According to her email, Gann will be taking a year’s leave during the 2013-2014 academic year before returning to CMC for the 2014-2015 academic year as a Professor of Legal Studies. During her final year as President, Gann says she intend to focus on “completing The Campaign for Claremont McKenna and be involved with moving forward several building projects, as well as the recruitment of our exceptional faculty and students.”

The email was sent to the student body on May 15, 2012. It was accompanied by a letter by Harry McMahon, President of the Board of Trustees, thanking President Gann for her service. Gann’s email is reproduced below.

May 15, 2012

Dear Members of the CMC Community,

About a year ago, I discussed with Harry McMahon, the Chair of the CMC Board of Trustees, my intention to step down as your President upon the completion of The Campaign for Claremont McKenna, as well as my interest in returning to teaching. It has recently become clear that our highly successful Campaign will wrap-up next year, so it feels like the time is right for the College and for me, personally, to move forward with a leadership transition. I therefore officially notified the Trustees at their meeting last Saturday of my plan to step down as your President on June 30, 2013, following 14 years of service. I write now to inform you of this decision, and to thank you for the privilege and honor of serving as the President of this splendid institution.

Leadership changes are healthy for all organizations, and they provide an opportunity for the community to come together to reflect seriously and intelligently upon its future. This leadership change will also come at a time when the College is well positioned to attract an exceptional new President.

I am very proud of the advances made in all aspects of the College over the past several years. The faculty has never been stronger in teaching and research, and it has grown substantially in overall size. It is a faculty that cares very deeply about the central role that it plays in the aims of all outstanding institutions of higher education. Along with our exceptional academic programs, our expanded financial aid policies help us recruit a talented student body nationally and internationally. Our students benefit from an ever larger set of co-curricular, internship, and off-campus study opportunities. Our physical surroundings are being transformed by a set of Master Plan principles that not only take advantage of our exceptional geography and climate, but also reflect, architecturally, the quality and significance of the educational work that takes place here. As a result of this progress, the College continues to contribute to and strengthen The Claremont Colleges. These advances are made possible through the leadership of our Board of Trustees, hard-working staff, faculty and students who care about our College, as well as through the generosity in service and philanthropy of our alumni, parents, and friends.

On a personal level, I will have had the special opportunity to serve in leadership roles at two fine institutions: first, as Dean of the Duke University School of Law for 11 years, and then, as President of CMC for 14 years. It has been a personally rewarding career to be involved as a professor and administrator for more than 37 years in the higher education of so many fine young people. I very much look forward to returning to the activities that drew me to academic life in the first place, particularly teaching and research. After a year’s leave, I will continue to be a part of the CMC community as a College Professor of Legal Studies, which presents a fantastic opportunity to teach our outstanding students.

During the coming year, I will focus on completing The Campaign for Claremont McKenna and be involved with moving forward several building projects, as well as the recruitment of our exceptional faculty and students. I also will work with the Board of Trustees to ensure a successful transition to the next President.

It is a rare opportunity to be asked to serve such a fine liberal arts college, and I will forever be grateful to be a part of this special place of higher education.

With personal appreciation,

Pamela B. Gann
President

 

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.”

He started by mentioning that his primary role is to elevate the quality of faculty and academic programs at CMC. He then stated that over the last six or seven years, in his role as the Dean of Faculty, he has hired roughly 40% of the current faculty members as the college has experienced high faculty turnover. For the upcoming academic year, Hess mentioned that the college engaged in a strong amount of hiring. (See below for a list of the departments with new hires.) He stressed that he is looking to hire faculty to encourage margins of development in areas where the college is not particularly strong, such as languages and sciences.

Hess then discussed the external review process for the academic departments and the various programs the college is looking to expand. The external review process occurs for each department every six or seven years and highlights specific improvements which should be made to advance that particular department.

According to Hess, the external review process of the Philosophy department determined that CMC currently has the best Philosophy department in comparison to any liberal arts institution.

Furthermore, CMC is extending the Yonsei-CMC summer program for another six years, with the hope to place students in internships in Korea in another two years. This summer, the college is also hosting a travel trip to Rome. Hess also noted that CMC wants to ensure the Silicon Valley Program is a 5C program. Four Pomona Students participating in addition to the 14 CMCers for next year; Pomona and other 5C alumni are helping out with the program.

