The college admissions fraud scandal, which cast a spotlight on coaches accused of selling slots reserved for recruited athletes, has caused scores of institutions, some quietly and some publicly, to introduce stricter regulations to their athletic recruitment procedures.
Prominent universities like Yale and Stanford, which had coaches implicated in the scandal, swiftly announced new layers of oversight, but a more furtive effort to enact additional safeguards has occurred out of public view.
Interviews with a handful of conference commissioners overseeing more than 70 institutions, from major universities to small colleges, revealed that a majority had already imposed more stringent athletic recruiting policies. The commissioners requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the actions of member institutions, and because the colleges did not want to be perceived as having been negligent in the past.
“People looked closely at what was in place, and even when they found nothing lacking, most decided to add a little more supervision just to be safe,” one conference commissioner said.
More widespread vetting may be on the horizon. With the college academic calendar coming to a close this month, athletic administrators across the country will soon convene for a series of annual meetings that are expected to prompt even more regulation.
“It’s the institutions’ responsibility, and I do believe there will be more scrutiny across the board,” said Bernadette V. McGlade, the commissioner of the Atlantic 10 Conference, whose athletic directors, coaches and administrators are meeting next week. “I don’t think there will be wholesale restructuring, but we’d be foolish not to examine the topic.”
For all the recent intense examination of the recruited athlete admissions process, no new fraud cases have been announced or confirmed by institutions. Harvard began an investigation into its longtime fencing coach last month after learning that he had sold his house at a vastly inflated price to the father of a current Harvard student, shortly before the student was admitted. And federal prosecutors have informed a new set of parents that they are under investigation in the admissions fraud inquiry.
In another case, the family of a Chinese student admitted to Stanford paid .5 million to William Singer, the college consultant at the heart of the college admissions scandal. The family has not been charged, and the student has said her admission was the product of hard work.
The scandal unfolded on March 12, when prosecutors described the biggest case of admissions fraud they had ever investigated, charging 50 people in a scheme that involved paying bribes to coaches and to people who monitor admissions procedures in order to get the children of wealthy patrons into some of the nation’s elite colleges.
In some cases, the students were accepted as recruited athletes even though they did not play the sports described in their applications. Yet they were granted preferential treatment in admissions because of the prevalent practice of allocating a number of admissions spots to athletes who might not get in otherwise.
Days after the first indictments were announced, officials at Brown conducted a case-by-case examination of every recruited varsity athlete who had enrolled there in the last four years. A university spokesman said the review found no suspicious or illicit behavior.
Three recruited athletes ultimately did not end up on a varsity roster, but in each case it was a result of a major injury or other “legitimate and well-documented reasons,” the Brown spokesman said.
Brown, which competes in the Ivy League, was not implicated in the scandal or contacted by federal agencies. The university has nonetheless enlisted its office of institutional risk management, audit and compliance to work with coaches and athletic department staff members who take part in the admissions process.
Several other Ivy League universities, including some not cited in the federal investigation, have also begun examinations of their recruited athlete cohort. Cornell reviewed the histories of every newly admitted or first-year athlete, according to a spokesman, but the university did not find evidence suggesting that any had altered their athletic credentials.
Dartmouth examined its last three entering classes and did not find that a coach had supported an unqualified candidate for admission. But the university created new oversight rules anyway.
“Going forward, we will require that, before a coach communicates their support for a candidate to the admissions office, that candidate’s athletic credentials are reviewed and approved by an administrator as a legitimate recruit with the athletic talent necessary to contribute to our Division I varsity team,” Diana Lawrence, Dartmouth’s associate vice president for communications, wrote in an email.
The painstaking self-examination has not been exclusive to institutions competing in the N.C.A.A.’s largest category, Division I. Colleges from the N.C.A.A.’s Division III, many of them with highly selective admissions protocols, have also been evaluating their procedures.
Johns Hopkins, in Baltimore, which fields 22 Division III teams (and plays Division I in lacrosse), described its recruited athlete process as “rigorous,” but a university spokesman added that the scandal was “an opportunity to review our processes to ensure they are sufficiently protective against fraud or deception.”
Officials at Carnegie Mellon, in Pittsburgh, also scrutinized policies regarding recruited athletes; they expressed confidence in the protocols currently in place. Emory, in Atlanta, another Division III institution, noted through a spokeswoman that admissions spots were not set aside for recruited athletes, and that coaches were required to provide the admissions office with a detailed written justification for why each recruit should be considered for admission. Still, Emory said it would assess its process in such cases this summer.
McGlade, the Atlantic 10 commissioner, said she did not believe the coaching corruption exposed by federal authorities in March was pervasive.
