College Admission Scandals Have Been Going on Forever

[Augie]

5 hours ago, Uncle Joe said:

wrestle?

 

Put him on a bus? 

[Uncle Joe]

10 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Put him on a bus? 

My college roommate (frosh and soph years) was a wrestler and let me know how good the wrestling program was at Slippery Rock.

So I thought the comment somewhat apropos.

[Augie]

1 minute ago, Uncle Joe said:

My college roommate (frosh and soph years) was a wrestler and let me know how good the wrestling program was at Slippery Rock.

So I thought the comment somewhat apropos.

Cool. Plenz was a swimmer/water polo guy. He be crazy, and so are the wrestlers! That’s some serious endurance! Both more than I was ever good for. Rugby was easy compared to THAT! 

[DC Tom]

On 11/6/2019 at 6:14 PM, Irv said:

Does anybody actually think George Bush Sr. and Jr. and the Kennedy clan all deserved admission to Ivy League schools?  Felicity Huffman and Lori Laughlin are just following in the footsteps of hundreds of our forefathers.  I think it's pretty naive to think people have not been buying their way into prestigious institutions like Harvard and Yale forever.  Now they are going to jail for what slimy politicians and the blue bloods have been doing for years.   They were wrong but this crap has been going on forever.  Just ask Hunter Biden.  

 

 

 

The difference is that it's not illegal to pay your way in to a school.  It is, however illegal to purchase a fraudulent scholastic record and bribe school officials to accept it.

 

  

[Uncle Joe]

7 minutes ago, Augie said:

Cool. Plenz was a swimmer/water polo guy. He be crazy, and so are the wrestlers! That’s some serious endurance! Both more than I was ever good for. Rugby was easy compared to THAT! 

I bet my 134# roommate my frosh year he couldn't pin me.

He won the 1/2 case in the 1st period. 
By my sophomore year he had taught me a lot about wrestling.

Edited November 8, 2019 by Uncle Joe

[Augie]

10 minutes ago, Uncle Joe said:

I bet my 134# roommate my frosh year he couldn't pin me.

He won the 1/2 case in the 1st period. 
By my sophomore year he had taught me a lot about wrestling.

 

We actually had wrestling in middle school PE. I was pretty darn good at it against the average toad in PE. The most important thing I learned was.....do NOT mess with REAL wrestlers! That is SERIOUS stuff! 

[RochesterRob]

59 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

The difference is substantial. Money donated to the school, which money benefits all the students vs. money going to the personal pocket of some admissions person/coach. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFia7FhVmuM

  The ends justifies the means?  A substandard student gains entry and the campus gets a new building so everybody is a winner?  More like a deserving student gets the shaft because their family did not win life's lottery.  That aside the money virtually never falls in a way where all the students benefit.  How does the Elizabethan Poetry major benefit from a new wing added to the law school?  It's like you have never been on the campus of a major university to hear all the cross talk on undeserving students.  It takes more than money to get an undeserving student into a curriculum without the instructors and other students placing that person on a firing line.  The record of the undeserving student would have to be cleaned up (lies) to get instructors to work with this student.  Are you saying that fabricating a record does not matter?  

[Sundancer]

10 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  The ends justifies the means?  A substandard student gains entry and the campus gets a new building so everybody is a winner?  More like a deserving student gets the shaft because their family did not win life's lottery.  That aside the money virtually never falls in a way where all the students benefit.  How does the Elizabethan Poetry major benefit from a new wing added to the law school?  It's like you have never been on the campus of a major university to hear all the cross talk on undeserving students.  It takes more than money to get an undeserving student into a curriculum without the instructors and other students placing that person on a firing line.  The record of the undeserving student would have to be cleaned up (lies) to get instructors to work with this student.  Are you saying that fabricating a record does not matter? t

 

A donation to the school is less money needed to be paid by tuition to secure some benefit. 

 

The bribe buys a coach a BMW. 

 

This ain't rocket science. One is better and not a crime...And rare. 

Edited November 8, 2019 by Sundancer

[RochesterRob]

34 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

A donation to the school is less money needed to be paid by tuition to secure some benefit. 

 

The bribe buys a coach a BMW. 

 

This ain't rocket science. One is better and not a crime...And rare. 

  I've never heard of a reduction in tuition because somebody donated a million dollars or two.  Now if you want to talk about a scholarship to offset tuition that is a different matter but once again is seldom the case.  Usually a donation is made with the intention of buying hard assets such as land, buildings, or equipment.  It's sad to see people such as yourself to say it is OK to screw over a deserving student in favor of an undeserving student.  In a lot of universities there are only so many spots or chairs as they say so you can't assume they will make extra room for the non-privileged student.  As far as rarity goes if accomplishments are near equal you can bet the administrator has a wide latitude to work with in terms of doing a quid pro quo so in that respect it happens more than you think.  Just because something is not a crime by statute does not make it ethical or moral.  Maybe it should be a crime.

