Given how this scandal is unfolding in drips I predict that this thread will reach post 3000 by tomorrow evening.
There’s a good editorial in the Washington Post by Jennifer Rubin. The thesis is that elite colleges will lose their elite status if they become known as colleges for the ‘mediocre rich’. She advocates transparency in all gifts and recruiting high school talent broadly instead of just at private and premier public high schools.
I really hope not. X_X
I remember when George Washington had an issue with their admissions their ranking dropped… could that happen to USC? Sad to see great institutions be messed up by greedy individuals
I think one of the roots of why this kind of thing happening is that the concept of a college experience and what that represents is very different for different people. Many folks look at it as a means to end - the paper gets you more career opportunities. Some see it as a way to park their kids somewhere for 4 years while they figure out life. Some see it as a stepping stone to marrying well (YES, those people still exist). Others look at it as a convenient concentration of young people who want to hang out, party, go to sporting events and be able to slap the school’s name on their car bumpers and name-drop it to all and sundry; classes, assignments and tests are secondary. When your chief concern isn’t about your kid being EDUCATED - learning new concepts, learning how to learn, meeting smart and interesting people, building a resume that will lead to a viable post-college career - the focus becomes the getting in and the prestige, regardless of the fit of the school to the kid’s abilities and aspirations. It’s sad, because it devalues the experience for the hard-working college student, both in their eyes and the eyes of possible employers.
The back-door admissions has always been there, but we generally accepted it as an evil (I won’t call it “necessary”). The side-door admissions is too much in our peripheral vision to ignore - that’s why this is blowing up. When you shove it into the faces of the majority who follow the rules, you will get slapped.
Not sure I would call USC a “victim”.
@socaldad2002 – doing a task well under extreme time pressure is certainly a rare skill. Usain Bolt is pretty amazing in that he can run 100 meters in 9 seconds. But if you gave me enough of a head start (since I’m a slow runner) I could beat Usain.
The underlying question here is the extent to which the intense time pressure of a standardized test really correlates with being able to do well in college. Few things in life are as artificially time intense as an SAT test or a 100 meter dash. It would be interesting to see some studies on what the time pressure on an SAT/ACT test is really measuring. Maybe it is valid measurement of something, maybe it isn’t. I really don’t know the answer.
But as it stands, the time pressured standardized tests are an important gate keeper to selective college admission. Hence the wide variety of investments made to improve your score – test prep, unlimited do-overs by being able to take the test multiple times, super scoring, choosing between the SAT and the ACT depending on which one suits you better, getting more time, etc. etc. etc. And it is inevitable that it would then bleed over into questionable time accommodations and flat out test cheating.
As most of us parents know, it did not used to be like this. I took the SAT once with no prep. I aced it because I’m a very good timed test taker (which helped me getting into college and grad school). So, like you, I always thought my strong SAT was measuring something valuable.
But I now write as a parent of a kid who is very high IQ but very slow LD processor. Without test time accommodations, my kid would be at community college. With time accommodation, my kid got a good test score. Now at a top 20 college and doing extremely well. So my kid’s experience gives me a very different perspective on how valuable my test taking skills were. My kid is doing better in HS and college than I ever did, but always had time accommodations. So is my kid really smarter than me? Or is my kid only doing better because of the extra time?
The answer is not obvious, even to me. My kid is legit smart, but is slow getting through things. What exactly does that mean?
@2mrmagoo I understand your sentiments re: USC. Unfortunately, the University seems to be repeatedly involved in scandals which is raising concerns about the culture there.
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-usc-culture-college-admissions-scandal-20190313-story.html
@Undercrackers very true. College does mean different things to different people. Sure, I partied and had fun, but education came first…
i do not see anything wrong with the “institutional advancement” of wealthy donors having their kids receive slightly preferential treatment. There are no guarantees and if the kids is grossly underqualified than no amount of money will get them in.
Interesting details in wsj… We now know that investigators weren’t actually looking for a college admissions cheating scheme when they were tipped off to what was going on with “Operation Varsity Blues.” It turns out, “federal authorities were pursuing a securities fraud case last spring when a person involved, a financial executive hoping for leniency, said he had information of great interest on another matter,” write Melissa Korn, Zusha Elinson, Sadie Gurman and Jennifer Levitz. – https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tip-the-yale-coach-and-the-wire-how-the-college-admissions-scam-unraveled-11552524237
In a free society people can attend college for whatever reason they feel appropriate. Advancement. Learning for the love of learning. A partner in life. Sports. A chance at the NBA. Whatever. It doesn’t have to fit my world view, to be right.
What it is worth looking at is the ranking and prestige arms race. Among parents and cascading to our children.
You can achieve every goal named above at any accredited university or college in America. Or trade school. Or apprenticeship.
Never! USC has had SO many scandals over the years, it’s really unbelievable.
I apologize if this acticle about all the usC scandals has been posted in the previous 96+ pages.
https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-usc-culture-college-admissions-scandal-20190313-story.html
Edit: Many apologies, someone beat me to it.
@momofsenior1- I don’t have a child at USC, nor any ties to the school. No dog in this fight. However, USC’s reputation is at stake here. People are assuming knowledge by USC and maligning them, when there is no indication anyone but rogue employees took bribes. Being falsely accused of involvement, if innocent, is being victimized.
If the allegations are true USC is a victim of fraud. Why would you not call a victim of fraud a victim of fraud?
Son of Greg and Marcia Abbott made some comments to the NY Post and was photographed doing so while smoking weed in front of their apartment on Fifth Ave. Abbotts are accused of paying $125K for their daughter’s fake ACT score of 35 (she herself made a 23) plus some SAT 2 tests. I think we know why the parents paid for their daughter’s test scores …
Could this family be any more awful? They need to hire the media strategist that Jane Buckingham did for her son Jack.
You just can’t make up stuff this good.
“I see recurring donations to NYU but I haven’t yet seen them named. I guess that’s one of the other shoes still to drop.”
I’m thinking the same thing. USC in LA and NYU in NYC have a lot of similarities.
Many of the Gossip Girls kids, after all, attended NYU even though they really wanted Columbia or Yale.
in my opinion two of the three most important decisions one makes in life are 1) your spouse 2) which college you attend Number 3 used to be profession or career but it is not unusual for someone to have 3 or 4 ( or more) different career paths today
Its an interesting question. Extra time doesn’t always lead to better results. I have one daughter who is a really gifted writer but not great at science and math. No amount of extra time would change her results in those subjects. It would be futile and frustrating for her to simply sit longer staring at problems she couldn’t do. I believe her standardized tests are a very good representation of her ability.
On the other hand, I have a daughter who is very gifted in math and science but not fast. She could certainly have benefited from a bit of extra time. I think her performance on standardized tests is a (slightly) imperfect representation of her ability. In our case, the difference was minimal and so it never became an issue.
I believe that every kid should have the chance to display their true ability on these very important tests, whether they have a recognized disability or are simply slower at reading and calculation. If speed is not important for the subject matter in college, it shouldn’t be a factor on the tests.
Geez if I paid that much money to raise a act score I would at least want a 33 or 34… Not a 32… Lol