4 ms·

This story reminds me of the stories that were common on my country of origin in South America. We had free high level education, but there was a system rigged

This story reminds me of the stories that were common on my country of origin in South America. We had free high level education, but there was a system rigged to preserve nepotism. I was in Russia for the World Cup in 2018 and heard the same crap.

topspin 6y ago
The US has evolved a similar rigging for our privileged. We supply various obscure sports accolades that can be purchased for the children of wealthy families to obtain admission to our leading universities. Unfortunately our schemes have also been exposed and a number of people are being prosecuted. So for the moment one must resort to investing in rather costly facility construction or similar expansion projects while we develop low cost alternatives to replace the now compromised schemes.
- amluto 6y ago
  I’m not sure that a fraud committed against the universities that the universities did not know about counts as a rigged system. Or are you talking about something else?
  - elliekelly 6y ago
    While I’m not so sure all of the universities were as blissfully ignorant as they claim, what does it matter? The system was still rigged in favor of wealthier applicants with or without the schools’ knowledge and awareness of the scheme.
    - unishark 6y ago
      If it was corruption because employees lied, violated their employment contracts, etc. in return for bribes, then the system is not "rigged". Important distinction, because in one case the system actually is striving to be better, even if humans break rules now and then.
    - amluto 6y ago
      Suppose you’re the president or another executive at a major university. Imagine, for the sake of argument, that you are entirely amoral. You find out that one of your employees is taking bribes, falsifying athletic recruit records, and personally pocketing the money. Do you: (a) look the other way because you like rigging the system, or (b) fire them and call the FBI. I think (b) is the clear answer. Even if you want the children of the rich and powerful in your university, you want to know who they are, you want to collect any money that comes with it into the university’s coffers, and you do not want your employees enriching themselves at your university’s expense. Add in the fact that most universities’ presidents are unlikely to be entirely amoral, and I think it’s pretty hard to conclude that this particular incident indicates corruption at the top levels. (Sure, one might argue that the fact that athletic recruiting requests are considered at all for admissions is a problem, but the case in question wasn’t really about this.)
  - topspin 6y ago
    Universities carefully not knowing about these and future fraud techniques is key to developing replacement admission purchasing schemes.
  - hansvm 6y ago
    Not the author, but it could be either. For donations 10-40x as large as those in the recent fraud I think you're referencing the Universities are absolutely fine letting students in.
- quadrifoliate 6y ago
  It's even simpler than that, the US has a codified system of nepotism in place called legacy admissions, which has been in place for several decades [1]. > In a deposition, Rakesh Khurana, dean of the college, said a legacy preference can foster another kind of diversity: placing people with deep Harvard experience alongside those without it. They refer to nepotism as "deep Harvard experience", that's the only difference. [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/11/04/663629750/legacy-admissions-offer-an-advantage-and-not-just-at-schools-like-harvard https://www.npr.org/2018/11/04/663629750/legacy-admissions-o...
  - kbenson 6y ago