He also mentioned that CMC is looking to add another ITAB networking trip, in addition to the current trip, to provide more students with opportunities in Silicon Valley.

In the near future, the college plans to establish a South Asia presence, particularly in India. CMC has been recruiting Indian students heavily, and President Gann visited India over winter break with the hope of establishing internships and course offerings for CMCers.

For the summer, the college has paired up with several NGO’s in India to offer social entrepreneurship internships. In the future, Cynthia Humes, a Religious Studies professor who has lived in India, may possibly teach a half-credit course. This opportunity will be subsidized heavily; the college is raising funds in South Asia to make the price modest for CMCers.

Dean Hess ended his talk focusing on entrepreneurship and the manner in which the college is trying to increase the academic presence in this field. CMC wants students of all majors to have some experience in entrepreneurial programming in the future. The college is trying to compliment the work done by the KLI and the RDS to extend entrepreneurship education to all students.

New hires:

Robert Day School: Hired two now professors. One of the professors will teach a course on economic development, and the other professor will offer a course on finance.

Literature Department: Hired a professor from Harvard to teach a course on British Literature.

History Department: Hired two new faculty members to teach courses on 19th century western history and environmental history, respectively.

Keck Science Center: Hired three faculty members to teach courses on Environmental Science, Chemistry and Biology respectively.

Furthermore, a professor from the University of Munich has been hired to teach Holocaust Studies in the John Roth Chair, which alumni of the college provided funding for. The college has also established the Cook Chair in honor of Scott Cook, the co-founder of Intuit, which will be filled by a new faculty member from Cal Tech to teach behavioral psychology and economic decision-making. Next year, the college is looking to hire faculty to teach Korean Politics, Brazilian History and Portuguese at the 5C’s, which will allow students to learn Portuguese after Spanish, if they so desire.

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.

Excluding interviews with the Forum and the Claremont Port Side, the ASCMC Senate meeting was the first time members of the administration spoke directly with students since the discovery of manipulated data was made public last week. During the meeting, Benavidez noted that President Pamela Gann, “said that she will meet with the students at an upcoming occasion.”

The Bauer Forum was unusually packed with nearly 150 students in attendance, eager to hear the administration speak publicly on recent events and offer answers to the many unanswered questions raised by the SAT scandal and Dean Vos’ resignation.

Photo Credit: Kelsey Brown

The meeting began with a motion from representatives of the Claremont Port Side to allow for recording and live-streaming of the event. Following an extensive discussion and vote, the senate body decided to bar video and audio recording from the room, much to the dismay of some attendees.

The discussion opened with an address by Dean Huang in which he explained, “We’re here tonight to listen to your concerns… We want to talk about moving forward as well.” He went on to summarize the events of the past two weeks, and tried to reassure students that the situation was under control. “We’ve pledged to strengthen our interior controls over the data,” he explained. He also argued that the impact of the scandal on current students would be minimal, especially for their employment opportunities. “One company … actually did call and said that they had heard about this, and that they were staying with us, saying ‘CMC students are still of incredible talent.’”

Following Dean Huang’s address, DeVeres and Sandoval-Dancs fielded questions from the students, while Benavidez offered help when necessary.

Students were quick to voice their concern for the potential ramifications of Vos’ misconduct. Daniel Shane (CMC ’13) asked how Early Decision applicants were responding to the recent news. DeVeres responded that none had yet asked to withdraw from enrollment because of the debacle.

When asked how the administration would prevent similar problems in the future, DeVeres declared firmly that “all admissions data has been audited” and that, “we’re going to be swiftly putting controls in place” to decrease the likelihood of a repeat offense. Benavidez seemed hopeful for the future when he declared, “We are in the middle of a PR challenge, but we are withstanding it because CMC has a strong foundation”

When asked what kind of pressure, if any, was placed on the administration to strengthen CMC’s performance in national rankings, Sandoval-Dancs claimed, “I can’t say I’ve ever interpreted anything as pressure … to me it was just about momentum and feeling good and knowing you can set goals and you can reach them” but that, “it was always be very clear, you know, be realistic.”

