Stanford Loses A Good One

What a bummer. Here I was worrying about whether I’d be kicked out of the Stanford alumni association as a failed parent because both of my children — my son five or six years ago and my daughter Jessie just now — turned down the opportunity to attend graduate school there when along comes this depressingly marvelous article in the “Outlook” section of the Washington Post today that has about convinced me to resign on my own. (Thanks to Stuart Buck for encouraging me to write something about it.)

Sarah Ball, a senior at T.C. Williams High School in Alexandria, Virginia, has written the best send-up of an “admitted students” weekend I’ve read. Drop what you’re doing (I mean, after you finish reading this) and go read the whole thing.

Some excerpts:

It was somewhere between picnicking in the California sunshine and sitting (or splashing) through four hours of obligatory “bonding” activities that I had an epiphany: This was not just an admitted-student weekend at Stanford University that I was attending, as I had originally thought. No, this event, specifically designed to convince hundreds of prospective freshmen (or, in Stanford-speak, “pro-fros”) like me to enroll, was nothing but an overblown sales pitch — complete with glitzy packaging, superficial presentation and the ever-peppy salespeople.

….

[Hilarious examples]

….

The real kicker came when I returned to the dorm post-scavenger hunt. It was 9 p.m., and most other admitted students were attending ethnic-themed parties. Asian Americans and Pacific-Islanders had “Chill Night” at Okada, the Asian dorm; African Americans, Chicano/Latino/Hispanics and Native Americans, respectively, were invited to do the same at other “theme” dorms. Lesbian/gay/straight/questioning/transgender students were invited to a separate social event at something called Caf

Say What? (39)

  1. Nels Nelson May 10, 2004 at 12:15 am | | Reply

    Ms. Ball will hopefully come to realize, as she interacts with more organizations and corporations, that these HR/Marketing/PR pod people are entrenched everywhere and that the easiest path is to suck it up for the short period of suffering through a workshop or retreat. My college had this sort of crap for freshman, and some of the larger companies I’ve worked at periodically had similar events, but once they were over most everyone laughed about whatever motivational/self-help/bonding hooey the instructors had been feeding us and went on with our schooling or work. It’s unfortunate this applicant didn’t stick around long enough to experience the invariable late-night parodies of that day’s events. Why didn’t she realize that after you’re in you’ll have almost no interaction with these admissions officers and the Communications or Hotel Administration majors who volunteer to assist them?

  2. meep May 10, 2004 at 7:04 am | | Reply

    Duke does do these things — they even have a queer dorm, or had one in the 90s. But the environment is different — NC as a whole makes fun of the multiculti-happy-happy-playschool idea, and at least one local university (N.C. State) has a bunch of students who really don’t care about identity politics. Because they’re busy doing engineering.

    (I’m an NC State grad, my sister went to Duke, and my stepfather went to Chapel-Hill… and I’ve got friends from all three universities.)

    Oh, and Duke is an overwhelmingly straight white campus, I would say. Every time I went to visit my sister, it looked like a J. Crew ad. The sororities and fraternities are a big presence on campus, so it’s more a matter of can you stand the Greeks.

  3. Richard Nieporent May 10, 2004 at 8:17 am | | Reply

    Two of my three sons attended Duke (97 and 00). Of course they talked about diversity, but they did not hit you over the head with it as some of the other schools did (such as Cornell). Of course things may have changed since then.

  4. KRM May 10, 2004 at 3:40 pm | | Reply

    A conversation that I recently had with my son has me bothered by the diversity cultists. He has just returned from freshman year at midwestern mega-urban U. They have the big diversity theme, but then the students all self segregate and cultivate their identity politics. My son complains that in high school he had real friends that were asian, middle eastern, black (etc.), but his collge experience would make him think that many of the obnoxious stereotypes are more true than not, and he now doubts whether we can all just get along civilly.

  5. Alex May 11, 2004 at 1:40 am | | Reply

    Wouldn’t call her a good one. Sounds more like a whiney little brat. Duke can have her.

  6. Bill May 11, 2004 at 9:19 am | | Reply

    I read the whole thing after a heads-up from a Stanford Network list, and the camp-style activities sound heinous. Luckily, my decision to attend Stanford in the ’80s was based more on their strength in biology and computer science, not whether they had designed an appropriate introduction. I definitely would have dug deeper if my dad had dished out the $$$$ for a cross-country flight.

    Was there any academic orientation? That fatal night, were her only options ethnic-themed parties? If so, Pro-fo organizers need a wake-up call, but I think it’s also possible that Sarah Ball has tunnel vision. She says, “The point, I’d thought, was to coalesce and learn from each other.” I think that’s one point of such events, even though one out of every three pro-fos won’t be at Stanford.

    She finally says, “But when you are trying to schedule your first four years of semi-independence as you embark on an exciting, challenging and very, very expensive adventure . . . well, I for one would at least like to know the real deal.” Bravo. Sarah, you know the $160,000 question. What are you going to do? She had me up to the point she hopped in the cab. Sarah would have been “a good one” if she ditched the group she despised, walked over to Tressider Union or any of the departments, and took the initiative by asking current students the skinny. Even after you arrive on the campus of Duke or Stanford, you won’t be working in bleeding-edge labs or shooting the breeze with Pulitzer winners if you don’t have initiative.

  7. SCSU Scholars May 11, 2004 at 11:16 am | | Reply

    Admissions sheeple

    One of our admissions staff writes a letter to the local paper (link dead tomorrow) that suggests that Jack is right about the submissive nature of our fellow mandatory diversity trainees.

