<p>To the OP:</p>
<p>Nuh-UH.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Nuh-UH.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a public discussion board for MIT-related subjects,
not an MIT-internal BBS. Accept the fact that discussion will
occur that may or may not be cheerleading. The OP has in fact
been one of the more cogent posters on this subject; here is an example that went unanswered:</p>
<p>"While no one runs a one woman admissions process, leaders who are as opinionated and vocal as Ms. Jones do not surround themselves with dissent. There will invariably be a tendency to hire and promote those who share the views of the director. While this does not taint every admissions decision made during her tenure, it does indicate that this problem runs a little deeper than Ms. Jones. MIT will have to start healing by accepting that a critical agenda was put in place by the most appalling source and that the university is obliged to review the legitimacy of the process, and not just its leader." [emphasis added]</p>
<p>Stu Schmill is only temporarily appointed as head of admissions. What the long-term management will be remains to be seen. In my opinion, only visible faculty control or oversight, including the freedom to replace Jones-era personnel to whatever extent needed, will fully restore confidence.</p>
<p>"The school allowed the process to be led and changed by a woman lacking both integrity and basic qualifications.
It is a time for the university to introspect about what went wrong and what changes should be made. They should acknowledge that some applicants may have been treated unfairly as a result of the leadership of a wholly unsuitable person."</p>
<p>This made me laugh. IMO, MIT doesn't have to change anything. What's wrong with the admissions process as is? Someone tell me. Each applicant is evaluated based on his/her education, personal, and cultural contexts. Over the years, Marilee Jones has worked hard to make the applications and applying to colleges less stressful. I personally find it almost impossible how people justify that certain applicants are treated "unfairly" without having read or seen their applications within the context of the entire applicant pool. There's a lot to complain about in the admissions process because it's getting so competitive. But MIT makes each decision in order to complement the entire class. Tons of qualified applicants don't get in.</p>
<p>And I still don't understand how Marilee's personal mistake misrepresenting her degrees has to do with the fact that the admissions process is tainted.</p>
<p>To characterize Jones' actions as a personal mistake and irrelevant to the process is to place integrity of leadership very low on the list of key factors that shape an organization.</p>
<p>Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.</p>
<p>Expecting the university to reassess and reevaluate Jones' impact on the system in light of recent revelations is a far cry from casting stones at Ms. Jones.</p>