<p>"With colleges demanding kids who play sports, run student government and take the heaviest course load they can, Jones shouted back the opposite: daydream, stay healthy, and don't worry so much about building a resume just to impress an elite college."</p>
<p>Of course she shouts that; she was probably a slacker who didn't take the heaviest course loads or extracurriculars. That's why she had to falsify her credentials. Someone like her having a say on who is admitted to MIT or not contaminates the whole admissions process because she has no idea what a scholar is. Her flawed leadership probably influenced the rejection of many qualified applicants. I hope she gets sued for fraud and has to go to prison or is fined heavily.</p>
<p>Your daughter is wise and has things in appropriate perspective, MIT2011Dad.
IMHO.</p>
<p>This is NO reflection on MIT. It is a reflection on one person's integrity. I highly doubt that a change in the person of the Admissions Dean will have any discernible effect on the make-up of the accepted classes coming next.</p>
<p>And for those who say that an Admissions Dean cannot accurately evaluate the applications of science students if s/he is not a scientist herself? Huh?
Does Stanford have a different Admissions Dean for science and engineering applicants from those for humanities and social sciences? Does JHU? Does Harvard? UCBerkeley? UCSD? That is simply a silly silly statement.</p>
<p>What is unmasked to date is hard enough to swallow. To realize Ms. Jones, with her LACK of education, sat in authority over all those applications, is disheartening.</p>
<p>Hazmat, when the nest empties is when a shaky marriage will come apart because the glue holding it together (the child/ren) are gone. Maybe not a romantic relationship, but certainly something. It's easy to check educational credentials if the records are recent. But 28 years back - that's harder, and it takes some work, especially if one's last name is "Jones" (perhaps this was before she was married - if not, the husband HAD to know - otherwise how would he think his wife somehow managed to earn degrees unless she somehow faked being in school for years - that makes no sense...), and, if this is a relative stranger, that person would have had to have been very, very determined to find something amiss. </p>
<p>This almost has to be a family member, or someone in her inner circle, someone close to her. Perhaps even a long time colleague that she confided in years and years ago, and perhaps even forgot she did so. Or perhaps someone who kept the secret for a long time, and then suddenly something happened, and they decided game over.</p>
The fact that you're even making that comparison proves how far MIT admissions have come. There was a reason why MIT was a different type of a school with a different objective than those you listed.</p>
<p>Let me restate a thought that I posted earlier, but more civilly this time -- adding to bethievt.</p>
<p>To those who like hazmat who are saying all sorts of semi-coherent celebratory things and calling for blood, stop and think for a second. You, lacking saintliness, have also done bad things, as have we all. Our mistakes differ in newsworthiness, but few are really qualified to sit in judgment of others. Those who take pleasure in dancing over the disgraced are being cruel and pointless. What will your crowing add or detract?</p>
<p>This isn't about most people on this thread -- just a vocal minority for whom apparently seeing the bad in someone else is a good reason to show the cruelest side of themselves.</p>
<p>Her bad doings affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of students. She probably influenced admissions decisions by choosing to admit students like herself, "daydreamers" who don't focus solely on academics and extracurriculars. Most of our mistakes don't have such a huge effect.</p>
<p>Bethievt, this isn't like getting a speeding ticket. How many people do you know who make up their qualifications for their job? Would you want an attorney who lied about law school? This is not trivial, in my mind. People that I know worked long and hard for their credentials, and most people have to provide verification of their degrees to employers. That may not have been as common in the late 70's, but I'm sure that every administrative employee in higher ed will have to provide transcripts from now on.</p>
<p>I'm sorry this happened. I liked her philosophy. But to me, it is more like Enron or the savings and loan scandals of years past. In academia, integrity is a requirement. I don't think her lies should affect any past, present or future students, or the esteem in which MIT is held. But I think it is a mistake to allow someone's outgoing personality overshadow their duplicitous behavior.</p>
<p>Edited to add: Ben, I'm not suggesting that Ms. Jones should be sent to prison, or that prospective students should boycott MIT. I do think it is appalling, though. She led the team that had a real impact on many students for many years. How about the kids who were rejected in the past? How do you think they felt at the time, or feel now?</p>
<p>I agree with bethievt and Ben Golub. Those who are feeling so judgmental and holier than thou... what is your point?</p>
<p>What she did was wrong. But she owned it and stated clearly that it was her own lack of courage that perpetuated the lie.</p>
<p>cghen - I don't get what you are talking about. What is the different objective that MIT has for its scientific education than, say, JHU or UCSD or Stanford in the education they offer to science students?</p>
<p>On the merits, I agree with cghen that MIT admissions has flaked out and that a scientist (by which I mean someone who has done some serious scientific research) should be the only kind of person allowed to judge whether someone else would make a good scientist. The only school that still does it (mostly) this way is Caltech. I wish MIT did it too, but that hasn't much to do with Jones. The decision to flake out was made by the trustees and they could have found plenty of people -- including MIT Physics PhDs -- to execute the plan. Maybe it would have been a little harder, but they could have done it.</p>
<p>Also, a lot of what Jones has done has been great for MIT. People still want to go to MIT -- in fact, more than they ever did. So what if you and I dislike the direction MIT has gone. In terms of making MIT a school that makes more lives better, it's quite possible that she was doing the right thing.</p>
<p>But the silver lining of these things is that they force a re-evaluation, so we'll see where MIT goes next.</p>
<p>jmmom, if Jones had brought this up herself, and "owned" her lie without being forced into it, I might agree with you. But she only came clean because she was forced into it. That doesn't earn brownie points for honesty with me.</p>
<p>no hazmat, I love you--I'm just saying we're mostly a mess here, on this benighted planet. She made a huge mistake and she will pay for it--especially if her chidren do. That's the worst price a parent will ever pay.</p>
<p>Just because she lied about her background doesn't mean she didn't do a good job. I'm not in any position to evaluate her on that but she certainly had enough skills to rise to the top, even without a college education. It seems that may be part of what bothers people, beyond the lies themselves. I'm not defending her, the situation is shameful, but I don't understand judging all of MIT admissions policies and decisions based on her lies. It's possible to lie about your background and still perform well on the job.</p>
<p>nogardder, if what you say is true, then MIT must be filled with "daydreamers" who don't focus exclusively on academics and extracurriculars.</p>
<p>But you may be right: after my last visit to MIT, I came away with the distinct impression that the general intellectual atmosphere bore a strong resemblance that extant at Hawaii University - Nanakuli. go easy, brah!</p>
<p>I agree, sj. I don't give her brownie points. But I don't believe it justifies those who are so mean-spirited here. And I truly don't get why any rejected applicant would think they have a basis for a lawsuit.</p>
<p>And I totally agree with MomofFour. Bill Gates, among others, does not have a college degree. Doesn't mean he cannot be stellar at what he does. He has never lied about it; that is the difference between him and Marilee. But those who believe she was incapable because she was "un-credentialed" are wrong, imho. She did wrong. She is paying the consequences. Doesn't mean she never did anything right.</p>