<p>And thank you everyone for the supportive comments towards our staff. They are appreciated more than I'm able to express.</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification. I have no judgement about any MIT student. This was an administrative problem. Take care.</p>
<p>Ben,
Lots of people who have been rejected or who have chips on their shoulders look for scapegoats. That's why there are so many posts on cc claiming that "unqualified URMs" took the spots of posters or the posters' friends. </p>
<p>Now, people with that kind of victim mentality are using the Marilee Jones situation to scapegoat women at MIT. Just as the allegations about URMs don't hold water, neither do the ones suggesting that MIT is somehow admitting hordes of unqualified women.</p>
<p>"I agree with Ben, it's unfortunate that this happened. I'm also in confusion how this has just occurred after 28 years of being with MIT... isn't this a bit of a harsh punishment after all she's done? I suppose it depends what was misrepresented, but I don't think anything is of such importance."</p>
<p>28 years of academic fraud, as she sat in judgment on hundreds of thousands of applicants, all of whom she expected to act honestly and forthrightly? Of course it reflects on the work that she did. Why shouldn't it?</p>
<p>I am indeed sorry that others are tainted in the process. (I've been through one of these myself, with a past boss.) My sorrow doesn't take away the taint. From experience I know that only future good work can.</p>
<p>I am stunned, and a little disgusted, at the level of outrage and vituperation that has been directed at MIT's admissions policies here, and the self-satisfied attempts to discredit them because of the character flaws of their most public advocate. To suggest that Jones cynically tried to remake MIT in her own image -- "a female with average objective credentials" -- or that she could possibly have succeeded in such a project, is way out of bounds. The women I've known who passed the MIT admissions hurdle were pretty darn impressive, and seem to do awfully well in the world beyond MIT. It's awfully insulting to them effectively to call them frauds because the Dean of Admissions for the past 9 years turns out to have been a fraud in one (or more) respects.</p>
<p>Get a grip. I know what it's like to feel disappointed about my children's application outcomes, but I don't personalize it as relating to any particular administrator's character flaws. And I would never attack a group of kids whose only sin was to have written better essays and presented themselves better than my children did.</p>
<p>I wouldn't deny that there are issues worth discussing about MIT admissions, and it's obvious that some people feel strongly, and emotionally, about them. But the ad hominem arguments here are awfully weak and distasteful.</p>
<p>JHS, post #345 -- you hit the nail right on the head. Thanks.</p>
<p>
That is exactly why this sort of misconduct is so egregious-- it undermines the accomplishments of others who she claimed to or purported to help. It's wrong for people to make that connection -- but it is predictable that they will. She has occupied a position of leadership and trust for the past decade -- and the exposure of her fraud undermines the credibility of the office she directed and the decisions that were made under her watch.</p>
<p>Hey, Ben (Jones), I'll chime in to NorthStarMom's post, wishing you well, and also thanking you, for trying to be as accessible/transparent as possible and for even getting to page 23 of this discussion during such a difficult time. Especially in admissions/admissions-related stuff, it's impossible to please everyone, as I'm sure you well know, but for every upset person, there will always be a number who appreciate and continue to support you guys.
Put me in the second category, please.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Let that be a lesson. Your spouse knows all your dirt.<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Yes she does, and don't you forget it!</p>
<p>Wendy:</p>
<p>You do not read posts carefully. I DO NOT teach math at Harvard or anywhere else. I have specifically stated in my post to you and many times over that I am not a math person. Please read more carefully.</p>
<p>Nothing in your post contradicts what I've said: your friend is responsible for the choices she made. Not Marilee Jones, not the rest of the MIT admissions committee. If responsibility is to be shared, it has to be by her family, friends and/or teachers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Lots of people who have been rejected or who have chips on their shoulders look for scapegoats. That's why there are so many posts on cc claiming that "unqualified URMs" took the spots of posters or the posters' friends.
[/quote]
Just as there are so many posts supporting her(1,[/url</a>] [url=<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=4036934&postcount=21%5D2">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=4036934&postcount=21]2</a>, 3</a>, 4</a>, .....</a>) because the "driving force" for MIT's admission policies helped them/friends/kids?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Now, people with that kind of victim mentality are using the Marilee Jones situation to scapegoat women at MIT. Just as the allegations about URMs don't hold water, neither do the ones suggesting that MIT is somehow admitting hordes of unqualified women.
