We Asked 20 Elite-College Admissions Deans About the Bribery Scandal. Here’s What They Said.

Yale University, the University of Pennsylvania, and Dartmouth College each pledged to increase oversight of athletics recruiting in light of an elaborate bribery scheme in college admissions that brought the indictments last week of 11 employees at eight universities, along with more than two dozen parents.

The statements, from admissions heads and university representatives to The Chronicle, describe ways to exert an administrative check on admissions procedures for athletes, including new auditing procedures and an annual review of all freshmen recruited as athletes.

The commitments to heightening oversight — coming less than a week after federal prosecutors revealed the scheme — show just how resounding news of the scandal has been across higher education and beyond.

Central to the allegations outlined by federal prosecutors was an organization that, they said, falsified aspects of students’ applications to make them appear to be recruited athletes — drastically improving their odds of acceptance, thanks to the deference given to coaches by admissions officers.

The Chronicle asked two questions to 20 admissions leaders whose universities admit the smallest percentages of students who apply, as reported by U.S. News & World Report, and who participate in intercollegiate athletics. Most of the colleges were not named in the investigation, and several colleges named in the investigation are not included on this list. The questions were:

• Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?
• Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

Here’s what we found. This story will be updated as we receive new information. Read past the table to see universities’ full responses.

Next Steps

Universities that pledged to make changes in athletics recruiting described new checks to help administrators know exactly what happens to students who, according to coaches, were recruited to join teams.

Yale said on a university web page that its athletics director would henceforth review coaches’ proposed recruits before they are sent to the admissions office. If a recruited athlete does not subsequently make a team, the situation “will receive close scrutiny.” The university will also create a “code of conduct” for recruiting.

At Penn, Dean of Admissions Eric J. Furda said the university was establishing “checks and balances” within each department with procedures to verify and audit the recruitment processes for athletes.

“There are lessons learned from this case, which can be applied to all candidates, regardless of whether they are recruited student-athletes,” he wrote in an email. “As an example, similar to the Fafsa verification process, selected applicants can be chosen for further vetting randomly or because of inconsistencies in a student’s application.”

A Dartmouth official wrote in an email that the college would formalize protocols for administrative approval of each recruit. In addition, Dartmouth committed to review annually all first-year recruited athletes, “to ensure they appear on the appropriate team roster.”

Other institutions outlined steps they’d taken since news broke about “Operation Varsity Blues.” Brown University reviewed every enrolled varsity athlete “to verify as thoroughly as possible that there has been no attempt to compromise the integrity” of the admissions process, wrote Logan Powell, the university’s dean of admissions, in an email. Fewer than five didn’t ultimately end up on a roster, he wrote, and each case was due to “legitimate reasons” such as an injury.

Admission Through the ‘Side Door’

Dozens of people, including famous actors, college coaches, and a university administrator, have been charged by federal prosecutors for their alleged roles in an admissions-bribery scheme involving Yale, Stanford, and other elite institutions.

• One Year After College-Admissions Scandal, 3 Questions About What (if Anything) Has Changed
• 5 Questions to Consider in the Wake of the Admissions Scandal
• The Bribery Scandal Revealed Holes in Admissions Oversight. Now Some Professors Want to Take Back That Role.

Stanford University said it had examined its policies and processes to see if change was necessary. “We stand behind the integrity of our admissions process,” a university representative wrote to The Chronicle.

Full Responses

Some admissions deans responded directly; some college representatives responded on behalf of admissions offices. In three instances, when contact information for an admissions official could not be found, a reporter emailed a university spokesperson or media officials.

Harvard University: A university representative declined to comment. Harvard has not been named in the federal investigation.

Stanford University: A university representative responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Stanford has been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. While we have undertaken an internal review to closely examine our policies and processes to see if improvements should be made, we stand behind the integrity of our admissions process.

Every student admitted to Stanford must meet the university’s high academic standards. There are no exceptions. Our admission office conducts a holistic review of each applicant, focused on academic excellence, intellectual vitality, extracurricular activity and personal context.

For students who have special talents — artistic, athletic, musical or otherwise — those talents are factored into the process. In the case of athletics, we have a process through which coaches can identify the most promising athletic recruits, who also have strong academic credentials, for the consideration of the admission office. All applicants still must meet Stanford’s very high academic bar for admission. An athletic recommendation does not “reserve a spot” for an applicant. The final judgment is made by the admission office.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. We can only speak for Stanford, and from that perspective, we are reviewing everything we have learned in this case to determine if additional steps are needed to improve our policies and processes. We are committed to ensuring that financial contributions to Stanford receive the proper level of scrutiny, and to ensuring that donors are never under the impression that a financial contribution will lead to a favorable admission decision.

