5 ms·

Once in our CS department (not CMU), we had given PhD acceptance to a wrong student (call him Student2) since he carried the same name+surname with the candidat

by mad44 12y ago

Once in our CS department (not CMU), we had given PhD acceptance to a wrong student (call him Student2) since he carried the same name+surname with the candidate we intended to admit (call him Student1). Instead of rescinding the acceptance, we let Student2 join. Of course we also admitted Student1 to the department as well. It turned out that Student2 (the candidate we admitted by mistake) performed much better than Student1. :-) Regehr notes a similar observation. http://blog.regehr.org/archives/147 http://blog.regehr.org/archives/147

CamperBob2 12y ago
Did Student2 know he was given a pass due to the mistake?
- mad44 12y ago
  No, as far as I know. Only some faculty knew, until it was divulged at a graduate review meeting.
  - sjwright 12y ago
    It would be interesting to look back and see what indicators might have indicated Student2's success that was not seen by the department.
a3_nm 12y ago
This reminds me of the novel _Small World_ where the main character is a young researcher who got a position thanks to a mistake like this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_World:_An_Academic_Romance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_World:_An_Academic_Roman... In that story, however, Student1 didn't get the position.
- acjohnson55 12y ago
  Also reminds me of the movie Orange County, where main character Shaun Brumder does not get admitted to Stanford because they mistakenly admit classmate and stoner Shane Brainard instead. Hilarity ensues.
craigyk 12y ago
I remember when I was applying to graduate schools I was waiting to go to my last (fourth) recruitment interview, but I was pretty sure I wanted to go to the third school I had visited. Well I wasn't back for more than a day from the last recruitment trip when I called up that third school to ask them when I should show up and what paperwork I needed to fill out... it wasn't until about two years later that I realized I couldn't remember receiving an official acceptance letter or phone call from them...
Blackthorn 12y ago
To some of you reading this who haven't been to graduate school, this mistake is not as large as you might think. A lot of graduate schools have the policy of overadmitting and then pruning out during the oral exam (which usually 1-2 years into the program). I do not know if CMU is one of those schools (I attended one which did not have this policy; also, this policy can vary by department within the same school).
chavesn 12y ago
As an aside -- I have always found this type of sentence formulation, common with software engineers, so mystifying. It would be just as easy to understand without the sentence variables -- it doesn't add clarity but it does add length. The alternative: > Once in our CS department (not CMU), we had given PhD acceptance to a wrong student, since he carried the same name+surname with the candidate we intended to admit. > Instead of rescinding the acceptance, we let both join. It turned out that the candidate we admitted by mistake performed much better than the other. :-)
- shrig94 12y ago
  In support of the variables, the comments seem to leverage Student1 and Student2 to describe the students the commenters are referring too, which is a lot easier than having to reexplain who you're referring to. (edit: DRY principle)
- kszx 12y ago
  My personal impression: Formulation 1 (with variables, short and concise sentences): easy to understand. Formulation 2 (without variables, long sentence): difficult to understand. ==> I prefer Formulation 1.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- jacquesm 12y ago
  It's a style you also see quite frequently in legal documents where you first introduce the parties, give them a shorthand name and then use that name consistently throughout the document. I personally prefer that style over endless repetition of a description (with possible inconsistencies between the repetitions).
- qnaal 12y ago
  One doesn't always know whether the structure of the prose they are about to produce will permit discernment of its subjects by context and description alone. That is to say, in informal communications, an intuitive notation such as "[class][index]" can easily map between an abstract thought and its textual representation, without a critical re-reading on the part of the author to ensure the subjects are properly differentiated, potentially followed by subtle sentence refactoring.
stfu 12y ago
Wasn't there once some sort of experiment of admitting a random sample from a college application pool? Couldn't find it on the spot, but I think it had some similar results to the PhD admission experience. It also does make sense from a armchair psychologist standpoint: The one being admitted on weak grounds will probably put in a lot more effort to keep up with the class/competitors than the one having always some other, similar options to fall back on.

by mad44 12y ago

CamperBob2 12y ago

Did Student2 know he was given a pass due to the mistake?

mad44 12y ago
No, as far as I know. Only some faculty knew, until it was divulged at a graduate review meeting.
- sjwright 12y ago
  It would be interesting to look back and see what indicators might have indicated Student2's success that was not seen by the department.

a3_nm 12y ago

This reminds me of the novel _Small World_ where the main character is a young researcher who got a position thanks to a mistake like this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_World:_An_Academic_Romance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_World:_An_Academic_Roman... In that story, however, Student1 didn't get the position.

acjohnson55 12y ago
Also reminds me of the movie Orange County, where main character Shaun Brumder does not get admitted to Stanford because they mistakenly admit classmate and stoner Shane Brainard instead. Hilarity ensues.

craigyk 12y ago

I remember when I was applying to graduate schools I was waiting to go to my last (fourth) recruitment interview, but I was pretty sure I wanted to go to the third school I had visited. Well I wasn't back for more than a day from the last recruitment trip when I called up that third school to ask them when I should show up and what paperwork I needed to fill out... it wasn't until about two years later that I realized I couldn't remember receiving an official acceptance letter or phone call from them...

Blackthorn 12y ago

To some of you reading this who haven't been to graduate school, this mistake is not as large as you might think. A lot of graduate schools have the policy of overadmitting and then pruning out during the oral exam (which usually 1-2 years into the program). I do not know if CMU is one of those schools (I attended one which did not have this policy; also, this policy can vary by department within the same school).

chavesn 12y ago

As an aside -- I have always found this type of sentence formulation, common with software engineers, so mystifying. It would be just as easy to understand without the sentence variables -- it doesn't add clarity but it does add length. The alternative: > Once in our CS department (not CMU), we had given PhD acceptance to a wrong student, since he carried the same name+surname with the candidate we intended to admit. > Instead of rescinding the acceptance, we let both join. It turned out that the candidate we admitted by mistake performed much better than the other. :-)

shrig94 12y ago
In support of the variables, the comments seem to leverage Student1 and Student2 to describe the students the commenters are referring too, which is a lot easier than having to reexplain who you're referring to. (edit: DRY principle)
kszx 12y ago
My personal impression: Formulation 1 (with variables, short and concise sentences): easy to understand. Formulation 2 (without variables, long sentence): difficult to understand. ==> I prefer Formulation 1.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
jacquesm 12y ago
It's a style you also see quite frequently in legal documents where you first introduce the parties, give them a shorthand name and then use that name consistently throughout the document. I personally prefer that style over endless repetition of a description (with possible inconsistencies between the repetitions).
qnaal 12y ago
One doesn't always know whether the structure of the prose they are about to produce will permit discernment of its subjects by context and description alone. That is to say, in informal communications, an intuitive notation such as "[class][index]" can easily map between an abstract thought and its textual representation, without a critical re-reading on the part of the author to ensure the subjects are properly differentiated, potentially followed by subtle sentence refactoring.

stfu 12y ago

Wasn't there once some sort of experiment of admitting a random sample from a college application pool? Couldn't find it on the spot, but I think it had some similar results to the PhD admission experience. It also does make sense from a armchair psychologist standpoint: The one being admitted on weak grounds will probably put in a lot more effort to keep up with the class/competitors than the one having always some other, similar options to fall back on.