  8. K May 11, 2004 at 1:24 pm | | Reply

    She saw the opportunities but decided not to take them. Sad about being separated by those potential people she could have bonded with over sushi at Chill Night? (read the full article to know what I’m talking about) Why didn’t she just go? You can’t complain if you chose to exclude yourself from events.

    Was Sarah Ball expecting someone to tell her the up-sides and down-sides of Stanford during admit weekend? Things like IHUM were great for some people and bad for others. Sometimes, you just have to experience things for yourself and decide what you like and don’t like. Stanford doesn’t pretend like it can show you what your four years are going to be like in the span of a weekend. Nobody expects two days to be a more than superficial look at a campus. Not until you take your first quarter of classes, make friends, and join a club or two are you going to realize anything about any place you go. She says she wants to know these things before she makes her decision. We all want to know the future, but its naive to expect to know it.

    In any case, I think it’s good that she found a place for herself. She wouldn’t have been happy here.

  9. Superdestroyer May 11, 2004 at 4:02 pm | | Reply

    Wait till young Sarah gets to Duke where, during freshman oreintation, sees the black students taken to a free dinner with black staff and professors while the white kids are left to fend for themselves.

  10. joel May 11, 2004 at 6:59 pm | | Reply

    Geez.

    Just rise above this stuff. Just some advice/observations.

    College isn’t an extended Summer camp.

    Consider yourself lucky you realize what nonsense this all is. Many of your fellow students don’t get it. This is good for you, bad for them.

    Get an education.

    Don’t draw attention to yourself. Keep under their radar. They’ll hurt you if you point out how ridiculous they are, like any religion with secular power.

    Enjoy your education. There will many like minded people for you you make friends with and to enjoy learning with.

    Make obscene amounts of money after you leave school.

    Have a good laugh at the whole system.

    Ignore those fund raising letters after you graduate.

  11. The Bitch Girls May 11, 2004 at 10:49 pm | | Reply

    Honesty Is The Best Policy

    But colleges don’t want you to tell that to prospective students. Here’s a nice little summary of a prospective student visit gone horribly wrong. My own story: I became a hostess for overnight prospective students within 3 weeks of arriving…

  12. Tiffany May 12, 2004 at 1:56 am | | Reply

    Sarah Ball is a selfish, priveleged close minded brat who did not choose to open her mind a bit and learn. She stayed in dorm and I know for a fact that she didn’t even spend the day. Instead what does this oh so wonderful independent strong young woman do? She takes her Louis Vuitton luggage and goes crying to her daddy’s hotel room without even spending a full 24 hours at Stanford. While she makes an impassioned plea to be taken seriously and to treated like an adult, her actuations are more appropriate to kindergartens than for adults. When things become uncomfortable and uneasy, does she expect to run to her father’s hotel room everytime? As a freshman I know what it is like to be lonely, to be homesick and to feel left out. Everybody goes through that stage but did I quit and run to my parents arms? No I stuck it out. Satnford is a diverse place and somebody as closeminded, as caustic and as conescending as Sarah Ball would not have thrived. I’m as happy with her decision as she is. I know that people that closeminded is better off being surrounded by other upper class white memebers of the priveleged class which she undoubtedly will be at duke.

  13. Outlaw3 May 12, 2004 at 8:33 am | | Reply

    Hurray for Sarah Ball! She saw through the slick sales pitch by a degree factory with more money than they know what to do with. They don’t want you to talk to anyone that is not in the party line of come here. Escaping to talk to a Nobel or Pulitzer Prize winner would have been impossible, not to mention difficult to find. The rush weekends are also normally scheduled for weekends with as few students around as possible so you don’t find out what it is like. As for the cheerleading student guides… they were like that all their lives, and then were indoctrinated by the event staff for the weekend; never a frown or a problem or bad word among them. No sense letting reality intervene in a good sales pitch.

  14. Anonymous May 12, 2004 at 8:29 pm | | Reply

    Ms. Ball’s experience at Stanford’s Admit Weekend is fortunately not representative of the majority of accepted students. I find her comments offensive, and particularly racists in that, for Ms. Ball, “the real kicker” about the miserable time she had at Stanford was the fact that among the activities planned for the admits were ethnic-themed parties. Ms. Ball neglects to mention that the parties were open to all admits, regardless of race, who were interested in interacting with the minority communities on campus and learn more about issues of diversity at Stanford.

    I am a Stanford student and personally attended and chaperoned some of the ethnic-themed parties Ms. Ball CHOSE not to attend, and I can tell you that about half the people who attended were either not of the sponsoring race and/or white. Ms. Ball, apparently, felt alienated by the campus’ diversity. The majority of her peers, apparently, did not. She mentiones that all that were left in the lounge of Branner Hall, the dorm where she was hosted, were a few “socially awkward” white kids. Where were the non-socially awkward white kids? Probably making the best of their time at Stanford and learning what the campus’ diversity has to offer.

    Furthermore, Ms. Ball claims she was never told the “real” side at Stanford, but her editorial makes no mention of an attempt to go out of her way to actually ASK someone. Perhaps Ms. Ball would like for the Admit Weekend staff at Stanford—dedicated, un-paid student volunteers—to be mind readers and guess that she had questions she never voiced. Or perhaps, to get a “real” sense for what Stanford is like, Ms. Ball would have liked to assist me in writing my term papers or studying for my midterms. I’m sorry Ms. Ball was offended by our good California weather and our palm trees, and that we couldn’t offer her a more dreary setting that would more closely resemble the “real” Stanford.