Columbia University: Dean of Undergraduate Admissions and Financial Aid Jessica Marinaccio declined to comment. Columbia has not been named in the federal investigation.

Princeton University: Acting Dean of Admission Jill Dolan declined to comment. Princeton has not been named in the federal investigation.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Stuart Schmill, dean of admissions and student financial services, responded via email through a spokeswoman.

Q: Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A: We have confidence in our process. At MIT, our athletic teams do not get “slots,” and athletes are subject to the same timing, standards and admissions process as other applicants. For example, there are no so-called “early reads” or “likely letters” for any athletes. All of our applicants are evaluated through a thorough admissions process that is designed to safeguard against undue influence of any one individual’s biases, preferences, or familiarity with a given application. Further, we consider each application in a holistic manner. Applicant test scores are part of the overall application, but high scores alone will not get anyone into MIT. Similarly, no single activity will secure admission. We consider the applicant’s full academic record and experiences.

Q: Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A: This case has highlighted a need for reform in selective college admissions. At MIT, we have been an early and consistent endorser, along with over 100 college admissions officers across the country, of the “Turning the Tide” report, released by the Making Caring Common project at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. The report highlights the negative effects on students of the pressures placed upon them to gain admission to highly selective schools, and outlines a broad set of reforms to “turn down the heat” on the process, and put “young people’s character and well-being at the center of a healthier, more sane college admissions process.”

Yale University: Dean of Undergraduate Admissions Jeremiah Quinlan responded to The Chronicle‘s questions with a written statement. Yale has been named in the federal investigation.

“I encourage you to review President [Peter] Salovey’s recent messages regarding the investigation, including [Friday’s] update regarding our next steps. A collection of frequently asked questions about the case is also available on the website of the Office of the President. I am, of course, committed to working with President Salovey, Director of Athletics Vicky Chun, and other university leaders to prevent this type of fraud from happening again. The coach who was charged no longer works for the university, and there is no indication that any other member of the Yale administration or staff knew about the conspiracy.”

(Editor’s note: In the FAQ, Yale said its athletics director would review coaches’ proposed recruits before they were sent to the admissions office and would scrutinize instances in which a recruited athlete did not make a team.)

California Institute of Technology: Executive Director of Undergraduate Admissions and Financial Aid Jarrid J. Whitney responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Caltech has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. Caltech does not reserve admission spots for our athletic department nor do we take into account legacy status or family wealth. The main criteria in our evaluation process focuses on academic and personal performance/potential as well as demonstrated STEM passion and achievement.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. This case is an important reminder how hypervigilant selective admission offices need to be in evaluating candidates and their credentials.

Pomona College: Vice President and Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid Seth Allen responded to The Chronicle’s questions. Pomona has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. I want to first note that our existing process has multiple admissions officers looking at every application — whether from athletes or not — during the application review process. We subject our internal admission procedures to a review every year to ensure a fair and equitable process. For this summer, we had already planned a more in-depth athletics procedures review to guide our future work, and we will proceed with that as scheduled. As part of that review, we will work with colleagues in athletics to make sure we have strong guidelines in place for confirming athletic talent.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. We’re witnessing high levels of stress and anxiety around selective college admissions. One message I think is very important to send is that there are so many college options and possibilities out there for students. At the same time, the recent news is just the latest reason selective institutions of higher education need to rethink their approach to admission for all students. That could involve building more opportunities for applicants to demonstrate who they are, rather than headlining what they achieve.

U.S. Naval Academy: The dean of admissions did not respond through an inquiry to the academy’s media email address. The Naval Academy has not been named in the federal investigation.

Brown University: Dean of Admission Logan Powell responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Brown has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. Our first step was to complete a case-by-case review of every varsity athlete admitted and enrolled as part of the athletic recruitment process over the last four years. That review generated no concerns — fewer than five recruited athletes did not ultimately end up on a varsity athletics roster, and in each case that was due to legitimate reasons such as a major sports injury. As we think of next steps, we are of course looking closely at all our existing processes to identify if there are ways to strengthen what we have in place. It’s too soon to speak definitively about what our assessment might identify or determine, but we are taking this very seriously.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. Each institution has to reflect on its own processes. Ultimately, our rigorous, comprehensive and individual review of every prospective student’s qualifications remains essential in enrolling an academically talented and diverse class through a fair and equitable process. We will certainly explore new safeguards and remain vigilant to the potential for fraudulent applications.

Northwestern University: A university spokesperson responded to The Chronicle‘s questions with a statement. Northwestern has not been named in the federal investigation.