[SoTier]

On 11/6/2019 at 6:14 PM, Irv said:

Does anybody actually think George Bush Sr. and Jr. and the Kennedy clan all deserved admission to Ivy League schools?  Felicity Huffman and Lori Laughlin are just following in the footsteps of hundreds of our forefathers.  I think it's pretty naive to think people have not been buying their way into prestigious institutions like Harvard and Yale forever.  Now they are going to jail for what slimy politicians and the blue bloods have been doing for years.   They were wrong but this crap has been going on forever.  Just ask Hunter Biden.  

 

 

 

Agreed. 

 

"Legacy" = affirmative action for rich white folks.  At lesser institutions, it's favoring graduates' relatives in hopes of garnering a few thousand dollars in donations.  At prestigious institutions, it's giving slots to frequently unqualified candidates who are the children/grandchildren of wealthy, prominent alumni in exchange for millions  in donations.

[Sundancer]

9 hours ago, RochesterRob said:

  I've never heard of a reduction in tuition because somebody donated a million dollars or two.  Now if you want to talk about a scholarship to offset tuition that is a different matter but once again is seldom the case.  Usually a donation is made with the intention of buying hard assets such as land, buildings, or equipment.  It's sad to see people such as yourself to say it is OK to screw over a deserving student in favor of an undeserving student.  In a lot of universities there are only so many spots or chairs as they say so you can't assume they will make extra room for the non-privileged student.  As far as rarity goes if accomplishments are near equal you can bet the administrator has a wide latitude to work with in terms of doing a quid pro quo so in that respect it happens more than you think.  Just because something is not a crime by statute does not make it ethical or moral.  Maybe it should be a crime.

 

I didn't say there was a reduction in tuition. 

 

Scholarships are often given as the result of donations so it's not "seldom."

 

I never said it's "OK to screw over a deserving student."

 

Colleges are recruiting non-privileged and first generation students like mad right now and if they are qualified, they will get excellent treatment in admissions. 

 

Illegal quid pro quo is... illegal?

 

Donations should not be a crime. If you donate a building to a school, that's a boon to generations of students, and if the school (a private institution in most cases) admits a student as thanks to that donor, that admission more than benefits the many other students for years. 

 

Setting those issues aside, your post is right on!

[SoTier]

10 hours ago, Sundancer said:

 

A donation to the school is less money needed to be paid by tuition to secure some benefit. 

 

The bribe buys a coach a BMW. 

 

This ain't rocket science. One is better and not a crime...And rare. 

 

Alumni contributions seldom actually reduce tuition for all students.  The Ivies have monstrous endowments (which are used to provide a reliable revenue stream for operating expenses) and it took an expose by the media about a decade ago to embarrass schools like Harvard and Yale to give almost all students reduced or free tuition.  Most contributions to colleges go into endowment and building funds -- often for building Taj Mahal-like sports facilities -- as well as providing inflated salaries for institution administrators, big name professors, and football and basketball coaches.  Donations to scholarship funds are the only dollars that are actually earmarked to help students with college costs with the income from those scholarship funds.

[Sundancer]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

Alumni contributions seldom actually reduce tuition for all students.  The Ivies have monstrous endowments (which are used to provide a reliable revenue stream for operating expenses) and it took an expose by the media about a decade ago to embarrass schools like Harvard and Yale to give almost all students reduced or free tuition.  Most contributions to colleges go into endowment and building funds -- often for building Taj Mahal-like sports facilities -- as well as providing inflated salaries for institution administrators, big name professors, and football and basketball coaches.  Donations to scholarship funds are the only dollars that are actually earmarked to help students with college costs with the income from those scholarship funds.

 

Some of this is true and that's why my sentence was written the way it was. 

 

Tuitions rose because the government backed student loans. All that extra money, intended to help students who couldn't afford tuition, poured money into the system that resulted in massive tuition increases.

 

 

Late 70s, and into the 80s to today were an era of massive federal student loan expansion (the bright green in the bars below). 

 

 

The tuition at a school these days is less an amount to be paid, and more the amount that will be paid if you're rich. Colleges get a lot of PR saying they give need-based scholarships in massive amounts but what they really do is have a target tuition (let's say 40K) they have to get in the door, and charge people who can afford it the sticker price of 55K and those who cannot a lesser price of say the 40K they really need for their budget, and can make that 15K difference into a need based "scholarship" that looks like a great effort of good will, but it's really just an inflated number that was reduced. It's a strange system, and the only truth in college financial aid and admissions is that everyone feels screwed.

 

Which is amusing because our university system is the envy of the world as it should be. But we Americans can sure whine about the good life!  

Edited November 8, 2019 by Sundancer

[row_33]

how much of a total dweeb must the kids be to have to go to this extent?