    I must also call into question the accuracy and truthfulness of Ms. Ball’s editorial, as she directly quotes a member of Branner’s Admit Weekend staff. This AW staff member claims she did not say the words Ms. Ball attributes to her.

    I am distressed that the Washington Post chose to ran such a misleading and biased editorial by an admittedly socially awkward and naive girl who simply did not have fun at Stanford’s Admit Weekend—Ms. Ball not only shows contempt for Stanford as a University, but for Stanford’s administration, its students, and HER OWN PEERS who are also admits, of whom she speaks only belittlingly.

    Furthermore, I have attempted to contact Ms. Ball personally, but she has so far failed to respond to any e-mails after the controversy she has caused and after putting our University in a bad light. Ms. Ball thus shows no responsibility or accountability for her rather rash actions and not well-thought out views—comparing our University’s architecture to a bathroom is not only offensive, but childish and smug. Her attempts to characterize activities aimed at making admits more comfortable with one another as juvenile reflect only on her and her lack of willingness to interact with other students. Therein lies her failure to feel comfortable in what I daresay is one of the most accomodating, warm, and brave efforts to make propsective students feel at home and recruit some of the nation’s fnest minds to one of the premier education and research institutesin the world.

    Stanford was clearly not for her. I would persoanlly like to wish Ms. Ball the best of luck at Duke, and can only hope she will exercise better judgement in her future journalistsic endeavors—same goes for the Washington Post.

    As for Mr. Nelson’s comments—I don’t think he is too familiar with Stanford undergrads (given that there is no such thing as a Hotel Administration major here), who do a great deal more of interacting with each other than many other comparable schools. I find that people here are generally open IF YOU APPROACH THEM, something I repeat Ms. Ball did not do. In addition, she needn’t have “stuck it out” through the day’s events—many ProFros with initiative actually chose to attend very few planned events, and sought their own experiences with other admitted students and current undergrads.

    It also must be said that the article is a personally bad decision for Ms. Ball, as I understand she has received many vicious e-mails from some of my fellow Stanford undergrads—to be expected given the vicious tenor in her own editorial. However, the behaviour on the part of those Stanford students is just as uncalled for, and I personally feel bad for Ms. Ball and what she muct be going through. Perhaps this experience will make her think twice before writing another misleading and controversial article about something she really didn’t take the time to learn much about.

    -Dar

  15. Anonymous May 12, 2004 at 8:29 pm | | Reply

    Ms. Ball’s experience at Stanford’s Admit Weekend is fortunately not representative of the majority of accepted students. I find her comments offensive, and particularly racists in that, for Ms. Ball, “the real kicker” about the miserable time she had at Stanford was the fact that among the activities planned for the admits were ethnic-themed parties. Ms. Ball neglects to mention that the parties were open to all admits, regardless of race, who were interested in interacting with the minority communities on campus and learn more about issues of diversity at Stanford.

    I am a Stanford student and personally attended and chaperoned some of the ethnic-themed parties Ms. Ball CHOSE not to attend, and I can tell you that about half the people who attended were either not of the sponsoring race and/or white. Ms. Ball, apparently, felt alienated by the campus’ diversity. The majority of her peers, apparently, did not. She mentiones that all that were left in the lounge of Branner Hall, the dorm where she was hosted, were a few “socially awkward” white kids. Where were the non-socially awkward white kids? Probably making the best of their time at Stanford and learning what the campus’ diversity has to offer.

    Furthermore, Ms. Ball claims she was never told the “real” side at Stanford, but her editorial makes no mention of an attempt to go out of her way to actually ASK someone. Perhaps Ms. Ball would like for the Admit Weekend staff at Stanford—dedicated, un-paid student volunteers—to be mind readers and guess that she had questions she never voiced. Or perhaps, to get a “real” sense for what Stanford is like, Ms. Ball would have liked to assist me in writing my term papers or studying for my midterms. I’m sorry Ms. Ball was offended by our good California weather and our palm trees, and that we couldn’t offer her a more dreary setting that would more closely resemble the “real” Stanford.

    I must also call into question the accuracy and truthfulness of Ms. Ball’s editorial, as she directly quotes a member of Branner’s Admit Weekend staff. This AW staff member claims she did not say the words Ms. Ball attributes to her.

    I am distressed that the Washington Post chose to ran such a misleading and biased editorial by an admittedly socially awkward and naive girl who simply did not have fun at Stanford’s Admit Weekend—Ms. Ball not only shows contempt for Stanford as a University, but for Stanford’s administration, its students, and HER OWN PEERS who are also admits, of whom she speaks only belittlingly.

    Furthermore, I have attempted to contact Ms. Ball personally, but she has so far failed to respond to any e-mails after the controversy she has caused and after putting our University in a bad light. Ms. Ball thus shows no responsibility or accountability for her rather rash actions and not well-thought out views—comparing our University’s architecture to a bathroom is not only offensive, but childish and smug. Her attempts to characterize activities aimed at making admits more comfortable with one another as juvenile reflect only on her and her lack of willingness to interact with other students. Therein lies her failure to feel comfortable in what I daresay is one of the most accomodating, warm, and brave efforts to make propsective students feel at home and recruit some of the nation’s fnest minds to one of the premier education and research institutesin the world.

