My research indicates that USC scores are 25% 1360, 75% 1540. That seems high to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting fact. Georgetown allowed usage of their courts to hold a USTA tennis tournament a few years back to benefit a Wounded Warrior charity. I remember seeing one kid that was on G-town tennis team and participated in the tournament. He was definitely not a DI tennis material. I was kind of shocked by how bad he was and was told he was at the bottom of G-town roster. All G-town male tennis players didn’t show up for next round, so I wonder if this kid was one of the “bribe” kids. I am sure this been going on for years and more is yet to come.

I thought the point of the bribe was you didn't have to actually come out and play. I think Loughlin's daughters should be frog marched to the boathouse and forced to row.

That would be truly hilarious.

She should stage it and post it to her you tube channel. I guarantee she sells a lot of advertising.

Just remove the time constraints for everyone in the testing

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For USC to act outraged at this is absurd. Hopefully they don't take donations for buildings from donors who happen to have kids applying to the school because this is the same

Umm, that’s literally what’s done all of the time, everywhere.

Every school has a development office, even Publics.

Yep. William and Mary...cough, cough.

Why do you appear to be shading William and Mary?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Test prepping, tutoring, accommodations, and affirmative action are not the same thing as cheating.

Admitting people who will affect the lives of many other people due to their position (e.g. a crown prince in one example) is not unfair.

Accepting large donations that benefit the entire school community with a wink that a dum dum kid will be admitted, isn't fair, but it's not cheating. Lower expectations for student athletes during admissions isn't fair, but because they attract more students/more money which helps the school community, so it's not cheating.

Paying someone to take a test, lying about achievements, falsely representing learning disabilities for accommodations, bribing school officials to assert that you are a student athlete, while doing nothing to contribute to your school community such as excelling at a sport or adding prestige, is cheating.

There is a difference between what is unfair, and what is cheating. I think it's super unfair, but not cheating, that other people have trust funds, safety nets, inheritances, private schools educations and connections that they can leverage for more privilege- while I just had hard work and a state school where I owed student debt, because that's what we could afford...but such is life. I have advantages too--it's relative.

Thanks.
Where do we place the amphetamines prescriptions on this continuum and the questionable ADHD diagnoses used to procure them?

+1. There is a continuum, with a lot of grey area. Perhaps cynical, but maybe it's human nature to try to obtain more resources for your offspring. Maybe the main difference between the questionable ADHD diagnoses and accommodations and those who swept up in the current scandal is just that the latter have access to more money, power, and connections. (Along with a greater sense of entitlement that comes from being rich and/or famous, since they obviously thought they'd get away with it.)

These families got the fake accommodations in order to:

1) get extra time so that their answers could be corrected once the kid was finished

2) to allow testing a a solo location so that someone else could take the test without detection

Singer had people at SAT and ACT in on the scam.

This is not at all equivalent to what people whose kids have legitimate disabilities and accommodations do.

PP here. I'm not talking about the legitimate cases--I'm talking about those who pursue questionable diagnoses and accommodations for their kids. All of the above parents want a leg up--but those in the college admissions scandal have a bigger leg up, with more money to throw at the problem.

+1000 over half of our private school have accommodations that started in 10th grade ...one mom didn’t want her kid to take the PSAT or any SAT subject tests prior to doctor visit. Another mom was unhappy her diabetic child didn’t get extra time but only breaks .

Over half, really? So, we live in a society where roughly 10% of people have a diagnosed learning disability. Let's be generous and say 15-16% because (in the article I read) ADHD wasn't mentioned specifically, but that's about the national average. Yet, you are asserting that 50% of ACT and SAT takers in your child's school have testing accommodations? Like, if I walked down the halls of your private school, half of the juniors and seniors I encounter are diagnosed with a learning or attention issue, presumably fake? So, either your private school hasn't picked up on/dealt with the fact that they are graduating 50% of their student body with a diagnosis- many which carry significant implications for academic and global functioning such as learning to read, classroom management, basic numeracy, speech, mental health, etc.?
As a parent of a son with "real" ADHD, I am gobsmacked. *Our* private school started calling me daily in the second grade for behavior management and didn't let up until we withdrew him--so your school counselors must be inept at how these conditions present, in on the widespread conspiracy, or far more accommodating than almost any private school I have encountered.

Before this scandal, u didn’t know such a thing existed, right? Unless u know the private schools scene where lots of $$$ go to,, you have no idea.

When CB stopped flagging the score, wealthly parents saw this as a way to game the system. They have connectors and $$$ to get accommodations for their kids.

In 2002, to avert further litigation, the College Board acted on the expert panel’s recommendation to end the practice of flagging scores. (Two weeks later, the other major college-admissions testing program, the ACT, adopted the same policy.) As of October 1, 2003, the Board will no longer note “Nonstandard Administration” on the scores of any students who take the SAT with extended time.

This decision will have an immediate impact on students with disabilities who take the SAT with accommodations, presently 2 percent of the two million students who take the SAT each year. Extended time, the only accommodation flagged by the SAT, is by far the most widely used accommodation, received by nearly all students who obtain accommodations. It is the only accommodation that nearly every test-taker would take advantage of if possible (unlike, say, the exams with larger print that are given to visually impaired students). Since 1976, the population of students designated as having a “specific learning disability” has grown 300 percent; learning-disabled students now compose 50 percent of the special-education population. In turn, since 1987, the number of students taking the SAT with accommodations has grown by more than 300 percent, compared with an 18 percent increase in the test-taking population as a whole (according to an analysis of annual reports from ETS. See sidebar by Samuel Abrams on page 40). Once the alleged “stigma” of flagging is removed, this trend can be expected to continue-and perhaps increase significantly.

