Not only was she stupid enough to post such things on her personal accounts, but even worse, she “liked” the posting from the official admissions account.
Says a lot about the quality of the admissions staff. I wonder if her food interests also influenced admissions decisions (she had been admission officer since 2014). BTW she is also a 2011 Stanford grad.
Wow how stupid do you have to be to do something like that?! She is 30-year old Stanford alum, not a silly teenager.
Still, one bad apple doesn’t say much about the quality of the admissions staff as a whole. This is like saying the Harvard professor currently on the news for decades-long allegations of sexual assault is a representation of the entire Harvard faculty.
This is a whole lot of nothing. The only problem I see is that she liked some of her posts on her personal account from the Stanford account. Yeah, that’s a bit unprofessional, and merits an official reprimand.
But the digs at her personal account… who cares… a young woman enjoying her life, cursing (gasp!!!), drinking alcohol (ohhh noooooooes!!!). And folks taking all of that and inferring that she may be racist toward white applicants? Give me a freakin break.
At most, she should be reprimanded by her supervisor, with a letter put in her personnel file.
Generally agree with the harvardandberkeley poster. However, I am not so impressed that Stanford accepted her into their school in the first place. lol I hope Stanford doesn’t judge student applicants by their social media posts either when they have their admissions staff as a fine example.
I am thinking maybe my kid should have applied to Yale or Harvard also. jk
What dramatic reaction? It was just my tiny impression. I see no big deal. Had I researched her social media posts, I would not have accepted her into my college. Colleges make such subjective decisions all the time for even lesser things.
Only the irony is that someone of questionable character/personal qualities will be evaluating your character/personal qualities!!! (according to the Stanford CDS it is a very important factor in admissions)
This is true for Harvard faculty that hires the best of best in their areas. But for Stanford admissions? The only qualification to get a job in Stanford admissions is that you couldn’t find another one elsewhere.
@CA94309 Well of course a spot as an employee at Stanford (or Harvard or anything other top school) admissions office is not really coveted or prestigious and doesnt attract the best of the best like a faculty position at Stanford or Harvard does. Still doesn’t mean that everyone at the Stanford admissions office is useless and stupid just because one young employee showed some lack of judgement. And similarly not every Harvard faculty member is of questionable character just because one of them is. It is the same principle, just different settings. You can’t generalize.
To clarify, I don’t think the person is a “bad apple” or anything. I just said if I were an admissions officer of a top college (or any college) or a head of an organization that values certain image or trustworthiness and I searched her social media posts, I would not accept her. I am pretty sure had my kid posted similar posts on his social media and the Stanford Adcom found and read such social media posts, my kid would not have gotten in. That’s all I am saying. Who knows, some colleges and some employers would hire her and found her posts just awesome but not me.
@lookingforward Spot on. And lets not forget the house dean at Yale who got caught posting inappropriate things online 1-2 years ago. Things happen all the time. Something as silly but innocuous as this is of no practical importance and doesn’t lend itself to any wider generalizations about the admissions office or the school.
It’s easy to take excoriate someone whom you do not know or have not met. I, however, have met this admissions officer. During Admit Weekend two years ago, I had a very enjoyable conversation with her. She was professional, warm, sincere, remembered details about my daughter’s application, and advocated for her. She obviously paid dearly for her indiscretion