    Stanford was clearly not for her. I would persoanlly like to wish Ms. Ball the best of luck at Duke, and can only hope she will exercise better judgement in her future journalistsic endeavors—same goes for the Washington Post.

    As for Mr. Nelson’s comments—I don’t think he is too familiar with Stanford undergrads (given that there is no such thing as a Hotel Administration major here), who do a great deal more of interacting with each other than many other comparable schools. I find that people here are generally open IF YOU APPROACH THEM, something I repeat Ms. Ball did not do. In addition, she needn’t have “stuck it out” through the day’s events—many ProFros with initiative actually chose to attend very few planned events, and sought their own experiences with other admitted students and current undergrads.

    It also must be said that the article is a personally bad decision for Ms. Ball, as I understand she has received many vicious e-mails from some of my fellow Stanford undergrads—to be expected given the vicious tenor in her own editorial. However, the behaviour on the part of those Stanford students is just as uncalled for, and I personally feel bad for Ms. Ball and what she muct be going through. Perhaps this experience will make her think twice before writing another misleading and controversial article about something she really didn’t take the time to learn much about.

    -Dar

  16. Darío Maciel-Hernández May 12, 2004 at 8:29 pm | | Reply

    Ms. Ball’s experience at Stanford’s Admit Weekend is fortunately not representative of the majority of accepted students. I find her comments offensive, and particularly racists in that, for Ms. Ball, “the real kicker” about the miserable time she had at Stanford was the fact that among the activities planned for the admits were ethnic-themed parties. Ms. Ball neglects to mention that the parties were open to all admits, regardless of race, who were interested in interacting with the minority communities on campus and learn more about issues of diversity at Stanford.

    I am a Stanford student and personally attended and chaperoned some of the ethnic-themed parties Ms. Ball CHOSE not to attend, and I can tell you that about half the people who attended were either not of the sponsoring race and/or white. Ms. Ball, apparently, felt alienated by the campus’ diversity. The majority of her peers, apparently, did not. She mentiones that all that were left in the lounge of Branner Hall, the dorm where she was hosted, were a few “socially awkward” white kids. Where were the non-socially awkward white kids? Probably making the best of their time at Stanford and learning what the campus’ diversity has to offer.

    Furthermore, Ms. Ball claims she was never told the “real” side at Stanford, but her editorial makes no mention of an attempt to go out of her way to actually ASK someone. Perhaps Ms. Ball would like for the Admit Weekend staff at Stanford—dedicated, un-paid student volunteers—to be mind readers and guess that she had questions she never voiced. Or perhaps, to get a “real” sense for what Stanford is like, Ms. Ball would have liked to assist me in writing my term papers or studying for my midterms. I’m sorry Ms. Ball was offended by our good California weather and our palm trees, and that we couldn’t offer her a more dreary setting that would more closely resemble the “real” Stanford.

    I must also call into question the accuracy and truthfulness of Ms. Ball’s editorial, as she directly quotes a member of Branner’s Admit Weekend staff. This AW staff member claims she did not say the words Ms. Ball attributes to her.

    I am distressed that the Washington Post chose to ran such a misleading and biased editorial by an admittedly socially awkward and naive girl who simply did not have fun at Stanford’s Admit Weekend—Ms. Ball not only shows contempt for Stanford as a University, but for Stanford’s administration, its students, and HER OWN PEERS who are also admits, of whom she speaks only belittlingly.

    Furthermore, I have attempted to contact Ms. Ball personally, but she has so far failed to respond to any e-mails after the controversy she has caused and after putting our University in a bad light. Ms. Ball thus shows no responsibility or accountability for her rather rash actions and not well-thought out views—comparing our University’s architecture to a bathroom is not only offensive, but childish and smug. Her attempts to characterize activities aimed at making admits more comfortable with one another as juvenile reflect only on her and her lack of willingness to interact with other students. Therein lies her failure to feel comfortable in what I daresay is one of the most accomodating, warm, and brave efforts to make propsective students feel at home and recruit some of the nation’s fnest minds to one of the premier education and research institutesin the world.

    Stanford was clearly not for her. I would persoanlly like to wish Ms. Ball the best of luck at Duke, and can only hope she will exercise better judgement in her future journalistsic endeavors—same goes for the Washington Post.

    As for Mr. Nelson’s comments—I don’t think he is too familiar with Stanford undergrads (given that there is no such thing as a Hotel Administration major here), who do a great deal more of interacting with each other than many other comparable schools. I find that people here are generally open IF YOU APPROACH THEM, something I repeat Ms. Ball did not do. In addition, she needn’t have “stuck it out” through the day’s events—many ProFros with initiative actually chose to attend very few planned events, and sought their own experiences with other admitted students and current undergrads.

    It also must be said that the article is a personally bad decision for Ms. Ball, as I understand she has received many vicious e-mails from some of my fellow Stanford undergrads—to be expected given the vicious tenor in her own editorial. However, the behaviour on the part of those Stanford students is just as uncalled for, and I personally feel bad for Ms. Ball and what she muct be going through. Perhaps this experience will make her think twice before writing another misleading and controversial article about something she really didn’t take the time to learn much about.

