid. I don't even have to do the math, but it should be obvious that your chance of acceptance still barely even moves.

Acceptance is largely a crap shoot after a certain point and GPA / Test Scores are not what determines acceptance.

You'd be asking the college to prove all 2,360 are rankable by GPA and test scores alone. The plaintiffs case falls apart when the school shows they did not accept students who were even more qualified than the plaintiff...

a reply to: ketsuko

Relaxed? More like a puddle of liquid attitude...

I'm not a bastion of common morality but logic dictates cheating is bad and hurts society... we're seeing the fruits of it now.

When the water and electricity stops flowing due to a paucity of informed adults, maybe we'll get old school again.

Cycles.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

They do look at more, but at the same time, now these schools will have to prove that kids with better GPAs weren't rejected in favor of kids who bribed their way in. It's an embarrassing mess.

How can you prove that if other factors determine admission...

Again... almost 40,000 kids applied to Harvard for admission into 2020 class. They only gave offers to 5.9%... so 2,360 kids out of 40,000.

I'd venture at least 10,000 of the applicants are well qualified to attend meaning that vast majority would still get rejected. This is why that suit won't go anywhere because I am sure these schools can easily show that even if they excluded the students who "weren't as qualified" the plaintiff still would not have been accepted.

Put another way, let's just assume 25% of the admits don't deserve to be there, so 590 slots that would go to another kid. I don't even have to do the math, but it should be obvious that your chance of acceptance still barely even moves.

Acceptance is largely a crap shoot after a certain point and GPA / Test Scores are not what determines acceptance.

You'd be asking the college to prove all 2,360 are rankable by GPA and test scores alone. The plaintiffs case falls apart when the school shows they did not accept students who were even more qualified than the plaintiff...

Doubtful.

The circumstance NOW will dictate otherwise considering all that has been uncovered.

Point is, how do we know the tough admissions was being fare to began with? Now that you have uncovered paid seats, everything prior is thrown into doubt.

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

They do look at more, but at the same time, now these schools will have to prove that kids with better GPAs weren't rejected in favor of kids who bribed their way in. It's an embarrassing mess.

How can you prove that if other factors determine admission...

Again... almost 40,000 kids applied to Harvard for admission into 2020 class. They only gave offers to 5.9%... so 2,360 kids out of 40,000.

I'd venture at least 10,000 of the applicants are well qualified to attend meaning that vast majority would still get rejected. This is why that suit won't go anywhere because I am sure these schools can easily show that even if they excluded the students who "weren't as qualified" the plaintiff still would not have been accepted.

Put another way, let's just assume 25% of the admits don't deserve to be there, so 590 slots that would go to another kid. I don't even have to do the math, but it should be obvious that your chance of acceptance still barely even moves.

Acceptance is largely a crap shoot after a certain point and GPA / Test Scores are not what determines acceptance.

You'd be asking the college to prove all 2,360 are rankable by GPA and test scores alone. The plaintiffs case falls apart when the school shows they did not accept students who were even more qualified than the plaintiff...

Doubtful.

The circumstance NOW will dictate otherwise considering all that has been uncovered.

Point is, how do we know the tough admissions was being fare to began with? Now that you have uncovered paid seats, everything prior is thrown into doubt.

Admissions isn't fair... it NEVER has been fair. There is no way to make it "fair" unless you just open admissions to anyone which isn't going to happen.

Whether we like it or not, these schools are as much social fraternities/sororities just as much as they are academic institutions. Just even think about it. We have people willing to pay many times more than it cost to attend just to get acceptance. It isn't about the learning, but the social connections and badges of prestige that certain schools confer.

How are admissions audited?

Are they at all?

Perhaps a third part organization needs to send test applications, and determine where admissions faults exist.

A dummy test. Security firms do this type of test all the time. I don't see a reason why it shouldn't be done.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

They do look at more, but at the same time, now these schools will have to prove that kids with better GPAs weren't rejected in favor of kids who bribed their way in. It's an embarrassing mess.

How can you prove that if other factors determine admission...

Again... almost 40,000 kids applied to Harvard for admission into 2020 class. They only gave offers to 5.9%... so 2,360 kids out of 40,000.

