<p>College admissions officials are looking harder at applicants’ past “infractions” in post-VaTech-massacre diligence. Do applicants really admit all? How do admissions staff weigh this information?</p>
<p>Excerpts</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Among some already nervous college applicants, the new questions make this tense time of year even worse. Internet chat rooms, such as the popular College Confidential, are sprinkled with debates about disclosures and tips on essays that treat a past infraction “as a learning experience” en route to maturity.<a href=“Bolding%20added”>/quote</a></p>
<p>It sounds like Pomona takes the right approach. It really would be irresponsible for a residential college to accept students with a history of violent or seriously dishonest behavior. Unfortunately kids with a tendency to be honest are more likely to reveal bad behavior with an explanation, and pathological liars will have no problem not disclosing at all.</p>
<p>I agree with the last statement, this is only going to harm kids not keep out psychos. </p>
<p>Consider that the VA tech shooter was a good student, quiet, and didn’t get into trouble in school IIRC, he was just a bit quirky. I know a kid I can GUARANTEE has the propensity for killing many people because of how they treat him, yet he has never so much as been YELLED at by a teacher. </p>
<p>And that explanation bs is nonsense, there is no explanation for doing something, just regret because you may not get into your college of choice. I speak from experience, and I’ve never tried to “explain” why I got suspended, it’s because I messed up (excluding one time), and there is no explanation, take what you get and keep it moving. Don’t do something if you are afraid of the consequences.</p>
<p>I feel that it’s not the job of the college however to be the moral police. I personally feel cheating on a test is a LOT better than getting ridiculously drunk and screwing up, but then again I’ve seen and had alot of drunk moments so I’m speaking from experiences but it’s truly NOT worth it, and certainly far worse than wanting to do well on a test. I think its a problem within our society to say, “It’s terrible you cheated”, yet its cool for you to go out and literally poison your liver. Ignorance is bliss though…</p>
Really? I feel just the opposite. Not that I’m condoning drinking to excess. But I don’t think drinking is a moral or ethical issue to the same extent. </p>
<p>I do think high schools need to be honest about infractions as I don’t see how we can count on students to be honest.</p>
<p>No, and I don’t think they should report on off-campus things, though I’m pretty sure the GC talked about the good things Mathson did off campus. But too many high schools hedge about things they do know about and that happened on school grounds.</p>
<p>Totally disagree in terms of relative impropriety. Cheating on a test goes to the heart of academic integrity – which is at the heart of the mission of the academy. What you do in your own time off school property – assuming this is where the drinking occurs – is more in the realm of your business. I don’t care what motivates either act.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I totally agree with your statement that these kinds of things are very unlikely to weed out the kids who might go off and assassinate someone or do some other violent thing. Totally agree. To do that, they’d probably have to have access to medical records – and even that wouldn’t help.</p>
<p>By the way, if there is some specific reason you think a kid in your school has a likelihood or possibility of going off and killing someone, maybe you should encourage a school official to intervene – at the very least to stop him being bullied by other students, don’t you think? Easier said than done, I realize.</p>
<p>I believe with almost absolute certainty that FAR more people drink alcohol, even under the age of 21 (gasp), than cheat on tests. Why? Because cheating, like stealing and lying, exhibits a complete lack of integrity. Drinking alcohol? Lots of people drink alcohol but still have integrity. I trust a guy who is honest and has a couple beers over a guy who is a teatotler but a habitual liar. Who would you rather go into business with? Handle your finances? Be your healthcare provider? Be your next congressman?</p>
<p>Also, agree about the quiet, weird kid being scarier than the gregarious party boy. Did those kids in Colombine have disciplinary records?</p>
<p>This is still illegal, and is dishonest behavior when done in a covert fashion. It is still morally wrong. Also, binge drinking can kill, and drinking and driving kills innocent people. It is nothing to be taken lightly, but I am sure you all agree with that.</p>
<p>I have another question. What should a school do if they have proof that a couple of students were drinking at school and these students admit to drinking, but the school staff has also heard from several sources that many more were also drinking at the same time? They are, lets say, unable to prove that allegation, and cannot get the students to say that they did drink. I do understand that in this scenerio it could be that students are not admitting to something that they did not do. Should the students who were caught and honest have a blemished transcipt along with other consequences, and those who “got away with it” be rewarded with an unblemished transcript and schoolas usual? I think that these situations are really tough decisions that schools need to make every day.</p>
<p>I am not confusing the two. As someone who has been married to an attorney for over 2 decades, I can tell you that I do know the difference. I am stating that it is 1)illegal 2) covering it up is dishonest. I still stand by my opinion.</p>
<p>Speaking from personal experience in the matter, getting caught for underage drinking (illegal) and trying to cover up underage drinking (lying = immoral) are different situations, as are drinking in moderation, binge drinking, and driving under the influence. Doing one does not mean you’ve done the rest.</p>
<p>Well, I can’t agree that all illegal behavior is “dishonest.” (Stealing is dishonest, but even murdering somebody isn’t exactly “dishonest.”)