The College Board’s unfortunate and puzzling action–an action that no court was likely to order if the case had gone to trial–deserves far more scrutiny than it has received so far. While private and without legal standing, this settlement involves giants in the testing industry and may have a chilling effect on validity and technical standards in the nation’s K-12 testing programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one family paid $250k to get their son into USC and then he withdrew after one year.

I know a family that paid $250K for private school K-12 and their son ended up going to WVU.

I know a family that paid $250K for private high school and their daughter ended up at Coastal Carolina.

There a lot of reasons that families choose private schools that do not relate to trying to get into Harvard. Your snakiness and judgment is astounding.

+1

NP. No snark, just would like to hear them.

Smaller class sizes. More individual attention. Religious instruction/shared religious beliefs, if applicable. Classical education.

Lol ok - yeah that makes sense if those attributes are continued in their college choice.

Not when the kid ends up at Walmart style mega public / directional state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one family paid $250k to get their son into USC and then he withdrew after one year.

I know a family that paid $250K for private school K-12 and their son ended up going to WVU.

I know a family that paid $250K for private high school and their daughter ended up at Coastal Carolina.

There a lot of reasons that families choose private schools that do not relate to trying to get into Harvard. Your snakiness and judgment is astounding.

+1

NP. No snark, just would like to hear them.

Smaller class sizes. More individual attention. Religious instruction/shared religious beliefs, if applicable. Classical education.

+1. Wanted same sex education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one family paid $250k to get their son into USC and then he withdrew after one year.

I know a family that paid $250K for private school K-12 and their son ended up going to WVU.

I know a family that paid $250K for private high school and their daughter ended up at Coastal Carolina.

There a lot of reasons that families choose private schools that do not relate to trying to get into Harvard. Your snakiness and judgment is astounding.

+1

NP. No snark, just would like to hear them.

Smaller class sizes. More individual attention. Religious instruction/shared religious beliefs, if applicable. Classical education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting fact. Georgetown allowed usage of their courts to hold a USTA tennis tournament a few years back to benefit a Wounded Warrior charity. I remember seeing one kid that was on G-town tennis team and participated in the tournament. He was definitely not a DI tennis material. I was kind of shocked by how bad he was and was told he was at the bottom of G-town roster. All G-town male tennis players didn’t show up for next round, so I wonder if this kid was one of the “bribe” kids. I am sure this been going on for years and more is yet to come.

I thought the point of the bribe was you didn't have to actually come out and play. I think Loughlin's daughters should be frog marched to the boathouse and forced to row.

That would be truly hilarious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting fact. Georgetown allowed usage of their courts to hold a USTA tennis tournament a few years back to benefit a Wounded Warrior charity. I remember seeing one kid that was on G-town tennis team and participated in the tournament. He was definitely not a DI tennis material. I was kind of shocked by how bad he was and was told he was at the bottom of G-town roster. All G-town male tennis players didn’t show up for next round, so I wonder if this kid was one of the “bribe” kids. I am sure this been going on for years and more is yet to come.

I thought the point of the bribe was you didn't have to actually come out and play. I think Loughlin's daughters should be frog marched to the boathouse and forced to row.

Yeah, they definitely look like power rowers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one family paid $250k to get their son into USC and then he withdrew after one year.

I know a family that paid $250K for private school K-12 and their son ended up going to WVU.

I know a family that paid $250K for private high school and their daughter ended up at Coastal Carolina.

There a lot of reasons that families choose private schools that do not relate to trying to get into Harvard. Your snakiness and judgment is astounding.

+1

NP. No snark, just would like to hear them.

Anonymous wrote:Interesting fact. Georgetown allowed usage of their courts to hold a USTA tennis tournament a few years back to benefit a Wounded Warrior charity. I remember seeing one kid that was on G-town tennis team and participated in the tournament. He was definitely not a DI tennis material. I was kind of shocked by how bad he was and was told he was at the bottom of G-town roster. All G-town male tennis players didn’t show up for next round, so I wonder if this kid was one of the “bribe” kids. I am sure this been going on for years and more is yet to come.

I thought the point of the bribe was you didn't have to actually come out and play. I think Loughlin's daughters should be frog marched to the boathouse and forced to row.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one family paid $250k to get their son into USC and then he withdrew after one year.

I know a family that paid $250K for private school K-12 and their son ended up going to WVU.

I know a family that paid $250K for private high school and their daughter ended up at Coastal Carolina.

There a lot of reasons that families choose private schools that do not relate to trying to get into Harvard. Your snakiness and judgment is astounding.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am really surprised at people being ‘surprised’ at SAT/ACT accommodations being manipulated. If you are wealthy, you have the money to buy a diagnosis.

I don't think anyone is super shocked at the diagnosis buying. The shocking piece isn't that these kids got extra time. It is that they secured a fake diagnosis in order to get extra time, and then that time was used by the proctor to change the answers[i].

If they got extra time and used it to move slowly and carefully and check their answers more than most kids are able to do - that's just business as usual.

No. They did not use the extra time to change the answers. I suppose in some cases maybe but the REAL key to the "racket" was using the accommodation along with a fake scheduling conflict to move the accommodated student to one of two facilities that CW-1 controlled (via bribes, part of the "racket"). By doing that, he could put his own brainy proctor in the room with the student alone, where they would either have the proctor take the test or help the student with answers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no comparison of this fraud to Development Admits or AA admits.

So, can you people arguing that go somewhere else or stay on topic please?

It's all being lumped together. The push is already on that any preference = bad.

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/12/18262037/college-admissions-scandal-felicity-huffman

Affirmative action is NOT even remotely the same as outright cheating and/or bribery. It’s ludicrous that anyone thinks this way.

Affirmative action is legalized cheating of the system.

legalized cheating? Is that a thing?