MIT admissions dean resigns over resume fraud. Ouch!

Parents Forum
701

<p>"It is just as likely that the qualifications of the top 50% of female applicants to MIT equal or exceed the top 10% of male applicants to MIT, as it is for the admissions results to be due to discrimination."</p>

<p>Chedva - It is possible, not likely given the male to female skew at the top end of standardized test score. However if this ever comes to court it would be easy enough to settle. Honestly if you are the cient (MIT) would you have your lawyers investigate this at $500 an hour? I think my explanation the more likely and that discovery would rule yours out though obviously without the applications to look at anything is possible.</p>

<p>My honest assumption would be that the two pools of applicants were pretty similar over all apart from size but that MIT dug deeper into the female pool to make the quota. Do you honestly think that is not the case?</p>

702

<p>Perhaps, one of the differences is seen in the Teacher Evaluation Forms for MIT and Chicago. Chicago's is a blank sheet - the teacher writes a letter of recommendation - it is his/her choice of what to say. </p>

<p>The MIT form has many specific questions. Questions which violate the principles of valid survey construction. Some of these questions have been the topic of other CC threads, especially the one which asks:</p>

<p>"How has the applicant achieved good grades in your class? Check as many as apply. The choices are Consistent Hard Work, Grade Conciousness, Virtue of Memory, Brilliance of Mind, Other."</p>

<p>Many posters raised issues with this question such as: Does the high school teacher actually have the data to make this conclusion? Many teachers have no idea of how much students study outside class. Some kids brag about never studying while studying several hours per night. Other brag about the opposite, complaining of staying up all night when they are, in actuality watching MTV.</p>

<p>Some teachers, may value hard work and think they are doing a favor to a student to check that box, not knowing that MIT is looking for brilliance. The problem list associated with this question goes on and on. </p>

<p>I think I understand the perspective M. Jones wanted when she drafted this question, but the problems associated with it are numerous and evidence of a poorly designed questionnaire. Similarly, she asked the teacher to evaluate the student "compared to other students you have taught......" This type of comparison question invites other complicating issues - a student is not judged independently but in reference to others. Is the bar higher or lower if a student attends a top tier school?A low performing school? </p>

<p>Not to mention that she asked questions regarding "integrity". What a joke!</p>

<p>Any graduate student in the sciences or social sciences would have taken many courses which incorporate the nuances of survey design. M. Jones was thought to have degrees that would have incorporated such coursework or experience. She had none. </p>

<p>Perhaps that begins to explain why some are calling into question admissions under this director. Not to mention the obvious problems already mentioned, including, possible mental problems, possibility for extortion, etc.</p>

703

<p>The return of the repressed.</p>

704

<p>I have a math/science son. Who didn't get in. I have no problem really with either some affirmative action for women and URMs. I think they benefit the school ultimately. What worried me more was that Jones seemed to be giving less credit than I would have liked to the kids who are passionate about math or science (or in our case computer programming) in favor of artists, dreamers and actors. But given the huge number of kids who apply, and not being able to be a fly on the wall, I have no idea what went on in the admissions office when they read my son's application. Nothing in the world could make my son write the touchy-feely application I think Jones was looking for. But I could It may have hurt him. Or it may just be there were too many similar kids. I never thought his odds were better than 1 in 4. I suppose part of me will always wonder a little if someone else had been in charge (a real scientist maybe?) if they might have been better at reading between the lines.</p>

705

<p>
[quote]
Wonder if they checked the Resumes and verified the Degrees of the other 65 applicants?

[/quote]
My husband (who works at a med school) is frequently on committees to hire new faculty. I asked him if they ever check out resumes. His answer was never. It's not as stupid as it sounds, since the part of the resume they care about - the last position or two will be verified by the recommendations. Still someone could probably easily lie about where they'd attended as an undergrad and no one would ever know.</p>

706

<p>
[quote]
Finally, from a mother's point of view, I wouldn't want my son to attend a school with much less than 50% girls. Part of the college experience is dating, developing social skills etc. For a quiet, math/science kid, that can be challenging. That's one reason that we encouraged him to look at schools which attract a variety of students.

