The event was run by ASCMC Student Life Chair Mohammad Abdul-Rahim ’15.

The 25-page report, which the Board of Trustees commissioned in late January, is available publicly on the College’s website and outlines in detail the findings of law firm O’Melveny & Myers LLP.

The independent report confirms speculations that it was Richard Vos, the former Vice President of Admissions and Financial Aid, who reported false SAT statistics to third party organizations. It also confirms the College’s earlier claims that the senior administrator acted alone and that no other College employees knew about the score modification.

In an interview with campus press on Tuesday afternoon, President Gann reiterated that she played only a minor role in the investigation process. “Because I was being investigated, I was definitely kept separate from this investigation except for the extent that I was interviewed or asked to provide documents,” she stated.

In total, the external investigation, which took just shy of three months, consisted of a review of over 14,990 documents and interviews with 24 different individuals. Former Vice President Richard Vos was interviewed five different times — for a total of over fifteen hours.

ACT SCORES AND OTHER STATISTICS ALSO MODIFIED

The report reveals that SAT scores were not the only modified metric.  Further investigation shows Vos also modified ACT, class rank, and application statistics as far back as 2004.

Vos told investigators “he believed reporting ACT statistics was unimportant and that he devoted little time and attention to this task.” Vos is also quoted in the report referring to the process of gathering class rank statistics as an ”art not a science.”

As for the infamous SAT score manipulation, the report describes how Vos worked backwards, setting a target median and then changing the data accordingly. The falsified statistics were created by hand — with nothing but “paper, a pencil, and a calculator.”

The report concludes that Vos began changing scores as early as 2004 and attributes his ability to do so undetected to two factors. First, Vos was highly respected within the College’s administration and, consequently, rarely questioned.  Second, the Claremont McKenna Admissions Office lacked an internal checks and balances process to confirm that the data was reported accurately.  It would have taken at least eight years before Vos’ falsified statistics would have been detected and officially reported.

Once concerns were raised in early 2012, however, the College moved quickly.  The report notes that an unidentified Admissions officer reported concerns to the College’s General Counsel on January 9, 2012.  An internal investigation immediately ensued.  Fifteen days later, Vice President Vos admitted to manipulating the scores and, on January 29, he resigned.  When asked whether or not the College requested his resignation, President Gann admitted, “It was discussed with him.””

““But he resigned,” she emphasized. ”I want to be clear that he resigned.””

ASPIRATIONAL GOALS AND THE MOTIVE

What could drive a senior administrator to unilaterally manipulate scores for the better part of a decade?

According to the report, Vos claimed CMC President Gann pressured him to “maintain or increase SAT scores for the College’s incoming classes.”

President Gann acknowledged that there were “aspirational goals” that had been set between her and Vice President Vos. However, she argued that these aspirational goals were agreed upon between the two of them. ”This was a conversation,” she told campus reporters. ”These [goals] were mutually set.””

The report concludes that the pressure Vos felt was not extraordinary. Investigators found no evidence of any verbal abuse “or any form of intimidation that might reasonably lead us to view the pressure exerted as coercive or improper.”

“While we believe the VP sincerely felt pressure to achieve particular SAT goals, we do not believe that the pressure he described exceeded the norm for an executive-level employee,” the report states.

Importantly, the report mentions a divergence in the admissions “priorities” of President Gann and those of former Vice President Vos.  According to the report, Vos ”felt [Gann] had too many goals and that some must give way.” Vos also told investigators he believed he knew what was best for the College.

Although CMC had an applicant pool talented enough to reach the specific aspirational goals set between Vice President Vos and President Gann, admissions decisions failed to meet the target scores. Claiming he was afraid to tell Gann otherwise, Vos said he chose instead to falsify admissions statistics.

The report emphasizes that Vos’ salary and compensation were unaffected by the yearly SAT score reports and does not point to any financial motive.

Despite national media coverage suggesting otherwise, it appears that college rankings were not a motivating factor behind Vos’ actions. Vos explicitly told investigators that his motive was not to increase CMC’s position in rankings. ”We believe the VP’s assertion to be true,” the report states.

“Gann acknowledges that this incident fundamentally alters the manner in which CMC will talk about admissions data in the future. “Assume you have totally accurate data, there’’s then the question of how we use it in communications and marketing,” she said. “We have to be sure that, for those of us that make speeches or refer to data in fundraising materials or in admissions materials, that we are talking about the data in a clear and verified way.””

Gann also noted that the there have been no changes to the College’s ten-year Strategic Plan in light of the scandal.

MOVING FORWARD: “WE CAN AND WILL DO BETTER.”