    I view the legacy stuff as a but more nuanced. Universities want to admit people that really want to go there, and that will increase their prestige later through some combination of espousing the benefits of that school, becoming famous, or becoming successful. It's not hard to see how the legacy systems tick a few of these boxes automatically, making those candidates seem slightly better than others (if nothing else, the candidate probably really wants this as their college over any other choices, and will likely have more pressure from self and family to complete college and do well). The problem then, as I see it, is not legacy consideration helping people get admitted, but legacy considerations overriding the other criteria. If legacy considerations where only a 15-20% in applicant suitability, I think most people wouldn't be that upset about it. When it leads to wholly and obviously unsuitable people going, that's probably when the legacy system has gone out of control.
    - quadrifoliate 6y ago
      More nuanced nepotism is...nepotism. You're basically saying that whether or not your parents went to some school should positively influence as much as one-fifth of the consideration of whether you could go to a school or not. That is, if you scored this in a rubric, some kid whose parents went to Harvard would score 20 and I would score 0. That is wrong on a fundamental level. It's a bit like anti-affirmative action. I am fine with this system as it stands. However, it is wildly inconsistent with the pearl-clutching top comment (I know, not you) spewing stuff about the "Western sense of morality".
- DevKoala 6y ago
  IMHO the situation of the USA is worlds apart from what I experienced as a kid in South America. The systemic corruption is normalized in Latin America. I remember when my dad bought a car that looked nice and we considered trading it because transit cops would stop us every now and then to get a tip from us. If we didn't agree to tip, we could potentially be arrested and paying your way out of the commissary was more expensive. The privileged had government printed plates that stopped cops messing with the occupants of the car. I came to the USA to have the future I couldn't have back there, and I call bullshit on your comparison. I didn't go to an ivy league school, I went to a public school, and today I make hiring decisions over engineering candidates with Ivy League school backgrounds. That type of social mobility is a fantasy in South America and the other countries you are trying to compare with the USA.
  - csunbird 6y ago
    Well, there is a term called "cop magnet", used for nice cars in USA or any other country.
  - NineStarPoint 6y ago
    100% the US is better than the more corrupt countries in the world, even if it does seem we tend to have more problems than the other first world countries. But on nepotism, I wonder if it’s not just that we are somewhat more against nepotism, and more that there’s wealth of opportunity here such that parents can help their children in potentially dubious ways while still leaving plenty of positions and money to go around for everyone else. There’s always a bit of a back and forth pull between culture creating a countries conditions and conditions creating a countries culture after all.
- jariel 6y ago
  "We supply various obscure sports accolades that can be purchased for the children of wealthy families to obtain admission to our leading universities." ? I don't really think this is the mechanism. When major donors, who are alumni and part of the institution, ask for a favour to have a slot for their kid ... to me that may seem 'unfair' but it's also above bar if the school wants to do that and I have no problem with it so long as it doesn't take up a huge share of any particular intake.
  - topspin 6y ago
    "? I don't really think this is the mechanism." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_college_admissions_bribery_scandal#Methods_of_fraudulent_admission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_college_admissions_briber... Polo, sailing, rowing, football, basketball, baseball... You name it; for a few hundred thousand you can have fake sports credentials fabricated -- complete with photoshopped team memberships -- and get yourself pencil-whipped into UoT, Yale, UCLA, USD, Georgetown, etc.

