<p>You know, when we stop bothering to feel outrage (or even worse, told we don't have the right to feel this--to "move on") at people lying and cheating their way to the "top," it could be the end of the world as we have known it. >></p>
<p>Agree with you for sure. But, let's think for a second. Nixon and Clinton had their little ethical lapses too. Nixon ended up with a state funeral, and Clinton is still flying under the "Senior statesman" flag. Heck, he may even be the "first man" in two years - don't see many speaking up with moral outrage there. :) </p>
<p>The truth is, we aren't still talking about this because MIT is intrinsic to our self-worth as Americans (sorry, cheers!), because our little discussion is going to change anything, or even because Marilee Jones was the equivalent of the leader of the free world (she wasn't), but because we all love to see the mighty fall. Pure and simple. Not saying there's anything wrong with that - it's human nature to want to mull over the failings of others. </p>
<p>I agree that what Marilee Jones did was wrong and I feel very, very sorry for the fact that her actions are detracting from what was actually a very good message that more need to hear. But I don't see how beating the dead horse changes anything, really. </p>
<p>Again, I'm just playing devil's advocate as this is supposed to be a discussion with many viewpoints, after all. I am sorry for interupting. I'll leave you to the discussion now.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, MIT, as one of two of our best Math/Science universities, is intrinsic to our concept of ourselves as inventive Americans--in a way that Virginia Tech is not. MIT and CALTECH produce superior graduates who lead the way in technological inventiveness, a key source of our superpower status and economic prosperity over the last 50 years.</p>
<p>We all have a stake in the survivial and continued excellence of MIT and Caltech.
[quote]
But this story might also lead one to ask, "What is an education for?" - to which the answer is surely not "to acquire a piece of paper" - a question which, at bottom, also underlies Hong Kong's move to a new university curriculum and the simultaneous proposals to position Hong Kong as a regional educational hub.</p>
<p>It is often easy to confuse, I think, the paper credentials conferred by a degree with the real skills and abilities presumably acquired while at university.
[quote]
However, one interpretation of the scenario playing out at MIT is that society's all-too-frequent insistence on paper credentials, or credentials of a certain type, where they might not in fact be necessary or, more exactly, not be an entirely relevant indicator of the requisite skills and abilities, can - at least on occasion - lead to perverse results.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This author brings a different perspective to the discussion. ;)
Demonstrating again the universal interest in the topic. "What is College For?"</p>
<p>Maybe these papers didn't get the memo that Jones has a degree. She was college educated. She had the paper credentials she needed for her job, had she just told the truth from the beginning. These may be good questions, but they have little to do with Jones.</p>
<p>I think that pleasure in seeing the mighty fall is really off the mark as to what has been expressed here, carolyn.</p>
<p>See beurah's thread in the cafe, which attempts to get to the bottom of what some are feeling about the seeming ethical/moral collapse in the world around us. The most pressing concern is how this affects our children.</p>
<p>P.S. I personally have tons of outrage over Clinton and the possibility that he may be our country's "roving ambassador" if Mrs. C. wins. Others feel differently, just as they do about MJ.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I agree that what Marilee Jones did was wrong and I feel very, very sorry for the fact that her actions are detracting from what was actually a very good message that more need to hear. But I don't see how beating the dead horse changes anything, really.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Carolyn, it is not that black and white. </p>
<p>Some of us can feel sorry for the person, even find some plausible excuse, and still see that the "infamous message worth hearing" was as hypocritical and misleading as the original r</p>
<p>I don't love to see the mighty fall simply because they are mighty. I don't like to see anyone fall who didn't deserve it. The honest mighty can stay mighty as far as I'm concerned. But I do like to see hypocrisy exposed and wrong-doers punished. </p>
<p>Seeing wrongs uncovered and righted provides a sense of justice to world. On a more everyday level, it also provides a cautionary example to point to on those countless CC threads where kids ask if it's okay or will they get caught if they exaggerate or lie on their applications.</p>
<p>Jones is 'mighty' precisely because of her position at MIT. She is not inherently mighty. </p>
<p>This story wouldn't have legs if MIT weren't tied to American identity and prosperity. It wouldn't have legs is Jones were the head of admissions at a school like Virginia Tech, a school with far less impact on our national culture and prosperity.</p>
<p>That's the part that interests me. </p>
<p>Also, the semi-complicity or brain-dead behavior of MIT interests me. Probably my keenest interest involves the fact that MIT allowed itself to go brain-dead, (for more than a decade <em>ahem</em>), when it was supposedly 'promoting' women scientists. </p>
<p>There is an element of sabotoge on the personal (Jones vs employer) and institutional (MIT vs women scientists) level. IMO only.</p>
<p>I'll keep reading the thread to see if anyone uncovers more information about what went wrong in MIT's chain of command.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The truth is, we aren't still talking about this because MIT is intrinsic to our self-worth as Americans (sorry, cheers!), because our little discussion is going to change anything, or even because Marilee Jones was the equivalent of the leader of the free world (she wasn't), but because we all love to see the mighty fall. Pure and simple.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Carolyn, that is, and will probably always be, the only offensive thing you have ever said on Cc, and it grieves me to see you hold that opinion.</p>
<p>What can I say, but that you are wrong, and it really is possible to take issue with both the lack of principles, and the support of that lack of principles, and not because you see someone's idea of "mighty" as fallen.</p>
