KenBurnski said:

---

"I am loving that USC is not allowing the daughters of Loughlin not to drop out."

What does this mean? The daughter tried to quit school but USC locked her in her dorm spa suite?

---

My understanding is that with regards to academic status, either nothing will be done if the daughters are adjudicated to be innocent of all charges, or they will be dismissed by USC. The choice for them to drop out on their own volition is taken away. Physically, I cannot imagine they will be caged there.

Got it. Thanks.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

"I am loving that USC is not allowing the daughters of Loughlin not to drop out."

What does this mean? The daughter tried to quit school but USC locked her in her dorm spa suite?

---

My understanding is that with regards to academic status, either nothing will be done if the daughters are adjudicated to be innocent of all charges, or they will be dismissed by USC. The choice for them to drop out on their own volition is taken away. Physically, I cannot imagine they will be caged there.

---

This is a f-u from the new SC President. They can't reenroll anywhere (like a JC) until they have an official status from SC. They are in limbo.

wifeisafurd said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

"I am loving that USC is not allowing the daughters of Loughlin not to drop out."

What does this mean? The daughter tried to quit school but USC locked her in her dorm spa suite?

---

My understanding is that with regards to academic status, either nothing will be done if the daughters are adjudicated to be innocent of all charges, or they will be dismissed by USC. The choice for them to drop out on their own volition is taken away. Physically, I cannot imagine they will be caged there.

---

This is a f-u from the new SC President. They can't reenroll anywhere (like a JC) until they have an official status from SC. They are in limbo.

---

I thought they only cared about partying anyway....

I think it's worth reminding everyone that you can get a great education at lots of public universities including the dreaded CSUs. My son's girlfriend (UCD undergrad) is finishing up a MS in Microbiology at SF State and her thesis advisor has a PhD from Cal. All those PhDs pumped out by the UC system have to get a job some place and for many of them, particularly if they want a more even blend of teaching and research, CSUs are a good place to work. Disclaimer: my two sons are Cal Poly grads and, come to think of it, only took the SAT and ACT once each.

philbert said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

"I am loving that USC is not allowing the daughters of Loughlin not to drop out."

What does this mean? The daughter tried to quit school but USC locked her in her dorm spa suite?

---

My understanding is that with regards to academic status, either nothing will be done if the daughters are adjudicated to be innocent of all charges, or they will be dismissed by USC. The choice for them to drop out on their own volition is taken away. Physically, I cannot imagine they will be caged there.

---

This is a f-u from the new SC President. They can't reenroll anywhere (like a JC) until they have an official status from SC. They are in limbo.

---

I thought they only cared about partying anyway....

---

To a certain extent yes. but we rather superior feeling Cal grads have to realize that the current U$C is not the U$C of 20 years ago. It has improved, and it has improved dramatically. It is to be applauded for that.

But in improving it has done much of the work with smoke and mirrors. To start, way back when, there were way too many 4.0s for the likes of 'furd, UCLA, and Cal. So U$C stepped into the equation to improve its overall profile. Then they supplemented that with doing best combo of scores on the SATs at different sittings, again to improve the entering profile. And finally they asked the lesser qualified to wait until spring and they would have a spot for them, but not in the fall. Think Why??? Again their fall profile.

So for years they have been working it, and combined with the numbers of qualified students who engage the admissions game each year, they prosper with a very nice profile. Are they Stanfurd? No. Cal? No. UCLA? No. But their numbers are rising first by gaming the system and now by sheer numbers getting them close. But do not kid yourself it is still U$C. Not bad. Getting better. But definitely not Cal.

Varsity Blues: Crew was ideal sport for stowaways

"Rick Singer, who bribed colleges to recruit clients' kids as athletes, found that crew (rowing) was a soft target for his scam, the L.A. Times' Matthew Ormseth reports:

The sport has "large rosters, little fan or media scrutiny, and wide latitude in recruiting female athletes."
"Schools with high-profile football programs use the sport as a Title IX counterweight, allotting women's rowing programs as many as 20 scholarships. ... As a result, some crew programs have rosters of 40 or more." Axios

The Harvard test taker, Mark Riddall, has pleaded guilty. Interesting side note about his regular job.

Quote:

---

He was typically paid $10,000 per test.

In his public-facing day job, Riddell was the director of college entrance exam preparation at IMG Academy, a private boarding school for student-athletes in Bradenton, Florida, where he'd worked since 2006.

---

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/the-test-taking-whiz-in-the-college-admissions-scam-scandal

KenBurnski said:

---

"I am loving that USC is not allowing the daughters of Loughlin not to drop out."

What does this mean? The daughter tried to quit school but USC locked her in her dorm spa suite?

---

You missed the double negative.


Edit: Nevermind. You added the double negative, but it was not present in the post you were responding to.

