Why would an Ivy League college suspend a destitute Black boy for a year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He cheated and then skipped the meeting to discuss it? How is the college supposed to know that he's so economically precarious that he will be homeless (if he can't what, live in the dorms?) if he doesn't go to the meetings? Presumably, they figured he would go live at home or wherever he lived last year. But yes, he is supposed to learn his lesson and not cheat anymore.

He was not a remote student, he was living in the dorm as required. It was not a remote course, it was an online assignment.

Presumably he lived somewhere before he started college? That's probably where they assumed he would go. Because he didn't tell them otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All cheating is bad regardless and if you take a chance cheating, you take a chance of getting caught. No sympathy, whether it's him or my wealthy white/South Asian daughter.

Thank you for dropping your mask and revealing your racism and classism. I feel sorry for you that you can't seeing the evil involved when Ivy League PhDs bait and entrap low-income unsophisticated students with online assignments loaded with tracking software, railroad them with Ivy bureaucracy when they know they have zero resources, and quite literally make them homeless for a year. A college with tens of billions of dollars in an endowment. Literally putting this teen boy in jail for a year would be safer. At least he would have shelter and food.

Would you feel same for White student?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A young man I mentored years ago randomly reached out to me on facebook for advice because he is homeless after his college suspended him for cheating on an online assignment. He believes he was caught with some sort of tracking software, which he wasn't aware of. He said wealthier classmates cheat, but are savvier ex. know to do it with more than one computer. He fessed up when caught but was too embarrassed to go to a meeting they had about it. He was later notified he was kicked out for two semesters (sounds like a default judgment in court?). I'm not going to rationalize cheating but I believe there are varying degrees of it and don't get how or why a filthy rich college would throw a destitute Black teenager out on the street to punish him? A year out of college, locked out of campus recruiting, delaying his graduation and professional start a year, is more severe punishment than most campus rapists. And for what? Is he supposed to learn his lesson and come back reformed? Wouldn't this young man be better served if he was given resources and mentors, instead of being sent kicked to the curb with zero resources? Or is this a roundabout way of expelling him, as in they hope he doesn't come back?

Google says over 95% of first-generation lowest income students who step away from college never end up returning and/or never graduate. If I can find that on Google in five seconds, safe bet all the PhDs there know this too. In other words, this is a de facto expulsion, they don't want him coming back and costing them more financial aid money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All cheating is bad regardless and if you take a chance cheating, you take a chance of getting caught. No sympathy, whether it's him or my wealthy white/South Asian daughter.

Thank you for dropping your mask and revealing your racism and classism. I feel sorry for you that you can't seeing the evil involved when Ivy League PhDs bait and entrap low-income unsophisticated students with online assignments loaded with tracking software, railroad them with Ivy bureaucracy when they know they have zero resources, and quite literally make them homeless for a year. A college with tens of billions of dollars in an endowment. Literally putting this teen boy in jail for a year would be safer. At least he would have shelter and food.

Would you feel same for White student?

LOL, of course they wouldn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All cheating is bad regardless and if you take a chance cheating, you take a chance of getting caught. No sympathy, whether it's him or my wealthy white/South Asian daughter.

Thank you for dropping your mask and revealing your racism and classism. I feel sorry for you that you can't seeing the evil involved when Ivy League PhDs bait and entrap low-income unsophisticated students with online assignments loaded with tracking software, railroad them with Ivy bureaucracy when they know they have zero resources, and quite literally make them homeless for a year. A college with tens of billions of dollars in an endowment. Literally putting this teen boy in jail for a year would be safer. At least he would have shelter and food.

Would you feel same for White student?

Yes, making a teen student homeless, no job, no car, and literally endangering their life in one of the most dangerous major cities in the nation is wickedly evil. They have tens of billions of dollars at their disposal.

[Anonymous]

Why don’t you take him into your home for the year? Let him work at Mc Donald’s.

[Anonymous]

In answer to the question in your subject line, it appears they suspended him for a year because he cheated and didn't show up for the meeting to discuss his cheating. At that meeting, he could have accepted responsibility, apologized, offered any mitigating circumstances, and even explained why suspension would be particularly devastating for him. They may have informed him that he had a right to appeal the suspension. There could have been a discussion about appropriate consequences. But he didn't go. That was a mistake. There may well have been resources available to him (both in terms of tutoring and mentoring and in terms of navigating the case) but he didn't take advantage of them, either before or after.

[Anonymous]

The one-year suspension was a standard thing for a variety of infractions at Harvard for a very long time. Not sure if it still is, if this is where it happened. I agree that it is a counterproductive measure when it comes to economically disadvantaged students. My college boyfriend went through that over 30 years ago. He had no stable home to go to, but at least he wasn’t homeless. He managed to get through the suspension working for UPS and returned the next school year. But a big part of the reason he got through it was because he had me and other close college friends with plenty of resources who helped him out, stayed in touch, even housed him occasionally in our dorm rooms (which was against policy) until we were ratted out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All cheating is bad regardless and if you take a chance cheating, you take a chance of getting caught. No sympathy, whether it's him or my wealthy white/South Asian daughter.

Thank you for dropping your mask and revealing your racism and classism. I feel sorry for you that you can't seeing the evil involved when Ivy League PhDs bait and entrap low-income unsophisticated students with online assignments loaded with tracking software, railroad them with Ivy bureaucracy when they know they have zero resources, and quite literally make them homeless for a year. A college with tens of billions of dollars in an endowment. Literally putting this teen boy in jail for a year would be safer. At least he would have shelter and food.

Would you feel same for White student?

Yes, making a teen student homeless, no job, no car, and literally endangering their life in one of the most dangerous major cities in the nation is wickedly evil. They have tens of billions of dollars at their disposal.

It's not a hotel or a homeless shelter. It's a college. He's an adult. They suspended him because he cheated. They did not intentionally make him homeless; it is not normally the case that a residential student doesn't have a permanent home (which is where they typically live during the summers, after all). The college was unlikely to know that he would be homeless, especially because he never told them that because he never talked to them about the cheating or the suspension.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like he’s not cut out for the Ivy League. This may be a blessing in disguise. If he was smart enough to be excepted, then he should be smart enough to navigate a way forward. Join the military.

[Anonymous]

I’m wondering if he actually was kicked out of school for drugs, possession or dealing or both. Or some other criminal activity which caused him to be kicked off campus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like he’s not cut out for the Ivy League. This may be a blessing in disguise. If he was smart enough to be excepted, then he should be smart enough to navigate a way forward. Join the military.

*accepted. Voice typo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like he’s not cut out for the Ivy League. This may be a blessing in disguise. If he was smart enough to be excepted, then he should be smart enough to navigate a way forward. Join the military.

Yes. Too immoral to know that cheating is wrong. Too stupid to get away with cheating. Too socially inept to weasel his way out of well-deserved punishment. Frankly he has no business in the Ivy League.

To be fair, morality isn't really required to graduate from an Ivy League.

[Anonymous]

Well, the world needs ditch-diggers, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like he’s not cut out for the Ivy League. This may be a blessing in disguise. If he was smart enough to be excepted, then he should be smart enough to navigate a way forward. Join the military.

Yes. Too immoral to know that cheating is wrong. Too stupid to get away with cheating. Too socially inept to weasel his way out of well-deserved punishment. Frankly he has no business in the Ivy League.

To be fair, morality isn't really required to graduate from an Ivy League.

In fact, it’s probably the opposite.