Tuesday’s report release was accompanied by two letters addressed to the CMC Community: one from President Pamela B. Gann and one from Chair of the Board of Trustees Henry T. McMahon.

McMahon noted that the Claremont community has “learned a great deal from this unfortunate matter and will become ever stronger as a result.”

President Gann’s letter announced that, going forward, admissions, financial aid, and student affairs have been consolidated into one Vice President position.  Dr. Jefferson Huang, currently the Vice President of Student Affairs, will be taking on this role.

Also in her letter, President Gann made a promise to the CMC community: ”We can and will do better.”

Photo Courtesy of Karnataka

Entrepreneur N.R. Narayana Murthy will be the Claremont McKenna College 2012 Graduation Speaker. Mr. Murthy will receive an Honorary Degree of Doctor of Laws at the ceremony.

Murthy is most well-known as founder and former CEO of Infosys, an information technology business and consulting company based in India.  The company, founded in 1981, today claims revenues of $6.825 billion.  Under Murthy’s leadership, Infosys became the first Indian IT company to be listed on NASDAQ. Murthy introduced the Global Delivery Model, which is largely credited for the success of outsourcing IT services to India.

Over the years, Murthy has received countless honors and awards for his work.  According to his biography on the Infosys website, he was named one of The Economist‘s ten most-admired business leaders in 2005 and topped the Economic Times‘s list of the most powerful CEO’s in India three years in a row.  In 2005, he co-chaired the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos along with six other business leaders, including Microsoft founder Bill Gates.

Murthy advocates for “compassionate capitalism” in his home country of India.  In 2004 interview with BBC, he said, ”We believe that if India has to solve its problem of poverty, we have to embrace capitalism, ensure that jobs are created, and make sure that market-driven policies are accepted.” Today, he sits on boards for the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, the United Nations Foundation, and the Ford Foundation.  He also serves as a Trustee for the Rhodes Trust, home of the Rhodes Scholarship program.

Murthy’s daughter, Akshata N. Murty, graduated from CMC in 2002.  She currently serves on Claremont McKenna’s Board of Trustees.

For more information on the 2012 Commencement, please visit the CMC Commencement Page here.

This article was updated at 3:15pm on February 23rd to include information regarding the honorary degree.

It isn’t fair. And it hurts.

Needless to say, this has been a rough couple days for CMC. Not only was the news surrounding the fudged SAT reports a poor moment for the administration, but it was also a difficult moment for the Claremont community. After all, we are the ones who love this place. We serve as its principal defenders and advocates. We devote inordinate amounts of time to explaining our institution to relatives and job recruiters– even strangers on the street.  It’s an incredible place, we argue. You’ve just probably never heard of it.

Now they have. It is a great irony that we receive so much attention for an issue that is so far removed from the hearts and minds of CMCers. Rankings are not necessarily what drove us here as prospective students, nor are they what we seek to take away with us as graduates.

I did not choose Claremont McKenna College for its name recognition; I came here in spite of its nonexistence.  I chose CMC because, despite knowing it was small and little-known, I had a feeling in my core it was worth the risk.

Let’s be clear: the unethical move highlighted in the press today was made by an administrator. It was one singular employee.  Perhaps he was moved deeply by his passions for the school, but nonetheless, his actions were his and his alone.  The bad news was honorably self-reported by the administration.

Our community, on the other hand, is innocent. This incident is by no means indicative of our school culture.  After three years here, I can tell you firsthand that Claremont McKenna College is not a hyper-competitive learning institution. The students here are scholars and leaders, not grimey grade-obsessed teenagers. Where I go to school, people do not try to sabotage their peers over grade point averages. Rather, they derive pleasure in seeing their peers succeed, in every venture.

The most important thing we can do as students in this moment is simple– we must defend the community we hold so dear.   Now is not the time for internal competition, rumors or conspiracy theories. We should take this moment to reaffirm our values as Claremont McKenna College’s finest, by supporting our classmates. This is an opportunity to reevaluate who we are as members of the CMC community. No matter what your major may be, we can all agree that, as students enrolled in this institution, we are part of an incredible organization.  This community is a caring one, founded on our ability to support each other regardless of our yearly U.S. News and World Report ranking. We do not find value in petty competition for competition’s sake. Claremont McKenna is better than that.

The CMC they’re writing about? That’s not my school. What happened this week– it is not who we are. Let them not extrapolate their opinion of our admissions office to that of us as a community. While it is clear that the administration needs to make some changes, it is important to remember that our college culture is not what is coming under fire.  Professors and students alike, continue your good work. Our educational policies are not the problem. Please don’t change a thing; you’re wonderful the way you are.