Photo Credit: Kelsey Brown

The officials also discussed the impact of recent events on themselves personally. Dean Huang in particular noted that, “I will forever be changed by this.” He hoped that students could also learn something from the affair, and implored the audience to, “be honest and forthright with the people you work with.”

Students later offered their responses to the discussion. Aditya Pai (CMC’13), who leads the Senate as ASCMC’s Vice President, said, “My expectation was that students would ask constructive, pointed questions and that administrators would answer those questions honestly and openly to the best of their knowledge. I think that expectation was met.”

Others were less satisfied. Tyler McBrien (CMC’14) noted that, “The voice of Dick Vos remains notably absent,” and summarized the night as “Too many questions. Not enough answers.” Talia Segal (CMC’15) agreed, saying “I thought there were too many ‘I don’t knows.’”

Sam Stone (CMC’14) was more critical. He explained, “I was not satisfied. I was, in fact, a little bit insulted because, number one, they spent a lot of time talking about how nice it was for them to take time out of their day to come and talk to us, and that’s their job … The only thing I got from today was that these people didn’t have answers.”

Carly Lenderts (CMC’14) added “I felt like they were trying to pacify us … the answers were dry and a little bit prepared.” She added that, “On a personal level, I don’t really believe it was just Dean Vos. I just don’t think that institutions work this way. You can’t tell us that every application gets two reads but the SAT scores are only dealt with by one person. That doesn’t really make sense to me.”

The CMC administration has made an initial attempt to reach out to students who are hungry for answers. Unfortunately, the general feeling of attendees seemed to be one of dissatisfaction. Many feel that the administration has yet to own up to their mistakes and engage the student body in a thorough, honest discussion regarding the manipulation of admissions data by the Office of Admissions. Hopefully, the administration will better involve students in the process of moving past this ordeal and work harder to resolve lingering questions.

Nathan Falk ’14 contributed reporting.

Photo Credit: Jessica Dang

On Thursday, February 2, the Forum and the Claremont Port Side sat down with Claremont McKenna College President Pamela Gann to discuss the recent SAT reporting scandal.

President Gann began the discussion by emphasizing honesty, integrity and the core values of the college. Gann felt it was important “to recognize all of the historical work of prior leaders within the college that makes this community what it is.”

The College’s overarching goal was to get to the “root of the problem.” Gann stated that, “there was never a question that we would be forthcoming” about the falsified SAT data. The College wanted to be open and transparent in their findings and get the information out “quickly but accurately.”

Gann went on to explain the chronology of recent events and how the falsely reported data first came to her attention. On January 9, an unnamed source from within the college approached President Gann and raised a question about the accuracy of the SAT data for CMC’s 2011 incoming class.

That day, Gann asked Vice President and Dean Emeritus Jerome Garris to look into the questions raised about the SAT scores. Gann noted that Garris is a man of unquestionable integrity. Over two weeks later, on January 24, Gann sent an email to Garris to check-in on the investigation. She awoke on Wednesday morning, January 25, to an email from Garris. The email included news that someone within the Office of Admission had confessed to falsely reporting SAT data since 2005.

President Gann was in disbelief when she first heard the news.

Richard C. Vos, former Vice President & Dean of Admission and Financial Aid, is widely assumed to be at fault and resigned on Monday after news of the scandal was made public.

On the morning of January 25, Gann immediately notified Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Harry McMahon ‘75, of Garris’ findings. McMahon formed a small working group of board members that met later that day by phone. McMahon, the Board of Trustees, and Gann worked in parallel through this process. “The board was totally in sync with us as we did our work,” said Gann. Gann then held an executive committee meeting over the phone on Thursday and a full meeting of the board on Friday.

Early Monday morning, January 30, the college began telephoning all entities to which the affected data was reported and informing them of the falsified data. At 9:00 AM, Gann met with her senior staff to inform them of the news, and at 10:00 AM, she met with the Office of Admissions and Financial Aid staff. Gann’s email was sent at 11:00 AM to all students, faculty, staff, alumni, and parents of current students.