“But it is a reality,” she said. “It was a crack that was taken advantage of and needs to be addressed.”B:
【温】【熙】【都】【没】【了】【平】【时】【的】【冷】【静】，【连】【忙】【拆】【开】【家】【书】，【看】【着】【熟】【悉】【的】【笔】【记】，【眼】【眶】【有】【些】【湿】【润】。 “【爷】【爷】【身】【体】【还】【好】【吗】？”【这】【是】【温】【熙】【最】【关】【心】【的】。“【还】【有】【师】【父】……” “【老】【爷】【子】【身】【体】【很】【好】，【您】【师】【父】【一】【直】【居】【于】【深】【山】，【但】【是】【百】【草】【堂】【的】【药】【没】【断】【过】，【应】【该】【身】【体】【不】【错】……”【贺】【小】【宝】【回】【答】【道】。 【凌】【颜】【染】【看】【了】【一】【下】【凌】【天】【傲】【的】【笔】【迹】，【微】【微】【笑】【了】【笑】，“【大】【哥】【身】【体】
“【我】【找】【一】【下】【温】【彧】，【可】【以】【告】【诉】【我】【他】【在】【哪】【间】【办】【公】【室】【吗】？”【今】【天】【早】【上】【从】【爸】【爸】【那】【里】【套】【到】【了】【温】【彧】【所】【在】【事】【务】【所】【的】【地】【址】，【一】【下】【火】【车】【就】【过】【来】【了】。 “【您】【好】，【前】【面】【左】【转】【第】【一】【间】，【要】【帮】【您】【跟】【他】【说】【一】【声】【吗】？”【前】【台】【的】【工】【作】【人】【员】【热】【情】【的】【回】【答】【着】，【我】【顺】【着】【她】【手】【指】【的】【方】【向】【看】【了】【过】【去】，【隔】【着】【门】【都】【无】【法】【掩】【藏】【我】【的】【喜】【悦】。 “【咚】【咚】，【咚】【咚】。”【我】【的】【这】【个】【惊】【喜】巴中特产论坛【夏】【笙】【凉】【掀】【开】【帘】【子】，【原】【本】【准】【备】【下】【来】【送】【她】【进】【去】【的】，【此】【刻】【看】【见】【有】【人】【出】【来】【接】，【便】【没】【有】【下】【来】【了】。 【淡】【淡】【的】【道】，“【公】【主】【好】【生】【进】【去】，【本】【殿】【就】【不】【进】【去】【了】。” “【好】，【殿】【下】【慢】【走】。”【宫】【倾】【颜】【咬】【着】【唇】【瓣】【低】【低】【一】【句】，【脸】【还】【是】【红】【的】。 【羞】【愧】【得】。 【夏】【笙】【凉】【放】【下】【了】【帘】【子】，【两】【辆】【马】【车】【又】【哒】【哒】【哒】【的】【行】【走】【在】【了】【寂】【静】【的】【街】【道】【上】。 【宫】【倾】【颜】【站】【在】【那】【里】，
【原】【逸】【宗】【被】【哈】【延】【福】【送】【回】【到】【家】【后】，【始】【终】【有】【点】【睡】【不】【着】，【他】【也】【说】【不】【清】【是】【什】【么】【原】【因】，【翻】【来】【覆】【去】【的】【几】【个】【回】【来】，【最】【终】【他】【还】【是】【爬】【了】【起】【来】，【给】【哈】【延】【福】【发】【了】【条】【信】【息】。 “【福】【子】，【回】【家】【了】【吗】？” 【他】【没】【想】【到】【哈】【延】【福】【回】【得】【很】【快】：“【还】【没】。【怎】【么】【还】【不】【睡】？” 【原】【逸】【宗】：“【睡】【不】【着】。【没】【回】【家】，【你】【现】【在】【在】【哪】【儿】？” 【这】【回】，【她】【没】【有】【马】【上】【回】，【过】【了】【一】
【隔】【了】【半】【响】，【系】【统】【那】【头】【缓】【缓】【发】【过】【来】【一】【句】【话】：“【怎】【么】【了】？” 【猫】【团】【将】【自】【己】【刚】【才】【看】【见】【一】【只】【虫】【子】【爬】【进】【来】【的】【事】【情】，【还】【有】【刚】【才】【沉】【曦】【的】【异】【样】【都】【发】【给】【了】【她】。 【最】【后】【忧】【心】【忡】【忡】【的】【说】【到】：“【沉】【沉】，【所】【以】【现】【在】【抱】【着】【我】【的】【究】【竟】【是】【不】【是】【你】【啊】。” 【沉】【曦】【若】【有】【所】【思】，【她】【瞥】【了】【眼】【自】【己】【怀】【中】【的】【白】【色】【奶】【猫】，【看】【起】【来】【什】【么】【异】【样】【都】【没】【有】。 【就】【在】【这】【时】，【猫】【团】
【对】【于】【王】【庆】【来】【说】，【他】【作】【为】【京】【西】【路】【林】【道】【上】【的】【总】【瓢】【把】【子】。 【有】【这】【样】【的】【大】【场】【面】，【他】【也】【不】【得】【不】【出】【场】，【毕】【竟】【来】【说】【第】1【场】【是】【平】【手】，【另】【外】【两】【场】【是】1【胜】1【负】。 【所】【以】【来】【说】【这】【件】【事】【情】，【不】【应】【该】【让】【木】【兰】【四】【杰】【面】【对】【所】【有】【的】【压】【力】。 【王】【庆】【在】【马】【上】【一】【抱】【拳】，【开】【口】【说】【道】：“【请】【了】，【不】【知】【道】【水】【泊】【梁】【山】【的】【人】【来】【我】【这】【京】【西】【有】【何】【贵】【干】。” “【要】【人】。”【郝】【思】