Here on the front lines in pleasant Claremont, California, one fact rings true: competition does not consume, nor define us. What happened on Monday is not reflective of our school community. Claremont McKenna College is a top-tier liberal arts college unlike any other in the nation– I maintain that opinion regardless of the news that broke this week.

Recently, my darling Heath has been begging me, along with many other members of the class of 2013, to contribute to the Forum‘s Letters to Home series.  But as much as I’m sure that “Letters to Home: How I Fell Off a Swing By Myself and Split My Head Open in Chile” would be an instant classic, I’m saving it for my memoir.

So here’s the back up plan: write about fat girls.

Like it or not, we’re all thinking about it – the prospect of going abroad with that cute little California beach body and coming back only to have been transformed into a whale hanging out at Scripps pool.  I might weigh 135 pounds, but that’s only 60 kilograms, so that means I’m actually skinnier in South America, right?  That’s a thing.

Let’s start from the beginning.  Before I’d even booked my plane ticket for my big Southern hemisphere adventure, I knew what was up.  My friends warned me about it all summer, teasing me endlessly.  “All the girls that go to South America get fat,” they reminded me.

One put it a little more tenderly, providing some charming advice: “Mimbs, don’t f#@king get fat down there.”

Easier said than done.  When you’re in a world of new, good habits are hard to maintain.  You’re only abroad once is frequently our rallying cry, our excuse to tear into anything and everything put in front of us.  It isn’t healthy, but who knows.  Maybe it is our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to have Dulce de Leche and Coconut flavored ice-cream.  And, yes, I could probably find that back in the States, thanks to globalization and what not, but shush.  Don’t tell me that.  Let me savor this mouthful of wonderfulness like Argentina and I are going to break up – and this is my last opportunity to savor our rich, rich relationship.   Besides, I haven’t had a real waffle cone since, like, 1998.

My tortured existence on this deserted continent of fine wine and Latin lovers now consists of two ever hounding thoughts: “when is my next meal coming” and “I should really be more careful at my next meal not to get fat.”  The pendulum unpredictably, and unproductively, swings between the two.   Thinking about it is not helping anything, but taking the time to stay in shape isn’t easy.  Going for a run is difficult – especially when there are modern art museums to see and chocolate chunk lattes to try.

I don’t think I’m alone in this experience. After Skyping with friends studying in many parts of the world, I’ve reached one final conclusion – more likely than not, I’m not the only one going crazy over food while abroad.

Rather, we’re each asking questions: is my on-campus boyfriend still going to love me when I come back from Europe looking like I just ate a Frenchman?   Are the new freshman going to be hotter than me?  And how the hell am I going to fit into all my American Apparel body suits for theme parties in the spring? By the way, screw the lingerie party.

More then once on this trip, I’ve found myself quoting Mary Scmich’s “Wear Sunscreen” essay.  The essay, packed with fitting life advice, was adapted to music video in 1999 by Baz Luhrmann, and features one increasingly relevant line: “You are not as fat as you imagine.”  Dreamy and idealistic, but also not so far from the truth.  While there’s less research on weight gain of college students during their junior year, one recent study showed that the “Freshman 15″ isn’t actually a real thing.  It is nothing but a panic-inciting, salad-diet-inducing myth: the average student only gains about 3 pounds their first year in college.  At the end of the day, it’s more in our heads than we realize.

I could feed you some sort of cookie-cutter “cherish the moment” advice, but you’ve had enough cookies already, girlfriend.  Let’s just put it this way – there’s something more important to study abroad than counting calories.  As one CMC alum sagely advised me –  ”If you are going abroad, eat, drink and party like they do. Weight is something that can be lost, but experiences can’t.”

So breathe, you’re still a hottie.  And if you put on some weight, it’s not the end of the world.  There’s always Jessica Mao’s killer kick boxing class in the spring to get you back into shape.

Besides, Pirate Party’s not till May. Ya got time.

Food images courtesy of Elizabeth Petit ’13, currently studying abroad in Sydney, Australia.  Photos were taken during a trip to New Zealand. 

I hadn’t a clue that I’d be walking into another country’s nightmare.

Turn back thirty-eight years.  Santiago, Chile.  It is September 11th, 1973. The democratic government of President Salvador Allende falls in a military coup d’etat. The President, according to one account, commits suicide by a single bullet through his chin.  Martial law is declared; General Pinochet takes control. Within twenty four hours, a dictator’s reign has begun.

Over the span of the next seventeen years, over 3,000 people will be killed or, worse, disappear after being detained by the dictator – their bodies still missing to this day.  Some will be recovered – their remains having been mutilated by torture and tossed in mass graves, only to be identified decades later for their grieving husbands, wives, and children.

