
Students Gain Access to Files on Admission to Stanford - jhull
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/us/students-gain-access-to-files-on-admission-to-stanford.html?_r=0&referrer=
======
jacobolus
> _At least one student has received the records, and said he was surprised by
> what he got back: several hundred pages, including a log of every time his
> electronic identification card had been used to unlock a door,_ [...]

It seems totally unnecessary to indefinitely store every door swipe. Sure,
store the swipes used to access the rare book room or the chemistry lab for 6
months or a year, but there’s no reason for every swipe into a dorm or dining
hall to be permanently recorded. Some amount of time between a few days and a
few weeks should be entirely sufficient for every reasonable purpose.

I imagine if the systems that store all the ID swipe data got hacked, it would
be possible to learn all kinds of things about students, including
embarrassing secrets or enough info about movement patterns to ambush someone.

[I guess this seems like a minor thing compared to records of people’s cell
phone movements, internet traffic history, etc., but I think those should be
deleted within a few days to a few weeks too.]

~~~
rickdale
When I was at college a friend of mine was being accused of a heinous crime.
In the end, he used key card time slots to prove he was innocent. But even
with the key card it was a matter of the incident happening like a single
minute after he was there. Luckily, all of the key swipes were stored and it
showed that shortly after he had already swiped his card etc. Anyways, long
story short, it doesn't hurt to keep that kind of data especially on a college
campus.

~~~
gwern
Your friend would have been saved with even an aggressive retention policy,
from the sound of it. Heinous crimes usually don't take years to pop up.

~~~
DanBC
Jimmy Saville. Harold Shipman. Etc etc.

~~~
colinb
I'll agree that the crimes committed by these individuals took a long time to
come to light, but I don't see that either had any relevance to the discussion
about retention of data that could be used to track their movements. Saville
didn't escape discovery because there was no proof of his movements. He
escaped because those who were harmed by him were cowed into silence, or
ignored by those whose job it was to help.

As for Shipman, wasn't it precisely because of anomalies in data collected
about him that he was caught? And do you agree that collecting clinical data
about doctor's use of drugs, and their outcomes vs. statistical norms might be
reasonably exempted from the kind of personal data logging that many people
find objectionable [me!]

------
clarkm
The newsletter from The Fountain Hopper (who appears to have discovered this)
has some more interesting details:

 _When you apply to Stanford, your application gets assigned at least two
admissions 'readers.'

FoHo knows you get a third (specialized) reader if you're a legacy or a
'minority' (though we're not too sure how that's defined). We also think you
get an additional reader if you're an athlete or development kid (i.e. you
donated $$$).

These readers (a mix of full-time admissions officers and seasonal hires) are
tasked with reading thousands of applications in just a few weeks and
distilling each of them into an concise, 300-ish word summary._

[http://us9.campaign-
archive2.com/?u=c9d7a555374df02a66219b57...](http://us9.campaign-
archive2.com/?u=c9d7a555374df02a66219b578&id=4f8b5e6fb4)

~~~
stfu
_development kid (i.e. you donated $$$)_

Anyone got any numbers on that? What does it take to become a development
kid...

~~~
gcb0
if they get another reviewer for that category, i can guarantee you that all
that person will do is open an excel sheet, order by donation amount per
family, and write the position your family is at. So i doubt donating the
minimum will do you any good.

~~~
swatow
Actually I've heard from sources I consider reliable, that there is a specific
number, that people know, that you have to donate to guarantee entry of you
child. It's really the logical conclusion of considering these factors in
admission.

------
ig1
This is pretty much standard practice in Europe.

If you're storing/producing an information about an individual as an
organization you have to operate on the assumption that the individual has a
right to read it as in most cases they do.