Another Bear said:

---

The Harvard test taker, Mark Riddall, has pleaded guilty. Interesting side note about his regular job.

Quote:

---

He was typically paid $10,000 per test.

In his public-facing day job, Riddell was the director of college entrance exam preparation at IMG Academy, a private boarding school for student-athletes in Bradenton, Florida, where he'd worked since 2006.

---

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/the-test-taking-whiz-in-the-college-admissions-scam-scandal

---

Quote:

---

"He didn't have inside information about the answers," Lelling explained. "He was just smart enough to get a near perfect score on demand or to calibrate the score."

---

Standardized tests are worthless as a judge of anything. I despise them, always have.

He edited the post. I didn't add anything.

KenBurnski said:

---

He edited the post. I didn't add anything.

---

Got it!

bluehenbear said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

The Harvard test taker, Mark Riddall, has pleaded guilty. Interesting side note about his regular job.

Quote:

---

He was typically paid $10,000 per test.

In his public-facing day job, Riddell was the director of college entrance exam preparation at IMG Academy, a private boarding school for student-athletes in Bradenton, Florida, where he'd worked since 2006.

---

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/juliareinstein/the-test-taking-whiz-in-the-college-admissions-scam-scandal

---

Quote:

---

"He didn't have inside information about the answers," Lelling explained. "He was just smart enough to get a near perfect score on demand or to calibrate the score."

---

Standardized tests are worthless as a judge of anything. I despise them, always have.

---

I disagree, but then my SATs are what probably got me into Cal (can't think of any other reason they would've let me in, lol).

So I'm a big SAT guy. They are sooooo meaningful! They're amazing!

I went to Cal for grad school, so it wasn't my SATs that got me in, it was my body of work as an undergrad.

I went to undergrad at U of Delaware (if you couldn't guess from my handle). When applying, I got a call from admissions person one day to discuss my application and his question to me was "Why are my SATs so low".

I said, in all honesty, that I didn't spend a great deal of time preparing for them (I just took a few practice exams and did some workbook stuff). I said I'd rather spend my time actually DOING things that make me a more knowledgeable, well-rounded, and happier person. Spending several hours a day practicing analogies didn't seem like a good use of my time. I don't regret it.

While I don't think it reduced any opportunities for me (after all I earned a PhD from Cal) and I was accepted everywhere I applied (undergrad and grad), I think it certainly impacted my ability to get scholarships that would've eased the financial burden on my parents to send me to Delaware.

okaydo said:

---

---

Wow, that is the definition of chutzpah.

bluehenbear said:

---

I went to Cal for grad school, so it wasn't my SATs that got me in, it was my body of work as an undergrad.

I went to undergrad at U of Delaware (if you couldn't guess from my handle). When applying, I got a call from admissions person one day to discuss my application and his question to me was "Why are my SATs so low".

I said, in all honesty, that I didn't spend a great deal of time preparing for them (I just took a few practice exams and did some workbook stuff). I said I'd rather spend my time actually DOING things that make me a more knowledgeable, well-rounded, and happier person. Spending several hours a day practicing analogies didn't seem like a good use of my time. I don't regret it.

While I don't think it reduced any opportunities for me (after all I earned a PhD from Cal) and I was accepted everywhere I applied (undergrad and grad), I think it certainly impacted my ability to get scholarships that would've eased the financial burden on my parents to send me to Delaware.

---

I agree that all that test-prep stuff is a waste of time, in the grand scheme of things (except as a means to an end to get accepted at a desired school). So I didn't do it either.

KenBurnski said:

---

He edited the post. I didn't add anything.

---

The errors of one's ways. From a Sub A student from the past.

UCLA Athletics is a disgrace. Dan Guerrero should be cleaning out his desk.

On a side note, if our Mic Men don't take advantage of this down in the Rose Bowl this year, my head will explode. In fact, every visit by Southern Branch teams should be greeted with "dollar derision", just as we used to do to Ol' $c.

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Am I the only one that finds this, at least from a moral standpoint and harming-of-others standpoint, pretty mild?

I get why it's a big story (the rich elite white collar crime is always sensational) and it's unequivocally shady, but I think ultimately inconsequential. In theory, they are keeping a few seats from other more deserving who will end up at other excellent schools as a result.

---

Let me explain this to you. And I want to start by saying I'm not mad at you. I may get emotional in my writing because I'm outraged by this whole story and the whole process. This is very personal for me.

I have a kid who is a junior in high school and one coming up 3 years behind. So this is very real for me right now. I see my kid and her friends going through this. And it is not just the process of applying to college but it is the whole academic career.

