[Mick]

The stuff about people taking tests for others reminded me of something I hadn't thought of for ages.  While I was in maybe 10th grade and had good test scores, I had another athlete (not from my school) throw out something like "I don't suppose you'd take my SATs for me?".  I took that as an off-the-cuff what-if thought that had no thought behind it.  I could believe that person may have wanted it and may have needed it, but it was a totally not-in-this-universe idea to me which was immediately dismissed.  The whole conversation was done in under a minute.  But I never reported it to any adult.

I had that happen as well, but it was pretty overt, closer to "what would it take for you to take it for me?" Like you I immediately said no. I wonder how often that happens...

I wonder as well.  When I was in high school, the school drug dealer paid someone to take his SAT for him, and he squeaked into a CSU based on the test score.  My theory is that academic skill seeks its own level.  This guy now teaches at a not-so-great elementary school.  I doubt he could do better.

---

How much money does Stanford have in its endowment?

A fundamental question to me is why did the sailing coach risk so much personally to find ways to support his team? If I read the indictments properly, he didn't take a dime, the kickbacks all went to support Stanford Sailing.

Wrong, yes. Illegal, yes. Unethical, yes. With so much cash available to Stanford programs in general, I'm curious as to why he felt he needed to go to such extremes for the program.

Perhaps he was indirectly funding his job; e.g., if they don't raise a certain amount, the program would be at risk.

---

I realize that this wasn't the focus of the investigation, but one paragraph caught my eye:

“There is a front door which means you get in on your own,” Singer said. “The back door is through institutional advancement, which is 10 times as much money. And I’ve created this side door in.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/12/heres-ho...orked.html

Singer created the side door, and he (and the parents and coaches) will be punished for it.  But isn't the back door illegitimate as well?  Doesn't it give one pause that a mega-donor can get less-qualified applicants admitted?  Or is it more or less acceptable compared with the "side door options" created by Singer?

---

I realize that this wasn't the focus of the investigation, but one paragraph caught my eye:

“There is a front door which means you get in on your own,” Singer said. “The back door is through institutional advancement, which is 10 times as much money. And I’ve created this side door in.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/12/heres-ho...orked.html

Singer created the side door, and he (and the parents and coaches) will be punished for it.  But isn't the back door illegitimate as well?  Doesn't it give one pause that a mega-donor can get less-qualified applicants admitted?  Or is it more or less acceptable compared with the "side door options" created by Singer?

[Mick]

The stuff about people taking tests for others reminded me of something I hadn't thought of for ages.  While I was in maybe 10th grade and had good test scores, I had another athlete (not from my school) throw out something like "I don't suppose you'd take my SATs for me?".  I took that as an off-the-cuff what-if thought that had no thought behind it.  I could believe that person may have wanted it and may have needed it, but it was a totally not-in-this-universe idea to me which was immediately dismissed.  The whole conversation was done in under a minute.  But I never reported it to any adult.

I had that happen as well, but it was pretty overt, closer to "what would it take for you to take it for me?" Like you I immediately said no. I wonder how often that happens...

I wonder as well.  When I was in high school, the school drug dealer paid someone to take his SAT for him, and he squeaked into a CSU based on the test score.  My theory is that academic skill seeks its own level.  This guy now teaches at a not-so-great elementary school.  I doubt he could do better.

---

How much money does Stanford have in its endowment?

A fundamental question to me is why did the sailing coach risk so much personally to find ways to support his team? If I read the indictments properly, he didn't take a dime, the kickbacks all went to support Stanford Sailing.

Wrong, yes. Illegal, yes. Unethical, yes. With so much cash available to Stanford programs in general, I'm curious as to why he felt he needed to go to such extremes for the program.

Perhaps he was indirectly funding his job; e.g., if they don't raise a certain amount, the program would be at risk.

---

I realize that this wasn't the focus of the investigation, but one paragraph caught my eye:

“There is a front door which means you get in on your own,” Singer said. “The back door is through institutional advancement, which is 10 times as much money. And I’ve created this side door in.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/12/heres-ho...orked.html

Singer created the side door, and he (and the parents and coaches) will be punished for it.  But isn't the back door illegitimate as well?  Doesn't it give one pause that a mega-donor can get less-qualified applicants admitted?  Or is it more or less acceptable compared with the "side door options" created by Singer?

---

I realize that this wasn't the focus of the investigation, but one paragraph caught my eye:

“There is a front door which means you get in on your own,” Singer said. “The back door is through institutional advancement, which is 10 times as much money. And I’ve created this side door in.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/12/heres-ho...orked.html

Singer created the side door, and he (and the parents and coaches) will be punished for it.  But isn't the back door illegitimate as well?  Doesn't it give one pause that a mega-donor can get less-qualified applicants admitted?  Or is it more or less acceptable compared with the "side door options" created by Singer?