MIT admissions dean resigns over resume fraud. Ouch!

Parents Forum
481

<p>LTS, re your post #476 -- you shouldn't be embarrassed! You should list all your professional accomplishments and any certifications you may have earned, proudly -- and describe yourself as an autodidact with no shame! I promise you, your colleagues will be impressed and intrigued.</p>

<p>Both in my family and professionally, I know people who have come this route - they are proud to tell their stories and include it in their bios, if there is room for more than a listing of credentials -- as usually they have an interesting story to tell. </p>

<p>I do understand how the "Dr." and Ph.D. labels crept in for Marilee Jones - one of the people I work with is self-educated and that is clearly stated in his online bio posted on his web site -- again because he has a fascinating life story behind it all. But he has written several books and we are always getting mail addressed to "Dr. so-and-so" -- we don't bother correcting every one who writes to him, as that would be an exercise in futility -- but of course we would not allow incorrect information to be published in a newspaper article or other bio. </p>

<p>Anyway -- I think your misplaced sense of embarrassment might give insight as to why Marilee Jones felt compelled to lie, given that she was surrounded by highly educated people -- but of course it does not justify the falsehood.</p>

<p>But, LTS -- I think you would be amazed and surprised at the positive response you would get if the first line of your bio was "Late t. School is a self-educated _<strong><em>. Over the course of her professional career she has earned the following awards and distinctions: _</em></strong>___"</p>

482

<p>NSM--wow, that's what I would expect the bio of a person in that level of position to read like. It's very specific, too. I wonder what Jones' looked like at MIT; it must have been very fuzzy in details (like majors, actual degrees etc.) Weird at a school which would seem to prize precision.</p>

483

<p>^^ I just looked it up, Northstarmom, and I think you are right about that.</p>

484

<p>"You need to know that this was a lie on a resume - not some big scandal surrounding our selection process." to quote Ben and Matt on the MIT website.</p>

<p>If I were at MIT, I'd also be trying to minimize the damage by painting Jones as a minor fibber, instead of major defrauder. First of all, I don't understand all this weeping and moaning for a woman who has been in charge of meting out non-stop disappointment to thousands of students over the last 28 years. I don't feel the least bit sorry for her, I feel sorry for all the students who applied to MIT and were probably not judged fairly by her and the people she commanded. I never believed her b.s. about taking the pressure out of college admissions, particularly when I noticed that the only students from our local school who were admitted to MIT either had perfect GPAs and SATs, or were under-represented minorities. Those students who had lived a life that represented her alleged philosophy, of not spending all of their time studying, were not admitted, even when those students had intensive, passionate commitment to hands-on engineering projects that were just the kind of activity she claims to support. In the Boston Globe today a reader (on the web site) says at one point, she offered early decision only to minority women at MIT (I don't know if this claim is true, but it's worth looking into). I think this woman was a phony from the get-go, and while one might be disappointed that she shnookered all of MIT for so long, they should resist defending her. What she did was indefensible. And if anyone want to investigate further, I'll bet they will find plenty of improprieties in the admissions process for which she is responsible. Amazing, isn't it, that people like this stand in judgment of students. Any professional association with this woman will only reflect poorly on the institutions or individuals who give her another forum to wreak havoc.</p>

485

<p>Motheroftwo, thanks for that, I am "satisfied" with my accomplishments, haven't reached the level of "proud" yet. That will come later. I am, however, ridiculously proud of my daughter, who will in 12 days time walk at graduation, and collect two degrees in two very different disciplines, and four minors (!!!!). I have seen her work very, very hard, battling her way through organic chemistry, pulling all nighters, etc. I have simply enormous respect for her accomplishments, considering her only parent is rather clueless about how to be successful in college. Inventing a degree of my own would be an insult to her accomplishments: that's why it's so hard to understand how Marilee could do what she did. I have been to MIT's campus once - and it felt rather like standing on hallowed ground. I cannot imagine how a person could spend a career in close contact with persons who either already earned, or were in the process of earning real, legitimate degrees, and observe the hard work that goes into earning those credentials, and not feel ashamed or embarrassed or guilty about their dishonesty.</p>

<p>Calmom, it's a chip on my shoulder, but, when you're moderating a panel or addressing an audience of people with tons of alphabet soup behind their names, it's difficult. We've covered so far by using the one-page method, when it's impossible to continue to stall to provide the bio. I do not have enough awards, etc., yet to use your suggestion, but, it is an excellent idea, once I get a few more. Thanks for that, I sincerely appreciate it and will probably take it to my staff person who refines this stuff to see if she can work up a rough draft that might look nicer than what we're using now.</p>