“The Office of Undergraduate Admission works closely with the Department of Athletics to insure all student-athletes meet our highest standards of excellence. We are confident this partnership upholds our rigorous and detailed review process. We are very disappointed to hear about the undermining of the admissions process at numerous universities. Northwestern, and all universities, put an enormous amount of trust in the ACT and SAT testing agencies. We rely on their safeguards and protocols to insure there is integrity in the results submitted by applicants for admission. At Northwestern, we value integrity throughout the admissions process. The University takes allegations of falsification very seriously. The University does not comment on specific applicants for admission or current students. If it is discovered that a student submitted false information in his or her application, it can result in a revocation of admission or, if enrolled, the student can be expelled.”

University of Chicago: Dean of College Admissions James G. Nondorf did not respond to requests for comment. Chicago has not been named in the federal investigation.

University of Pennsylvania: Dean of Admissions Eric J. Furda responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Penn has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. Yes. Penn Admissions and Penn’s Department of Recreation and Intercollegiate Athletics have worked with an outside consultant to review and strengthen our processes for the recruitment of student-athletes. We are further establishing checks and balances within each department and across the departments with standard operating procedures to document, verify and audit the recruitment and evaluation processes for student-athletes. Furthermore, there are lessons learned from this case which can be applied to all candidates, regardless of whether they are recruited student-athletes. As an example, similar to the Fafsa verification process, selected applicants can be chosen for further vetting randomly or because of inconsistencies in a student’s application.

Finally, we will not be naïve to think that all people will act in the manner in which we hope they should or underestimate how persuasive some people can be in trying to influence the admissions process. Operation Varsity Blues may also, hopefully, demonstrate to others who may try to manipulate the system that there are no shortcuts and that their actions will eventually come to light, with heavy repercussions.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. Yes, there is a broader need for reform in highly selective admissions. Operation Varsity Blues, along with litigation and court cases currently pending centered around highly selective admissions, exposes the deepening divide across our country along socioeconomic, geographic and racial lines. These gulfs have only deepened since the 2008 global financial crisis. The sense of zero-sum competition and winner-take-all to gain admission to “the 20 most selective universities” adds to this divide and is detrimental to the fabric of our nation and, most regrettably, damaging to our children. As educators we need to highlight and celebrate the range of options in American higher education, from community colleges which can become a path to a four-year degree, [to] our flagship state university systems and private institutions, that should be measured by their graduation rates rather than admit rates. Once we admit students to our institutions, we need to make sure all of our students, regardless of background, are entering into a supportive learning environment where they can find their own voices and learn from those who have different lived experiences. In this way, they will be better prepared for the lives they will enter into as young adults.

Claremont McKenna College: Assistant Vice President for Admission Jennifer Sandoval-Dancs responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Claremont McKenna has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. We are currently reviewing our existing checks and balances and assessing how we can minimize any risk, no matter how small, of fraud or other forms of deception and misrepresentation. This includes looking at our training across multiple departments, the ways we verify the credentials of student-athletes, and how we track recruited athletes who, in rare circumstances, may leave a team. We believe our small size and collaborative process makes the kind of fraud exposed in the federal indictments extremely unlikely, but we will continue to do all we can to eliminate that risk.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. Structural change goes beyond what colleges can do alone. It would require taking an incisive look at how we as a nation fund education, the socioeconomics of athletics, the role of prestige and rankings, and other factors that affect college opportunities.

CMC has worked hard to make our admission process as fair and accessible as possible. We have worked closely with organizations like QuestBridge, the American Talent Initiative, and the Coalition for College Access. We have increased our enrollment of students from families with modest resources and first-generation students through greater financial and program support. We are also regularly assessing the role of early decision, the weighting of legacy engagement, standardized testing, and other elements of the admission process to ensure a fair and effective process.

Dartmouth College: A university representative responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Dartmouth has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. Dartmouth is proud of its athletic program and the academic accomplishment of its student athletes. That achievement is fostered by a rigorous practice and protocols designed to yield students capable of succeeding on and off the field. In light of these revelations, the athletics office is redoubling its efforts to ensure the integrity and strength of that process. We are committed to formalizing the protocols for administrative approval of each recruit and an annual review of all first-year students who were recruited athletes to ensure that they appear on the appropriate team roster.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. “Operation Varsity Blues” has uncovered a sophisticated fraud scheme. Our review process of each application is rigorous, multifaceted, and thorough. Dartmouth remains vigilant to the potential for fraud; committed to the energetic response to, and investigation of, any allegations of misconduct; and proactive in working to prevent fraud within our own institutional processes. In addition, we encourage the admissions testing agencies in their efforts to carry out their prevention efforts.

Duke University: Dean of Undergraduate Admissions Christoph Guttentag did not respond to The Chronicle‘s questions. Duke has not been named in the federal investigation.