 

 

i remember one complete loser and grub at the back of Calculus class, i was hoping at least he was a brain, but he got 4% on the midterm and nobody ever saw him again

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 11/6/2019 at 5:14 PM, Irv said:

Does anybody actually think George Bush Sr. and Jr. and the Kennedy clan all deserved admission to Ivy League schools?  Felicity Huffman and Lori Laughlin are just following in the footsteps of hundreds of our forefathers.  I think it's pretty naive to think people have not been buying their way into prestigious institutions like Harvard and Yale forever.  Now they are going to jail for what slimy politicians and the blue bloods have been doing for years.   They were wrong but this crap has been going on forever.  Just ask Hunter Biden. 

 

Everyone knows if the school library is named after your grandfather, or for that matter if your parents and grandparents are alums, you go into another admission pile at an Ivy League.

 

The thing is it's all sub rosa.  Actually lying and bribing seems like a different level.

 

[Sundancer]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Everyone knows if the school library is named after your grandfather, or for that matter if your parents and grandparents are alums, you go into another admission pile at an Ivy League.

 

 

It's not just Ivy League. They are only a handful of schools. 

 

All private schools do this. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, Sundancer said:

It's not just Ivy League. They are only a handful of schools. 

All private schools do this. 

 

Well, no.  Not ALL.  But to your point, most of them do.

[row_33]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

It's not just Ivy League. They are only a handful of schools. 

 

All private schools do this. 

 

they have to do this to survive

 

[SoTier]

3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

 

Some of this is true and that's why my sentence was written the way it was. 

 

Tuitions rose because the government backed student loans. All that extra money, intended to help students who couldn't afford tuition, poured money into the system that resulted in massive tuition increases.

 

 

Late 70s, and into the 80s to today were an era of massive federal student loan expansion (the bright green in the bars below). 

 

 

The tuition at a school these days is less an amount to be paid, and more the amount that will be paid if you're rich. Colleges get a lot of PR saying they give need-based scholarships in massive amounts but what they really do is have a target tuition (let's say 40K) they have to get in the door, and charge people who can afford it the sticker price of 55K and those who cannot a lesser price of say the 40K they really need for their budget, and can make that 15K difference into a need based "scholarship" that looks like a great effort of good will, but it's really just an inflated number that was reduced. It's a strange system, and the only truth in college financial aid and admissions is that everyone feels screwed.

 

Which is amusing because our university system is the envy of the world as it should be. But we Americans can sure whine about the good life!  

 

That's a very partisan and elitist statement -- and it's untrue.  Maybe it's not where you're coming from, but most of the proponents of this view are the same people who advocate subsidizing private elementary and secondary education via vouchers; are always worried about "unqualified" people  color being admitted to prestigious educational institutions while being just fine with "unqualified" children of alumni taking spots at competitive colleges, etc; and who actively promote the idea that college degrees are unnecessary when, in fact, statistical data shows just the opposite.

 

The rise in the cost of tuition coincides with the decline of government support for higher education, especially on the state level with aid to public colleges and universities; with the rampant inflation of the 1970s and 1980s which raised costs for all organizations and businesses; with the unionization of collegiate faculties which raised the wages of teaching and research staff; and finally, a massive increase in demand, especially for prestigious schools. 

 

Except for the issue of government support, these same factors have resulted in massive tuition increases in private elementary and secondary schools where government backed loans have never existed.  

[Sundancer]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

That's a very partisan and elitist statement -- and it's untrue.  Maybe it's not where you're coming from, but most of the proponents of this view are the same people who advocate subsidizing private elementary and secondary education via vouchers; are always worried about "unqualified" people  color being admitted to prestigious educational institutions while being just fine with "unqualified" children of alumni taking spots at competitive colleges, etc; and who actively promote the idea that college degrees are unnecessary when, in fact, statistical data shows just the opposite.

 

The rise in the cost of tuition coincides with the decline of government support for higher education, especially on the state level with aid to public colleges and universities; with the rampant inflation of the 1970s and 1980s which raised costs for all organizations and businesses; with the unionization of collegiate faculties which raised the wages of teaching and research staff; and finally, a massive increase in demand, especially for prestigious schools. 

 

Except for the issue of government support, these same factors have resulted in massive tuition increases in private elementary and secondary schools where government backed loans have never existed.  

 

Inflation does explain the rise in college tuition except in very small part:

 

 

With more money in the form of loans, colleges found themselves flush with cash. What they didn't do with all that money was keep tuitions steady and build only necessary buildings for education. They built tons of new buildings in the university arms race to get more students, hired lots of administrators, and raised salaries. They did what most people (and government officials) do when they get more money. They spent the new money. Weeeeeee!

 

Then because they had more bills, they, wait for it, raised tuition. And started a cycle. 

 

Government funding flooding the university system wasn't the only factor in rising tuition but there's hardly an economist who's looked at this problem that doesn't identify it as the prime one. 

Edited November 8, 2019 by Sundancer