<p>Re Marilee, I can understand the embarrassment of course, but, being around these people, why wouldn't it instead motivate her to go get her own, legitimately earned degree? It seems to be that the overwhelming majority of the thrill is the shear joy of doing the work, earning the grades, actually learning the subject matter. How does an active, healthy mind NOT crave that knowledge? Heavens, many of the classes my daughter has come home to tell me about, they sound so fascinating, it makes me want to go to those classes, too. (Well, maybe not organic chemistry...) - but still - why wouldn't Marilee want to have this wonderful experience for herself???</p>

<p>The other thing I don't understand about what Marilee did - if you're going to tell a lie, for heaven's sake, why not invent something that at least has a reasonable chance of succeeding? She cannot be very smart - why wouldn't she invent a degree from a school with say 20,000 students? (Not that I think anyone should lie, especially about this, but, yikes, how dumb is that...to pick such small schools where women in science would stand out...)</p>

486

<p>I know someone who is a very famous alum from Union. The Union development office makes a HUGE fuss over him. They must have known that Jones was a fake--otherwise they would have celebrated her Union degree the way they celebrate my friend's degree and subsequent accomplishments.</p>

<p>Maybe Union outted her for some sort of slight?</p>

<p>Anitaw describes my sense of the double speak going on at MIT. If we believed that doulbe speak, my second son might have applied. He has the scores after all. But he didn't have the grit that I knew he would need.</p>

<p>How did we know it was double speak? Scattergrams. Scattergrams proved that MIT only takes kids with the scores (+1450 +720 Math) and the proven grit (+4.0 GPA). MIT does not have floating dots on their scattergrams from top schools. They ONLY take the best and the brightest and the ones with the most 'grit'. Their scattergrams look like a solid dot at +1550SAT and +4.5 GPA.</p>

<p>It was just so much hooey--but interestingly, that hooey did 'modernize' adcom communications, intorducing the most successful adcom blogging.</p>

487

<p>I think it is ludicrous to think no one at MIT or elsewhere knew.</p>

<p>Insiders did, or must have...the public didn't. The leak was to the public, and the insiders had to force Marilee's hand.</p>

488

<p>"Calmom, it's a chip on my shoulder, but, when you're moderating a panel or addressing an audience of people with tons of alphabet soup behind their names, it's difficult."</p>

<p>For you to have succeeded without going to college is a big deal, and I agree with whomever posted that you should start your bio with the fact that you're self educated.</p>

<p>For instance, here's how the high school whom I mentioned is described on the website of the institute that bears his name. Can you imagine being a high school dropout who was one of the questioners in a nationwide presidential debate? That's what he did with insightfulness and grace.</p>

<p>"Robert C. Maynard, a charismatic leader who changed the face of American journalism, built a four decade career on the cornerstones of editorial integrity, community involvement, improved education and the importance of the family. ...</p>

<p>Maynard, the son of an immigrant from Barbados who founded a New York moving company, dropped out of a Brooklyn high school at the age of 16 to become a writer in Greenwich Village in the 1950s. He had a photographic memory, and mastered myriad subjects through reading and inquiry... "'My credentials,'" he told a sister on the day he decided to quit school, "will be my work....'"</p>

<p>My experience has been that self made people who attain high positions have a lot more going for them than do most people with alphabet soup by their names.</p>

489

<p>One of the only good things to come out of this fiasco is that now my son (rejected by MIT) understands why the URM female (who was repeating Calc BC in high school) was accepted and he was not. The joke's on MIT. They got her, and another, equally highly rated engineering school got him. Talk about bad PR! MIT students will never be seen in the same rarefied light</p>

490

<p>
[quote]
But he has written several books and we are always getting mail addressed to "Dr. so-and-so" -- we don't bother correcting every one who writes to him, as that would be an exercise in futility -- but of course we would not allow incorrect information to be published in a newspaper article or other bio.

[/quote]
My husband has two Masters degrees and had completed orals for his PhD, but business opportunities arose and he left without completing it. (He still plans to someday!) He has an international reputation in his field, publishes in journals and speaks at many conferences, and works with many universities. Professors and grad students just assume he is Dr. Mootmom, and send him letters or emails addressed that way. He has no problem telling someone he doesn't have a doctorate, never refers to himself inaccurately, and corrects any bios in journals or conference proceedings (pre-publication) so they don't mistakenly refer to him as a PhD, but he doesn't include a correction in every email response to anyone who mis-identifies him in their salutation. So I can understand why some who may have assumed Jones had a doctorate didn't get an automatic correction, but I cannot understand how her biographies containing the incorrect information could have been printed or read at conferences.</p>

