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

91–100 of 456 posts

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#91

Post by sudosysgen »

wegs wrote: post #28
adaisadais wrote: post #12

Upon close examination I think we would find the ALL schools do this. This is just a symptom of the underlying problem with our education system in the US. It’s no longer about educating but about $. When the almighty dolla gets in the way judgment is clouded. Come to think of it... maybe this happens in politics and medicine too? ;)

All schools do NOT do this. I went to MIT: * MIT wouldn't be caught dead with JUST 64 students admitted on the basis of connections and donations. * MIT wouldn't be caught dead letting external auditors look at this stuff. * MIT wouldn't be caught. None of this would be public for MIT. That's what NDAs and non-disparage agreements are for. I'm sorry, but all schools don't do this. Most are smart enough to stay out of…

Well, 64 that we know of.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#92

Post by blobbers »

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 of a wealth donor, does the person being admitted (through this side channel) not have more potential impact on the world and thus more reason to be admitted?

On the other side, does the education have the most impact on the person who was denied entrance (bottom of the applicant pool), assuming they would get through to graduation. (utility of education)

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

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#93

Post by s17n »

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…

Better idea, let's outlaw legacy admissions.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#94

Post by nicoburns »

ipnon wrote: post #46
CharlesMerriam2 wrote: post #34

Have a rule. Our republic, and the California state government, is based on rule of law. One group makes the laws, another enforces it, and a third interprets the conflicts. This works. What we have here is a 'no rules' set of actions. How about rules that say "we will take any student for $200K/year". This is enough money to supply extra supervision and also give a full scholarship to another student.

The idea of privilege first entered the public sphere in the prelude to the French Revolution. "Privilege" in Old French literally means "private law".[1] It was the idea that a different set of rules for each of the Estates (Clergy, Nobles, and Commoners) was both fair and natural. Are we are starting to see similarly different sets of rules for each class in the United States? Is such privilege in accordance with o…

Starting? When has this not been the case?

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#95

Post by willturman »

lacker wrote: post #55

This is bad, but 64 students isn't all that much. It pales in comparison to private colleges. For example, Harvard accepts about 1/3 of its students as "legacy". If you believe the lawsuits about Harvard's anti-Asian discrimination, that also affects hundreds of potential Harvard students every year. Once you consider that UC Berkeley is about five times larger than Harvard, and that there are at least a dozen top-ti…

> It pales in comparison to private colleges.

As it should. One student admitted in this fashion is too many for a public university.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#96

Post by TheAdamAndChe »

ipnon wrote: post #46
CharlesMerriam2 wrote: post #34

Have a rule. Our republic, and the California state government, is based on rule of law. One group makes the laws, another enforces it, and a third interprets the conflicts. This works. What we have here is a 'no rules' set of actions. How about rules that say "we will take any student for $200K/year". This is enough money to supply extra supervision and also give a full scholarship to another student.

The idea of privilege first entered the public sphere in the prelude to the French Revolution. "Privilege" in Old French literally means "private law".[1] It was the idea that a different set of rules for each of the Estates (Clergy, Nobles, and Commoners) was both fair and natural. Are we are starting to see similarly different sets of rules for each class in the United States? Is such privilege in accordance with o…

It's always been there, it's just that social media is making it extremely easy for everyone to see it now.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#97

Post by dragonwriter »

ffggvv wrote: post #76
jedberg wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re-leaglize. It was legal until the 90s. When it became illegal, the diversity on campus dropped significantly. There is an argument to be made that the race-based admissions help make up for prior injustices.

>> 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.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#98

Post by geodel »

gibolt wrote: post #63
kenhwang wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 for 1 isn't worth it, and the UC system already plays that game with international students where one international pays for 3 in-states. Make the buy-in price pay for 10 and I'm in support.

1 for 10 seems reasonable, assuming there is also a strict academic requirement for that privileged student. Even more points if it supports their housing and food plan.

Further points if rich kids do household chores, cleaning, cooking etc for less privileged folks. Just strict academic requirement is not sufficient. Rich kids also have to remain in 95 percentile in academics. A further investigation committee need to be setup to investigate every year if rich kids are not using their influence to be among top students in their classes.

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#99

Post by Google234 »

selimthegrim wrote: post #80
wegs wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All schools do NOT do this. I went to MIT: * MIT wouldn't be caught dead with JUST 64 students admitted on the basis of connections and donations. * MIT wouldn't be caught dead letting external auditors look at this stuff. * MIT wouldn't be caught. None of this would be public for MIT. That's what NDAs and non-disparage agreements are for. I'm sorry, but all schools don't do this. Most are smart enough to stay out of…

I absolutely agree. Did you know if you have an NSF GRF as a grad student at MIT it costs a PI more to employ you than if you were on TA support? MIT takes more overhead and assumes the PI will just suck it up as he/she/they is "riding off MIT's brand" anyway. Numerous complaints to NSF run into the brick wall of " MIT"

Yes but TAing might take 30 hours a week. Anyway, MIT professors should be the best in their field, if they can’t support the small amount more it takes for the grad student with the NSF grants that sounds like a problem

Re: UC Berkeley inappropriately admitted students as favors to donors

#100

Post by vallard »

wegs wrote: post #28
adaisadais wrote: post #12

Upon close examination I think we would find the ALL schools do this. This is just a symptom of the underlying problem with our education system in the US. It’s no longer about educating but about $. When the almighty dolla gets in the way judgment is clouded. Come to think of it... maybe this happens in politics and medicine too? ;)

All schools do NOT do this. I went to MIT: * MIT wouldn't be caught dead with JUST 64 students admitted on the basis of connections and donations. * MIT wouldn't be caught dead letting external auditors look at this stuff. * MIT wouldn't be caught. None of this would be public for MIT. That's what NDAs and non-disparage agreements are for. I'm sorry, but all schools don't do this. Most are smart enough to stay out of…

I appreciate your zealousness for MIT but your response doesn't mean that it hasn't happened at MIT nor other revered places of higher learning in the past, just that it hasn't been made widely known. The people I associated with at Cal I thought were above this kind of behavior as well, but apparently not. I would be sad to hear about this for MIT or any other college. However there's a lot of deals that happen behind closed doors, and sadly, it could be more than we think given all the press we've heard about college admissions these last few years.
Post reply on HN