    -Darío Maciel-Hernández, Stanford class of 2006

  17. Anonymous May 12, 2004 at 8:40 pm | | Reply

    Outlaw3 (email hidden; JavaScript is required) is in the dark about Stanford Admit Weekend—which makes Ms. Ball’s article more powerful because hers is the only word the Washington Post readership has to go on. First of all, it’s just plain silly to say that our event would be scheduled “for weekends with as few students around as possible so you don’t find out what it is like.” ProFros are hosted by undergrads in the undergrad’s dorms, where they’re likely to see quite a few of us, and SHOULD THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO, can ask us whatever they want about Stanford—we encourage this and my freshman dorm Cedro even threw together a panel where ProFros COULD AND DID ASK any questions about Stanford life and academics from students’ points of view. Secondly, none of our Admit Weekend staff were “indoctrinated by the event staff for the weekend; never a frown or a problem or bad word among them.” They weren’t paid and there is no incentive for hosting a ProFro, especially during midterm season. RoHos and HoHos have to go out of their way to apply for those VOLUNTEER positions, and only have to make sure the admits are well-hosted and in a safe environment where they can explore what Stanford has to offer.

    I would seriously discourage anyone who has not taken the time to become familiar with Stanford’s Admit Weekend policies to refrain from saying some very ignorant and uninformed things.

    -J.D. Maciel-Hern

  18. Anonymous May 12, 2004 at 8:40 pm | | Reply

    Outlaw3 (email hidden; JavaScript is required) is in the dark about Stanford Admit Weekend—which makes Ms. Ball’s article more powerful because hers is the only word the Washington Post readership has to go on. First of all, it’s just plain silly to say that our event would be scheduled “for weekends with as few students around as possible so you don’t find out what it is like.” ProFros are hosted by undergrads in the undergrad’s dorms, where they’re likely to see quite a few of us, and SHOULD THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO, can ask us whatever they want about Stanford—we encourage this and my freshman dorm Cedro even threw together a panel where ProFros COULD AND DID ASK any questions about Stanford life and academics from students’ points of view. Secondly, none of our Admit Weekend staff were “indoctrinated by the event staff for the weekend; never a frown or a problem or bad word among them.” They weren’t paid and there is no incentive for hosting a ProFro, especially during midterm season. RoHos and HoHos have to go out of their way to apply for those VOLUNTEER positions, and only have to make sure the admits are well-hosted and in a safe environment where they can explore what Stanford has to offer.

    I would seriously discourage anyone who has not taken the time to become familiar with Stanford’s Admit Weekend policies to refrain from saying some very ignorant and uninformed things.

    -J.D. Maciel-Hern

  19. Darío Maciel-Hernández May 12, 2004 at 8:40 pm | | Reply

    Outlaw3 (email hidden; JavaScript is required) is in the dark about Stanford Admit Weekend—which makes Ms. Ball’s article more powerful because hers is the only word the Washington Post readership has to go on. First of all, it’s just plain silly to say that our event would be scheduled “for weekends with as few students around as possible so you don’t find out what it is like.” ProFros are hosted by undergrads in the undergrad’s dorms, where they’re likely to see quite a few of us, and SHOULD THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO, can ask us whatever they want about Stanford—we encourage this and my freshman dorm Cedro even threw together a panel where ProFros COULD AND DID ASK any questions about Stanford life and academics from students’ points of view. Secondly, none of our Admit Weekend staff were “indoctrinated by the event staff for the weekend; never a frown or a problem or bad word among them.” They weren’t paid and there is no incentive for hosting a ProFro, especially during midterm season. RoHos and HoHos have to go out of their way to apply for those VOLUNTEER positions, and only have to make sure the admits are well-hosted and in a safe environment where they can explore what Stanford has to offer.

    I would seriously discourage anyone who has not taken the time to become familiar with Stanford’s Admit Weekend policies to refrain from saying some very ignorant and uninformed things.

    -J.D. Maciel-Hernández

  20. Laura May 12, 2004 at 9:12 pm | | Reply

    Boy, somebody’s got the PC speech code thing down pat. How dare “Ms. Ball” write an article stating what she really thought.

  21. John Rosenberg May 12, 2004 at 9:54 pm | | Reply

    Perhaps it would be in order for me to mention that I, too, was a Stanford undergraduate (as well as graduate student). Since I entered as a transferring sophomore, however, I missed the hoho ProFro promo, if indeed there was one.

    Back in my day, right after the earth cooled, Stanford seemed to be trying hard, with some occasional success, to live down its older image as a rich kids’ playground and appeal to a more intellectual group of students who would also be prime candidates for the Ivy League and other “serious” academic campuses. Of course it retained its desire for “well-roundedness,” etc., and would never admit students solely on the basis of grades and test scores. For better or worse.

    What I found so depressing about Sarah Ball’s description was not so much the politically correct “ethnic theme” parties — my strong bet is that she’ll find the same thing, maybe more, at Duke — but the juvenile tone of the weekend she describes. It is certainly true that all of Stanford is not juvenile, and she could have found much that she would have liked if she had departed from the prepared path and looked for it, but it is sad (if true) that the ProFro team could not have made that aspect of Stanford more evident than it appears they did.

  22. Dario May 12, 2004 at 11:33 pm | | Reply

    “Boy, somebody’s got the PC speech code thing down pat. How dare “Ms. Ball” write an article stating what she really thought.”

    I don’t know the girl, so I won’t pretend to by calling her Sarah. I only call friends on a first-name basis. Last I checked, Ms. Ball wasn’t my friend. There’s a difference between PC and polite, Laura.

    As to her “stating what she really thought,” don’t you think it’s a little too early to have a real opinion on something when you didn’t really spend much time there? The ethnic-themed parties that were sponsored on campus happened on THURSDAY. Admit Weekend lasted until SUNDAY MORNING, meaning Ms. Ball spent a grand total of LESS THAN 24 HOURS AT STANFORD. The girl didn’t even spend a whole day there before she went home to her father with enough material to write such a smug editorial about Stanford.