Soon after, Gann informed this year’s Early Decision I applicants—those who had already received notification of their binding admission—and Early Decision II applicants about the falsification of SAT scores.

On Wednesday, February 1, the college formally released the corrected data and sent it to outside agencies, including the New York Times, the LA Times, the college’s auditors, Moody’s Investors Service and other interested parties. The corrected data has not been sent to all entities, but the college hopes to finish their distribution by the end of the day.

Photo Credit: Jessica Dang

Gann emphasized the important distinction between data construction and data reporting. Data construction, she explained, is the way in which the college compiles the data internally. Applicants often take the SATs and the ACTs more than once, and all scores are sent to the college. Like many of its peer institutions, Claremont McKenna takes an applicant’s highest critical reading and highest math score to create the combined SAT score used for the college’s admission decision. If a student’s ACT score is higher than his or her SAT score, the former score is used in the admission process.

Gann explained that now, nearly fifteen to sixteen percent of applicants only submit ACT scores to the college. Since a higher ACT score can trump the SAT score, Gann said, “There will not be an SAT score for every student.”

Data reporting, she explained, is the way in which the college’s admissions data is presented to outside entities. According to Gann, the manipulation of SAT score data was an issue of data reporting and not data construction.

“As far as we know,” said Gann, “there was no falsification of data construction.”

Gann noted two main reasons for how the data could have been misreported for over six years. First, she said, “a sole person had too much authority over the reporting of data.” Gann admitted that there was “no internal checks and balances system in place” when the senior administrator was falsifying reports of the data.

Second, the reported SAT scores “did not trigger suspicion,” said Gann. Gann explained that the data were relatively flat, and “the falsified numbers were almost the same every year.” Nothing in the data raised any suspicions amongst those who saw it.

Citing personnel matters, protected by California privacy law, Gann could not comment on the former senior administrator’s motivation behind fudging the numbers. She also could not comment on whether the person responsible was asked to resign and whether there was a resignation letter.

President Gann has said the college will move forward next week with an independent review conducted by the law firm O’Melveny & Myers and led by the Board of Trustees. Gann emphasized that no one from within the college can be responsible for leading the independent review as it would be an obvious conflict of interest.

Though she can’t predict when the review will be completed, Gann said she hoped it would be finished quickly. The findings of the independent review will only be made public if the Board of Trustees chooses to do so. Although the college has no reason to believe that other data has been falsely reported, the independent investigation will look at data before 2005.

Photo Credit: Jessica Dang

Gann believes the college acted quickly and “used good governance” to address the root of the problem and manage the situation. Gann asserts that the College has “been very prompt, open, and honest” in its handling of the issue.

While some students have expressed frustration with the minimal communication from Gann and the college administration, Gann emphasized that her plan of action thus far has prioritized (1) obtaining the right information and (2) getting the correct information out to the appropriate agencies. Now, she said, the college is in the midst of her third objective—to repair the trust of the community—and will continue to reach out and inform students as best it can.

Gann thought going to student publications such as the Forum and the Claremont Port Side was more effective than immediately holding a town hall-style meeting. However, Gann has been present in college dealings over the past week. She attended a senior class reception on Tuesday evening, appearing at a Board of Trustees meeting breakfast with students, and may appear alongside Vice President of Public Affairs Max Benavidez on Monday evening at the ASCMC Senate meeting.

President Gann could not speculate on how this incident will impact CMC’s rankings in the future. On NPR’s All Things Considered, Robert Morse, director of data research for U.S. News and World Report, indicated that the dip in scores is likely to have only a small effect on the ranking. “It’s certainly not going to drop the school to twentieth place,” said Morse, “but I guess there’s some chance that it could drop out of the top ten.”

President Gann added that she does not see any data that suggests rankings drive a student’s decision to go to a college. “The primary reason that students come here is the high quality education and the academic program is a good fit for them,” said Gann. She continues, “rankings and guides are only part of the process.”

Many believe that rankings played a role in causing this incident. Gann stated that the Office of Admission has no explicit goals for SAT scores. “Our aspiration is to have a talented student body,” said Gann, “and SAT scores are a part of that.”