~~~
dom96
I currently attend a university in the UK and would like to request this
information. But I'm not sure what the best way to do so is, who should I
contact at my university (I presume the admissions department) and how should
I request this information? Should I quote the Data Protection Act? Does
anybody have experience doing this?

~~~
DanBC
Search your university website for "data protection". You migt need to include
"policy". They should have a page with instructions.

EG:
[http://www.uwe.ac.uk/finance/sec/dp/](http://www.uwe.ac.uk/finance/sec/dp/)

They have to check your ID. They're allowed to make a small charge. They'll
want to know what information you want. You can try saying "everything you
hold about me" and they will give you as much as they can, but that will miss
some information. For example, that wouldn't include all the occurances of
your face on CCTV. You can request that but I think you need to be specific
abot the date / time and there might be a higher charge.

------
wdaher
MIT had the same problem in late 2003, and in the case of the college
applications, solved the problem by simply destroying parts of the records
when they were done with them.

([http://tech.mit.edu/V123/N53/53studrec.53n.html](http://tech.mit.edu/V123/N53/53studrec.53n.html)
and
[http://tech.mit.edu/V124/N47/47e3.47n.html](http://tech.mit.edu/V124/N47/47e3.47n.html))

~~~
qq66
Which is how it should be. I can understand keeping a summary of the data to
track the performance of your admissions process, but you shouldn't be keeping
highly personal information about students for any longer than it takes to
make the admissions decision.

------
WBrentWilliams
It would be interesting if a group of students applied for their applications
en mass (say, the entire 2012 admitted class to a University in the US) and
performed statistical analysis on the resulting data. I wonder if any great
numbers of students would be willing to breach their privacy to allow such a
study to be run.

~~~
BorisMelnik
Would like to see this too. I'm sure they could do this without breaching
their privacy, maybe have one person validate the data, then redact name,
social, and other identifiable information.

------
rab_oof
For grad school, working at the dept in which one would wish to enter is a
popular, lower risk approach. The admissions for grad school tends to be
either multi-tiered (uni & dept) or defers entirely to the department's
admission folks. This tends to be one or two people for smaller programs. If
they know you and you work in the same dept, you're probaly already friends by
this time, so you'll at least have more intel on what's expected, if not some
bias in your favor.

(Former Stanford affliate here. Ask me anything.)

------
spiritplumber
I tried the "rejection rejection letter" joke with Stanford after applying and
being rejected (2009). I ended up working on a project with a Stanford prof
for six months after that. It was fairly fun, and it let me decide that I
didn't want to do grad school, so win-win there.

History is made by those who show up. If you're told to not bother showing up,
SHOW UP ANYWAY!

I never had to escort a security person out of a building, either (although
that happened at a Best Buy in 2006, but that's out of the scope of this
article).

~~~
eadler
By any chance, was the Best Buy story related to
[http://improveverywhere.com/2006/04/23/best-
buy/](http://improveverywhere.com/2006/04/23/best-buy/) ?

~~~
spiritplumber
Sometimes the best way to prevent a physical fight is to carry the would-be
fighters outside over your shoulders, and then offer to referee it. Securistas
calm down very quickly when they realize they're not the only people in the
room willing to use their hands.

------
pbhjpbhj
Is there a legal conflict here - do writers of letters not have any
protections under the law to prevent the letter being made public, or passed
on to third parties. Do you lose all legal rights and controls over letters
once you mail them?

The teachers maker recommendations clearly had an assumption of privacy in
their communication?

If the Uni chose to precis the letter - eg provide a score in its place -
would the right to view its content disappear. Is it just by virtue of it
being attached directly to your internal academic record that one gets the
ability to view it?

Interesting.

~~~
zaroth
"On the Common App used by most top colleges, applicants are asked to check a
box waiving their right to ever see the recommendation letters written by
their high school teachers and counselors. But students who did not check the
box can get copies of those, too."

~~~
kevinwang
although if I recall correctly, it seemed obligatory to check that box in
order to get our recommendation letters sent through Common App.

~~~
hwatson
You are allowed to keep your FERPA recommendation rights but, as misingnoglic,
most universities will not pay much attention to your recommendations if you
choose to do so.