The percentage of people applying to college has skyrocketed. It is not like when I was in school. Schools that were safety schools when I applied are now classified as elite. When I applied, I could afford to turn up a middle finger at "elite" private schools (and I did) because I put in the effort got the grades, and I couldn't be sure I'd get into every college I applied to, but I could be sure I'd get into most of them. That is not how it is now. Kids with perfect GPA's and perfect test scores and good extacurricular accomplishments can find themselves at UC Santa Cruz wondering why.

Kids who want an elite college experience now grow up working really hard for it. They make sacrifices. They stay up late working on their studies many nights. They develop themselves in ways outside of school. And you watch your kid doing that. And you watch her friends that do that. And you watch her friends who DON'T do that.

See, here is the thing. You go and look at the test scores for each school. Now what they do is report the range of test scores from the 25th percentile in the admitted class to the 75th in the admitted class. So you look at a school you like and say you see 25th is a 29 on the ACT and 75th is a 32. Well, I've got a perfect 36. And I have all A's. And I have great activities. This is a safety school for me, right? Wrong. Because who knows how they decide that kids that would be in the 99th percentile academically in the class don't qualify, but they do. It's not just a handful. It is a lot.

At this point, getting good grades and test scores buys you a lottery ticket. That is it. There is no sure way to get in anywhere. You can't work harder than your peers, be more talented than your peers, be smarter than your peers. That doesn't do it.

And then you look and you see the rate of acceptance for legacy admissions for some of these schools. And then you see a kid who you've known all your life who has slacked off all his life get into an Ivy. An Ivy he doesn't want to go to because he hates school. He's embarrassed to go. His friends give him the business, nicely but persistently. And he knows they are right. But Mom and Dad want him to go. (true story).

And then you read something like this article where literally half the kids in certain zip codes are having their parents pay doctors to diagnose them with a learning disability so they can have 2 days to take a test instead of 4 hours. HALF. And the parents think this is okay. And the doctors think this is okay. Personally, I think they all should go to jail and the doctors should permanently lose their license. Howe despicable do you need to be to pose as handicap. Would they fake paralysis to get an advantage? Would you think that is okay?

And then you see rich parents get their kids trained in some stupid little sport that is extremely expensive, like sailing, and get them into some school that has a Division III program. Or, Dad will put up seed money for a business, run the business in his kid's name, and pretend like the kid spent his high school years running a profitable business when he had nothing to do with it.

And now they go beyond all of that and just buy their way in? Sure thing.

Look, when you see kids grow up smarter and better and more talented, and you see them put in literally thousands of hours more work to develop themselves and you know they would kick that kid's ass in the classroom if given a shot because they've kicked that kid's ass all their lives, it does not seem like a minor moral transgression. It is not like there are tons of spots and a handful of them go to someone undeserving. There are not nearly enough slots for all the talented hard working kids. To jump the line for your lazy, dumbass kid who doesn't need or want the opportunity is disgraceful. If they stole $50 from a liquor store, they'd be in jail. They take an opportunity from someone worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it is a minor moral transgression.

I would submit to you that if you walked around with a high school kid who truly has the talent and work ethic to make the most of the opportunity, you wouldn't feel this way. Yeah, they'll be successful. They deserved better. They deserved that kid's slot. And I guarantee you they do not view the harm as mild.

They need to put the fear of god into these parents. No one should feel safe faking a kid's learning disability after this. I hope they get extensive jail sentences for this. That is the only thing they can't buy their way out of. I do not resent wealthy people. I resent takers. These people are takers.

---

OTB, this is one of the bests posts I've ever read on this board. Thanks for taking the time and articulating the issues and, yes, the outrage, so very well. I wish your family well on the college admissions process.

BGGB2 said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Am I the only one that finds this, at least from a moral standpoint and harming-of-others standpoint, pretty mild?

I get why it's a big story (the rich elite white collar crime is always sensational) and it's unequivocally shady, but I think ultimately inconsequential. In theory, they are keeping a few seats from other more deserving who will end up at other excellent schools as a result.

---

Let me explain this to you. And I want to start by saying I'm not mad at you. I may get emotional in my writing because I'm outraged by this whole story and the whole process. This is very personal for me.

I have a kid who is a junior in high school and one coming up 3 years behind. So this is very real for me right now. I see my kid and her friends going through this. And it is not just the process of applying to college but it is the whole academic career.

The percentage of people applying to college has skyrocketed. It is not like when I was in school. Schools that were safety schools when I applied are now classified as elite. When I applied, I could afford to turn up a middle finger at "elite" private schools (and I did) because I put in the effort got the grades, and I couldn't be sure I'd get into every college I applied to, but I could be sure I'd get into most of them. That is not how it is now. Kids with perfect GPA's and perfect test scores and good extacurricular accomplishments can find themselves at UC Santa Cruz wondering why.

