Al Gores son

<p>

The Duke admissions officer who fell in love with my son via his application and called him a day or so after he was accepted, emailed him constantly, asked to have dinner with us when we came to Durham (we did) and continues to regularly have my son to dinner at her home mentioned my son's passion REPEATEDLY in the conversations/emails and also at dinner with us. Funny, she never mentioned Kansas even once! ;) Could it be...could it REALLY BE...that his passion spoke more loudly than his hook? :confused:</p>

<p>I'd say so! :D</p>

<p>~berurah</p>

<p>The problem with stoners is the people they bring into their lives, and therefore the lives of other people around them (roommates).
A peer of my sons in hs was killed in a <em>home invasion</em> type deal which was drug related.
Who here would feel comfortable knowing that their kid's roommate was bringing sleazy drug dealers into their living arrangements? (don't everyone raise their hands at once)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Some schools are notorious for seeking out developmental admits- Duke for one.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Weren't special admissions well described by Rachel Toor in her book describing policies at the school she nicknamed the "Plantation" by borrowing that term from long-term employees. </p>

<p>Of course, I want to make clear that I did not intend to imply -- and have no evidence to suggest that Rachel Toor was credible. After all, she might have been in a deep mist during her entire career at Duke. or miss the obvious lack of parallels to her own alma mater, namely Yale with its seemingly distinctively different set of preferences by admission officers. </p>

<p>For a similar line, let's see what ABC's legal eagles came up for the usual CYA in one of those cases. </p>

<p>
[quote]
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=2954118&page=1%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=2954118&page=1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"Nightline" aired a report on November 2, 2006, about the college adissions process that focused on the advantages that candidates can have if they come from a wealthy family perceived as potential big donors to the school. In this regard, we reported on the admission into Duke of two children of the designer Ralph Lauren, who later made a six figure contribution to the university. We also noted that the then Vice Chancellor of Duke, Professor Joel Fleishman, recommended that the children be admitted to the university, solicited donations from the Lauren family, and later was appointed to the Ralph Lauren Company's board of directors. </p>

<p>We want to make clear that we did not intend to imply -- and have no evidence to suggest -- that Professor Fleishman's appointment to the Ralph Lauren board in 1998 was in exchange for or conditioned on the admission of the Lauren children to the school in 1989 and 1992.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ah the beauty of positing through generalizations and innuendos.</p>

<p>Yeah, but duke's former president was on the same program. He never disputed the implications that fleishman was compensated for the admission of the Lauren children.</p>

<p>[edited out - Mod JEM]</p>

<p>Trust me, Gate's kids will get the same kind of attention and 'love' for their 'hook'--times 150.</p>

<p>AS for stoners...man alive...that is not a path I'd recommend to anyone. I know plenty of 50 somethings who still make it a daily habit and it has deeply affected their productivity, their relationships--and the neurological health of their children. A daily pot habit is a form of extreme self-medication IMO.</p>

<p>So that this doesn't seem like a vilification of Duke, I'll add that the fact that their former president was willing to come out on national TV and basically acknowledge that development admits exist at Duke and that it's unfair is a real positive step.</p>

<p>One school might be impressed with a particular passion and another not so much. It varies from school to school and who else is in the applicant pool. </p>

<p>"Having a checkered past does not enrich anyone's life, IMO, unless you become a counselor for AA or something like that." Doubleplay, I hope you will re-think that absurd statement. I have run into SO many people- young and old-who have taught me a great deal due to the mistakes THEY have made in their lives and the lessons they are willing to share. In fact, I have received many, many PMs on this very forum thanking me for sharing my son's story and the things he did to get his life back on track. I happen to think he has enriched many lives and helped a number of his peers. (his issues did not involve drugs, academic dishonesty or violence- but if they did, I would likely feel the same way) Have you never been to any kind of 12 step meeting or group where someone shared a story and it deeply moved you and caused you to reflect on your own actions, good fortune and future? If not, you have my sympathy. I was told this by not one- but several- admissions people: "We would rather have a kid who has run into some trouble, figured out how to get back on course, and shown that he/she learned from it, than a kid who presents as 'perfect' who has never had a growing experience."</p>

<p>You know, there was a guy in my class that was suspended for smoking pot in his room in high school (residential dorm.) He was one of the top 50 people in the country in mathematics. He ended up going to a state school because he didn't want to go to an ivy (not into prestige,) but had he wanted to I would gladly admit that he deserved to go to any college in the country.</p>

<p>It's more that Al Gore III probably had mediocre stats and smoking pot was his big EC...I'm sure the kid is reasonably intelligent, but not Harvard-caliber.</p>

<p>Mowc,
I am not talking about your child.<br>
I understand that people who smoke weed can and are wonderful, beautiful, talented, and exceptionally intelligent (but not using their intelligence very wisely) people. But they also have to get it from somewhere, and in many cases that's from a criminal element (because pot has been criminalized- that's another debate). God knows I knew enough stoners in college and post-college. The people they had to associate with in many cases were downright scarey.</p>

<p>Berurah's son was an excellent admit (even if the Yale adrep did not think so--Yale's loss). But the question is, could he have attended Duke or any other private school without financial aid? And where do the funds for such generous financial aid come from? Rich donors.</p>

<p>Marite, I think most of the donations come from rich alum, not donors who are paying for their children's admission.</p>

<p>The growing experience I had with a drug user was having him get increasingly nasty and physically abusive. Couldn't figure it out for a while (blonde you know). After the latter we split and he eventually ended up getting caught up in a sting with a Colombian cocaine cartel.</p>

<p>Edit, everyone thinks that being a stoner is so benign. It isn't.</p>

<p>
[quote]
So that this doesn't seem like a vilification of Duke, I'll add that the fact that their former president was willing to come out on national TV and basically acknowledge that development admits exist at Duke and that it's unfair is a real positive step.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Indeed, admitting that problems exist is a positive step. One can hope, Duke uses the alphabet in picking its problems worth addressing ... *adm*issions should be just a little bit before *ath*letics.</p>

<p>Some of these posts are really personal and snarky. Kind of makes me glad my kids didn't go to a private LAC, or would people be coming on here trying to say he got in this or that way?</p>

<p>marite~</p>

<p>I can't thank you enough for your post #190. <em>Your</em> opinion happens to mean a great deal to me. Very healing after some of the things leveled at my son and me on this thread. </p>

<p>I have never said I take issue with donor admits. By the same token, I also have no issue with URM admits, athletic recruits, geographical diversity recruits, etc. And I don't. I just happen to think that there are enough intelligent, talented, responsible donor admits that the colleges would have little if any reason to scrape the bottom of the barrel in terms of those with very "at risk" resumes. That was all that I was EVER trying to say on this thread. </p>

<p>~berurah</p>

<p>Xiggi,
I am a proponent of the value ($) and excitement that athletes bring to a college.</p>

<p>
[quote]
their former president was willing to come out on national TV and basically acknowledge that development admits exist at Duke and that it's unfair is a real positive step

[/quote]
Yes- the FORMER president. Doesnt matter what he says. Big money = admission preference in a lot of cases.</p>

<p>^^true, but he is still a professor there and an important figure at the university...</p>

<p>It is very easy to sound sanctimonious when you are not the one in the hot seat as the president (doing fundraising) or head of admissions.</p>

<p>DP, I am also a big proponent of athletics in college and recognize the immense value the programs bring to the schools. However, this value cannot eclipse the lack of control at many reputed programs and its impact on the permitted behavior from coaches to recruits.</p>