[https://appsupport.commonapp.org/link/portal/33011/33013/Art...](https://appsupport.commonapp.org/link/portal/33011/33013/Article/984/FERPA-
Waiver)

------
WalterBright
> “The things they write, it’s clear that they never expect them to be read,”
> said the Fountain Hopper staff member. “They’re very frank.”

I guess that'll now change. It'll become like what employers do when asked
about a former employee's job performance - name, rank and serial number only.

The admissions committee may also become closed door meetings, with nobody
allowed to take written notes or minutes. Verbal only.

~~~
driverdan
> I guess that'll now change.

Why? So long as they don't do anything illegal in the selection process they
shouldn't have to worry about anything. This is only for people who get
accepted, not rejects.

~~~
barry-cotter
If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will
find something in them which will hang him.

\- Cardinal Richilieu

Things that seemed perfectly innocent at the time can very easily come back to
bite you on the ass later. Donating to the wrong political campaign (Brendan
Eich), being a part of the wrong political party (the Hollywood Six),
overestimating how fast public attitudes to sex will change (the 60's
supporters of NAMBLA who found it expedient to renounce them later).

If everything is anodyne consensus bullshit you can't blame anyone without
blaming everyone. So all the real decisions get made somewhere there are no
written/recorded notes.

------
crm416
I'm a little confused--the article mentions that letters of recommendation
must be turned over, but I believe that's only the case if the writer
explicitly waived confidentiality (see
[http://www.naceweb.org/public/ferpa0808.htm](http://www.naceweb.org/public/ferpa0808.htm)).

------
davidrusu
Looks like we've got something similar in Canada,

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Information_Protection...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Information_Protection_and_Electronic_Documents_Act#Personal_Health_Information_Protection_Act_.28Ontario.29)

I'm excited to try it out at my university!

------
001sky
If/once these become public record, does that create any legal issues for the
university? Given how easy it is to twist informal speech like an e-mail out
of context it does make ya wonder. A boderline-defamatory remark made public
seems quite different something kept private.

~~~
wavefunction
FERPA doesn't make them public records, it just allows a student to access
their own educational records.

I think a student could release their own records but that wouldn't fall under
defamation from what I know.

------
jacalata
Why does the article focus so heavily on Stanford? I understand that the
students who have done this so far are there, but if this is based on a
federal law that applies to all universities, shouldn't it work at all
universities?

~~~
gwern
> I understand that the students who have done this so far are there,

That's it exactly. They've done the groundwork, laid out a template, recruited
some students to request their records, and discussed a bit what they found or
might found. So it's going to be Stanford-specific until similar meat is
thrown out about other places.

------
tux1968
Why not ask students to only submit a 300 word-ish summary in the first place?

------
gwern
This sounds interesting. I just composed 3 based on the Fountain template and
mailed them off (snailmail, since I don't still have access to any university
help systems). Wonder what I'll get back?

------
forrestthewoods
Where is a link to actually read files? Reading NYTimes summary about said
files is fine but I'd love to actually read them. It sounded like at least one
student had made their files public? Maybe not.

------
tarstarr
Has anyone successfully gained access to their records? And has anyone posted
them publicly? I'm interested in insights from this.

------
fgblanch
Any source about which federal law is? or if it does apply to other
universities such as MIT or Harvrad?

~~~
mrbabbage
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, available at
([http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1232g](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/1232g))

------
pikachu_is_cool
Wait, so will this work for other schools, too? Like a UC perhaps?

~~~
shazeline
Current UCLA student. I just sent a request. Waiting to see what happens.

~~~
pikachu_is_cool
Keep me updated please!

------
tfang17
Current Stanford student here willing to answer any questions.

~~~
cjbarber
Just so you know, it looks like your account is shadow banned - all of your
article submissions since 248 days ago show as [dead] (I have showdead on).

~~~
tfang17
How do I get un shadow-banned?

------
gpanger
Okay so how do I get my file?!