...
I would submit to you that if you walked around with a high school kid who truly has the talent and work ethic to make the most of the opportunity, you wouldn't feel this way. Yeah, they'll be successful. They deserved better. They deserved that kid's slot. And I guarantee you they do not view the harm as mild.

They need to put the fear of god into these parents. No one should feel safe faking a kid's learning disability after this. I hope they get extensive jail sentences for this. That is the only thing they can't buy their way out of. I do not resent wealthy people. I resent takers. These people are takers.

---

OTB, this is one of the bests posts I've ever read on this board. Thanks for taking the time and articulating the issues and, yes, the outrage, so very well. I wish your family well on the college admissions process.

---

So much of this discussion seems to ignore that mostly when we talk 'elite' we are also talking 'private entity'.
For my lifetime "private entity" has meant not public, we make the rules, no complaints. Getting into a 'private' school is not the public's choice. Is the behavior egregious? Yes. Is the behavior of POTUS egregious? Yes.

So what, as long as private entity's can hide their actions and policies from public scrutiny there should be no outrage. Do you think these private entity's want public disclosure? No, and they will throw as many parents under the bus to avoid exposure as necessary. This case is a god sent smokescreen for private entities who fear public disclosure.

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Am I the only one that finds this, at least from a moral standpoint and harming-of-others standpoint, pretty mild?

I get why it's a big story (the rich elite white collar crime is always sensational) and it's unequivocally shady, but I think ultimately inconsequential. In theory, they are keeping a few seats from other more deserving who will end up at other excellent schools as a result.

---

Let me explain this to you. And I want to start by saying I'm not mad at you. I may get emotional in my writing because I'm outraged by this whole story and the whole process. This is very personal for me.

I have a kid who is a junior in high school and one coming up 3 years behind. So this is very real for me right now. I see my kid and her friends going through this. And it is not just the process of applying to college but it is the whole academic career.

The percentage of people applying to college has skyrocketed. It is not like when I was in school. Schools that were safety schools when I applied are now classified as elite. When I applied, I could afford to turn up a middle finger at "elite" private schools (and I did) because I put in the effort got the grades, and I couldn't be sure I'd get into every college I applied to, but I could be sure I'd get into most of them. That is not how it is now. Kids with perfect GPA's and perfect test scores and good extacurricular accomplishments can find themselves at UC Santa Cruz wondering why.

Kids who want an elite college experience now grow up working really hard for it. They make sacrifices. They stay up late working on their studies many nights. They develop themselves in ways outside of school. And you watch your kid doing that. And you watch her friends that do that. And you watch her friends who DON'T do that.

See, here is the thing. You go and look at the test scores for each school. Now what they do is report the range of test scores from the 25th percentile in the admitted class to the 75th in the admitted class. So you look at a school you like and say you see 25th is a 29 on the ACT and 75th is a 32. Well, I've got a perfect 36. And I have all A's. And I have great activities. This is a safety school for me, right? Wrong. Because who knows how they decide that kids that would be in the 99th percentile academically in the class don't qualify, but they do. It's not just a handful. It is a lot.

At this point, getting good grades and test scores buys you a lottery ticket. That is it. There is no sure way to get in anywhere. You can't work harder than your peers, be more talented than your peers, be smarter than your peers. That doesn't do it.

And then you look and you see the rate of acceptance for legacy admissions for some of these schools. And then you see a kid who you've known all your life who has slacked off all his life get into an Ivy. An Ivy he doesn't want to go to because he hates school. He's embarrassed to go. His friends give him the business, nicely but persistently. And he knows they are right. But Mom and Dad want him to go. (true story).

And then you read something like this article where literally half the kids in certain zip codes are having their parents pay doctors to diagnose them with a learning disability so they can have 2 days to take a test instead of 4 hours. HALF. And the parents think this is okay. And the doctors think this is okay. Personally, I think they all should go to jail and the doctors should permanently lose their license. Howe despicable do you need to be to pose as handicap. Would they fake paralysis to get an advantage? Would you think that is okay?

And then you see rich parents get their kids trained in some stupid little sport that is extremely expensive, like sailing, and get them into some school that has a Division III program. Or, Dad will put up seed money for a business, run the business in his kid's name, and pretend like the kid spent his high school years running a profitable business when he had nothing to do with it.

And now they go beyond all of that and just buy their way in? Sure thing.

Look, when you see kids grow up smarter and better and more talented, and you see them put in literally thousands of hours more work to develop themselves and you know they would kick that kid's ass in the classroom if given a shot because they've kicked that kid's ass all their lives, it does not seem like a minor moral transgression. It is not like there are tons of spots and a handful of them go to someone undeserving. There are not nearly enough slots for all the talented hard working kids. To jump the line for your lazy, dumbass kid who doesn't need or want the opportunity is disgraceful. If they stole $50 from a liquor store, they'd be in jail. They take an opportunity from someone worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it is a minor moral transgression.