In 2002, the Board of Trustees adopted a general policy statement to guide the admissions office on shaping incoming classes. Some considerations include leadership, diversity, and support for co-curricular programs. According to Gann, one change in this policy since the beginning of her presidency was to increase the number of international students.

Despite the recent SAT score incident, President Gann believes that Claremont McKenna remains a strong institution. “We have wonderful students, wonderful faculty, and I’m very proud of this college,” she said.

Gann hopes that this unfortunate incident will also become a learning experience for students. She explained that the past week has been an excellent lesson in “crisis leadership.” Gann stated that, “lapses in leadership are where you learn the most.”

Updates: February 2, 2012 at 3:14pm

Since the incident first came to light, the college has taken a number of steps to ensure that this will never happen again.  Before any data is released from the Admissions office, two Vice Presidents in different areas of the college, that have no authority in the Office of Admission, must sign off on the data.  President Gann believes this method should be extended for all data reporting at the college. Vice President for Administration and Planning, General Counsel, and Secretary of the College, Matthew Bibbens, and Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty, Gregory Hess, signed off on the corrected SAT score data before it was released yesterday. President Gann also signed off on the SAT data.

Heath Hyatt ’12, Caroline Nyce ’13, and Nathan Falk ’14 contributed reporting.

Editor’s note. This article was updated on February 2 at 2:37pm. The original article stated that a senior administrator had “falsified reporting” of SAT data since 2005. The updated article clarifies and states the administrator confessed to “falsely reporting” the data.

On campus, the Forum broke the news of President Gann’s email concerning the fudged reports and compared a google cache of the Office of Admission webpage to its current page, and later highlighted former Dean Vos’ resignation. On Wednesday afternoon, the Forum publicized an official statement from CMC’s student government, ASCMC. Nationally, The New York Times and The LA Times were among those to first pick up the story, offering background on the events of the incident, including the score falsification, Richard Vos’ resignation, President Gann’s email to students, and the move to hire a law firm to investigate the matter more fully.

Photo Courtesy of CNN

A variety of reports have concluded that the college’s rankings will only be mildly affected, if at all.  CNN reported that according to U.S. News and World Report, SAT scores “account for about 7.5% of a school’s total score in the formula.”  In an interview with NPR, Robert Morse, the director of data research for U.S. News, speculated that while the score change wouldn’t have dire effects on the college’s ranking, it could likely drop out of the top ten.

USA TODAY interviewed Robert Franek, the senior vice president of publishing for The Princeton Review who stated that “he had never heard of a college intentionally reporting incorrect data.” However, Franek also told the Forum that he didn’t believe the score inflation would make a real difference in CMC’s standing with the Princeton Review, as their reviews are based entirely on student opinion.

Rankings aside, the Claremont Port Side conducted an in-depth investigation into how much the scores had been altered to create an upward trend in scoring. Reporter Jeremy B. Merrill ’12 published graphs which reveal critical reading scores were inflated by “an average of more than 17 points,” suggesting the score manipulation was more drastic than President Gann had originally suggested. Merrill reported an elevated mean during the past years to cover up a dip in scores and the fact that, “the freshmen admitted in 2011 — the class of 2015 — had mean Critical Reading scores that were the lowest since the class admitted in 2007.”

TIME magazine’s online newsfeed was sympathetic to CMC and criticized the rankings system for putting undue pressure on colleges to present a flawless face.  The Chronicle of Higher Education also reported on the competitive world of admissions and gave examples of several colleges in similar circumstances.  The article concluded by reaffirming, “We also maintain the belief that the system is fair and honest, and try to head off the cynicism that our families could easily adopt by viewing college admission as a rigged game of numbers and self-interest.”

As for the man responsible, The New York Times also confirmed that it was in fact Richard C. Vos the former Vice President and Dean of Admission and quoted him as saying, “No comment. It’s an internal personnel matter.”

The New York Times Education Section spent time on campus for an article entitled “Students at Claremont McKenna More Worried About Reputation Than Rankings” interviewing students who generally agreed that although the score adjustment was regrettable, it did not reflect negatively on their fellow students. Most students echoed senior Blake Bennett’s sentiment, “It’s still a great school. I just wish this wasn’t why it was getting headlines.”