[/quote]
I don't support people spacegoting women/URMs, but it hurts when you realized that you were rejected by someone who was a fake (No offense at admits, you truly deserved a place).</p>
<p>
[quote]
But Marilee Jones, admissions director at MIT, says it's not that important. She uses herself as an example. She's a graduate of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute -- an outstanding university, but not MIT. 'You don't need to go to those schools to lead a good life or be a leader,' she said. "You can succeed by going to any school."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's a scandal. I mean, the <em>dean</em> of admissions, the person <em>responsible</em> for the whole admission process, was a liar. Even though Jones wasn't involved in the actual admission process, she certainly was the representative. It's hard to believe that this representative was a liar and it makes the admission process look bad.</p>
<p>Secondly, it's very embarrassing for MIT. I mean, really...</p>
<p>My sympathies for Ben, Matt and the other guys from the admission committee. It's probably very hard to see a person discredited who one has known (or believed to know) for a long time.</p>
<p>JHS: I agree with all your posts. </p>
<p>Ben Jones: You and the rest of the admissions staff have done fabulous work. My sympathies in this difficult time.</p>
<p>Lying about degrees seems to be a not uncommon problem when it comes to resume fraud. Of all of the items on the resume, what degrees you have earned seems to be the one that is easily checked and most likely to come to light if you lie about it. Obviously, many employers must not check and those who lie on the resume are counting on that.</p>
<p>What amazes me is that the people caught lying have often amassed a great record on the job! Of course, the reason that they have gotten caught is that their success has put them in the public eye and someone decides to do some research on them. </p>
<p>I'm thinking about that football coach from Notre Dame in 2001, George O'Leary, who resigned after 5 days when it came out that he didn't really have that Masters from NYU that was in his bio. Don't know who squealed on Mr. O'Leary--but obviously Notre Dame hadn't checked him out carefully enough.</p>
<p>Or Quincy Troupe, the UCSD lit professor and California poet laureate, who resigned in 2002 when it was found out that he didn't have that BA as he claimed. Mr. Troupe was caught when the state did a background check on him in connection with getting legislative approval for his appointment as poet laureate.</p>
<p>To all those who have fudged their resume--stay under the radar! To those who are thinking of fudging the degrees on their resume--don't do it! The consequences can be catastrophic to your careers and your lives.</p>
<p>Ben J & Mollie,
I feel only sympathy for the position Mrs. Jones put the ad staff and students in. I'm sure at many colleges and offices people are quietly checking out colleagues' credentials. I know of a judge who did have a UG & law degrees, but pretended he came from "more elite" schools than he really did. A colleague checked out the background. At least, this judge did not lie on application, just in his interactions with others. Had Mrs. Jones acted foolishly, or alienated one of her close associates, that person may have questioned her judgement. It is quite easy to get a copy of someone's PhD dissertation. It appears no one questioned her intelligence or work ethics, so learning how flawed she is in personal honor is shocking to even her closest associates.</p>
<p>What is truly amazing is that no one came forward--not a classmate or a professor from one of the colleges she purported to attend. No journalist asked her who her mentor/s were, and then contacted them for a quote. Her lies kept growing, and she--and she alone--nourished these falsehoods.</p>
<p>Once again, my best regards to the hard-working admissions staff at MIT.</p>
<p>My favorite whopper teller is James Ware who is a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose, California. He didn't lie about any of his degrees, which could explain why he is still a judge. He was very well connected and respected for his legal work in the Palo Alto community--why he should have told his lie in public so many times is unfathomable.</p>
<p>From Wikipedia:</p>
<p>Ware received a B.A. in 1969 from California Lutheran University and a J.D. from Stanford Law School in 1972. From 1988-1990, Ware was a judge on the Santa Clara County Superior Court. He was appointed to the Federal Bench by President George H. W. Bush and received his received commission on October 1, 1990.</p>
<p>In 1998 Judge Ware was reprimanded by the Judicial Council of the Northern District Court of California for fabricating the story of being the brother of Virgil Ware, a 13 year old black boy shot by teenage racists in Alabama in 1963 on the same day as the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing. According to a story Judge Ware had told many audiences, he was riding his bike with his brother Virgil on the handlebars when Virgil was shot and killed by white racists. The incident was a real one, however it happened to a different James Ware, as was discovered when Judge Ware's claim was published in the Alabama papers after he was nominated to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals by President Clinton. The father of the long-ago slain boy contacted the Alabama courts to report that the California judge was impersonating his own son James Ware who was an employee in a Birmingham power plant. The Alabama courts contacted the California courts, who convened the ethics hearing. Judge Ware was reprimanded but allowed to retain his lifetime appointment as district judge.</p>
<p>28 Years - Living a Lie
These are the actions of a con artist that holds academics in contempt.
MIT was so politically correct that they never questioned her degrees.
But what person with a Doctorate would apply for a job as an administrative assistant, even back in 1979. They never checked, shame on MIT for keeping their collective head in the sand.</p>
<p>
Spoken like a true lawyer. Where I would never personally use this extremely unfortunate situation to comment on the admissions policies at MIT (I simply do not know enough about them and my kid did not submit an app there), this is <strong><em>EXACTLY</em></strong> why what Ms. Jones chose to do is so completely devastating--because HER OWN ACTIONS have caused others to cast aspersions. EVERYTHING this woman has done will now be fodder for those who are unhappy or who feel scorned. <em>AND</em> there <em>IS</em> room for legitimate questions (see my post 266). To say that WHO she was and WHO she represented herself as had NO bearing on her "heart and soul" job and her performance of it over the past nine years is ludicrous.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>To the wonderful admissions staff at MIT~</p>
<p>As I told Mollie last night, my heart goes out to each and every one of you for what you are going through at this very difficult time. I have nothing but the utmost respect for those of you who work with such commitment and dedication at a job that is <em>SO</em> much more than <em>just</em> a job. It is truly a "heart and soul" endeavor into which you have each invested so very much--and with such incredible results. Please know that in NO way do I or many, many others consider what happened either a reflection of your school or of you. I hope you realize how very much you are appreciated.</p>
<p>~berurah</p>
<p>In the Times this morning, a professor from MIT is quoted as noting the Hardyesque quality of the story. I had been thinking that, too; there is definitely a Victorian novel feel to this--I could cite characters in Dickens, also, but the book that most comes to my mind is Eliot's Middlemarch, where several of the characters make and then cover up bad choices, always for personal gain which ultimately evaporates when the truth comes out.</p>
<p>And the theme is clear in that novel and others; what is ultimately condemned is not so much the first error, but the refusal to take responsibility and own up, letting the original falsehood fester out of fear of loss--either material, personal, or both. And ultmately leading to a higher level of loss when the truth comes out.</p>
<p>Definitely an air of classic tragedy. And harder (and sadder) to see in real life than in fiction.</p>