I don’t have ready access to tv these days but, from the picture posted with this discussion, it appears that Ms DeVos is morphing into another version of DJT with lighter (bloned) hair and tan (orange) complexion.
The large gifts are reported on both parties’ tax filings, and the gift is to the institution (though may be earmarked for a specific purpose), not directly to an employee of the institution, who may or may not spend the money to the institution’s benefit. There’s also the question of whether any of the scheme students received federal aid of any kind (thus this investigation), where it’s a pretty safe bet that the child of an 8 figure donor isn’t receiving aid. I also wonder if there are title IX issues given that someone worthy may have been displaced from a sports team.
3 Likes
It’s not entirely clear the extent to which the schools themselves are under suspicion.
1 Like
It also requests information about any employee or student implicated in the scheme, including any disciplinary action taken against employees, and student applications, letters of reference, exam scores, and records indicating if they received federal student aid.
So Mums and Dads paid half a million for coaches and bribes and then claim poverty for federal student aid?
1 Like
That is the fault of the university. There should be no quid pro quo for such gifts except as spelled out in the gift contract. Anything else violates basic rules of fairness - but of course we know these are violated all the time.
These recent cases I think are different - they have involved several types outright fraud - for example, cheating on standardized exams or providing false information (e.g., regarding athletic accomplishments) - enabled by bribery of college staff. Pretty awful stuff.
2 Likes
Really can’t comment specifically on what you say but I do agree in general that “legacy admits” are unfair.
They are also not particularly productive, but that’s another story.
1 Like
Hey, I’m all for that. Works for public schools. I guess private ones can use any standard they choose.
My more aggressive solution:
- Increase the number of seats in all these ‘elite’ schools. Scarcity has greatly increased the problem.
- Set reasonable minimum standards for application.
- Fill seats by lottery.
1 Like
In fact, many of the Ivy Leagues don’t use their massive endowments to cover student, faculty, or research spending. They just have bigger & bigger funds to manage. So their presidents are essentially money managers. Let’s them hang out with the hedge fund crowd.
1 Like
Just read how DeVos is cutting $17 million for the Special Olympics while giving $60 million more to charter schools. Incredible. Republicans work so hard to not look like movie villains and then they do something like this.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/betsy-de-vos-under-fire-over-special-olympics-budget-cuts-210604137.html
1 Like
- How?
- What do you mean by “reasonable”?
- A lottery that treats all applicants equally?
1 Like
As presented, the schools are not accused. But I guess there is always the ‘this happened on your watch’ concern.
E.g., a coach was bribed to claim kiddo was scouted for a sports team. That note was added to the file. But nobody from the admissions office checks the following year to see if kiddo is really on the team. Should somebody have noticed? Colleges are big operations; this fraudster operated on a small scale.
1 Like
That was my first thought, as well. The DoE is not in the business of regulating college admission practices - they’re in the business of regulating Federally-guaranteed student loans.
2 Likes
Ivy League endowment and endowment income are not used to provide any societal benefit?
There’s a real likelihood under DeVos that this will end up hurting the students at these universities who couldn’t afford to go without the federal student aid that’s under threat. Given all I’ve read of her, I could really see this becoming a play to ‘clean up’ these bastions of privilege, hiding the exclusion of even more students of marginalized background (by withholding these funds) under a pretense of penalizing the schools for looking the other way as this went on (which seems like a good possibility).
4 Likes
- Fair question, I only have vague answer for that. We could be building more schools. We could be expanding more schools. As many folks (not only me) have observed, we have been pushing for college-readiness & college attendance at a much faster rate than we have been increasing the number of college seats. That is a recipe for disaster.
- Colleges already have application standards. But then admissions officers add onion layers of competition. Those ‘personal’ essays that @castor_troy is rightly concerned about are only one. Many of the selective measures to find “the best” people are inherently problematic.
- Fuckin’ A! If we are a meritocracy, give everyone a chance to shine!
ok, I’ll add one more item, corollary to #3,
FUND more support systems to help kids navigate the college system. There are terrible stories about the ‘scholarship kids’ who get in, but then don’t have the family support system (or connections) to succeed. When they fail, it only serves the narrative that ‘those people’ are undeserving layabouts…
2 Likes
It is very clear: She is not an honest broker. She does not make good-faith arguments. She is a worthless grifter.
1 Like
But the essence of meritocracy is that not all people are treated equally …
Give me a better word for it, then.
1 Like
A purely random admissions lottery?
(If that’s what you mean I cannot be supportive.)
Wake me when they investigate how the Moron In Chafe got into Wharton.
1 Like