1667
This seems like an astronomical improvement. I don’t know what causes a red flag for the College Board in terms of improvement.
1420 SAT is a 95th percentile
1020 PSAT is a 52nd percentile
Maybe @lindagaf can weigh in, but my understanding is that the testing agencies do not track/flag improvements from PSAT or PreACT to the real SAT and ACT tests
And earlier someone reported that the Caplan kid went from a 24 to a 33 on his ACT (or maybe it was a 23 to a 34), either way, it is hard to imagine how that is not flagged, especially if the test was taken with accommodations.
961
@bud123 being the father of an Ivy recruited fencer, I know there is nothing “back door” about her acceptance into the University. Nothing back door about the commitment. dedication, and talent it takes to be a top academic student with high scores and one of the best fencers in the country. If you feel your scion work extremely hard to be a top student, imagine throwing what it takes to be an elite athlete into the mix.
@Cardinal Fang @houndmom @gourmetmom
Any kid who got in as a fake recruited athlete knew, and there are University employees beyond the coach who knew. I am the parent of two D1 athletes, at two different schools. In both their cases, they got multiple emails after committing not just from the coach- from their team’s academic advisor as well as email from the assistant athletic director assigned to the team. When they registered for classes prior to starting as freshman, they met in person with the team’s academic advisor who made sure their classes were scheduled around their practice. They were matched with other athletes for roommates. They were included in press releases that covered all student-athletes in their recruiting class for their team. They were invited and encouraged to arrive and move in earlier on campus than non-athlete freshman, and so on.
@sable999 the FBI was involved by the time the Caplan child “took” that 2nd ACT (in reality, the cheater took it for her). The Caplans had applied for accommodations and were denied, then appealed and were denied, and upon the request of the FBI the ACT granted the accommodations. Thus, the ACT was taking instructions from the FBI for that particular test taker and wouldn’t have flagged the increase like (presumably) they normally would have.
If you were to show Huffman’s daughter those stats, she’d tell you that she was in the 147th percentile.
962
@jonri Thank you! I’m happy that you posted this. I agree that this thread is permeated by sour grapes, IMO. The vitriol espoused here just shows how invested people are in having their progeny matriculate at these elite universities.
I am not aware of any tracking from PSAT and PreACT to actual test scores. It would be ridiculous to do so with the ACT especially, because kids take the PreACT as sophomores, usually long before they do an official test.
The pre-tests are supposed to be taken cold and serve the purpose of showing kids areas of strength and weakness on the tests. It actually isn’t unheard of for kids to make huge gains from pre-test to the actual test, especially when they get private tutors.
@GnocchiB ahhh, thank you for clarifying that fact. It had been eating at me as just not adding up. ACT being in on it definitely makes sense.
When my D was a freshman or sophomore in HS I was chatting with the mother of an older girl who had just been accepted at Duke. This mother told me emphatically that we “HAD” to use a college consultant because without one it was really impossible to get accepted to a selective school. (She also said the chances of being admitted somewhere “good” were nil if you weren’t a varsity athlete.) None of this sounded right to me, and we weren’t interested in spending money on such a thing. In the end D (not a school athlete) got into her first choice school without a consultant (although with lots of good advice from a very on-the-ball college counselor at her high school). I have thought of this conversation so many times in the last few days. Do large numbers of people really think this? My impression is a consultant (the non bribing kind anyway) would actually HURT your chances of getting in because I’ve heard it said over and over again that admissions officers can spot applications written by someone besides the student a mile off.
“My D goes to Barnard. She says the Columbia/Barnard campus is buzzing with this topic right now. She is hearing lots of “Hahaha, I wonder that’s how I got in!!” because lots of students are from super wealthy families!”
adorable.
I don’t think this will change anything. Colleges will continue to accept bribes from those who can pay. The methods will just change.
@soccermother to your point, most if not all of the students knew what was going on and even if they didn’t, the colleges and authorities need to come down hard on these families and students to make an absolutely clear point that what they did was wrong on so many levels and will make future families think twice before attempting to cheat and defraud the college admission process.
“Singer apparently had thousands of clients and many of them were legitimate. I wonder how he decided who to reveal the shady side of the business to.”
Probably pretty easy to figure out. Parents with unreasonable expectations and demands given the legit credentials of their adorable exceptional special kids. We all know the type of parent.
Appears that Singer was indicating to the Loghlin family that their kid was really ASU material. The horror!! So Lori says “isn’t there anything that you can do to get her into a better school than that? Anything???” “Well now that you ask…”
The part I’m more curious about is how Singer cultivated the relationships with the bribed coaches. How exactly do you cultivate those relationships?
[QUOTE=@Lindagaf]
I am not aware of any tracking from PSAT and PreACT to actual test scores./]
Thanks for this I did wonder if the College Board or whatever tracked.
There were some comments on the subject, but not much compared to the flood of posts on other aspects.
Would people treat each class of tainted student (or graduate) the same or differently?
A. Student knowingly participated in or knew (or should have known) of the cheating on his/her behalf.
B. Student did not know of the cheating on his/her behalf.
C. Student did not know of the cheating on his/her behalf, but would have been admitted anyway.
D. Student had contact with scandal participants, but was not affected by the cheating (e.g. a legitimate athlete recruited by a corrupt coach, or someone who used Singer college consulting but was not offered the “side door” services).
Kathie Lee Gifford talked about this on her show this morning. Both of her kids went to USC. And Frank of course.
I also had the impression that she is friendly with Lori Loughlin.
She was sad and appalled by the scandal. Of course Hoda also talked about it, sounded like just like us, it’s something everyone is talking about
I think students in category A,B, and C should be expelled. They were admitted under false pretenses.
@soccermother I totally agree!! The female soccer player at UCLA has roster photos. And these sports, soccer and water polo, run in such small circles locally…Everyone knows everyone else on the email distribution when you are talking D1 California soccer and water polo teams. That’s why some of the teammates had to know and just kept quiet about it. My kid would be like, “who are you? Where have you been the last 10 years like the rest of us? Certainly not at any of the national tournaments required to get recruited to one of these programs!”