91–100 of 321 posts
This is pretty wild. Seeing the FBI tackle something like this is so far outside of the legal and cultural norms of society that it's difficult to even really comment on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is no secret It sounds like you agree, then? It should be public.
It is public. Universities almost always include the donation size when they put out press releases about the new building.
This might be more overt than the usual form, but how does this differ from donating a new building, department, or scholarship fund and subsequently getting your kid in? My mother did well in the Masters program at Stanford and I would have likely gotten in if she donated a couple million dollars but she didn’t and I didn’t (despite getting an invitation a year after accepting enrollment at another university). It’s…
When you "donate" $1.2m to a "consultancy" you're just committing fraud. Nobody benefits except your kid and the "consultancy." It's much easier to prove that this transaction is fraudulent.
So in this case the government is going after fraudsters because the government isn't getting paid, and neither is the school. I'd be willing to bet that the government would have continued looking the other way if a) the wealthy had paid taxes on their bribe or b) there was some indisputable asset one could point to and say "there's my donation!"
[flagged]
> Are paywalls ok? It's ok to post stories from sites with paywalls that have workarounds. In comments, it's ok to ask how to read an article and to help other users do so. But please don't post complaints about paywalls. Those are off topic.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/investigations-college-admis... Has a list of people and indictments/etc that have been filed so far.
*while also believing that, given the opportunity, I would choose to play it fair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s not corrupt.
The purpose of a research institution is to do research, not provide degrees to some selection of particularly smart young people. They will act in ways to increase the research they can do. People don’t deserve to be let in just because they are clever, they also should have some probability of furthering the research aims through their studying/paying fees. Why is it more unfair to let in someone who can pay for a…
Undergrads are pretty much irrelevant to major research institutions (e.g. my undergraduate alma mater MIT spends only about 16% of its budget on undergrads who are actually subsidized -- tuition is about 14% of revenue). Grad students are what matter and apart from the B school they are mostly paid (barely) to attend.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Donating a building is a payment to the university . The university then gets to decide to admit your child in return. It may not be meritocratic, but it's not corrupt (except perhaps insofar as by pretending the exchange is a donation, the university and donor manage to cheat the taxman). The donor is simply paying the university to provide a service that they have every right to offer for money. It also benefits ot…
Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s not corrupt.
It feels like having a purely merit based population of students would create a very stagnant and dull environment.
Probably the best way for an experienced engineer to get in at this point.
This might be more overt than the usual form, but how does this differ from donating a new building, department, or scholarship fund and subsequently getting your kid in? My mother did well in the Masters program at Stanford and I would have likely gotten in if she donated a couple million dollars but she didn’t and I didn’t (despite getting an invitation a year after accepting enrollment at another university). It’s…
How do you determine the parent's motives? I can't deny that parents use donations as a pay-to-play mechanic at colleges, but how do you guard against it? Do you ban kids from enrolling in or applying to colleges in which their parent's (or close relative) has donated to? My local college was a blessing to me. It provided me an education, a safe atmosphere, and most of all, confidence. It changed me for the better. I…
how do you guard against it? Do you ban kids from
enrolling in or applying to colleges in which
their parent's (or close relative) has donated to?
Obviously, people's opinion on that will depend on their opinion on things like admissions essays and extracurricular activities; anything like "I learned a good work ethic helping my father with his senate campaign" will have to go.
Blind grading after admission would be sensible too, for the same reasons. Although perhaps difficult in subjects where individual students' work was identifiable even without their name.