I would submit to you that if you walked around with a high school kid who truly has the talent and work ethic to make the most of the opportunity, you wouldn't feel this way. Yeah, they'll be successful. They deserved better. They deserved that kid's slot. And I guarantee you they do not view the harm as mild.

They need to put the fear of god into these parents. No one should feel safe faking a kid's learning disability after this. I hope they get extensive jail sentences for this. That is the only thing they can't buy their way out of. I do not resent wealthy people. I resent takers. These people are takers.

---

Excellent post. I'll also add that the parents involved are implicitly (although I bet they'd be quite happy to be explicit about it) saying that college is not for pursuing knowledge or broadening one's perspective or any of those lofty goals. It's for making connections and having bragging rights. And they also believe that once their kids are attending USC or one of the other schools in question, they'll be able to skate through with the same effort (or lack thereof) they exhibited in high school. This is the crux of the "deal" that most private universities (especially USC, Stanford, etc) make with the parents: you send your kid here and if they make even minimal effort, we'll be sure they get a degree. I know parents of USC and Harvard grads who both heard that speech - it's carefully coded, but it's clear what they meant.

Lori and a lot of people on this board have the same obsession.

What's interesting about this article is the guy got into Princeton, but was rejected by USC.

HearstMining said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Am I the only one that finds this, at least from a moral standpoint and harming-of-others standpoint, pretty mild?

I get why it's a big story (the rich elite white collar crime is always sensational) and it's unequivocally shady, but I think ultimately inconsequential. In theory, they are keeping a few seats from other more deserving who will end up at other excellent schools as a result.

---

Let me explain this to you. And I want to start by saying I'm not mad at you. I may get emotional in my writing because I'm outraged by this whole story and the whole process. This is very personal for me.

I have a kid who is a junior in high school and one coming up 3 years behind. So this is very real for me right now. I see my kid and her friends going through this. And it is not just the process of applying to college but it is the whole academic career.

The percentage of people applying to college has skyrocketed. It is not like when I was in school. Schools that were safety schools when I applied are now classified as elite. When I applied, I could afford to turn up a middle finger at "elite" private schools (and I did) because I put in the effort got the grades, and I couldn't be sure I'd get into every college I applied to, but I could be sure I'd get into most of them. That is not how it is now. Kids with perfect GPA's and perfect test scores and good extacurricular accomplishments can find themselves at UC Santa Cruz wondering why.

Kids who want an elite college experience now grow up working really hard for it. They make sacrifices. They stay up late working on their studies many nights. They develop themselves in ways outside of school. And you watch your kid doing that. And you watch her friends that do that. And you watch her friends who DON'T do that.

See, here is the thing. You go and look at the test scores for each school. Now what they do is report the range of test scores from the 25th percentile in the admitted class to the 75th in the admitted class. So you look at a school you like and say you see 25th is a 29 on the ACT and 75th is a 32. Well, I've got a perfect 36. And I have all A's. And I have great activities. This is a safety school for me, right? Wrong. Because who knows how they decide that kids that would be in the 99th percentile academically in the class don't qualify, but they do. It's not just a handful. It is a lot.

At this point, getting good grades and test scores buys you a lottery ticket. That is it. There is no sure way to get in anywhere. You can't work harder than your peers, be more talented than your peers, be smarter than your peers. That doesn't do it.

And then you look and you see the rate of acceptance for legacy admissions for some of these schools. And then you see a kid who you've known all your life who has slacked off all his life get into an Ivy. An Ivy he doesn't want to go to because he hates school. He's embarrassed to go. His friends give him the business, nicely but persistently. And he knows they are right. But Mom and Dad want him to go. (true story).

And then you read something like this article where literally half the kids in certain zip codes are having their parents pay doctors to diagnose them with a learning disability so they can have 2 days to take a test instead of 4 hours. HALF. And the parents think this is okay. And the doctors think this is okay. Personally, I think they all should go to jail and the doctors should permanently lose their license. Howe despicable do you need to be to pose as handicap. Would they fake paralysis to get an advantage? Would you think that is okay?

And then you see rich parents get their kids trained in some stupid little sport that is extremely expensive, like sailing, and get them into some school that has a Division III program. Or, Dad will put up seed money for a business, run the business in his kid's name, and pretend like the kid spent his high school years running a profitable business when he had nothing to do with it.

And now they go beyond all of that and just buy their way in? Sure thing.