491

<p>Northstarmom, thanks for that. I'm not that accomplished yet though. I'm right at that sort of mid-way point where the absence of a degree could make a difference in whether someone chooses to include me or not. Another year or two, I'll hopefully be past that point. </p>

<p>I agree with Allmusic, I think someone or several someones have known about this for some time. As I posted before I think the timing is interesting - it's almost as if someone deliberately chose this particular time to make the call (right at the very end of the admissions season, when all the commitments are due and likely 99% of postcard responses already in) when it would do the least possible damage to MIT.</p>

<p>Mootmom, you have that right. As you know conference people ask for this stuff WELL in advance of events, it's virtually impossible to get the details "accidently" wrong...</p>

492

<p>Oceanview and others -</p>

<p>I think the focus of this thread should be that integrity and honesty are of the utmost importance in one's professional life, especially in an admissions officer. I think that comments about who was or was not admitted to MIT, and especially comments disparaging female and/or URM students who were admitted are highly offensive and do not belong here.</p>

493

<p>"I think someone or several someones have known about this for some time.:</p>

<p>I agree that many people have known about this for a long time. The worst time, however, for them to have made the call would have been in Dec. or Jan., when applications were due and the admissions officers were even busier than they are now.</p>

<p>The timing continues to make me think that the call was made by someone with some kind of connection to a student who was rejected this year.</p>

494

<p>"Calmom, it's a chip on my shoulder, but, when you're moderating a panel or addressing an audience of people with tons of alphabet soup behind their names, it's difficult."</p>

<p>I could have an alphabet soup after my name, including a legal Esquire (even though I'm not a lawyer.) But I'm also a Quaker, and, as a matter of principle, I refuse to use them. Every time my workplace makes new business cards, they try to add 'em all back in, and I have to go explain myself. They don't get it, but they do accede to my wishes.</p>

495

<p>mini - </p>

<p>I was not aware of a Quaker practice of not using such titles, and I understand your modesty. On a personal level, I understand where you are coming from - I do not like to be introduced as "Doctor Mother of Two" at social functions, etc. (A very prestige-conscious colleague introduced me as "Doctor Mother of Two" to his elderly MOTHER at a viewing for a member of his family who had died suddenly and tragically, and I was horrified!!) </p>

<p>However, I have a question for you. I know you work for a government agency (and so do I) and your job involves giving professional advice and opinions in your field. Don't you feel that your credentials add to public confidence in the guidance or opinions you provide? I also have such credentials and I feel that a reader will have more assurance of the professionalism and credibility of my work if they see those letters on a memo or report. The kind of work I do should not normally be signed off on by a person who does not have a doctorate in my field or a related field.</p>

496

<p>And as follow up to that Mini, would you typically be introduced as a speaker with no educational credentials? I'm asking because I'm curious...</p>

497

<p>Actually, having worked with state medical boards and the like, I think the last thing I want to do is increase folks' confidence by having them look at the alphabet soup after their names - I guess I know too much.</p>

<p>I do have a funny story, though. The first job I got in the state was as senior health planner for the state board of health. The listed job requirements were a Ph.D. in epidemiology, an M.D. plus course work in epidemiological statistics, or an MPH plus 90 credits including the statistics, or an MPH plus 5 years of experience. I had never taken a single health course in my entire life, never took a math course after high school, and had no health experience of any kind (though I did edit and publish the first book on AIDS in the Third World published in the U.S.) But I soon figured out that what they wanted was someone who could write an English sentence, and after about a month on the job, I figured out that all you really needed to know was that germs caused disease (despite the evidence of our children to the contrary), and that if you drank dirty water, you might get a bellyache (or you might not.) They made it work. (Then there was the day I got my 72-hour MPH on infectious diseases - because I wrote the annual state of the state on health for the governor, and my assistant, a Harvard MPH/Michigan Dr.PH, had total writer's block, and we fired him.)</p>

<p>Anyhow, in the early 90s I sat on all kinds of review panels, and ended up playing a major role in writing the state's HIV/AIDS rules. Folks wanted to know how I knew so much. At the time, I kept it a secret. I was the second person in state government to get myself hooked up to the Internet, with a direct line into the CDC. My boss, who was totally computer illiterate but at the end of the biennium would buy the largest, most expensive computer system she could find, put it on her desk, and never plug it in, wanted to know about this Internet thingy. So I brought her over to my desk, and had her type in her favorite subject "mustangs" into my favorite pre-google search engine. Up came the Mustang Ranch. She never wanted to know what I was doing ever again. ;)</p>

<p>I have now acted as advisor to two MPH/CDC-certificate students at UW. </p>

<p>The head of Board at the time was the founder of Group Health in my town. He's a Friend, and still a good friend of mine. When they built the new building, they decided to name the biggest hall after him. Fine, but at the dedication, he made them take down the plaque, 'cause it had "Dr." before and the alphabet soup after his name.</p>