[/quote]
I agree completely. It's one of the reasons I preferred MIT to Caltech.</p>

<p>But at least on the CC boards kids have been complaining about MIT admissions policies for as long as I have been here.</p>

707

<p>
[quote]
What worried me more was that Jones seemed to be giving less credit than I would have liked to the kids who are passionate about math or science (or in our case computer programming) in favor of artists, dreamers and actors.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>OMG these posts are getting more absurd by the minute!! </p>

<p>God forbid they should admit some of those touchy feely musicians. Werner Heisenberg was a talented pianist- I guess we wouldn't want him admitted over someone who was a PURE math and science person. </p>

<p>Puhleeeezz</p>

708

<p>I am late to this thread, and couldn't read the whole thing so I am
sorry if this has been pointed out. One interesting item in this
whole matter is that Ms. Jones was able to actually work her way up
thru the MIT admissions bureaucracy, and perform at a very high level
WITHOUT a college degree. Doesn't this incident really point out the
fallacy we place on the importance of college degrees and the fight
to get into the very top schools? Possibly the most influential AD owed her
success to being excellent at criteria learned outside college. How necessary
is a degree anyway in running the Admissions process?</p>

709

<p>“I think many people have downplayed Ms. Jones' role in admissions far too much.”</p>

<p>I completely agree. I think her success speaks volumes. The sadness and the tragedy come from the fact that she and her team have been so successful in communicating the mission and message of MIT that those who love the place fear her astounding transgression will cut short the dialogue that has begun.</p>

<p>Whether or not you agree with the institutional priorities for diversity set further up the chain, we have all benefited from MIT’s emphasis on transparency and their attempt to de-mystify the admissions process. Ben Jones, Matt McGann, Bryan Nance, and the dedicated bloggers and lively CC posters who flesh out the MIT culture and experience have been so successful that MIT has become even more selective, increasing their yield each year. So successful in fact that I believe the MIT admissions bashing has notched up each year as a result. There are more rejected students and competing universities feeling the pinch. </p>

<p>Their accessibility has created a forum for discussion and dissention, and I personally wouldn’t have it any other way. I love MIT for my son. I just feel the profound loss of the story that could have been told had Marilee Jones lived up to her message and not created the current doubt troubling those rejected and those accepted. It’s not fair to either.</p>

710

<p>


I'm pretty sure admissions to schools in Germany in the early 20th century were practically only based on scores, so Heisenberg probably had to be pretty good at math and science to study under Sommerfeld at the University in Munich. My guess is that he was admitted over many people who had more striking talents outside of math and science who were not as capable as him when it came to math and physics. I guess, though, we'll never really know how those people would have done, but I don't think bringing up Heisenberg really supports your claim.</p>

711

<p>
[quote]
How necessary is a degree anyway in running the Admissions process?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Apparently not necessary at all. Not at MIT.</p>

<p>
[quote]
...perform at a very high level...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's debatable.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Doesn't this incident really point out the fallacy we place on the importance of college degrees

[/quote]
</p>

<p>For every person that is "successful" without a degree, there are many who are more successful with a degree.</p>

<p>A college degree is very important.</p>

712

<p>"Twenty years ago, few females entered the AIME contest, and only slightly over 2,000 students (mostly males) qualified. The reason MIT can enroll 45% females has nothing to do with gender discrimination. It has everything to do with the fact that more high-school females are enrolling in the top math classes. If you're interested in statistics, you can track the shift in high-school math enrollments at the National Center for Education Statistics."</p>

<p>CalAlum - You miss the point entirely. The question of discrimination has nothing to do with qualifications. MIT could fill its class entirely with men and they would all be eminently qualified. Likewise they could fill it entirely with women and have them all be emminently qualified. They could fill it all with Asians or Caucasians or African Americans if they wanted. Discrination involves the preference to fill the class with people of a given race, religion, nationality, sex, gender, sexual orientation or other arbitrary characteristic.</p>

<p>When the Ivy league schools put a quota on the number of Jews they would accept back in the bad old days it didn't mean they were accepting unqualified WASPS it meant they were rejecting qualified Jews for arbitrary and unreasonable reasons.</p>