    It’s also sad that so many people have commented on how PC ethnic-themed parties are. Maybe we should resort back to non-PC everywhere, and Stanford Admit Weekend could feature the N—– Student Party for blacks, and the Wetback Student Party for Hispanics. Better yet, let’s not even acknowledge that diversity exsists, ’cause then we’d all be equal. Yeah, real PC there, huh?

    -Dar

  23. PJ/Maryland May 13, 2004 at 2:00 am | | Reply

    …comparing our University’s architecture to a bathroom is not only offensive, but childish and smug.

    Actually, Dario, she compared Stanford’s architecture to a Don Pablo’s restaurant, not to a bathroom. I can understand you wanting to defend your university, but let’s not get carried away.

    Are you sure she was writing about Thursday’s activities? By her description, she arrived with her luggage (who brings “a load of luggage” for a long April weekend in California?) and was announced in front of lots of people. I was guessing that she arrived on Friday (or even Saturday), and might have missed any introductory explanations… eg, that most of the program was optional, and that the ethnic-themed parties were open to all.

    I got the impression that she only spent one day at the Pro-Fro event. If that day was Thursday, I have to wonder why she left so early, since she probably wasn’t flying back till Sunday. (Of course, she might have returned to the campus, but left that out in the interests of a better story.)

    I gather you and Tiffany (what is an “actuation”, anyway?) and J.D. are currently at Stanford. Defensiveness aside, does Sarah Ball’s article give you any ideas for changes to next year’s Admit Weekend?

  24. Anonymous May 13, 2004 at 3:03 am | | Reply

    Thanks for bringing that up. To correct myself, what she actually said was: “

  25. Anonymous May 13, 2004 at 3:03 am | | Reply

    Thanks for bringing that up. To correct myself, what she actually said was: “

  26. Darío Maciel-Hernández May 13, 2004 at 3:03 am | | Reply

    Thanks for bringing that up. To correct myself, what she actually said was: “…in the midst of all those terracotta roofs and palm-studded plazas, I felt more like I’d gotten lost on the way to the Don Pablo’s restroom…”

    You’re right that Friday and not Thursday was the day she attended Admit Weekend. The point remains, from what the people who hosted her say, she was at Stanford for less than a day. Regardless of when she got here, I doubt she would have missed any introductory explanations, which she would have received at the same time she was “inundated with maps and schedules for a full day of activities.” Furthermore, the staffs at the houses were also in charge of letting them know what events were going on, and I’m sure they would have told her those events were open to everybody and what they consisted of.

    To quote Laura Selznick, special assitant for diversity outreach, in an interview in today’s (12 May 2004) issue of the Stanford Daily, when questioned about her thoughts on the Ball editorial:

    “Diversity at Stanford is for everybody. In fact, one of the ideas that I’ve had which I’m hoping for in the future is that there could be some kind of panel or conversation about diversity at Admit Weekend, so it isn’t just that you’re depending on the community centers to provide the vision of diversity at the University. A student who feels alienated by diversity needs a conversation to understand how to participate in the diversity. Everybody contributes.

    Diversity isn’t about sectioning off people and assigning them an identity, because so many people have different identities and connect in different ways. I think that’s one of the beauties of Stanford—that you can connect.”

    What I believe Sarah Ball was going on with her editorial was the Washington Post readership’s general lack of knowledge about the specifics of Admit Weekend.

    By the way, I am J.D. and Darío (same last name), and to sort of answer your question, this year’s Admit Weekend staff actually is meeting to discuss the editorial, which I assume will include a discussion not only of Sarah Ball’s comments, but of how to make sure subsequent admits don’t get the wrong impression from their experience. While her accusations were uncalled for, there are a significant minority of Stanford students that think she has a point (though none have actually elaborated which points they support), so it’s clear that they need to be addressed.

    Personally, I would think that the only real way to address Sarah Ball’s concerns is to have a panel in each dorm hosting ProFros where they can ask any questions they want from the students—in fact, many dorms do this. Other than that, any changes really have to take place from the ProFros themselves, to take the initiative to ask more questions. Despite the fact they are technically high school students, that should not be a problem given the fact Stanford students are selected on the basis of their initiative. Perhaps rather than rethinking Admit Weekend, Stanford should rethink its admissions criteria and further stress initiative as a requirement.

    -J. Darío Maciel Hdz.

    P.S. Sorry for turning this comment board into a discussion forum, it must annoy the site manager as these comments are straying further and further from the manager’s own intent. Please e-mail me personally if you have a response.

  27. John Rosenberg May 13, 2004 at 9:08 am | | Reply

    Dario – Thanks for your concern about the site, but as a Stanford alum (and a loyal one) I’m finding these comments fascinating. One thing I hope the Admit Weekend staff will consider in its post-mortem is the degree to which “diversity” has become such a mantra, such an article of faith, that those who are not communicants in this new religion feel not only excluded but ex-communicated.

  28. Superdestroyer May 13, 2004 at 10:18 am | | Reply

    Dario, et al,

    I wonder if you realize how elitist it is to have a Pro-Fro weekend? Expecting a student from Virginia to fly out to California for a weekend makes a huge assumption about the finances of the family.

