<p>This is about CMC, but it's at least mildly related:</p>
<p>First and foremost, it is a good college. Hopefully this is what CMC will be judged on and not the unfortunate deed of an individual.</p>
<p>How unfortunate that the CMC administration now has to spend precious time and resources trying to correct the actions of one very misguided individual. My sympathies.</p>
<p>^u sure bout that?</p>
<p>It’s an interesting question. One might suspect that the administration offers incentives (money, continued employment, etc) to admissions officers who are able to report improvement in the stats of the entering class. And once there’s an incentive, it’s not utterly shocking that an admissions officer might stretch the truth. I assume this was not the case at CMC, but it’s hard to deny that an admissions office at any highly competitive college or uni probably feels some stress about the need for continual improvement. </p>
<p>There was a similar situation recently at the University of Illinois law school, and the admissions director there either took the fall for failed policies, or was solely to blame. Speculation was rampant.</p>