The Newest College Admissions Ploy: Paying to Make Your Teen a “Peer-Reviewed” Author

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is complete garbage.

People, just because something is in writing doesn't make it true. Don't fall for this stuff. Safe to say that most kids getting accepted to college aren't published. Don't believe the hype.

+100%!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some AOs can see through this BS, but unfortunately some can’t. That’s the problem when colleges consider non-academic factors. “Peer-reviewed” publications, starting your own business, starting a charity, etc.

The AOs at the most coveted and elite schools for which people engage in this nonsense universally can see through the bullshit. I promise you.

I hope so but apparently no all AOs see through that. Someone brought up students from China who did fake research. International schools are a huge cottage industry there. Rich families don’t want their kids to go through the grueling Gaokao (standardized college entrance exam) to get into domestic colleges. They send their kids to international schools like BASIS and take the American curriculum. BTW, BASIS intl schools in China are paying teachers over $100k (USD!) per year, in a country where the average income is just over $10k. Ridiculous. And then there’s the “counseling” system to tailor their college apps to fit the taste of American college AOs. And the real sad part is that these American AOs love them! They pay full tuition and don’t apply for scholarship or financial aid. All cash. Not just the Ivys. A lot of state schools love them too. It’s all about $$$.

[Anonymous]

It's just the latest ploy by companies preying on the fear of parents and separating them from their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's just the latest ploy by companies preying on the fear of parents and separating them from their money.

True with a lot of upper and middle class whites but especially a problem among some Asian communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

“Nowadays, having a publication is kind of a given” for college applicants, she said. “If you don’t have one, you’re going to have to make it up in some other aspect of your application.”

This is complete garbage.

People, just because something is in writing doesn't make it true. Don't fall for this stuff. Safe to say that most kids getting accepted to college aren't published. Don't believe the hype.

This makes me think of all of the DCUM posters who claim that their high school kids are doing hardcore paid CS work. I’ve been an engineering manager for 25 years, and I’ve never met anyone who would consider paying a high school kid to do any IT work whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

I remember writing a really extensive research paper as a kid and my mom saying — it’s so good, if we were Kennedy’s, we’d pay to have it published. (I guess the Kennedy’s did that with some book written by Jack?). So yeah it’s always been a game the rich have played, but I agree it’s gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember writing a really extensive research paper as a kid and my mom saying — it’s so good, if we were Kennedy’s, we’d pay to have it published. (I guess the Kennedy’s did that with some book written by Jack?). So yeah it’s always been a game the rich have played, but I agree it’s gross.

But in JFK’s days admissions were so much easier. I read somewhere that in 1947, Harvard accepted 1000 students out of 1200 applicants. Don’t quote me on that. I read it quite a while ago. I also read that as late as 1990, UPenn’s acceptance rate was 41%. Even if the numbers are not quite right, the Ivys of decades ago were not nearly as selective as today’s 3rd or 4th tier colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’re seeing this at our school - a few kids have parents who work at hospitals with med schools affiliated. They do research and get co-author. Know Harvard, Penn, and Dartmouth admits who did this.

But what you are describing is not pay to play. Your example is one in which parents use their connections to get summer internships/jobs for their kids. How is that different than the wealthy, big law partners, high-level congressional & WH staffers, famous media people opening doors for great internships for their kids? And if the kid has contributed time and effort toward the project it is not cheating for them to be included in the list of authors.

Additionally, AOs should be able to look at the overall portfolio, areas of demonstrated interest/rigorous study, other ECs and teacher recs to determine if kid contributed in a meaningful way to the project or if evidence of that appears a bit thin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember writing a really extensive research paper as a kid and my mom saying — it’s so good, if we were Kennedy’s, we’d pay to have it published. (I guess the Kennedy’s did that with some book written by Jack?). So yeah it’s always been a game the rich have played, but I agree it’s gross.

But in JFK’s days admissions were so much easier. I read somewhere that in 1947, Harvard accepted 1000 students out of 1200 applicants. Don’t quote me on that. I read it quite a while ago. I also read that as late as 1990, UPenn’s acceptance rate was 41%. Even if the numbers are not quite right, the Ivys of decades ago were not nearly as selective as today’s 3rd or 4th tier colleges.