Look, when you see kids grow up smarter and better and more talented, and you see them put in literally thousands of hours more work to develop themselves and you know they would kick that kid's ass in the classroom if given a shot because they've kicked that kid's ass all their lives, it does not seem like a minor moral transgression. It is not like there are tons of spots and a handful of them go to someone undeserving. There are not nearly enough slots for all the talented hard working kids. To jump the line for your lazy, dumbass kid who doesn't need or want the opportunity is disgraceful. If they stole $50 from a liquor store, they'd be in jail. They take an opportunity from someone worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it is a minor moral transgression.

I would submit to you that if you walked around with a high school kid who truly has the talent and work ethic to make the most of the opportunity, you wouldn't feel this way. Yeah, they'll be successful. They deserved better. They deserved that kid's slot. And I guarantee you they do not view the harm as mild.

They need to put the fear of god into these parents. No one should feel safe faking a kid's learning disability after this. I hope they get extensive jail sentences for this. That is the only thing they can't buy their way out of. I do not resent wealthy people. I resent takers. These people are takers.

---

Excellent post. I'll also add that the parents involved are implicitly (although I bet they'd be quite happy to be explicit about it) saying that college is not for pursuing knowledge or broadening one's perspective or any of those lofty goals. It's for making connections and having bragging rights. And they also believe that once their kids are attending USC or one of the other schools in question, they'll be able to skate through with the same effort (or lack thereof) they exhibited in high school. This is the crux of the "deal" that most private universities (especially USC, Stanford, etc) make with the parents: you send your kid here and if they make even minimal effort, we'll be sure they get a degree. I know parents of USC and Harvard grads who both heard that speech - it's carefully coded, but it's clear what they meant.

---

I agree with all of the foregoing comments and want to add that the "grade inflation" or "no one gets a grade lower than a B" at most of the "highly selective" private colleges is part of their complicity in the overall process Once a student gets in, that student WILL graduate with a B average

The official rationale often provided for 'this policy has been. "We know there Student are smart and work hard. Otherwise they could not have been admitted.
So it would be unfair to give these students grades lower than a B when they are all competing against other smart and hardworking students. Grades below a B would not fairly represent their instead intelligence and their hard work."

BTW I have heard that rationale expressed by a representative of Brown University when my kids were taking an official tour of that campus given for prospective students.

The media has made much of certain parents rejecting plea deals while others accepted them. Details of the deals offered were not revealed. It seemed that the parents accepting the deals were the ones that for a few thousand rigged the colled entrance exams; while the parents who donated hundreds of thousands to parties at the private schools were the ones rejecting the deals.

Maybe there were different deals offered based on the monetary value of the crime. Perhaps 0-2 years for buying a rigged test for $20,000 But then for buying an entrance 'preference' for $250,000, 10-20 years. In that case I can see the parents who 'donated' to the school or a 'preferred' sport, rejecting the deal. I suppose we could debate which is the greater crime; altering entrance exam test scores that misaligned the test performance of hundreds of thousands of high school seniors or the preferred admission of a handful of students at private schools where admissions policy is highly discretionary.

It seems the lesser crime is the one which affected the greatest number. Wrath of the 1%ers?

sp4149 said:

---

The media has made much of certain parents rejecting plea deals while others accepted them. Details of the deals offered were not revealed. It seemed that the parents accepting the deals were the ones that for a few thousand rigged the colled entrance exams; while the parents who donated hundreds of thousands to parties at the private schools were the ones rejecting the deals.

Maybe there were different deals offered based on the monetary value of the crime. Perhaps 0-2 years for buying a rigged test for $20,000 But then for buying an entrance 'preference' for $250,000, 10-20 years. In that case I can see the parents who 'donated' to the school or a 'preferred' sport, rejecting the deal. I suppose we could debate which is the greater crime; altering entrance exam test scores that misaligned the test performance of hundreds of thousands of high school seniors or the preferred admission of a handful of students at private schools where admissions policy is highly discretionary.

It seems the lesser crime is the one which affected the greatest number. Wrath of the 1%ers?

---

I think you will find that there is another round of indictments coming, as those copping a plea tattle on others. Appreciate these parents were wire tapped which provides direct evidence. But those parents taking as plea had to learn about how to cheat from someone else who also helped their kids in this manner. More often then not, plea deals at this stage are for the purpose of gathering and marshaling evidence against others. To your point, the SAT abuse is more widespread, but you still need evidence to indict more people, rather than rely on Singer vs the word of other new defendants.

It turns out my niece went to the same HS as one of the Huffman kids, LA County Art Magnet. Interesting to hear what her parents have said about the process and LACAM, that a portfolio, sample work or live auditions are involved, the process is different. Test scores don't mean that much, although they were obviously worried and they didn't know the process going in.

The niece got into UCLA this year. She had a 1,300 SAT and a 3.8 GPA. That sure seems low doesn't it..until you factor in the portfolio. Also she was no slouch, won visual artist of year two years running. It's been mentioned that she was accepted only as an Art major...but it has a 8% acceptance rate.

