Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

auditor.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 456 posts

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#151

Post by vkou »

nirajd wrote: post #3

Not surprising at all; however, I am curious how someone who didn't meet the admissions criteria is able to graduate CAL with a passing GPA...

Admissions is a rat race, where you have to run as fast as you can just to keep up. You may have a 4.0 GPA, and 1550 on your SAT, and are the quarterback of the hockey team, but you'll be passed over for someone with a 4.0 GPA and a 1550 SAT, who is both the quarterback of the hockey team, AND spent three weeks building orphanages in East Oblastan.

Once you're admitted, you no longer need to participate in the rat race. You just need to meet the criteria for passing your classes, which do not scale up, just because the person sitting next to you in lecture is an orphanage-builder.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#153

Post by kenhwang »

sudosysgen wrote: post #85
TimTheTinker wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Completely agreed. The idea that we have to "tear it all down" and institute Marxism is backward and self-contradictory. As you said, we need to identify where and how rule of law is lacking and fix it, making sure that representative government and separation of powers remains intact (or is put in place again).

Do you actually believe that letting people pay for guaranteed enrollment is at all acceptable?

There was a study suggesting the strongest social mobility influence granted by an university education is really just the proximity and opportunity to network with the wealthy on even grounds more than the education itself.

So by having a guaranteed ratio of very wealthy mixed into your student pool, it's hugely beneficial to everyone else. It's practically the reason people chase after prestigious MBA educations.

The practice might be distasteful philosophically, but the results are apparently great.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#154

Post by awillen »

Balgair wrote: post #130
setgree wrote: post #84

If you had asked me yesterday what percent of students I thought got into UC schools due to personal connection or wealth, I would have estimated between 10-20%. But this report seems to suggest otherwise: > In Violation of University Policy, the Campuses We Reviewed Admitted 64 Applicants Because of Their Families’ Donations and Connections > UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted 42 other applicants the UC schools as…

Since when were Water Polo, Golf, or Volleyball rich person sports? Costs are pretty cheap at public courses. Beach Volleyball, I guess, kinda, but sand is pretty cheap even in cold weather climates. Crew, sure. The 'field' is hard to get things to, typically. Lacrosse, well, maybe 20 years ago, but it's everywhere now. Now, (horse) Polo and Dressage. Those are rich people sports.

Where on earth do you think inner city kids are playing water polo and golf? Just because golf courses aren't that expensive to play on doesn't mean they're accessible to poor people (plus there's the cost of clubs, obviously).

And water polo... even if there are public pools near you, they probably aren't dedicating space for competitive water polo.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#155

Post by kneel »

blakesterz wrote: post #14
whalesalad wrote: post #9

I am really impressed by the reporting format here. The illustrations are fantastic.

Wow. I wasn't really sure what to expect, but you're right. Whoever designed this did a GREAT job.

Academia is filled with administrators who make powerpoint presentations, it's not a complete waste.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#156

Post by MiroF »

TedShiller wrote: post #56

Rather than claim that students are admitted based on test scores and grades alone, why don't universities simply say that admissions are also based on factors such as how influential or wealthy the parents are? Doing so would not be a problem, the only problem is not being transparent about it. Stanford is very clear about the fact that "legacy" applicants (meaning their parents or siblings are at Stanford and presu…

> meaning their parents or siblings are at Stanford and presumably the family will be active donors

Not going out to bat for legacy admissions, but it's not always tit-for-tat related to donations and there are other reasons schools do it other than just $$$ from donations.

The uber-rich aren't getting in through a generic legacy boost.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#157

Post by ghaff »

MiroF wrote: post #137
belorn wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are three systems. People who pay their way in, people who has the highest grades, and people who get in through diversity quota. Transparency in all three would cause a major waves into the public perspective of admission practices.

Cal doesn't have a "diversity quota."

Every competitive school has a diversity goal (though perhaps not outright quota) at some level for many dimensions of diversity. Many/most schools have academic floors but are then looking to blend in other factors other than pure academic achievement.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#158

Post by blobbers »

jackedtheripped wrote: post #122
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…

> Is there no room for circumstance? There is and there should be. Affirmative action has already been help up by the US supreme court. > Does a donation to the school that helps improve the quality of the school and the research need to come without strings attached? Yes. > Should the rich be required to have such purity of intention? Or should they only donate to private schools where they can legally have influenc…

So unqualified applicants have to pay a higher entrance fee than qualified applicants?

Now it is starting to sound like capitalism at work!!!

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#159

Post by samatman »

ianmobbs wrote: post #140
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…

> This system isn't "fair", but the outcome is effectively the same as our current setup. With the most notable difference being that, at least this system is transparent and acknowledges that X% of incoming students paid for their post. With the current setup, there are consequences to trying to pay your way in if you're caught. What's the point of removing those consequences?

Those consequences, in practice, simply act as an additional filter: you have to be savvy enough, and well-connected enough, to make a large alumni donation, and butter up the admissions committee.

This would replace that with cash on the barrel, which is simpler and more honest.

I'm not convinced it's better, but that would be the point of so doing.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#160

Post by MiroF »

ghaff wrote: post #157
MiroF wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cal doesn't have a "diversity quota."

Every competitive school has a diversity goal (though perhaps not outright quota) at some level for many dimensions of diversity. Many/most schools have academic floors but are then looking to blend in other factors other than pure academic achievement.

> diversity goal

Well, if Cal has one - it's not one that it can target through changing admission practices.

Post reply on HN