<p>This makes me sadder than maybe anything else i have read here.</p>
<p>She (Merilee) maybe wasn't so mighty but MIT is, and some people do delight in finding fault there, especially if they or their kid did not get in. Maybe that's what Carolyn was saying. I don't believe MIT has fallen at all, but I have certainly heard some people crowing about this.</p>
<p>I have to agree with what ASAP wrote a ways back that this thread is long, in part, because the topic has to do with college admissions and this is a college admissions website, as opposed to some other threads of news that happened on college campuses. I assume that many readers here come to this site with an interest in college admissions (among other interests) and so this thread really relates. I am not into it being a "bash Marilee Jones" thread as I just am not into that kind of "talk." But I think what makes this story more interesting isn't so much that it was at MIT, but that this particular adcom was a very public adcom who spoke widely around the country and in a book preaching a message. While I agree with Carolyn that her message was a good message....I think I have to take the message (which again I think has validity) with a grain of salt because of the huge hypocrisy in that the message was preached by someone who did not follow her own preaching in her own life. The message is a good one if it is now put forth by someone else but the validity of the messenger in this instance is called into question. Sorry, but even though she had good messages and tried to do good things, for which I give her credit, that stuff has a pale put on it because of the irony of all that she preached. It is hard to listen to someone telling others to do something that they can't even do themselves. That is why this story isn't simply hearing of someone who lied on their resume....something that likely is done quite frequently....but more to do with the influence she had over applicants and families through her speaking engagements and book, persuading others (including young impressionable people) to do one thing, while she egregiously did another. She not only changed the name of her college on her resume to benefit herself (in her perception) but added degrees and then when others called her "Dr." she did not correct the misconception and I can't imagine the kind of thinking that goes on in one's head when someone addresses you as something you are not and you just let it go. It is one thing to be called a curse word and let it go and another to accept being labeled as having an accomplishment or title that you never earned. She had the ultimate padded resume (again, nothing so different than likely many others must do) but she kept weaving the lies over time and then went out on a limb to preach that others NOT pad resumes as it was not needed to get ahead in college admissions or to be successful in life. </p>
<p>So, for those who followed the wisdom of her advice (and truly I do think she had a good message), it is understandable to feel that they have been "had." To me, that is why this was more than a typical "leader lied" type thing. Her actions ran in the opposite extreme to the persuasive message she so publicly espoused. It really is too bad because had she not lied, she really was doing some good work. But now her work has lost some validity due to the hypocrisy involved. </p>
<p>I see nothing wrong with discussing this on a college admissions forum. I'd rather not see bashing and I'd rather not see this spill over into what people think of MIT or MIT admissions. I think this is simply about the actions of this person and her public work. She was a public person after all, out of choice. Given her lying that she had to hold in all this time, it is kinda interesting that she put herself in the public limelight and risked being found out.</p>
<p>For me, it has nothing to do with seeing someone who is "mighty" fall. I take no pleasure in it. Actually, in one of the early pages, I said I felt badly for Marilee to be so shamed and fallen. It is her own doing but it is rather sad and I am sure a very difficult time being so public and all. </p>
<p>Carolyn, I am assuming that maybe you could be conflicted because you liked Marilee and liked her message and she was doing good work and now she is shamed and fallen. That is very difficult. Yes, she did good things. One bad thing doesn't erase all the good someone has done. I truly believe that. Still, however, one can discuss the wrongness of the one bad thing that person did, without taking joy in seeing her fall or without bashing her as a person. I know lots of people I LOVE who have done some things that I find to be really wrong, but I like the other things they have done and I still love them. But I can be critical of the wrong thing they have done that has caused pain for someone else. It is not an all or nothing proposition.</p>
<p>soozievt
I think I can put myself in the same position in which you have just placed Carolyn. But what I find troubling on this thread is that some posters seem to be out for blood. To me, the disgrace she has brought upon herself and her family, community, school etc etc is a 'punishment.' However, other posters seem to feel that it's not enough. I'm not sure what some posters would like to see happen to her- have her toe nails pulled out, sent to jail for 10 years?</p>
<p>I think I take issue with the idea that Marilee has done good work. In what way? She made many statements about the need to reduce the cut-throat nature of college admissions, but those statements had no relation to reality, as far as I can see. The battlefield is still there, and I actually think it is misleading to try to convince kids that they can gain a spot at ANY selective school without the GPA, test scores or ECs that they truly need. When was the last time a regular kid got into MIT or Harvard or any other "elite" school? Just because the verbiage is softer, kinder or whatever doesn't change the reality. </p>
<p>I think it's better when the expectations and standards are clear -- then kids aren't as disappointed when they don't get into a school like MIT.</p>
<p>Andi, I don't know why you think anyone is out for blood here. Most posters just seem really disappointed that someone in a position of responsibility abrogated that duty. I don't want to see her sent to jail -- I do think it's right that she lose her status in the academic community. I think she could have phrased her "resignation" speech more honestly.</p>