U.S. Military Academy: Director of Admissions Col. Deborah J. Kenneth McDonald responded to the questions with a written statement. West Point has not been named in the federal investigation.

“The U.S. Military Academy admission process is unique and there are multiple steps to complete and receive a nomination for acceptance to the academy’s 47-month cadetship leading to a commission as an officer in the U.S Army. Candidates accepted at USMA are weighted by a whole-candidate score and requires a variety of criteria that is used to determine eligibility for an appointment to attend West Point. No adjustments are expected to our current processes and occur in accordance to mandates by the Department of Defense.”

Swarthmore College: Vice President and Dean of Admissions Jim Bock responded to The Chronicle‘s questions with a written statement. Swarthmore has not been named in the federal investigation.

“The alleged misdeeds revealed by this investigation are deeply disturbing, and should encourage all schools to confirm their policies and practices are applied consistently. At Swarthmore, each admission decision is the result of a thorough, committee-based, holistic, contextual, and highly selective application evaluation. We do not guarantee admissions spaces for athletes, or anyone else. We are very proud that 27 percent of students in our admitted Class of 2023 are first in their family to go to college. We are now focused on welcoming all of our admitted students to campus for a visit this spring.”

Vanderbilt University: Vice Provost for University Enrollment Affairs Douglas L. Christiansen responded to The Chronicle‘s questions. Vanderbilt has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. Vanderbilt University firmly believes in ensuring access to education for all qualified students on the basis of an individual applicant’s complete and factual record. We have worked for more than a decade to ensure the nation’s brightest students, regardless of socioeconomic status, can have access to a Vanderbilt education. We vet all of our applicants as thoroughly as possible to ensure that we are providing access and opportunity in line with our admissions requirements. We strive to establish an accurate and holistic picture of each applicant — working closely with high school guidance counselors and confirming, to the extent possible, that information provided by prospective students and their families is legitimate. Our admissions process has a number of checks and balances intended to prevent the serious matter of admissions fraud, chief among them is a multistep process that includes review by multiple admissions officers. All applicants, including athlete applicants, go through our central Admissions Office, where all decisions are made.

While we feel we have solid processes in place, in light of the recent, serious indictment related to admissions fraud impacting other universities, we are reviewing our own approach to ensure that we continue to execute a fair process to all students. We believe in integrity and fairness, and should we discover someone has misrepresented their application, there would be serious ramifications.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. We are troubled by the recent indictment of individuals believed to have deceptively tilted the college admissions process in their favor. These charges call into question issues of equity and access on a national scale, and provide the opportunity for higher education to continue to take a critical look at our processes that in the end are intended to protect all students.

At Vanderbilt, in line with our values for an immersive, residential college education that focuses on educating the whole person, our admissions process is need-blind. We meet all demonstrated need with scholarships/grants and no loans to further our continuing goal of building a class of exceptionally talented students from a broad array of backgrounds to live and learn together, independent of family standing and economic status. To that end we will continue to commit to innovative improvement relative to our fraud detection processes and will do everything in our power to stop this abusive behavior by individuals who act above the law.

The Johns Hopkins University: David Phillips, vice provost for admissions and financial aid, responded via email through a spokeswoman. Johns Hopkins has not been named in the federal investigation.

Q. Will your university exert more oversight over how students are designated as athletic recruits in the admissions process? If so, how?

A. Yes. Johns Hopkins has in place a rigorous vetting process for consideration of student athletes. This process includes a formal written recommendation from our coaches regarding a student’s athletic ability and contribution to the team, and places decision-making for all applicants in the admissions office. Nonetheless, recent allegations of admissions fraud involving athletics elsewhere are deeply concerning, and at Johns Hopkins we are taking this as an opportunity to review our processes to ensure they are sufficiently protective against fraud or deception.

Q. Does “Operation Varsity Blues” show a broader need for reform in selective admissions?

A. Yes. Over the last decade, Johns Hopkins has sought to streamline and simplify our admissions process, significantly circumscribe the weight accorded to legacy status, and increase access for low income and first-generation students. The number of students with a legacy or family connection in Johns Hopkins’s entering class in fall 2018 is 3.3 percent, while the number of Pell-ligible students is 15.4 percent. But this is a critical moment in higher education and a further call to action for addressing social and economic inequities in admissions. At Johns Hopkins we are committed to strengthening further the rigor of our recruitment and admissions practices.

Updated (3/20/2019, 3:30 p.m.) with a response from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and (3/21/2019, 4:15 p.m., with a response from the Johns Hopkins University.

Lindsay Ellis is a staff reporter. Follow her on Twitter @lindsayaellis, or email her at lindsay.ellis@chronicle.com.