Comments on Admissions Group to Tackle Conflict of Interest Issues

• Posted by Emmanuel G. on March 10, 2008 at 7:40am EDT

• It is clear that, from study abroad to endowments to annual giving to admissions, closer scrutiny of practices in higher education, especially at private colleges and universities which have long existed as self-regulating bodies, is long overdue. Boards, as well as Presidents and finance officers, should be held accountable.

• Subject to interpretation
• Posted by Martin on March 10, 2008 at 9:25am EDT

• There will always be room for interpretation where college admissions is concerned, no matter the issues faced. I believe that the profession is moving toward being recognized as a legitimate profession, not just a job for people waiting to go into their profession,which has been the case since the beginning of the admissions field. As this acceptance as a profession grows, so does the scrutiny needed to regulate the profession, setting standards not just for behavior but for ethics as well.

  These are growing pains, nothing more. Most admissions counselors still work less than three years, those of us who stay longer do so because we are called to do so by some higher power, or we just love working in the university environment. Either way, I think as the acceptance of the profession grows, as salaries begin to match other "professional groups" we will see things level out. I say let the process take its course before we crucify anyone.

• Posted by Dodge Johnson, CEP , Chairman at IECA Membership Committee on March 10, 2008 at 9:45am EDT

• Scott Jaschick is quite right that the IECA does not forbid dual relationships, provided they are open - not secret or "an open secret."

  Many of our members are admissions officers or school counselors who decided to make a change - retire, relocate, be more independent, work at their own schedule. And, not surprisingly, they often want to keep their 'day job' until it's clear that consulting is truly what they want and that they can make a go of it.

  These expert and experienced professionals are among the most desirable candidates not only for consulting but also for those who deal with us: colleges, schools, families. And in fact IECA sponsors annually a well-attended, day-long "transitioning" workshop just before NACAC's annual convention for just that reason.

  We see nothing inherently wrong with including a number of things you're good at in a private practice. And some consultants serve on college Boards of Trustees, school boards, consult for schools on their college placement or include related services as part of their practice - tutoring, SAT Prep, career counseling, financial aid counseling, and the like.

  We do, however, insist on transparency - that any situation where there is possibility for conflict of interest or perceived conflict will be actively and fully disclosed to all parties, and that any multiple relationships will pass the 'sniff test.'

• SNIFF THIS
• Posted by OSTJEUF on March 10, 2008 at 1:00pm EDT

• Gee Dodge, we'd all to keep our day jobs before doing something else, how would you feel if members of congress who are thinking of becoming lobbyists took that approach? Or judges or prosecutors who are thinking of giving private practice a shot, or emergency room docs who might want to go out on their own? Next time you are in the ER and the doc passes you over while giving a new, "transitional' private patient some attention, write back and let us know how you feel.
  Am I missing something, why are rules diff. for admissions folks?
  As to transparency? You got that backwards, no? This is a case were admish officers are more than transparent, they scream of their dual loyalties on their websites, as Hodara at Penn did, and that "transparency" is why parents, in fact, hire them.
  Dude, "transparency" in this case takes a, ahem, slightly more "old school" form, DON'T DO IT. Remember that approach to ethics? Or are you, as it appears from self-serving legal sermonette you posted, too far in the bag to think straight?

• AIGAC's Standards
• Posted by Linda Abraham , President at Association of International Graduate Admissions Consultants on March 10, 2008 at 4:55pm EDT

• Dodge,

  IECA has done an excellent job of representing and professionalizing undergraduate admissions consulting, but I think it has to adjust its standards to match those of AIGAC, the graduate admissions consultant association. AIGAC's Principles of Good Practice include "Maintain independence of thought and action." If paid by two institutions or by a private client and an institution, a consultant's independence is compromised.

  As long as we are paid for our advice, we have to have one primary interest: the client's. If we are paid by schools to screen applicants and by applicants to help them promote themselves to specific schools, there is a conflict of interest. That conflict should trump the convenience and financial comfort of "trying out consulting" before jumping in full time. It shouldn't be part of admissions consulting. It isn't for AIGAC members.

  Linda Abraham

• Transparency & Scrutiny:- Not new in the workforce
• Posted by Veteran administrator , Director on March 11, 2008 at 12:00pm EDT

• Transparency, which opens one to scrutiny, is not new to the workforce. E.g., in the financial sector, employees of businesses that invest in the stock market must disclose investment of stocks by themselves and even family members. Some employees elect to stand clear of stocks, going for mutual funds instead in order to avoid opening themselves up to scrutiny and possible negative perceptions of wrongdoing. One might argue that the set of criteria for wrongdoing is ambiguous, which is certainly disconcerting. Nonetheless, the list of positions in colleges that are subject to regulation might grow in the years ahead.