<p>Obituaries ought to say nice things: She made a terrible mistake almost 30 years ago, but worked her way up from a secretarial post to become a national leader in her field. She was responsible for thousands of brilliant women getting an MIT education, women who, in turn, have helped to transform the place of women in fields long dominated by men (this was one of her areas before becoming Dean). Despite working at one of the most competitive universitites in the country, she was the poster child for a humane, less stressful admissions world. And she kept athletics and academics in balance in the admissions process in a way that's both admirable and unusual. It's hard not to be at least a little ambivalent. RIP</p>
<p>How about her book? I'd buy a book by a woman in her fifties who is a scientist (cool!) and dean of admissions at MIT. I'd probably pass it over if I knew she was a college dropout before getting a clerical job in the admissions office.</p>
<p>Is she going to continue to profit by her fraud, or is she going to pull her book?</p>
<p>Maybe it is public, but what are the credentials of the other admissions staff at MIT? Do many of them have science backrounds? Are they MIT grads?</p>
<p>Donald,
one of the reasons that the MIT story hits so hard is that, especially in science and engineering, telling the truth is really not negotiable. Fib on a bridge design and people may die. Manipulate the results on a drug test, and people die or are crippled. </p>
<p>Does the end justify the means in this case? You will have to decide for yourself. </p>
<p>However - one person is NOT the university - or the admissions office. Remember that no institution on the face of this earth is perfect. I wish the best to all the MIT students, prospects, parents and admissions officers that post here. This will be a difficult season.</p>
<p>Another weird part of this situation is that MIT has left on their site all of her comments and such. Kinda like helping her cross to burn. They are supposedly a top computer school that could have modified any part of their site at the moment of dismissal.</p>
<p>"And she kept athletics and academics in balance in the admissions process in a way that's both admirable and unusual."
It's fortunate that it's unusual; admitting people to MIT on the basis of athletics is crazy. It's an engineering school! If she had really wanted admissions to be less stressful, she should have made sure it was done as objectively as possible. It's the 'tell us how you feel' stuff that makes admissions so stressful. I expect the current admissions regime will be quickly ousted. Their policies are part of the reason why other schools like Caltech and Stanford are gaining ground on MIT.</p>
<p>hazmat, I don't understand why you think they would want to summarily remove all evidence of her presence without any review. That would be a bizarre reaction to today's news.</p>
<p>No promoting from within huh? I just wonder how long the dept has known this would be announced? Clearly yesterday........but how much longer.</p>
<p>
[quote]
**summarily remove all evidence of her presence without any review.
[/quote]
**</p>
<p>Public has NO knowledge of how long MIT has known of her actions. This may have been extensively investigated. I was just commenting that I personally found the blog and comments from staffers rather amusing.</p>
<p>Well, theyre not exactly going to go all 1984 on her and make her an "unperson".</p>
<p>I think deleting any mention of her from all website records and history is a bit much.</p>
<p>Needless to say I was among many today to be surprised by this event. She presided over my class' applications and many others. I found her message and admissions strategy to be in general very good for the institute. As I overheard another person say, "she was very good at what she did."</p>
<p>I do however agree that she did have to step down. Claiming you have degrees from several institutes is not just lying. It is claiming credit for credentials that people work for years to earn. This sort of thing devalues the degree for all. Imagine someone putting that they received a degree from MIT or another top school on their resume, when they did in fact not receive it. Imagine how it makes those that worked to earn it feel.</p>
<p>I think it's crucially important for anyone to judge science and engineering applicants to have a strong background in some technical field; that's why this particular instance of mis-representation feels so horrible to me. </p>
<p>If she did not have a complete technical training, what authority did she have to push MIT's admissions decisions the way she did? How can someone evaluate who is best to receive a scientific education without a firsthand understanding of the difficulties and necessary personal attributes for success? Without that experience, how could her vision and plans for admissions be based on anything other than just rhetoric?</p>