713

<p>mathmon, with regards to Post 705, committees might not verify resumes, but the Human Resources dept. does. I was recently on a search committee and the HR people handled/verified the official transcripts of the applicants. Even at the lowly community college I teach, everyone applying for a job has to submit official transcripts from all colleges attended. Also, they routinely ask employees to submit updated resumes.</p>

714

<p>Andi, no not at all. I think MIT benefits from kids with other interests. Even before all this broke it sometimes seemed to me like MIT was emphasizing non-science aspects more than I would have liked. I've got no beef against multi-talented people and have known plenty of them. Obviously MIT have the right to make the decisions they believe are right for their institution. As far as I know the institution was happy with the classes Jones was putting together for them. </p>

<p>I wonder if people would be less indignant about MIT's admissions policies if they were a "university" instead of an "Institute of Technology"? </p>

<p>I've got conflicted feelings about the whole business, to some extent colored by my son's admissions results. </p>

<p>And I agree with the poster who said that they had found the teacher recommendation forms problematic.</p>

715

<p>cghen
my point is that disgruntled applicants or their parents of will tailor the saga of Marilee Jones to fit their own sorry stories. First it's to denigrate the women who have gotten in and now it's artists and dreamers who apparently write "touchy feely" essays (interesting deduction here- I guess we know how some people view creative types).
I never realized that being creative and being a serious scientist were mutually exclusive.</p>

716

<p>
[quote]
The MIT form has many specific questions. Questions which violate the principles of valid survey construction. Some of these questions have been the topic of other CC threads, especially the one which asks:</p>

<p>"How has the applicant achieved good grades in your class? Check as many as apply. The choices are Consistent Hard Work, Grade Conciousness, Virtue of Memory, Brilliance of Mind, Other."

[/quote]
Anecdotal aside: My son's teachers didn't bother to fill in that form two years ago, they just sent the letter they would have sent to any other school, as they did for all students applying to MIT. My son was admitted, as were 12 other students from his class, and 16 students in the two classes since his. It's not a requirement for teachers to fill in that form. (And my son is a math/science/compsci guy. Of course, he is much more than that, as are most students.)

[quote]
I never realized that being creative and being a serious scientist were mutually exclusive.

[/quote]
Amen, andi.</p>

717

<p>
[quote]
I just feel the profound loss of the story that could have been told had Marilee Jones lived up to her message and not created the current doubt troubling those rejected and those accepted

[/quote]

Thank you for the sentiment. Well put.</p>

718

<p>^Maybe not mutually exclusive but possibly not really correlated either if by "creative" you mean musically talented. You could be highly talented musically and completely incapable of doing math, etc. at the level needed for MIT, or you could be a brilliant scientist and unable to carry a tune, so why is musical talent considered at all? In what way does it really help MIT to get the "best" people? What about other "talents" - having a great fashion sense say , should this be considered too? Being an sharp dresser and a serious scientist are not mutually exclusive either. What if instead of musical talent, the extraneous "plus" factor was some upper class pursuit - say polo playing ability. Would it be okay with you to consider that kind of extraneous factor or are only certain externalities allowed to be taken into account? Wouldn't it result in a stronger student body if such extraneous factors were ignored entirely?</p>

719

<p>"There is even some denial that this private university ought to have discretion in how it composes its classes."</p>

<p>Mootmom - certainly a private university ought to have discretion in how it composes it classes within the comfines of the law. I presume that if a private university's discretion resulted in a class of all white males you might find something amiss in the extent of the discretion they have been afforded. Certainly the federal courts would.</p>

720

<p>
[quote]
and now it's artists and dreamers who apparently write "touchy feely" essays (interesting deduction here- I guess we know how some people view creative types).
I never realized that being creative and being a serious scientist were mutually exclusive.

[/quote]
Are you purposely misreading my posts? I don't think they are mutually exclusive at all. The reason I'm an architect is that I liked both math and art. I consider myself a creative type. Really. I also might have even been a scientist if my high school hadn't provided such a lousy science education. Tuesday's New York Times was always my favorite day because of the Science Section. I read my son's essays and I didn't think they were touchy-feely enough for what it seems like many (not just MIT) admissions committees appear to be looking for, but for better or worse they were him and off they went. </p>

<p>I had no idea really what MIT was looking for when they describe "the match". As someone else said it could just as easily describe the goals of her Girl Scout Troop.</p>