ABC News reported on campus in front of the Kravis Center, gathering footage of sweatshirt-clad CMC students as a background to its report on the recent controversy.  More recently, ABC News reported that a spokesman for CMC, Associate Vice President for Public Affairs, Communications and Marketing, Max Benavidez, stated “We’re not hiding anything,” he said. “We’re the ones volunteering to tell people what took place and what we’re doing to fix it.”  The report also quoted Aditya Pai ’11, ASCMC Vice President, as saying, “[Vos’s] actions do not reflect the strength of our community, the excellence of our education, or the caliber of our people.”

Students continued to ask for answers as Nathan Falk ’14 called for a further explanation from the administration. “Only shedding light on the issue will bring us closure,” Falk said in his Forum op-ed.

In a positive take on recent events, Caroline Nyce ’13 defended her college and its community in another Forum op-ed published Wednesday morning. Nyce wrote, “The CMC they’re writing about? That’s not my school.”

It is on the front page of the Education section of the New York Times. Publications like USA TODAY, CNN, the Wall Street Journal, TIME, Bloomberg, ABC, and countless others are all writing about us. Finally, people all over the country are talking about that “small, selective liberal arts college in California.”

Credit: hhsprincipalsoffice.wordpress.com

This is definitely not how I pictured it would happen.

Students and professors are shaking their heads in disgust, and Pomona students are preparing “S-A-T” chants for the next basketball game.

I am the first one to tell you that rankings matter. You may, in fact, recall the Forum article I wrote last fall in which I argued that CMC’s rise in the national rankings changed people’s perception about the school. Claremont’s ascension into the ‘elite’ tier of liberal arts colleges convinced many students who would have otherwise gone elsewhere to choose CMC. Perhaps you are one of them.

So, yes, rankings do matter.

Do they matter too much? What could drive a “senior administrator” to adjust already-great scores? There are many unknowns here, but one thing is absolutely clear: there’s no excuse for cheating. Period.

No increase in applications, donations, or rankings could possibly justify risking CMC’s reputation. Nothing can justify fudging the numbers at any time. The fact that the admissions office apparently did it for six years straight is truly disturbing.

Claremont McKenna prides itself as an institution that educates leaders. CMC graduates often go on to run for public office or lead successful businesses. Teaching ethical conduct, no matter the circumstances or competition, is one of the most important lessons a school can teach.

The blame game has already started. Former Dean of Admissions Richard C. Vos is no longer employed by CMC. Honestly, I don’t know who is responsible. Instead of calling for scapegoats, however, I am calling for answers.

The administration owes the Claremont community a further explanation.

Where is the transparency after-the-fact? The news broke after one vague email to the student body, and after 36 hours, the Office of Public Affairs has not released any more information except that the Dean of Admissions has been replaced. Trying to close the book on the issue with an email saying we caught the bad guy and hired lawyers won’t suffice. I understand that there may be legal reasons certain details cannot be revealed, but some very general questions need to be answered before we can move on.

I want to know how these discrepancies came to light. Why now? The administration apparently found out about this in January. Does that mean January 1st? Does that mean Monday morning? Does the timing of this incident just happen to be after applications have been turned in? Was there internal or external pressure to climb the rankings? Were there cutoffs the admissions department were told to meet? Were there incentives in place that may have motivated the individual to manipulate the scores? Most of all, I would like to know how this could have happened – for six years – without anyone else knowing about it at a college that is built on leadership, accountability, and integrity.

The fact that President Gann publicized this information is an important first step. This could have been swept under the rug completely, but it wasn’t. An official from Public Affairs has agreed to address the Student Senate next week. That is a crucial next step.

We need more information. We need to have an open discussion about what happened and how we can move forward from here. The best way to get past this is to understand it and learn from it. Transparency is the only way to end the speculation and conspiracy theories. Only shedding light on the issue will bring us closure.

Is this the end of CMC as we know it? No. Will future employers look at recent grads any differently? Probably not. But will CMC’s reputation be stained indefinitely? Maybe.