In any case, the paid application consultant said not to even bother with UCLA, she will not get it. The school counselor however said, just apply but make sure you apply. Apparently the school counselor knew something...that proof of ability (aka portfolio) is weighed heavily because it cuts down on admissions guess work. Not exactly an easy thing to produce, basically double course work (regular ed and magnet work) for 4 years. All-nighters started sophomore year.

So the point...the Huffman kid didn't need a test boast, and the second one apparently didn't get one. And maybe they figured it out alone the way. The other thing, if a portfolio or sample work is involved, different situation, could be a tipping point. Proof of ability could another way in. The funny thing is, the niece didn't care, didn't even want to go to college. Didn't know it was a deal. My sister was shocked her kid got in...then relieved.

A tip of the cap to any parent going through the process. Looks like crazy making with side of personal hell or anxiety.

The question I have now is how do you reform this mess? Or can reform even be attempted?

GivemTheAxe said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

Am I the only one that finds this, at least from a moral standpoint and harming-of-others standpoint, pretty mild?

I get why it's a big story (the rich elite white collar crime is always sensational) and it's unequivocally shady, but I think ultimately inconsequential. In theory, they are keeping a few seats from other more deserving who will end up at other excellent schools as a result.

---

Let me explain this to you. And I want to start by saying I'm not mad at you. I may get emotional in my writing because I'm outraged by this whole story and the whole process. This is very personal for me.

I have a kid who is a junior in high school and one coming up 3 years behind. So this is very real for me right now. I see my kid and her friends going through this. And it is not just the process of applying to college but it is the whole academic career.

The percentage of people applying to college has skyrocketed. It is not like when I was in school. Schools that were safety schools when I applied are now classified as elite. When I applied, I could afford to turn up a middle finger at "elite" private schools (and I did) because I put in the effort got the grades, and I couldn't be sure I'd get into every college I applied to, but I could be sure I'd get into most of them. That is not how it is now. Kids with perfect GPA's and perfect test scores and good extacurricular accomplishments can find themselves at UC Santa Cruz wondering why.

Kids who want an elite college experience now grow up working really hard for it. They make sacrifices. They stay up late working on their studies many nights. They develop themselves in ways outside of school. And you watch your kid doing that. And you watch her friends that do that. And you watch her friends who DON'T do that.

See, here is the thing. You go and look at the test scores for each school. Now what they do is report the range of test scores from the 25th percentile in the admitted class to the 75th in the admitted class. So you look at a school you like and say you see 25th is a 29 on the ACT and 75th is a 32. Well, I've got a perfect 36. And I have all A's. And I have great activities. This is a safety school for me, right? Wrong. Because who knows how they decide that kids that would be in the 99th percentile academically in the class don't qualify, but they do. It's not just a handful. It is a lot.

At this point, getting good grades and test scores buys you a lottery ticket. That is it. There is no sure way to get in anywhere. You can't work harder than your peers, be more talented than your peers, be smarter than your peers. That doesn't do it.

And then you look and you see the rate of acceptance for legacy admissions for some of these schools. And then you see a kid who you've known all your life who has slacked off all his life get into an Ivy. An Ivy he doesn't want to go to because he hates school. He's embarrassed to go. His friends give him the business, nicely but persistently. And he knows they are right. But Mom and Dad want him to go. (true story).

And then you read something like this article where literally half the kids in certain zip codes are having their parents pay doctors to diagnose them with a learning disability so they can have 2 days to take a test instead of 4 hours. HALF. And the parents think this is okay. And the doctors think this is okay. Personally, I think they all should go to jail and the doctors should permanently lose their license. Howe despicable do you need to be to pose as handicap. Would they fake paralysis to get an advantage? Would you think that is okay?

And then you see rich parents get their kids trained in some stupid little sport that is extremely expensive, like sailing, and get them into some school that has a Division III program. Or, Dad will put up seed money for a business, run the business in his kid's name, and pretend like the kid spent his high school years running a profitable business when he had nothing to do with it.

And now they go beyond all of that and just buy their way in? Sure thing.

Look, when you see kids grow up smarter and better and more talented, and you see them put in literally thousands of hours more work to develop themselves and you know they would kick that kid's ass in the classroom if given a shot because they've kicked that kid's ass all their lives, it does not seem like a minor moral transgression. It is not like there are tons of spots and a handful of them go to someone undeserving. There are not nearly enough slots for all the talented hard working kids. To jump the line for your lazy, dumbass kid who doesn't need or want the opportunity is disgraceful. If they stole $50 from a liquor store, they'd be in jail. They take an opportunity from someone worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and it is a minor moral transgression.