    If the diversity socials were for all, then how many black pro-fros (or even students) were at the Asian social? My guess is probably the number converges to zero. And why was their not a social for white students from blue collar families that asian, black, or hispanic student could have attended?

    I would also assume that you don’t want to cover how it is virtually impossible to fail at Stanford once admitted or what the entering majors are of students versus what degrees are actually awarded in at Stanford?

  29. EH May 13, 2004 at 12:07 pm | | Reply

    Saw that as usual Stanford makes a big deal about playing up ethnic diversity. Speaking of which, a recent newspaper article had me laughing out load because it suggested Stanford may be diversifying itself out of existence: it turns out non-white alumni, whose numbers are increasingly rapidly, give back financially at a level significantly lower than white alumni.

  30. Anonymous May 13, 2004 at 12:48 pm | | Reply

    Superdestroyer: “I wonder if you realize how elitist it is to have a Pro-Fro weekend? Expecting a student from Virginia to fly out to California for a weekend makes a huge assumption about the finances of the family.”

    I believe Stanford has many outreach programs for people in areas far from California that would otherwise not be able to afford the trip. I can off the top of the head mention two friends from Texas and one from Maryland who paid $0.00 to come to Admit Weekend, and I’ve met many more people who have the same story.

    Admit Weekend was not designed to encourage only the rich to attend. Stanford means it when they say they do not discriminate on the basis of financial need.

    As I am not in an official position (as snidely pointed out to me by outlaw3 in an e-mail), perhaps you should cc this message I’m sending you to the University’s president (as outlaw3 did) and ask whether what I’m saying is true.

    -Dar

  31. Anonymous May 13, 2004 at 12:48 pm | | Reply

    Superdestroyer: “I wonder if you realize how elitist it is to have a Pro-Fro weekend? Expecting a student from Virginia to fly out to California for a weekend makes a huge assumption about the finances of the family.”

    I believe Stanford has many outreach programs for people in areas far from California that would otherwise not be able to afford the trip. I can off the top of the head mention two friends from Texas and one from Maryland who paid $0.00 to come to Admit Weekend, and I’ve met many more people who have the same story.

    Admit Weekend was not designed to encourage only the rich to attend. Stanford means it when they say they do not discriminate on the basis of financial need.

    As I am not in an official position (as snidely pointed out to me by outlaw3 in an e-mail), perhaps you should cc this message I’m sending you to the University’s president (as outlaw3 did) and ask whether what I’m saying is true.

    -Dar

  32. Darío Maciel-Hernández May 13, 2004 at 12:48 pm | | Reply

    Superdestroyer: “I wonder if you realize how elitist it is to have a Pro-Fro weekend? Expecting a student from Virginia to fly out to California for a weekend makes a huge assumption about the finances of the family.”

    I believe Stanford has many outreach programs for people in areas far from California that would otherwise not be able to afford the trip. I can off the top of the head mention two friends from Texas and one from Maryland who paid $0.00 to come to Admit Weekend, and I’ve met many more people who have the same story.

    Admit Weekend was not designed to encourage only the rich to attend. Stanford means it when they say they do not discriminate on the basis of financial need.

    As I am not in an official position (as snidely pointed out to me by outlaw3 in an e-mail), perhaps you should cc this message I’m sending you to the University’s president (as outlaw3 did) and ask whether what I’m saying is true.

    -Darío

  33. Outlaw3 May 13, 2004 at 3:58 pm | | Reply

    Let us all bow in honoring an actual Stanford Ho. Who among us would dare trod upon the path unprepared by the Hos? If few attend the Ho events, why does the University plan them? If they do not satisfy the needs of prospective students, why have them at all, why program out some plan for the weekend?

    Get a life Dario, or find someplace better to prepare you for life after college where there are no HoHos to greet you at the door and run pep rallies so you feel better about being whatever you are.

    And thanks for representing yourself as the Stanford official spokesperson (PC correct, right?).

  34. Outlaw3 May 13, 2004 at 4:01 pm | | Reply

    Oh, anyone else get an email version of good old Dario’s comments for personal consumption?

  35. Laura May 13, 2004 at 6:31 pm | | Reply

    My PC comment was not about the “Ms. Ball” thing, it was about the fact that Sarah Ball’s lack of appreciation of Stanford’s version of diversity is unacceptable to you. Sarah (I will call her such, because she’s about the same age as my daughter) wrote about her observations and the conclusions she drew. She can do that. There is no requirement that you, Dario, or anybody else like it. If you had a real appreciation for diversity, you would appreciate Sarah’s dissenting point of view.

  36. Anonymous May 13, 2004 at 6:39 pm | | Reply

    Outlaw3-

    First of all, I am not a “Ho,” which I assume is your attempt to make the term “HoHo” sound demeaning.

    I don’t remember anyone mentioning that few students attend Admit Weekend events, so I’ll leave it at that since that since most of your arguments become moot points.

    HoHo’s and RoHo’s are there for Admit Weekend, to give the admits a warn welcome, orient them, and provide them with a safe environment. But the rest of the year, the HoHo’s are regular students just like anyone. HoHo’s don’t lecture in my classes, they don’t take notes for me, they don’t do my homework or take my exams, they don’t choose which events I go to, they don’t choose my classes nor do they choose my major, and they don’t determine what path I take in life. Your comments are just childish and again an attempt to try and shut me up with insult and threat. Not gonna happen, and I’m sure everyone can see how immature you are. Let’s make a deal, I’ll “get a life” if you promise to grow up.

