UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors • Hacker News Board

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#111

Post by barkingcat » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:14 PM UTC

I don't think it's inappropriate and also not unexpected. It is inappropriate to pretend to have an impartial process when money drives the admission process for as long as the American universities (either public or private alike) have existed.

It's a part of the nature of these schools that money/donors get kids into school. That's the way it's always been, and it's worth saying it up front. That's the first step.

And face it, this is the reason UC Berkely, etc are so great. It's because there are donors supplying a huge stream of funding dollars. Without these kinds of favours, UC Berkeley will be a 4th or 5th rate school.

You want that new lab or that new library wing? Accept some kids with rich families. That's how it works.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#112

Post by amithassan » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:14 PM UTC

beervirus wrote: post #61

Abolish legacy admissions. Abolish race-based admissions. Pure meritocracy.

But who decides what merit is, and who deserves it?

And certain kinds of merit can come primarily/only from high caste individuals. How do you choose merit that isn't coloured in race or otherwise?

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#113

Post by syspec » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:16 PM UTC

blobbers wrote: post #92

I have not attended an american school. People seem to want robotic admission standards. Is there no room for circumstance? Does a donation to the school that helps improve the quality of the school and the research need to come without strings attached? Should the rich be required to have such purity of intention? Or should they only donate to private schools where they can legally have influence? By being the child…

> I think the person writing this report clearly has an agenda, as can bee seen in the level of sensationalism in the clip art.

It is a non-editorialized factual report by the office auditor of CA. It's literally their job to audit things

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#114

Post by tshaddox » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:16 PM UTC

TrackerFF wrote: post #42

In this day and age, with all the fierce competition, it's a real problem that elite universities are admitting rich kids on such unfair and uneven grounds. Going to the "correct" school can transform the life of some people, essentially pulling them up from the lower working classes, and opening up the doors to middle, or even upper-middle classes. And what's even worse, a lot of these rich kids could go pretty much…

It's probably true that generally rich kids could go to school pretty much anywhere and be okay, and that non-rich kids can have their lives transformed for the better by going to a reputable school. But isn't the latter due to the fact that people with power associate reputable schools with elite social status? Presumably if rich kids stopped going to a reputable school, it wouldn't take long for that school's reputation to diminish, even if the actual merit's of the education provided by the school didn't change.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#115

Post by _pd19 » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #89

People are always going to use their money to buy status. So as long as these college offer prestige & status, people with money are going to use it to get in. Much like doping in sports, you have two paths you can take: try to combat cheating, or accept the cheating as part of the game. I think these universities should accept that they are providing an education, but they are selling prestige, and split their admis…

The problem is that you can only sell prestige if there is strategic ambiguity between the two categories.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#116

Post by slivanes » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #89

People are always going to use their money to buy status. So as long as these college offer prestige & status, people with money are going to use it to get in. Much like doping in sports, you have two paths you can take: try to combat cheating, or accept the cheating as part of the game. I think these universities should accept that they are providing an education, but they are selling prestige, and split their admis…

Imagine seeing that type of perverse qualification for sports teams? Some players that pay for the privilege to play, others through dedication and skill. Is this the type of spectacle you would want to watch? Actually, maybe seeing some spoilt rich brat getting creamed on a football field would be worth admission.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#117

Post by TimTheTinker » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

sudosysgen wrote: post #103

TimTheTinker wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all!! Not sure where you got that. I think this business of improper admission and bribes violates rule of law terribly. That's the point -- rule of law means everyone is subject to the same rules, without partiality.

Well no, that's not really what rule of law means. It would be perfectly within the rule of law to allow people to pay for admissions. If this wasn't a public institution, it would be perfectly legal, and I'm not even sure it's illegal here. Rule of law is not sufficient, power also needs to be distributed correctly for rule of law to lead to good outcomes.

> It would be perfectly within the rule of law to allow people to pay for admissions

Not if a law exists to the contrary. And that was the point I was agreeing with -- the solution should be to write a law if one doesn't already exist; or to enforce it if it does.

> power also needs to be distributed correctly for rule of law to lead to good outcomes

Agreed, though distribution isn't the word I'd use, as it implies the existence of another human authority to determine how it should be distributed (thus granting that person or group of people improper power).

But if the placement of power is determined by duly enacted law, that's acceptable.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#118

Post by fiftyfifty » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

ihumanable wrote: post #104

centimeter wrote: post #82

Letting in a few subpar students to raise millions of dollars that can help more qualified students is a perfectly reasonable tradeoff.

Was it millions of dollars? I saw one donor give a few thousand and one person get admitted for babysitting. Almost all the donations in the report went directly to athletic departments, which would only seem to help student athletes and not academically qualified students that were bumped.

You've got to admire the kid that got in for babysitting for the director of undergraduate admissions...maybe they are smarter than most of the other applicants or they just happened to live next door.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#119

Post by ffggvv » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #97

ffggvv wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> it was legal until the 90s so it was legal until then but didn’t make a dent in inequality? but i’m sure it’ll work this time!

> so it was legal until then but didn’t make a dent in inequality? It did make a dent in inequality. It didn't end it, but then it wasn't around nearly as long as the structural disadvantages that entrenched inequality, and it was a much gentler push than those it sought to mitigate the effects of.

it’s been legal since the 70s outside of california and outcomes for minorities have steadily gotten worse not better.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#120

Post by spullara » Tue, Sep 22, 2020, 9:17 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #89

People are always going to use their money to buy status. So as long as these college offer prestige & status, people with money are going to use it to get in. Much like doping in sports, you have two paths you can take: try to combat cheating, or accept the cheating as part of the game. I think these universities should accept that they are providing an education, but they are selling prestige, and split their admis…

Then they could just run a dutch auction for the spots!