I recalled that the plaintiffs were trying to make each settlement larger than the previous one and was curious as to how these two settlements were much smaller, but this quote from the article shared by @pa94306 shares the public rationale:
In their motion seeking court approval for the two new settlements, the plaintiffs noted that the comparatively lower amounts for Caltech and Johns Hopkins were due to their shorter membership duration in the 568 Group compared to the other defendants.
This was the quote I found most damning in the article @jym626 linked:
Notre Dame admitted 163 applicants off its “university relations” list in 2012, including 38 who fell well below its typical academic standard. Those applicants were classed in an admissions category that normally would have led to rejection; admitting them, then–associate vice president for undergraduate enrollment Donald Bishop wrote in an email included in the court documents, amounted to “massive allowances to the power of family connections and funding history.”
Bishop added that he hoped next year, “the wealthy” would “raise a few more smart kids!”
Definitely goes against the idea that donor admits are usually just as strong as regular ones, at least for Notre Dame.
I found the quotes from the former Cornell (and USC and Rochester) admissions officer interesting. It appears as though Cornell has reformed its practices to a significant degree, if all of his statements are accurate.
I also found this quote interesting:
Angel Pérez, president of the National Association for College Admission Counseling, said the reverberations are one of the most unfortunate consequences of the lawsuit. With the memory of the Varsity Blues admissions scandal still relatively fresh in public memory, allegations of universities secretly prioritizing the children of the rich and powerful is likely to further erode public trust in the sector, even at less selective universities where “donor capacity” is unlikely to be a factor.
“The things that have come out about practices at a few institutions are going to have repercussions for all institutions,” Pérez told Inside Higher Ed. “There’s going to be less trust in the process and less trust in higher education.”
Do people think that Varsity Blues and this lawsuit and such is harming people’s trust in higher education? Or is it only harming the trust of people gunning for these types of institutions?
, I don’t think any of these settlements have been court approved, is that correct? It seems judgements from the ongoing lawsuit could end up being more than what the schools have settled for…is that possible?