I would submit to you that if you walked around with a high school kid who truly has the talent and work ethic to make the most of the opportunity, you wouldn't feel this way. Yeah, they'll be successful. They deserved better. They deserved that kid's slot. And I guarantee you they do not view the harm as mild.

They need to put the fear of god into these parents. No one should feel safe faking a kid's learning disability after this. I hope they get extensive jail sentences for this. That is the only thing they can't buy their way out of. I do not resent wealthy people. I resent takers. These people are takers.

---

Excellent post. I'll also add that the parents involved are implicitly (although I bet they'd be quite happy to be explicit about it) saying that college is not for pursuing knowledge or broadening one's perspective or any of those lofty goals. It's for making connections and having bragging rights. And they also believe that once their kids are attending USC or one of the other schools in question, they'll be able to skate through with the same effort (or lack thereof) they exhibited in high school. This is the crux of the "deal" that most private universities (especially USC, Stanford, etc) make with the parents: you send your kid here and if they make even minimal effort, we'll be sure they get a degree. I know parents of USC and Harvard grads who both heard that speech - it's carefully coded, but it's clear what they meant.

---

I agree with all of the foregoing comments and want to add that the "grade inflation" or "no one gets a grade lower than a B" at most of the "highly selective" private colleges is part of their complicity in the overall process Once a student gets in, that student WILL graduate with a B average

The official rationale often provided for 'this policy has been. "We know there Student are smart and work hard. Otherwise they could not have been admitted.
So it would be unfair to give these students grades lower than a B when they are all competing against other smart and hardworking students. Grades below a B would not fairly represent their instead intelligence and their hard work."

BTW I have heard that rationale expressed by a representative of Brown University when my kids were taking an official tour of that campus given for prospective students.

---

A frequent poster here from Stanford in the old days who was much loved by many as "reasonable" and much reviled by others who saw through his act expressed the exact same sentiment to me by email. He then added that the reason why Cal had a much lower average GPA at the time was not because Cal graded harder than Stanford. It was because that is what the quality of student at Cal deserved. It was not said as a joke or a troll. He was completely serious and clueless to the fact that I would be offended. He clearly believed the statement was inherently true. I cut off private communications and did my best to expose the ass on the board.

Another Stanford poster at the time who was a decent guy tried to defend the guy as not elitist. I privately sent him quotes and he responded with something like "Okay, He's on his own. Have at it" and never defended the guy after that.

Another Bear said:

---

It turns out my niece went to the same HS as one of the Huffman kids, LA County Art Magnet. Interesting to hear what her parents have said about the process and LACAM, that a portfolio, sample work or live auditions are involved, the process is different. Test scores don't mean that much, although they were obviously worried and they didn't know the process going in.

The niece got into UCLA this year. She had a 1,300 SAT and a 3.8 GPA. That sure seems low doesn't it..until you factor in the portfolio. Also she was no slouch, won visual artist of year two years running. It's been mentioned that she was accepted only as an Art major...but it has a 8% acceptance rate.

In any case, the paid application consultant said not to even bother with UCLA, she will not get it. The school counselor however said, just apply but make sure you apply. Apparently the school counselor knew something...that proof of ability (aka portfolio) is weighed heavily because it cuts down on admissions guess work. Not exactly an easy thing to produce, basically double course work (regular ed and magnet work) for 4 years. All-nighters started sophomore year.

So the point...the Huffman kid didn't need a test boast, and the second one apparently didn't get one. And maybe they figured it out alone the way. The other thing, if a portfolio or sample work is involved, different situation, could be a tipping point. Proof of ability could another way in. The funny thing is, the niece didn't care, didn't even want to go to college. Didn't know it was a deal. My sister was shocked her kid got in...then relieved.

A tip of the cap to any parent going through the process. Looks like crazy making with side of personal hell or anxiety.

The question I have now is how do you reform this mess? Or can reform even be attempted?

---

It's "Los Angeles County High School for the Arts," or "LACHSA" (pronounced "Lock-suh").

A few of my friends from junior high went there, and they reported smoking out with the teachers. It's located at Cal State L.A.

LACHSA isn't a magnet school and it isn't part of the LAUSD.




I'm pointing that out because my high school is actually the Los Angeles Unified School District visual arts magnet.

The student body of my high school looked like this in 1967:






In the 1970s, they started allowing more black, Latino and Asian students -- including Prince Harry's mother-in-law -- making it more diverse:




That prompted white flight.

To encourage white students to attend, my high school established a visual arts magnet in 1981 and bused white kids in from the suburbs. Some of those kids ended up transferring to LACHSA.

(My high school is currently 8% white.)

Fairfax High, alma mater of Cal's Darrell Haley, was the ish in the late 70's.

Fyght4Cal said:

---

Fairfax High, alma mater of Cal's Darrell Haley, was the ish in the late 70's.

---

Yes, indeed.