LOL. Have you seen JFK's Harvard essay? Imagine doing that today! https://nypost.com/2022/02/03/jfks-harvard-essay-resurfaces-online-87-years-later/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is only going to get worse in a post test-optional world.

And I say that because I am the problem. I am wealthy and I will do whatever it takes to advantage my children. Peer review publication, dubious nonprofit, private sports coaching… whatever angle I can find, I will pour money into exploiting. Cut off one snake head and I’ll find another.

Why? Do you not have confidence in your child’s abilities to do well no matter what college they end up attending?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some AOs can see through this BS, but unfortunately some can’t. That’s the problem when colleges consider non-academic factors. “Peer-reviewed” publications, starting your own business, starting a charity, etc.

The AOs at the most coveted and elite schools for which people engage in this nonsense universally can see through the bullshit. I promise you.

I hope so but apparently no all AOs see through that. Someone brought up students from China who did fake research. International schools are a huge cottage industry there. Rich families don’t want their kids to go through the grueling Gaokao (standardized college entrance exam) to get into domestic colleges. They send their kids to international schools like BASIS and take the American curriculum. BTW, BASIS intl schools in China are paying teachers over $100k (USD!) per year, in a country where the average income is just over $10k. Ridiculous. And then there’s the “counseling” system to tailor their college apps to fit the taste of American college AOs. And the real sad part is that these American AOs love them! They pay full tuition and don’t apply for scholarship or financial aid. All cash. Not just the Ivys. A lot of state schools love them too. It’s all about $$$.

To pick up on your point 'not just the Ivys' ... this phenomenon is on full display at my kid's not-Ivy-yet-top-15 college. Rich, rich kids from China and SKorea (judging from their cars, travel and 'things'). I think there's been a wider disbursement of this cohort beyond the 8 Ivys and Stanford into places like WUSL, Northwestern, Vandy, Duke, Emory, USC etc. The Harvard lawsuit discovery material showed us why

[Anonymous]

I think US should ban all undergraduate students from China. It’s grossly unfair to American students including (especially including) American students of Asian descent. If Harvard has to do some kind of racial balancing, they would much prefer to take students from China than Americans of Chinese descent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some AOs can see through this BS, but unfortunately some can’t. That’s the problem when colleges consider non-academic factors. “Peer-reviewed” publications, starting your own business, starting a charity, etc.

The AOs at the most coveted and elite schools for which people engage in this nonsense universally can see through the bullshit. I promise you.

I hope so but apparently no all AOs see through that. Someone brought up students from China who did fake research. International schools are a huge cottage industry there. Rich families don’t want their kids to go through the grueling Gaokao (standardized college entrance exam) to get into domestic colleges. They send their kids to international schools like BASIS and take the American curriculum. BTW, BASIS intl schools in China are paying teachers over $100k (USD!) per year, in a country where the average income is just over $10k. Ridiculous. And then there’s the “counseling” system to tailor their college apps to fit the taste of American college AOs. And the real sad part is that these American AOs love them! They pay full tuition and don’t apply for scholarship or financial aid. All cash. Not just the Ivys. A lot of state schools love them too. It’s all about $$$.

Don’t forget the trips that the international schools arrange for the AOs. Now that COVID restrictions are lifting it is amazing to see how many AOs come visit the local schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Case Western just early-admitted 23 students who were clients of one of the pay-for-play research companies. Stanford accepted 11. Most are from China. Agreed that some AOs definitely do not see through this . . .

They choose not to see through this. The nonprofit, business, and peer-reviewed byline tell universities that you have $$$ (themselves or their government sponsor) without having to consult with the Financial Aid office. So you can maintain need-blind admissions while being "impressed" with this "achievement".

This.
And also signals that you’re into status and are willing to pay to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.propublica.org/article/college-high-school-research-peer-review-publications

All part of the performative dance we do here. The college admissions officers need to stop touting the stat of how many of their admits had publications up to their bosses and trustees.

Else this stupidity continues.

The same thing has happened with bogus non-profits and startups that high schoolers are supposedly creating.

+1000 Thus needs to be addressed. There is a whole industry for artificially fluffing resume.