<p>What saddens me is the lack of integrity in many of our American "leaders" these days. I don't want to start listing all the things that are disappointing, because they are not truly comparable.....but there does seem to be an erosion of integrity in America. WE must lead by example, at home, in our communities, at our work, every day, all the time. The truth is that no one likes to have their trust violated. Marilee Jones spoke up a lot....over time she attracted a wide audience who listened.....events like this make it easier to dismiss other voices....there are many today who deceive others to achieve their own agendas. I don't know when our society crossed that line, but it seems to be the norm....in my opinion anyway. I know I am painting with a broad brush....but, I am very disappointed....especially upset that a strong female voice has been eliminated from an important dialog. </p>
<p>I personally cannot imagine living with such a lie...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Another weird part of this situation is that MIT has left on their site all of her comments and such. Kinda like helping her cross to burn. They are supposedly a top computer school that could have modified any part of their site at the moment of dismissal.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why would they do that? MIT policies are to be open.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Their policies are part of the reason why other schools like Caltech and Stanford are gaining ground on MIT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If anything Stanford admissions policies are less meritocratic than MIT's.</p>
<p>pundit,
I'm not "harassing an innocent" -- when my son filled out his college app he asked me what college did you go to, when did you graduate, what was your major. I gave him that info. So, I'm assuming D asked Mom for that info as well and if so, what did MOM say?</p>
<p>Rub the magic lamp////////first guess doesn't count? Precisely what others know to be true. The gift to her daughter that keeps on giving? What an act of hubris.</p>
<p>"Did she actually call herself "Dr," or are you guys being humorous?"</p>
<p>The "National Association for College admission Counseling" listed her this morning as Dr. Marilee Jones, PhD. It has since been corrected, but if you google Dr. Marilee Jones, you'll see on the results page that they had originally listed her thusly.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Their policies are part of the reason why other schools like Caltech and Stanford are gaining ground on MIT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, Stanford's policies are definitely worse than MIT's. And I don't think Caltech's gaining ground on MIT at all... in fact, I think they've fallen behind (in terms of popularity, not in science, of course). In fact, it seems that most MIT applicants agree with MIT's policies on admission.</p>
<p>Are you doubting your own eyes? Why do you ask this? Googler broken? A lie that kept on growing. She took full credit for her lack of credits. YIKEs
[quote]
**NPR : Colleges Want to Cool Admissions Frenzy
Dr. MARILEE JONES (Dean of Admissions, MIT): I wanted to start another revolution tonight, because I want us to be able to give our childhood back to our .
[/quote]
**</p>
<p>
[quote]
**NACAC Speakers
Dr. Marilee Jones, Ph.D., is the Dean of Admissions at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and has served on several professional boards ...
<a href="http://www.nacacnet.org/MemberPortal/Events/NatlConference/Speakers/%5B/url%5D">www.nacacnet.org/MemberPortal/Events/NatlConference/Speakers/</a> - 37k -
[/quote]
**</p>
<p>Think of how many individuals were rejected/accepted under reign: 10 years at 10-12 thousand per year, or more. Each and every one of them deserves a personal apology from MIT. I hope the school has the guts to do it.</p>
<p>Why has this been moved to the parent's forum? There are multiple threads on this issue but I think at least one of them deserves to stay in the MIT forum</p>
<p>maineparent: I agree with much of what you are saying above, but I also believe charlatans have been around forever, sad to say (think snake oil salesmen). They just moved around too often for anybody to ever catch them at their game. I just think it's now easier to out these people here in the 21st century, especially with digital technology. I do find it especially sad, though, that she violated the trust of young people-- not to mention her family and those with whom she worked.</p>
<p>Thanks for the excerpt on the PhD credentials. I'm flabbergasted, most especially that this went unnoticed for 28 years. (I'd be terrified that someone would ask me to teach--or do something showing my "trained scientist" expertise.)</p>