MIT Dean of Admissions Resigns in Lying Scandal

Billosaur writes "CNN has a report that the Dean of Admissions at MIT has resigned her post after admitting to lying about her academic record. 'Marilee Jones, who joined the staff of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1979 to lead the recruitment of women at the university, stepped down from her post after admitting that she had misrepresented her academic degrees to the institute, according to a statement posted on MIT's Web site.' The school had recently received information about her credentials and the subsequent investigation uncovered the misrepresentations. Question is, why did it take 28 years?"

Comments

This means one of two things...

[brejc8]

Either: She is obviously good at her job and should keep it.
Or: University degrees aren't worth very much.

Your're right on both counts

[l2718]

As an academic, I'd be the first to tell you: (high-quality) academic degrees are worth a lot if you are going to do research in that field. They are of little value for "general education" and life experience. Attending a top college is good for your networking and your resume, but otherwise I'd say only go to college if you want the education.

In this case, she was clearly doing the job well. Since we are no longer trying to predict how good she'll be at the job, her lying is irrelevant on that count, and if she had a research position, the story should have ended there (there are many professors with no undergrad or even grad degrees). However, she was Dean of Admissions. As such, she was in charge of using people's resumes for application purposes, and MIT would be sending an odd statement to future applicants by letting her keep her job had she not resigned.

Re:It took 28 years because she is a woman.

[Lumpy]

REALITY: she actually did a great job during her tenure, and in reality a degree truely means nothing about the persons ability.
Problem is most people that have degrees tend to be degree-racist and look down their nose at non degree holders with no good reason to.

I have met several IT and CS people in my life that were far smarter and better educated than Master degree holding fresh graduates.

Problem is managers hand out promotions like candy to a degree paper and ignore the incredible work and experience of the guys that are actually better at it.

Schools are incredibly degree-racist. They want a PHD holder for the janitor positions! (Ok, that might be a bit of a stretch)

Reality is that many MANY people self educate or get education from the "school of life" that is far more comprehensive and rounded than anything you get in a institution for around $100K or more plus a few years of your life.

I was lucky enough to have rich enough parents that I was able to afford to go to college full time. Most people in the world do not have that kind of luck.

honestly, if MIT does not beg for her to return based on her merit and 28 years of exemplory work, then MIT is pretty scummy.

Re:A PhD doesn't make you an expert

[Anonymous Coward]

And he was an expert. The problem was, CS wasn't what you thought it was.

Re:It took 28 years because she is a woman.

[Ironpoint]

Problem is managers hand out promotions like candy to a degree paper and ignore the incredible work and experience of the guys that are actually better at it. Exactly. Employers want cheap, highly skilled labor. Skills will get you a job, but only a degree will get you the correct salary. Employers do not reward skills on their own. They reward the ability of a person to leave and get a job somewhere else. When changing jobs, degrees represent a third party endorsement and make it much easier to change jobs.

The idea that individual skills get rewarded is what keeps the country running on budget.

Re:I know what CS

[brandonY]

Conveniently, I also have an MSCS, so I think I also know what it is, and I suspect you may not. I suspect this from your line:

this Computer Scientist had never taken a CS class! He was just good at algorithms.

Algorithms are a fundamental part of computer science. They're so fundamental that computer science was a discipline before there actually were computers. I'll bet you Ada herself would be an awful programmer today (until she got the hang of it), but don't you dare say she didn't know computer science. Computer science is 50% automata theory, 20% algorithms, and 30% softer sciences, like HCI and cognitive science. What you're thinking of is software engineering, which is often what computer scientists end up doing, and because of that they usually offer many, many classes on it, but don't you dare say that you're not good at computer science just because you're not a software engineer.

That's as stupid as saying that Turing was a hack because he wasn't MSDN certified (and dude didn't even know C++!)