<p>Please read the link above - no where does it say the student cannot see the letter. It only says the college can choose not to show the letter if FERPA is waived. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OK, you are not understanding the legality here - FERPA APPLIES to the college(s) to which one applies, not to the person who wrote you the recommendation. </p>
<p>All the FERPA waiver says is that before enrollment the college has the legal right to not release the letter until after enrollment. A student or parent could still ask though and the college could still send if it wanted. It is a simple waiver, not some law set in stone. Waivers can be ignored, and many times are.</p>
<p>The big issue, however, is the argument makes no legal sense whatsoever re the recommender - the person writing the recommendation is not a party to the student FERPA waiver, does not sign the FERPA form, does not agree to the FERPA form anywhere, and therefore FERPA cannot pertain to the recommender or to the school from which the recommendation came. If that were the case, that is the first time someone or an entity is held responsible for rules he never had to see, read, sign, or agree to, i.e., it is the student who signs the waiver and the student does not represent or speak for any recommender. </p>
<p>@awcntdb @mikemac You guys… just ask what Princeton think about this, I’m sure they have a policy on this.
I’m guessing they will say this is cheating?</p>
<p>@lllllum What? She got a 4.0 for 80+? Talk about cheating…
I thought 90+ is 4.0. Anyone here can confirm this?</p>
Since my replies were directed to micmatt513’s belief that the author cannot show the letter to the student – all I can say is great, another poster unable to understand that FERPA is a restriction on the student demanding that the college where they enroll show them the letters of rec, and nothing more.</p>
<p>If Princeton or any other school considers getting accurate information about a candidate cheating, I would be surprised. (In this case, I consider cheating, as supplying inaccurate or non-truthful information)</p>
<p>I suspect any school would say the politically-correct answer in public and say they do not like the practice, but quietly ignore because what they would consider cheating is only if the information were not truthful or accurate. If the information is correct, Princeton, in reality, has the best information necessary to make a knowledgeable, informed decision, which is what it really wants to do.</p>
<p>The question I would also ask Princeton is would if it rather have all available truthful, accurate information about a candidate or not? I bet the answer would be yes. And as long as a respected third party attests to and verifies said info that is all, I also bet, they are concerned about. </p>
<p>Anyway, legally, if a school has a problem, it is very easy to solve - have a short form that recommenders electronically sign, which says they agree not to show the letter to applicants. Can be done in three sentences and take 1 minute to sign. The fact that schools have not done as much tells me volumes.</p>
<p>@awcntdb
What exactly is “accurate information”?</p>
<p>In her book, there’s a recommendation letter she wrote, she used a bunch of good words like
“exceptional young lady, intellectual acumen, lofty kindness, extraordinary independence and maturity, unquestionable excellence, has strong logic and broad knowledge, superior oral skills, a gifted student, remarkable young lady, sufficiently qualified for college”, etc.</p>
<p>Sounds more like exaggeration and narcissism than accurate information.</p>
<p>Since she seems like quite the creative writer, perhaps she at least wrote her own essays? Wonder how many at Princeton didn’t do that? Or how many had parents that paid someone to fill out the CA? </p>
<p>“Board meetings at my high school would surprise you - it was all the business of student into the top colleges. And yes, for most top schools that is their business, and if you think teachers are neutral to that effort, dream on.”</p>
<p>Unfortunately this is just one more way that schools are not on a level playing field. At our school teachers and GCs 100% write the LOR. You are not asked for resumes, or brag sheets, or buzz words or Mommy and Daddy’s input. S’s GC even came right out and said that he includes negatives in every LOR…seriously? He feels it gives the LOR credibility-that it makes it a true assessment of the student, and everyone has room for growth. I don’t disagree, but the problem is, that is not the approach other schools are taking. </p>
<p>The letters are a joke, the essays are a joke…seriously though, admissions officers don’t live in a bubble, they KNOW this, right? I hope? Please?</p>
<p>The whole process is a “joke” filled with bias, discrimination, inequality, and arbitrariness at every level … But let’s not be too harsh, it has improved much in recent years and hopefully it’ll continue to do so.</p>
<p>On several levels, I agree with this, but for opposite positive reasons, as compared to the negative aspects implied by the post. </p>
<p>Nothing is ever without bias, as someone (or an some entity) always favors something. Discrimination to one is equivalent to having freedom to choose to another. Inequality to one is the same as having specific standards to another, as not all n=benchmarks are equal. Arbitrary to one is being able to employ all there aforementioned concepts (bias, discrimination and inequality) in one’s decision. </p>
<p>Basically, one man’s heaven is another man’s hell, but that does not mean one person is purposefully trying to harm another from an intentional negative standpoint.</p>