I'd venture at least 10,000 of the applicants are well qualified to attend meaning that vast majority would still get rejected. This is why that suit won't go anywhere because I am sure these schools can easily show that even if they excluded the students who "weren't as qualified" the plaintiff still would not have been accepted.

Put another way, let's just assume 25% of the admits don't deserve to be there, so 590 slots that would go to another kid. I don't even have to do the math, but it should be obvious that your chance of acceptance still barely even moves.

Acceptance is largely a crap shoot after a certain point and GPA / Test Scores are not what determines acceptance.

You'd be asking the college to prove all 2,360 are rankable by GPA and test scores alone. The plaintiffs case falls apart when the school shows they did not accept students who were even more qualified than the plaintiff...

Doubtful.

The circumstance NOW will dictate otherwise considering all that has been uncovered.

Point is, how do we know the tough admissions was being fare to began with? Now that you have uncovered paid seats, everything prior is thrown into doubt.

Admissions isn't fair... it NEVER has been fair. There is no way to make it "fair" unless you just open admissions to anyone which isn't going to happen.

Whether we like it or not, these schools are as much social fraternities/sororities just as much as they are academic institutions. Just even think about it. We have people willing to pay many times more than it cost to attend just to get acceptance. It isn't about the learning, but the social connections and badges of prestige that certain schools confer.

That's fine and all, but if they get government funding there are rules to be played by, like discrimination.
If they were truly private, they could admit anyone they want.

When everybody gets a trophy what did they expect!!

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

They do look at more, but at the same time, now these schools will have to prove that kids with better GPAs weren't rejected in favor of kids who bribed their way in. It's an embarrassing mess.

How can you prove that if other factors determine admission...

Again... almost 40,000 kids applied to Harvard for admission into 2020 class. They only gave offers to 5.9%... so 2,360 kids out of 40,000.

I'd venture at least 10,000 of the applicants are well qualified to attend meaning that vast majority would still get rejected. This is why that suit won't go anywhere because I am sure these schools can easily show that even if they excluded the students who "weren't as qualified" the plaintiff still would not have been accepted.

Put another way, let's just assume 25% of the admits don't deserve to be there, so 590 slots that would go to another kid. I don't even have to do the math, but it should be obvious that your chance of acceptance still barely even moves.

Acceptance is largely a crap shoot after a certain point and GPA / Test Scores are not what determines acceptance.

You'd be asking the college to prove all 2,360 are rankable by GPA and test scores alone. The plaintiffs case falls apart when the school shows they did not accept students who were even more qualified than the plaintiff...

Doubtful.

The circumstance NOW will dictate otherwise considering all that has been uncovered.

Point is, how do we know the tough admissions was being fare to began with? Now that you have uncovered paid seats, everything prior is thrown into doubt.

Admissions isn't fair... it NEVER has been fair. There is no way to make it "fair" unless you just open admissions to anyone which isn't going to happen.

Whether we like it or not, these schools are as much social fraternities/sororities just as much as they are academic institutions. Just even think about it. We have people willing to pay many times more than it cost to attend just to get acceptance. It isn't about the learning, but the social connections and badges of prestige that certain schools confer.

That's fine and all, but if they get government funding there are rules to be played by, like discrimination.
If they were truly private, they could admit anyone they want.

Unless, of course, they're a religious school and their standards don't suit certain grievance groups, private or not.

At any rate, you're right, that's how it should be with public v. private, and some of those schools make a good case for being private if they aren't like the Ivies where their endowments are easily large enough to make them financially independent.

It is done, supposedly. For example, the Southern schools are accredited (and periodically evaluated for reaccreditation) by SACS (the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools) and each region has similar. Then there is the NCAA for sports. But the problems come in when paperwork that’s reviewed has been falsified or doctored.

a reply to: Archivalist

a reply to: nicevillegrl

As I said, given my experience with how the athletics thing is done, I can only imagine they were faking it as walk-ons or as athletes for club level sports with no higher scrutiny NCAA involved or else you're looking at having to con the NCAA too which is a separate body from the uni entirely. It can be done ... look at all the cheating scandals, but the conspiracy gets a whole lot bigger with more people involved in keeping things under the rug and a lot more money would be involved just to get some celeb's kid through the door.

Basically, this would have to be something where they could more or less take a spot and quit with little repercussion because they weren't going to be in the revenue stream in all likelihood.