    The problem with Sarah Ball’s article is that it makes a lot of people (yourself included, I see) think that Stanford is a summer camp where we play name games and do arts and crafts every day while sunbathing in palm-tree lined plazas and jumping into fountains. The fact is, we don’t.

    One last thing to you, I never said I was an official spokesperson, but as a former ProFro and a student at Stanford today, I feel I am in a better position to tell you what Admit Weekend and real life at Stanford is like, relative to much of the staff, faculty and administration you might ask. Same goes for just about any other Stanford student. And especially compared to Sarah Ball who (it’s confirmed as I originally thought) only stayed there from Thursday afternoon to Thursday night.

    I would invite all of you to read this article from today’s Stanford Daily, it was written by Sarah Ball’s RoHo, who personally interacted with her. Interesting to note that Sarah Ball, contrary to what her article makes it sound like, was not so fed up with Stanford that she decided to leave early—but had only planned to stay for a night and leave the next morning. Furthermore, in the short amount of time she was there (and as you’ll see if you read the article) she chose to isolate hersell, so I don’t see how she could claim to have experienced enough of Admit Weekend to make apt judgements about it.

    http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=14195&repository=0001_article

    -Dar

  37. Anonymous May 13, 2004 at 6:39 pm | | Reply

    Outlaw3-

    First of all, I am not a “Ho,” which I assume is your attempt to make the term “HoHo” sound demeaning.

    I don’t remember anyone mentioning that few students attend Admit Weekend events, so I’ll leave it at that since that since most of your arguments become moot points.

    HoHo’s and RoHo’s are there for Admit Weekend, to give the admits a warn welcome, orient them, and provide them with a safe environment. But the rest of the year, the HoHo’s are regular students just like anyone. HoHo’s don’t lecture in my classes, they don’t take notes for me, they don’t do my homework or take my exams, they don’t choose which events I go to, they don’t choose my classes nor do they choose my major, and they don’t determine what path I take in life. Your comments are just childish and again an attempt to try and shut me up with insult and threat. Not gonna happen, and I’m sure everyone can see how immature you are. Let’s make a deal, I’ll “get a life” if you promise to grow up.

    The problem with Sarah Ball’s article is that it makes a lot of people (yourself included, I see) think that Stanford is a summer camp where we play name games and do arts and crafts every day while sunbathing in palm-tree lined plazas and jumping into fountains. The fact is, we don’t.

    One last thing to you, I never said I was an official spokesperson, but as a former ProFro and a student at Stanford today, I feel I am in a better position to tell you what Admit Weekend and real life at Stanford is like, relative to much of the staff, faculty and administration you might ask. Same goes for just about any other Stanford student. And especially compared to Sarah Ball who (it’s confirmed as I originally thought) only stayed there from Thursday afternoon to Thursday night.

    I would invite all of you to read this article from today’s Stanford Daily, it was written by Sarah Ball’s RoHo, who personally interacted with her. Interesting to note that Sarah Ball, contrary to what her article makes it sound like, was not so fed up with Stanford that she decided to leave early—but had only planned to stay for a night and leave the next morning. Furthermore, in the short amount of time she was there (and as you’ll see if you read the article) she chose to isolate hersell, so I don’t see how she could claim to have experienced enough of Admit Weekend to make apt judgements about it.

    http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=14195&repository=0001_article

    -Dar

  38. Darío Maciel-Hernández May 13, 2004 at 6:39 pm | | Reply

    Outlaw3-

    First of all, I am not a “Ho,” which I assume is your attempt to make the term “HoHo” sound demeaning.

    I don’t remember anyone mentioning that few students attend Admit Weekend events, so I’ll leave it at that since that since most of your arguments become moot points.

    HoHo’s and RoHo’s are there for Admit Weekend, to give the admits a warn welcome, orient them, and provide them with a safe environment. But the rest of the year, the HoHo’s are regular students just like anyone. HoHo’s don’t lecture in my classes, they don’t take notes for me, they don’t do my homework or take my exams, they don’t choose which events I go to, they don’t choose my classes nor do they choose my major, and they don’t determine what path I take in life. Your comments are just childish and again an attempt to try and shut me up with insult and threat. Not gonna happen, and I’m sure everyone can see how immature you are. Let’s make a deal, I’ll “get a life” if you promise to grow up.

    The problem with Sarah Ball’s article is that it makes a lot of people (yourself included, I see) think that Stanford is a summer camp where we play name games and do arts and crafts every day while sunbathing in palm-tree lined plazas and jumping into fountains. The fact is, we don’t.

    One last thing to you, I never said I was an official spokesperson, but as a former ProFro and a student at Stanford today, I feel I am in a better position to tell you what Admit Weekend and real life at Stanford is like, relative to much of the staff, faculty and administration you might ask. Same goes for just about any other Stanford student. And especially compared to Sarah Ball who (it’s confirmed as I originally thought) only stayed there from Thursday afternoon to Thursday night.

    I would invite all of you to read this article from today’s Stanford Daily, it was written by Sarah Ball’s RoHo, who personally interacted with her. Interesting to note that Sarah Ball, contrary to what her article makes it sound like, was not so fed up with Stanford that she decided to leave early—but had only planned to stay for a night and leave the next morning. Furthermore, in the short amount of time she was there (and as you’ll see if you read the article) she chose to isolate hersell, so I don’t see how she could claim to have experienced enough of Admit Weekend to make apt judgements about it.

    http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=14195&repository=0001_article

    -Darío Maciel-Hernández

  39. Dario Maciel- