<p>
[quote]
In fact, she should have substituted "fabricated" for "misrepresented."
[/quote]
Exactly. What a euphemism "misrepresented" is in this case. </p>
<p>Actually, mini, I think Americans love to celebrate successful college drop-outs like Bill Gates. There's something uplifting & inspiring about the nonconformist who follows his own path to success. We just hate liars.</p>
<p>When observing the changes in MIT's gender make-up over the years, it's important to think in terms of generalities, not specifics. You may be a brilliant teckie-type woman, or know several, or have given birth to one. But the truth is, more men than women will have off-the-charts mathematical ability than women. I have three friends who earned their BS & MS in math. Only two went on to earn PhDs. (Not in math, however.) They were both women. I'm not going to assume, from my own little sample, that women are more likely to study math or earn PhDs than men. Nor am I going to assume that because they were women, they didn't have what it took to continue their math studies, so they sought doctorates in the field of education. But I think that's what many people do --- make assumptions, based on their own associations with brilliant women math/science/engineeer types, that women are just as likely to choose math/science as men. Well, they aren't. </p>
<p>It's also been shown that girls are surpassing boys in measures of high school academic success. They are more likely to follow the rules, finish assignments, and join clubs. If MIT, or any college, wanted to recruit more girls, they could change their admissions guidelines to favor joiners & rule-followers in order to admit more girls. Aren't LACs realizing they have to change their guidelines, as well, because the admitted classes are too heavy with females?</p>
<p>This whole issue of gender dynamics in college applications is not as black and white as people are making it. Sure, it's easier to get into MIT, all other things being equal, if you're a woman instead of a man. Conversely, it's easier to get into Brown, all other things being equal, if you're a man instead of a woman. Should all the men admitted to Brown this year hang their heads in shame and have their degrees questioned for years to come? Or should we just recognize that colleges have to balance many factors in making their decisions? The focus of this thread, for me, is on one woman's hypocrisy and lies and not whether gender balance, or diversity, are valid considerations for college admission. She rallied primarily not for gender balance or diversity but on not padding your resume to impress colleges -- coming from the queen of resume padding, that's a hoot.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Admissions is a process that consists solely of assessing qualifications.
[/quote]
I don't think so at all. I think it's mostly about building a class. One aspect of what an institution will want is some minimal qualifications (set fairly high at MIT).</p>
<p>I actually think it makes sense that MIT may be looking for scientists who are also ____. (Fill in the blank with musicians, athletes, artists, comedians etc.) Less tech-y places may actually be able to accept more straight scientists because they'll have more of the other stuff in the rest of their student body. Not to say that there aren't also plenty of scientists and nothing but scientists at MIT too.</p>
<p>Burn this - That is the essence of her downfall, and makes it like a Greek Tragedy
[quote]
She rallied primarily not for gender balance or diversity but on not padding your resume to impress colleges -- coming from the queen of resume padding, that's a hoot.
[/quote]
Of course, you can see why Marilee knew Padding resumes was a problem :)</p>
<p>oceanview</p>
<p>I'll accept what you're saying a lot more readily when all kids in this country DO have access to a high quality elementary and secondary education. Since this is very far from being the case, I don't think you can argue that treatment should suddenly become equal at college admissions time.</p>
<p>And I agree with BurnThis. I think my son got an admissions boost by being a male applying to LACs. If he'd applied to MIT, the tables would have been turned. I really do believe that colleges are trying to admit a balanced class of human beings, not a table full of statistics.</p>
<p>Marite wrote: Of course, student pools vary by educational institution. But most teachers and profs will say something like "best student I've taught in my xxx years of teaching at this school (or string of schools). Unless they've taught at both HYP and Podunk U, profs will not be expected to compare students at Podunk U with those they taught at HYP. Same with high school teachers.</p>
<p>Absolutely right, Marite. That's why those boxes are not a particularly way to gather data. The basis of comparison is so variable that one generates and receives more useful information from a narrative presentation, a letter.</p>
<p>I've seen boxes on may other rec forms. Some ask to rank an applicant
Top 1%, top 5%, top 25%, and so forth. Some ask recommenders to rate applicants on a variety of metrics: "writes well" "maturity."
Some recommenders do not check those boxes; others do. All seem to write longer narratives. I've heard people say that checking these boxes is a way of contextualizing some of the hyperbole of the narratives. If a recommender describes an applicant as "brilliant"' but then rates him/her only a 3 for a certain metric, that might give the adcom pause.<br>
So both types of approaches, the boxes and the long narratives, have their uses.</p>
<p>"I'll accept what you're saying a lot more readily when all kids in this country DO have access to a high quality elementary and secondary education."</p>
<p>I think just about no one minds giving extra consideration to students who objectively haven't had the opportunities to show their stuff that others have, through no fault of their own (say, those who attend inner-city public schools with few AP courses, or those who had to work through school to help support the family).</p>
<p>I think all of that is absolutely justified and fine. The problem is that skin color and gender are NOT appropriate proxies for genuine disadvantage.</p>
<p>"Actually, mini, I think Americans love to celebrate successful college drop-outs like Bill Gates. There's something uplifting & inspiring about the nonconformist who follows his own path to success. We just hate liars."</p>
<p>Yeah. And moms who have lunch with the CEO of IBM on a regular basis, and pitch sonnyboy's business idea so that maybe she can get him to move out of the garage. ;)</p>
<p>I think she was spectacularly successful in her chosen field of endeavor (even though I found her message mostly a bunch of pandering), and her lies don't change her success or lack thereof one way or the other.</p>
<p>
<p>I think all of that is absolutely justified and fine. The problem is that skin color and gender are NOT appropriate proxies for genuine disadvantage.
</p>
<p>Absolutely true. America, in general, uses the mostly-bygone foes of racial and gender discrimination to misdirect attention from the current problems of sexuality-based and economic/social class discrimination (though the latter is much more pertinent to college admissions).</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Burn this - That is the essence of her downfall, and makes it like a Greek Tragedy<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Yeah, with CC as the Chorus.</p>
<p>My post 371
[Quote]
I agree with Garland it does indeed have all the makings of a classic tragedy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Adcoms as the gods on Mt. Olympus (they had their own character flaws, too). Applicants as the mortals acting out their fates; CC functioning as a Greek chorus.</p>
<p>^^^^ ROFL !! At last, a little humor!!!!!!!!!!!!!</p>
<p>Where do we go to get our Robes?</p>
<p>My friend called and asked if I had heard abouth this situation. I told her I knew. She had spoken to a firend who works at MIT (pretty responsible position) and they all feel sorry for poor Mrs. Jones, especially since her sister has cancer, and she is going through a divorce, and she did such a great job! I pointed out that it was a job she received through fraud, deceit and outright lies. Yes, but she did so much good! And how far has she set others back? Marilee took a job that someone who worked for many years in college should have had. And who is to say that person wouldn't have done things better, or differently, and still well? Somehow, she has become the victim here, and isn't it time we start making people accountable for what they do, and stop giving them excuses? Why is this OK for Marilee? Because she is a friend of a friend? My friend came around, especially after I told her that she expects her own jr. high students to own up to their actions. If they should, then shouldn't Marilee? She also said that the MIT scuttlebutt is that she has done such a wonderful job that she will land a job at a small institution that normally couldn't get someone with her experience. (I am happy they said that, not her qualifications!) And that she will write a tell-all book, too. Here we go again! I will be appalled if this happens. Can't they just go away quietly?</p>
<p>Where? :eek:</p>
<p>Where do you get your robes? Go to the bedding thread on the Parents Cafe, then check out this link:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.hypatia-lovers.com/page24.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.hypatia-lovers.com/page24.html</a></p>
<p>How funny! Marite, whre were you when I had to sew a toga?</p>
<p>It sounds like Marilee will land on her feet. Wonder if the divorce came before/during her "outing".</p>
<p>After we have our togas we can gather together by the columns in front of the infinite corridor for our chorus roles</p>