MIT admissions dean resigns over resume fraud. Ouch!

<p>
[quote]
Class action suit? On what grounds?</p>

<p>People forget that Marilee Jones was not the only person making decisions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>One assumes that Jones was a dominant player in hiring, firing and promotion decisions in the admissions office, in setting policy and in implementing her philosophy of "humane" (i.e. mush-based) admissions. The cumulative differential effect on MIT and the US economy, given the number of applicants involved, is potentially rather large. Does it mean that MIT contributed 1 percent or 10 percent or 20 percent less than it might have had admissions not drifted so far from the policies of decades past? It's hard to say, but damage is very likely to exist and be large.</p>

<p>mollie, This article suggests that it may have been other discrepancies in Jones' resume that was the real tip off. I am sure it was nothing you posted.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=518546%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=518546&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>As anyone can see from a brief google of her name, she has mentioned having biology and chemistry degrees from RPI in many places. The MIT newspaper itself reported her as having these degrees when they announced her promotion to dean of admissions. The later claim of a PhD, made on the nacac site is really a mystery, as it would have had to have been acquired after she became dean.</p>

<p>She didn't embezzle money as far as I know... I also have never heard of her use her influence to damage people personally. She could have gotten exactly where she was without lying and implemented the same policies. Would you sue her in that case?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I never cease to be amazed by the magnitude of the human capacity for hypocrisy, rationalization, and self-deception.

[/quote]
That's what stuns me as well. As Berurah pointed out, Marilee Jones chose to thrust herself in the spotlight with a book, public speaking engagements, etc. The article that Kemet referenced in post #317 above also shows that when she was elevated to her position as director in the 1997, it was after an extensive "search" for a director, with 65 applicants for the job. She could have withdrawn her name from consideration for the top job, keeping a role as an assistant... and thus avoided drawing attention to herself. No one outside of MIT & MIT applicants would have ever heard of her... no one would care what her credentials were ... and that would be it. </p>

<p>So I do see this not only as a one-time lie but one that was continued and reiterated every step of the way. Certainly rather unfair to the 64 highly qualified men and women who wasted their time applying for the job in 1997.</p>

<p>Not to mention the kids she hurts when she tells them they have a hope of getting into MIT with SAT's in the 600's and a string of B's. Or is that not damaging people personally? Like if you hurt a lot of people but only a little each it doesn't really count?</p>

<p>Marite,</p>

<p>You teach math at Harvard, right? Mostly the smart people, but there is generally a level where some people can't go on right? It's different for everyone. You can fake and study your way to your limit, but math owns you in the end.</p>

<p>While I realize my friend is an adult, the fact that she got into MIT put blinders on a lot of the decision making process.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>My friend felt that she did not fit in with her family, not only lookwise but also that she felt "dumb". Going to MIT was a way to prove this idea wrong and win the approval of her parents. She is also the oldest sibling. There is no precedent to say "it's okay to go whereever" or "Susie went to MIT, so at least one person went." </p></li>
<li><p>MIT can sell itself rather well. She was really excited about going to a "little tech school down the street from Harvard." If you are remotely nerdy, the idea of the culture will appeal to you. She used to talk in homeroom about wanting to take some really hard class, that only the really smart people could manage (and practically make bumper stickers about surviving).</p></li>
<li><p>She was the first person to be admitted in at least four years. Being from RI, smart kids from my high school reliably from Brown. I believe my year was the only year in the past (oh, say 6 or 7) that a student from my school did not go to Brown.</p></li>
<li><p>MIT is still made up of people who are are good in math or science and excelled in high school. There are major big fish/small pond issues at a place like MIT. As my AP Calc teacher pointed out, whether we had a C in this class or and A, we were the top 10% of our high school's math students just because we made it to AP Calculus. You could be a big fish in a big pond. </p></li>
<li><p>There is (was?) a reasonable assumption that the admissions process is objective. Especially considering how obnoxiously selective MIT is. Good candidates with Legacy advantages, AA, etc still do get rejected. I think my friend who was in her calculus class and I were one of the few people who doubted her going.</p></li>
<li><p>Her dad, while an elected official, didn't fail to include the fact that he was so proud that his daughter was studying to be an Engineer (just like him) in a speech to over 1000 attendees and a band. While the event was academic, (opening of a school), you have to try to slip this in.</p></li>
<li><p>She would probably have taken any suggestion that MIT would be overly rigorous (or even a bad social fit) as a challenge and gone anyway.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Yes, I know my friends problems are my friend's fault. MIT isn't for everyone (I didn't dare apply. I was not looking for my college experience to be defined by a school with a reputation for being a pain, even if I could manage it). Tons of kids I know at my college need to tell their parents that med school isn't for everyone. There are social issues at every college. I've also heard of imposter syndrome. But I also can't help thinking of the Gatekeepers, where the main character made social judgements about the kids that reflected his own prejudices. Though when you read the "where are they now" part, the kids who objectively were the better students were happier in thier choices (Wesleyan or not) and more active in their campus activties (or still enrolled).</p>