<p>"And as follow up to that Mini, would you typically be introduced as a speaker with no educational credentials? I'm asking because I'm curious..."</p>

<p>If folks insist on reading my long list, I insist back that they add "the greatest education he ever received he got from his kids." (That's the truth.)</p>

498

<p>On the contrary, Marilee Jones was brought on board at MIT in "1979 to lead the recruitment efforts for women." So whether women are as qualified as men, and the criteria of qualified, is an essential part of this issue. What exactly did Jones do to recruit women? Were men shortchanged in this equation? If there is one group of people in the admissions pool who get no sympathy it is men. Particularly white men. And discussion of URMs, and who is admitted and who is not, are an essential part of many discussions regarding affirmative action. If you want to be politically correct, perhaps this is not the forum for you.</p>

499

<p>Marilee Jones: I never asked for this
Or planned it in advance
I was merely blown here
By the winds of chance
I never saw myself
As a Solomon or Socrates
I knew who I was:
One of your dime a dozen
Mediocrities</p>

<p>Then suddenly I'm here
Respected - worshipped, even
Just because the folks in MIT
Needed someone to believe in
Does it surprise you
I got hooked, and all too soon?
What can I say?
I got carried away
And not just by balloon</p>

<p>Wonderful
They called me "Wonderful"
So I said "Wonderful" - if you insist
I will be "Wonderful"
And they said "Wonderful"
Believe me, it's hard to resist
'Cause it feels wonderful
They think I'm wonderful</p>

<p>See - I never had a college experience of my own. So, I
guess I just wanted to give the applicants to MIT everything.</p>

<p>CC Parents: So you lied to them.</p>

<p>Marilee Jones: CC, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it "history."</p>

<p>A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist
There are precious few at ease
With moral ambiguities
So we act as though they don't exist</p>

<p>They call me "Wonderful"
So I am wonderful
In fact - it's so much who I am
It's part of my name...</p>

500

<p>I do not condone what Marilee Jones did. But I find many of the reactions here highly disturbing.</p>

<p>For people who feel unqualified women were accepted: That is incredibly insulting to the women who are students now and recent graduates. I know two, and they are two of the smartest people I’ve ever met. Clearly many of you would rather have more men on the MIT campus, and so reject more women. I find that sexist and chauvinistic. What – women can’t be a smart as men? They don’t belong at MIT? (I also think it’s a little strange that you would want to decrease the number of women around.) </p>

<p>I had no idea that there was such disgust and hatred for the way MIT accepts students. Clearly many people feel the wrong people were accepted while the right ones are now at Caltech or Iowa State or wherever. If the admissions office were accepting unqualified students, if students were unable to handle the work load, the admissions office would have been notified immediately to change its policy. The last thing MIT faculty want in classes is students who cannot handle the work. There would have been a directive from the faculty to admit more qualified students if that were the case. I’m confused by people calling MIT admissions “a circus” and claiming that high-achieving students are not being accepted. Are there that many incompetent people at MIT? Do you walk around school and point to people saying – there’s a mistake by Jones, and there’s another one and another one? Yes she did the wrong thing personally and professionally, but you’re going too far when you question every admission decision made in the last 9 years.</p>

<p>Jones is not responsible for the fact that 87% of applicants get rejected. If she hadn’t been dean, do you think more students would have gotten in? Maybe different ones would have been accepted – but even though she may have signed off on every acceptance, the process was mainly collaborative. If she were changing dozens of decisions singlehandedly, she would have had a very unhappy staff. </p>

<p>I’m going to suggest another scenario for what could have happened to Ms. Jones. She may or may not have lied on her first resume, and I could build a case that she might have been honest at first. But maybe at some point her secretary or assistant was filling out paperwork and called out – hey, you went to RPI, right? And next thing she knows, she’s listed with a degree and embarrassed to admit it was wrong. It became easier to live with the lie, and embellish it, than to correct it. It’s also possible that by the end, she had convinced herself that she had these degrees. I’m not condoning or excusing her actions – but I’m not prepared to call her things like amoral quite yet. </p>

<p>What she did was wrong, but the level of anger and insults being expressed here is extreme. I hope the story convinces people to be honest in the future. There are many posts on CC where kids ask if it’s OK to lie on their applications, and many other posts where kids say the absolute worst thing one could be is a snitch (and 60 Minutes just did a whole segment on the culture of covering up in this country today). Jones lied, someone snitched, she lost her job. In the end, I hope this story convinces students that being honest is the better road to take.</p>