On the tenth anniversary of September 11th, I didn’t think I’d find myself spending quality time with the Chilean socialist party. But I did, and though I find myself quite far from being socialist, we shared a sidewalk – and a hope that such atrocities will never happen again.

Neither 9/11 supersedes the other – no country has a monopoly on tragedy, especially when it comes to that infamous day. That they share a single date is no more than coincidence, one of those quirky little twists of fate. But there is a moral to these stories – that even in our modern “civilized” society, there exist flagrant human rights violations and unspeakable violence.

On September 11th, I held vigil, along with many others – from Manhattan to Santiago – to honor the victims. We gathered around candles, bearing our red, white, and blue, to take a somber moment to remember those who lost their lives in these two senseless tragedies – and to pray that no more pain be inflicted on this date in the future.

Photos from la marcha para los derechos humanos
9/11/2011

On May 14th, 2011, the sun set on silent tents and empty chairs. The stage had been crossed, the diplomas awarded, and the champagne drunk.

As they say, it ain’t over till the Registrar sings.

Class of 2011, we here at the Forum wish you all the best. It has been a privilege to live in your shadow, and we look forward to seeing what great things you will do in the future. Keep on wearin’ it.

You can see the rest of the pictures on our main slide show here.

Drill this into your brain: this Sunday is Mother’s Day.

(Yes, I bolded that for a reason. Don’t mess this one up.)

Flowers, again? Yawn.

So how are you planning on spoiling your mother? If you are like me, you already pulled the 1-800-Flowers.com trick freshman year. Besides, while flowers are a pretty expression of a child’s affection, they are not exactly pragmatic.  Pastel roses, unlike my love for my Mother, wilt and fade within days, crumbling into the muddy water of their own vase.

I considered sending her an eCard, but my mother is getting too tech saavy to find kistchy animated cats endearing.  After all, she just figured out Facebook mobile uploads.

Unfortunately, to procure a suitable alternative gift, I need the help of my family from afar.  Now, I find myself three-thousand miles away from my little brother, and trying to micromanage my Mother’s special day via text message. Gift-splitting may be practical for college-aged siblings with limited budgets, but cross-country coordination can be difficult.

What’s a kid to do?

Enter Splittr.

Splittr, the joint brain-child of CMC Alum Erik Hansell ’09 and current senior Eric Scott, is a online gift-giving platform which allows users to contribute to gifts over the internet.   Splittr is a place where relatives and friends alike can pool together their money and – well – split the cost of gift, instead of each just sending a Hallmark card with cash.

How does Splittr work?  First, a user decides what they want.  For instance, say I want a new laptop for my birthday.  I choose the computer I want and add it to my Splittr account.  I am then provided with a link to send to my family and friends, who can each chip-in a small amount.  When the target amount is reached, Splittr ships the laptop to my house.  (If not enough funds are secured to make the purchase by my big day, Splittr sends me an Amazon gift card with the amount I acquired.)

Some might believe that Splittr undermines the art of gift giving.  The social norms surrounding the giving and receiving of holiday presents seem deeply ingrained into our society.  Having one pick out their own gifts feels strange.  It seems to violate the unwritten constitution of gift-giving.

“Social conventions have already changed because of social media,”  CEO Eric Scott argues.  “With Splittr, we’re just trying to harness those social conventions. For instance – the ‘Happy Birthday’ Facebook Wall post.  You could say it’s ruined social interactions, but I don’t think that’s true. It’s just made different ones.”

Sure, Splittr might work well if your Mom ardently desires a pink iPod shuffle or a Martha Stewart Pie and Tart Cookbook (both of which can be found in Splittr’s database),  but what of handmade gifts, tenderly baked cookies, and sweetly constructed Mother’s Day poems?

Certainly, Splittr is not the optimal tool for die-hard romantics.  Scott himself acknowledges the intrinsic value of these kinds of gifts.  “The best gifts money can’t buy,” he admits, “but for everything else, there’s Splittr.”

So if you’re still hell-bent on toying with pipe-cleaners and glue this weekend, craft away for your dear Ma.  Just be careful – when you’re twenty, framing your own art isn’t nearly as cute.  You know what?  It’s actually kind of pretentious.  Who do you think you are, Van Gogh? Besides, I’m fairly certain that if I mailed my mother a popsicle stick sculpture this year, she’d laugh and mail me back an unpaid tuition bill.

No matter what you decide to get Mom and how you decide to get it, don’t you dare forget that Sunday morning phone call home. (See, I bolded that too.)  She deserves it.

You’re not going to be able to get ‘Shots’ out of your head for a week, but whatever – it was so worth it.