<p>My friend does have the work ethic to survive at MIT. She is also the sort of person who will have to focus to prove she can do something for the sake of doing so (bad bad idea), so she won't flunk out. She'll make it, but she won't enjoy it, but she will need to avoid the downward spiral.</p>

<p>I'm curious. Do professors at Elite Universities see any trends among incoming classes? Are students smarter because schools are more slective, or has the deemphasis on academic excellence caused incoming classes to be academically weaker but more socially aggessive.</p>

<p>Also, do any admissions offices survey their senior classes with respect to the original applications. Do they pick out their top recruits and see what they did with their time? Do they see if their marginal admits were a mistake or the senior class president?</p>

<p>

There are other ways to damage people (and her employer) than the ones you mentioned. In fact, this revelation, in and of itself, HAS caused damage to many people, something Ms. Jones knew was a distinct possibility all along. Also, if you'll read my post #266. you will see why this situation had all KINDS of potential for abuse (and if it happened, may never be revealed).</p>

<p>~berurah</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>There is nothing to feel sick about. Bringing an end to an an on-going and outrageous fraud is something to feel GOOD about.</p>

<p>

Ms. Jones's behavior smacks of pathological narcissism. She seemed to consider herself above the rules set for everyone else.</p>

<p>"Not to mention the kids she hurts when she tells them they have a hope of getting into MIT with SAT's in the 600's and a string of B's."</p>

<p>Well one, I don't think encouraging young kids would fall under the category of maliciousness. And two, I don't think that has much to do with her falsifying her academic degrees...</p>

<p>berurah-</p>

<p>I think your post a few pages back about the possible extortion she made herself vulnerable to is absolutely the best post in this thread. I believe that's the biggest wrong we can accuse her of at this moment.</p>

<p>Wendy-</p>

<p>Wait, are you saying your friend being unhappy at MIT is Marilee Jone's fault? What you listed seemed to be a whole train of good reasons why you were right about her and she was wrong but I don't see how this has to do with MIT admissions?</p>

<p>I think lying (or encouraging as you say) is a lot like lying (or falsifying).</p>

<p>"I think lying (or encouraging as you say) is a lot like lying (or falsifying)."</p>

<p>Well I'm glad you're not given a role of any importance in our justice system.</p>

<p>Only people who relied on her false degree claims, to their detriment, would have any cause for a lawsuit. I don't believe that parents or students would fall into that category. The school might, but it was their own fault they didn't check her credentials so they would bear some of the blame.</p>

<p>It's been a long day and I'm too tired to process 23 pages of this stuff. But let's get one thing straight here.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"Moreover, we now know why MIT relied so much upon subjective criteria opposed to objective criteria in admissions, and (this is controversial) why MIT so warmly welcomes women, and has a 30% female admissions rate compared to a 10% male admissions rate. Marilee Jones set it up so that the ideal applicant is, that's right, herself -- a female with average objective credentials."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really?</p>

<p>Because other than Caltech and perhaps a handful of other schools, you won't find more difficult requirements for graduation than those at MIT. And yet the graduation rate of our female undergrads is higher than that of most schools in the country - somewhere in the mid-90's I believe.</p>

<p>Our selection process isn't broken and it's not going to change. Just didn't want anyone to waste any more time speculating to the contrary.</p>

<p>Let the bashing continue.</p>

<p>I am sure it has been a very long day. I cannot imagine your level of fatigue. It is a sad day. Too bad that you consider this open discussion as "bashing". Peace to you in this time of turmoil, I hope your own job is secure. I take it you speak for the interim director? Nice to know what the status is.</p>

<p>ben, the vast majority of us realize that this incident in no way reflects negatively on any of the great work you've done. No matter how we may philosophically view MIT admissions, we recognize all of the hard work and dedication you put into decisions and your valuable contributations for explaining the process; you're truly admirable.</p>

<p>I hope you have found support with the other MIT adcoms and the MIT community, and I wish you strength during this difficult time.</p>

<p>I'm sure many of us who were rejected are probably thinking about the Timberlake song..."what goes around comes around."</p>

<p>Thought it was me and you babe...MIT until the end...but I guess I was wrong....</p>

<p>Said you were moving on now, guess Caltech's just the same, funny thing about that is, it's even better than they say....</p>

<p>Actually I don't really care that much...I just view this as pretty ironic, and thus funny....how this happened...</p>

<p>Ben,
Wishing you well during this difficult time.
I am sure that it's hard for all of the hard working admissions staff at MIT to be hit by such unfortunate and surprising news about a supervisor whom you respected.</p>

<p>hazmat, that was directed at the quote, not the general open discussion. Sorry for the confusion.</p>

<p>Stu Schmill, our interim director who was Marilee's second-in-command, graduated from MIT in 1986 and has worked at MIT since '87 or '88. He, along with other members of the senior staff, helped create our process, which is wholly independent of what happened today with Marilee.</p>

<p>I can understand the conversation happening around today's events. What I cannot understand is how some find it so easy to make the leap to insulting our ~2000 female undergrads.</p>