http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/04/27/mit.dean/index.html<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p> MIT dean resigns in lying scandal<br><br>The dean of admissions at one of America's most prestigious schools resigned on Thursday after the university discovered she had lied about her academic credentials.<br><br>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.<br><br>"I misrepresented my academic degrees when I first applied to MIT 28 years ago and did not have the courage to correct my resume when I applied for my current job or at any time since," Jones said in a posting on the school's Web site.<br><br>Jones was named dean of admissions at MIT in 1997 and received MIT's highest award for administrators, the "MIT Excellence Award for Leading Change." She was also the 2006 winner of the "Gordon Y Billard Award" given "for special service of outstanding merit" performed for the school.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>You know, that's a shame that someone who apparently did such a great job was fired because she lied on her resume. Yeah, I understand about the integrity and all that...and sure, she should be fired. But to me this shows that you don't need a degree to do an excellent job in a high up position. Just look at Enron as the opposite.<br><br>

Lying is wrong, period. About doing such a great job at admissions . . . I wonder just how hard it is for the admissions director at MIT to do a good job. I know nothing about what she did or why she got the awards she did, but I honsetly can't imagine that steering the MIT admissions process is that difficult.<br><br>

yeah, I agreed about being fired..look up. <br><br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br>"I misrepresented my academic degrees when I first applied to MIT 28 years ago and did not have the courage to correct my resume when I applied for my current job or at any time since," Jones said in a posting on the school's Web site.<p><hr></blockquote><p> She lied and she still is lying. Misrepresented? She said she had three degrees from three different institutions. She has no degree from any of them. One has a record of her taking a few courses.<br><br>Her award winning work at MIT was based on trying to keep the pressure off students from focusing only on their resumes. From only working for the degree. There is some irony there.<br><br>There are likely thousands of people who have lied on their cv over the years. Back when all resumes and records were paper this was easier to do. Now there are ticking time bombs out there that a google search will start nailing people. Toss them all out. Make an example of every single liar they can find.<br><br><br>Auditing a course does not mean you took the course. Taking the course does not mean you passed the course. Passing the course does not mean you majored in the subject. Majoring in the subject does not mean you got the degree. Graduating from community college then taking a Harvard extension course does not mean you graduated from Harvard. Exaggerations on a cv are not "misrepresentations." They are lies.<br><br>It is not a shame that she got her butt fired. It is a shame that there was a qualified person who did not lie or cheat who did not have her job the last 28 years. It is a shame that she lied 28 years ago and so was imprisoned in that lie her entire career. Must have sucked being her no matter how many awards she received. She should not have lied.<br><br><br><br><br><br>

You are right.<br><br><br><br>

Does this mean I should edit my resume? Like, deleting the part about being present at David Ogilvy's birth and teaching him everything he knew about advertising? <br><br><br>Oh crap, I hope my new agency doesn't catch that? <br><br>

As deceitful as she was, MIT must bear the greater blame. Because of their lethargic vetting process, this sorry state of affairs can only result in a climate of suspicion. This news evens the convictions of those students who believe that the person serving them is an idiot.<br><br>This institution violated the public trust and surfacing so close to the tragic events at V Tech, where some are questioning the veracity and competence with which school officials pursued the proper course of action after the initial shootings, is but one more nick in their credibility.<br><br>MIT I'm sure, employs some of the finest people on the face of the planet, however even they will see this as annoying and disruptive and will lash out at administrators who are dispassionate about their hiring practices and policies.<br><br><br>M i c h a e l (OFI)

i can't speak for MIT, but our hiring practices are very different depending on the position. for faculty, we have a fairly rigorous process. for Deans and higher ups, we do as well. i just lead a faculty search and we had over 70 applicants. we ended the search last month after nearly 9 months and did not make a hire. we'll try again next year. perhaps we vetted too hard. <br><br>on the other hand, i was on a search for a classified position to help run a community outreach office on campus. the process was not nearly as intensive and much more flexible. we didn't have the same layers of oversight that i had on the faculty search.<br><br>we also have a Dean of Multicultural studies. the Dean was hired as a program coordinator 10 or more years ago. as the university grew, the position was just promoted to Dean status on the whim of our university President (likely in response to some incidents on campus that reflected negatively on the treatment of minorities) . . . sounds similar to Jones being named Dean of admissions after many years of service. once a person is in the system, things can happen much more easily than when hiring for a major position as part of a more global search. <br><br>i think the lesson to learn is that folks should more fully scrutinize every position hire even if the person being hired is from within.<br><br>--<br>"I am mindful that diversity is one of the strengths of the country" --president bush on 9/27/05

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>As deceitful as she was, MIT must bear the greater blame. <p><hr></blockquote><p> That is blaming the victim. She worked for 28 years and moved from administrative assistant upwards to finally Dean of admissions. I could easily see this happening as everyone assumes the CV presented in each promotion has been vetted earlier. I have to send my CV in at least twice a year. Is it the responsibility of my department to check that I have not added a degree or two? Is it their responsibility to check my old degrees which have been there for the past 28 years? (Yes I have been in the same employ for 28 years.)<br><br>No, it is my responsibility. And I should be thrown out in the street if I add a degree I do not have. The year she lied was the same year I obtained a ten week summer grant to work at the Marine Biological Laboratories in Woods Hole. It is still on my CV. It has the begin and end dates. Ten weeks. I didn't add a week or a month. Nor did I say I got a degree from the MBL. If I lied like her I could be dean right now. I'm glad I never thought of it and I am glad she is on the sidewalk and not me.<br><br>It is incomprehensible to me how you could blame MIT.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>

Ditto.<br><br>If I was MIT I would sue her, if that is possible. I still haven't calmed down over the plagiarism I've experienced this year, and this is just an even more serious version of it.<br><br>