Many people, however, think that it is unethical to disobey a valid law, unless it is unjust. (That is, it’s unethical to underage drink or to speed, even if you don’t really agree with the law–while it it isn’t unethical to assist a runaway slave, even though it’s illegal). So I wouldn’t say that the fact that a person drinks underage reflects on his honesty, but it may reflect on his ethics.</p>
<p>I think the Common Application question is reasonable, in part because I think it’s a valuable exercise to discuss and explain a mistake you’ve made. In my experience, something like being ticketed once for minor-in-possession or getting detention for planning a senior prank rarely hurts a kid’s admissions results when it’s disclosed.</p>
<p>If the Common App asked about a student’s behavior in elementary school, then that would be over the privacy line in my opinion. As a comparison, the Illinois Bar Exam “Character and Fitness” board gave me SERIOUS problems because of my failure to maintain academic good standing in high school. This was the spring of my third year of law school, when I was 26 years old and had earned a four-year college degree and all but 10 credits of my JD. They did eventually let me take the bar exam, but they made me go through a whole humiliating rigamarole first. That was ridiculous. But if I’d failed a bunch of classes in law school (i.e. within the last couple of years), then I think the bar’s reaction would have been reasonable, just as the Common App is reasonable.</p>
<p>“pathological liars will have no problem not disclosing at all”</p>
<p>That’s true, but the information may reach the school from some other source – before or after enrollment – at which point the failure to disclose provides an ironclad reason to expel the kid. That makes it much easier on the school later on.</p>
<p>Interesting point about the ethics. Here’s one for you- both of these things are unethical, using your definition:</p>
<ol>
<li>40 year old smokes a joint for old times sake on his birthday (disregard how he obtained the contraband).</li>
<li>40 year old knowingly exceeds the speed limit on a cross country road trip.</li>
</ol>
<p>Which is more reprehensible, from a moral standpoint?</p>
<p>The second case is actually more harmful to people, in general.</p>
<p>I think that many of us (I’ll speak for myself, but I’m sure lots will agree) judge the sins of others based on our own vices. My parents would go ballistic if they found out their grandkids smoke weed, but they wouldn’t have a problem if they saw the speedometer creep up a few miles over the speed limit.</p>
<p>So let’s use a different example:</p>
<ol>
<li>18 year old drinks a few beers at his friends house (doesn’t drive or do anything else illegal).</li>
<li>18 year old pays someone to take the SAT for him.</li>
</ol>
<p>Hanna, wow, that was tough, but it just demonstrates how your past can follow you for a long time. I do wonder how many of the pathological liars get caught. In today’s letigious society, I wonder how many teacher’s/school districts would stick out their necks to provide nondisclosed information. I don’t think that it would be ironclad until proven to be true first.</p>
<p>doubleday, are you asking me to answer what I find more unethical? I guess I can play along. Yes, I find a person speeding more unethical for the reasons you state than smoking a joint on a 40th birthday. I also find cheating on the SAT more unethical than a few underage (18 y/o) at a friend’s house. Frankly, I am not crazed by the whole drinking age thing. I was raised in a European household I guess I am not getting my thoughts across as clearly as I thought. Oh well.</p>
<p>Now I see northeastmom that you make a distinction between illegal and immoral. It’s just in your original statement you ran it all together in a big picture putting “covert” together with “drinking.” The sin is dishonesty. The law broken is that relating to underage. I see you get that. But you were the one who brought up lying about it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hunt, I see what you’re saying, murdering someone and lying about it is dishonest, but not all illegal behavior is dishonest. Indeed, I find it refreshing to see a murderer come out and embrace honesty about his/her drinking.</p>
I guess I am not getting my thoughts across as clearly as I thought. Oh well.</p>