topspin 6y ago

The US has evolved a similar rigging for our privileged. We supply various obscure sports accolades that can be purchased for the children of wealthy families to obtain admission to our leading universities. Unfortunately our schemes have also been exposed and a number of people are being prosecuted. So for the moment one must resort to investing in rather costly facility construction or similar expansion projects while we develop low cost alternatives to replace the now compromised schemes.

amluto 6y ago
I’m not sure that a fraud committed against the universities that the universities did not know about counts as a rigged system. Or are you talking about something else?
- elliekelly 6y ago
  While I’m not so sure all of the universities were as blissfully ignorant as they claim, what does it matter? The system was still rigged in favor of wealthier applicants with or without the schools’ knowledge and awareness of the scheme.
  - unishark 6y ago
    If it was corruption because employees lied, violated their employment contracts, etc. in return for bribes, then the system is not "rigged". Important distinction, because in one case the system actually is striving to be better, even if humans break rules now and then.
  - amluto 6y ago
    Suppose you’re the president or another executive at a major university. Imagine, for the sake of argument, that you are entirely amoral. You find out that one of your employees is taking bribes, falsifying athletic recruit records, and personally pocketing the money. Do you: (a) look the other way because you like rigging the system, or (b) fire them and call the FBI. I think (b) is the clear answer. Even if you want the children of the rich and powerful in your university, you want to know who they are, you want to collect any money that comes with it into the university’s coffers, and you do not want your employees enriching themselves at your university’s expense. Add in the fact that most universities’ presidents are unlikely to be entirely amoral, and I think it’s pretty hard to conclude that this particular incident indicates corruption at the top levels. (Sure, one might argue that the fact that athletic recruiting requests are considered at all for admissions is a problem, but the case in question wasn’t really about this.)
- topspin 6y ago
  Universities carefully not knowing about these and future fraud techniques is key to developing replacement admission purchasing schemes.
- hansvm 6y ago
  Not the author, but it could be either. For donations 10-40x as large as those in the recent fraud I think you're referencing the Universities are absolutely fine letting students in.
quadrifoliate 6y ago
It's even simpler than that, the US has a codified system of nepotism in place called legacy admissions, which has been in place for several decades [1]. > In a deposition, Rakesh Khurana, dean of the college, said a legacy preference can foster another kind of diversity: placing people with deep Harvard experience alongside those without it. They refer to nepotism as "deep Harvard experience", that's the only difference. [1] https://www.npr.org/2018/11/04/663629750/legacy-admissions-offer-an-advantage-and-not-just-at-schools-like-harvard https://www.npr.org/2018/11/04/663629750/legacy-admissions-o...
- kbenson 6y ago
  I view the legacy stuff as a but more nuanced. Universities want to admit people that really want to go there, and that will increase their prestige later through some combination of espousing the benefits of that school, becoming famous, or becoming successful. It's not hard to see how the legacy systems tick a few of these boxes automatically, making those candidates seem slightly better than others (if nothing else, the candidate probably really wants this as their college over any other choices, and will likely have more pressure from self and family to complete college and do well). The problem then, as I see it, is not legacy consideration helping people get admitted, but legacy considerations overriding the other criteria. If legacy considerations where only a 15-20% in applicant suitability, I think most people wouldn't be that upset about it. When it leads to wholly and obviously unsuitable people going, that's probably when the legacy system has gone out of control.
  - quadrifoliate 6y ago
    More nuanced nepotism is...nepotism. You're basically saying that whether or not your parents went to some school should positively influence as much as one-fifth of the consideration of whether you could go to a school or not. That is, if you scored this in a rubric, some kid whose parents went to Harvard would score 20 and I would score 0. That is wrong on a fundamental level. It's a bit like anti-affirmative action. I am fine with this system as it stands. However, it is wildly inconsistent with the pearl-clutching top comment (I know, not you) spewing stuff about the "Western sense of morality".
DevKoala 6y ago
IMHO the situation of the USA is worlds apart from what I experienced as a kid in South America. The systemic corruption is normalized in Latin America. I remember when my dad bought a car that looked nice and we considered trading it because transit cops would stop us every now and then to get a tip from us. If we didn't agree to tip, we could potentially be arrested and paying your way out of the commissary was more expensive. The privileged had government printed plates that stopped cops messing with the occupants of the car. I came to the USA to have the future I couldn't have back there, and I call bullshit on your comparison. I didn't go to an ivy league school, I went to a public school, and today I make hiring decisions over engineering candidates with Ivy League school backgrounds. That type of social mobility is a fantasy in South America and the other countries you are trying to compare with the USA.
- csunbird 6y ago
  Well, there is a term called "cop magnet", used for nice cars in USA or any other country.
- NineStarPoint 6y ago
  100% the US is better than the more corrupt countries in the world, even if it does seem we tend to have more problems than the other first world countries. But on nepotism, I wonder if it’s not just that we are somewhat more against nepotism, and more that there’s wealth of opportunity here such that parents can help their children in potentially dubious ways while still leaving plenty of positions and money to go around for everyone else. There’s always a bit of a back and forth pull between culture creating a countries conditions and conditions creating a countries culture after all.
jariel 6y ago
"We supply various obscure sports accolades that can be purchased for the children of wealthy families to obtain admission to our leading universities." ? I don't really think this is the mechanism. When major donors, who are alumni and part of the institution, ask for a favour to have a slot for their kid ... to me that may seem 'unfair' but it's also above bar if the school wants to do that and I have no problem with it so long as it doesn't take up a huge share of any particular intake.
- topspin 6y ago
  "? I don't really think this is the mechanism." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_college_admissions_bribery_scandal#Methods_of_fraudulent_admission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_college_admissions_briber... Polo, sailing, rowing, football, basketball, baseball... You name it; for a few hundred thousand you can have fake sports credentials fabricated -- complete with photoshopped team memberships -- and get yourself pencil-whipped into UoT, Yale, UCLA, USD, Georgetown, etc.