Current, future, and past students had nothing to do with this incident, but we now have to pay the price.

The pride that I have in my peers and professors at Claremont McKenna remains unchanged. My professors are no less brilliant, and my peers are no less amazing. The spectacular experience that I have had here as a student cannot ever be taken away from me. My future degree is not any less meaningful to me than it was on Sunday.

But we need information. We need answers.

We need to talk openly about this, because this matters. Yes, rankings matter. Ethics, however, matter more.

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.

Unfortunately the answer is obvious, and cringe-worthy: U.S. News & World Report National Liberal Arts College Rankings.

Claremont McKenna College has been rising on this list—and other lists—for some time now. The yearly reports have been big news on campus: we glorify falling admissions rates and drool when Forbes ranks us higher than Yale. We post on our Facebook walls about how we fared relative to other competitive colleges. We put flashy banners on our homepage telling us where we stand. The 5^th and 6^th lines of President Gann’s biography on the college’s website list the school’s ratings and its admissions selectivity ranking.

The administration is obsessed with our placement on an arbitrary scoreboard, and many of us students have joined the self-congratulatory bandwagon. We find ourselves today in an environment so focused on rankings that a senior admissions officer decided that a one-percent fudge was worth his career.

Shame on Mr. Vos, but he does not deserve all the blame.

Monday’s announcement was a wake-up call. Yes, these types of rankings games must be watched more closely. Yes, everyone involved should see the door. But the administration must also address the fact that the incentive to cheat at these games in our community seems to be unusually high. Beyond firing those responsible for cheating, the administration must address both the larger system of college rankings and its attitude towards our own ratings.

The college continues to insist on measuring itself by metrics calculated by people who have never eaten in Collins dining hall. We have an unusual and unhealthy obsession with moving up that list. It must stop now. If the administration continues to see us only in numbers, we will continue to bleed integrity. CMC will win the game. But we will lose ourselves.

Why would President Gann care what U.S. News and World Report thinks about our professors? The answer is simple: high rankings lead to better students, better professors, more money for the school and better jobs waiting for us after graduation. High rankings are good—and we can measure them. How can the college possibly be asked to ignore them?

It can’t really. Somehow, we have to attempt to strike a balance between caring and obsessing about our reputation as an institution. Unfortunately, this is an issue that every college community and every admissions department in the country must confront.

Why? Because the college ranking system is broken.

We know this intuitively. Measuring Harvey Mudd College on paper with Claremont McKenna on paper is like asking a blind man to compare apples and oranges. If a high school senior were to ask you which of the two schools she should attend, telling her the square footage of Kravis or the SAT score statistics of Mudd’s freshmen would be silly. Yet these are the very numbers that colleges around the country let rule the decisions they make at the very highest levels. These statistics are not inherently important; the ranking system makes them important. That’s ridiculous.

Once a school has been named among the top 20 schools in the nation, it should not be ranked against its peers. The differences between schools at this level come from the different focuses and strengths of each school. Publishing rankings only encourages an obsession with prestige: a gaggle of kindergartners standing on tippy toes trying to see who is the tallest.

Undeniably, the actions of anyone involved with this scandal are irredeemable and absolutely inexcusable.

But the admissions department was acting on the pressures it felt by the rankings fixation of this administration. “I put pressure on myself to drive up the rankings because it is in my office’s best interest,” Dean Vos told the Claremont Port Side in an interview in 2008, a year in which scores were inflated. This administration has created an environment that passively encouraged cheating.
But the administration was acting on outside pressures too—pressures caused by a broken ratings system that we know has no baring on the quality of this education. A solution, then, to properly address what happened will be complex.

U.S. News and World Report should admit that what it publishes is based on funny math from essentially all participants. And at some point, this college should stop sending data to institutions that rank colleges. More realistically in the short term, however, this administration needs to address its ranking mania. The resignation of Mr. Vos should not be the end of this fiasco. From here, the first step is to admit we have a problem.

I didn’t come to Claremont McKenna College because it’s number nine. I came here for the people, the classes and the professors. This won’t affect those things. But we must understand that it is worth reflecting on this situation further. For those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

And we are better than this, CMC.