~~~
gwern
[http://us9.campaign-
archive1.com/?u=c9d7a555374df02a66219b57...](http://us9.campaign-
archive1.com/?u=c9d7a555374df02a66219b578&id=93a261f1d8)

Apparently you mail a letter to the Office of Undergraduate Admissions with
strong language referring to FERPA.

~~~
cjbarber
Even easier, you just submit a help ticket online (and they included copy-
paste text templates)

~~~
gwern
If you're a Stanford student. I wouldn't want to try that for other schools.

~~~
pikachu_is_cool
Why not?

~~~
gwern
Because you have no idea if it'll work when you go through that system or be
escalated to the right people, and you may not have access to such a system in
the first place.

------
michaelochurch
This has the potential to be really devastating, and not because of a few
stray lawsuits (if that) that won't go anywhere. It threatens to put the most
powerful brands in this society on trial. People understand that there's
_some_ socioeconomic corruption in the process, but still have the idea that
admissions are 85-90 percent academic. If contrary information gets out there,
it could have a major effect.

What will be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a very short amount of time
is that the non-academic "character" component of admissions isn't "partly"
socioeconomic but almost 100% socioeconomic. And that's a huge brand risk.

~~~
rab_oof
Seems a bit conspiratorial sensationalist. There's probably some subtle bias
(humans are fallible, impossible to be purely objective) common to reviewers
that could be brought to light with large-scale stastical analysis. Admissions
have a tough job because they are inundated with candidates that appear good
but the signals of quality, if known, would tend to be easily simulated...
Defeating their use.

~~~
michaelochurch
I don't care that much what admissions offices do, to be frank about it. If
they want to put bigoted "holistic"/nonacademic bullshit into their admissions
processes, then that's about #43,207 on my concerns list. I don't have kids so
I'm at least 18 years from this being my issue and the whole fucked-up mix
will be different by then (better? worse? who knows?) I don't think the fault
is mostly with the admissions offices themselves. The academic signals they
get are not always reliable; high-school grades are hard to standardize, and
the SAT is pretty preppable and doesn't go high enough on the math. (The SAT-M
should have harder problems that extend it out to ~1000-1100. Or AMC/AIME
scores can be given weight in admissions.) But right now, the SAT is too
preppable and the relative lightness of academic merit in the admissions
process _isn 't_ the officers' fault. They are, as you've noted, working with
crummy data. In order to believe they're doing better than they would at a
dartboard, they have to convince themselves to "see things" in a bunch of
17-year-old strangers.

What would be of value is to reduce the importance of these brands in the
world at-large. It's not that I give a damn either way about Stanford or what
it does. I do think the pedigree whoring that has crept into "tech" has been
to its detriment. Twenty years ago, Silicon Valley was much less pedigree-
obsessed. You didn't need a Stanford degree to raise capital. These days, we
see pedigree being the most important factor in the Valley determining who
gets to be a founder and who is merely "Engineer #2" on 0.1% of a $5M company,
and we see absolute shit founders like Spiegel and Duplan tapping into that
private welfare system. A bit of reversion-to-truth in the power given to
brands might be a good thing... not only for the world, but also for elite
universities, which would be pushed in the direction of using academic merit
again, because the mystique they get in admitting rich idiots and making
admissions appear "holistic" would be blown. That would be good for them,
because it would force them to admit better students.

~~~
rab_oof
Thiel and others would probably agree with the value of brand point.
[http://www.paulgraham.com/credentials.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/credentials.html)

Get more than one (1) IITian on a ski/gambling trip, and it's rank and test
war stories the whole way. :) (I aced (800) the SAT I math section without
studying a single minute, no prep classes... Not a lie.)

One thing I noticed is how anything that disess Ivy/Pac 10 always gets down-
voted. Doubting the value of pedigree is tantamount to Siné out of Charlie
Hebdo for poking at a certain religion I guess. People might be down-voting
because they hate the circumstances and then do that the same as down-voting a
video containing something newsworthy but horrible on (video platform).

Perhaps I'll try an evidenced-based comment sometime with generous, neutral
language and let the audience make up their mind.

On the plus side of (undergraduate) academia, it signals completion of a large
task.. Which has some value.

(Bias: I've worked at a big brand uni on both the research and business
sides.)

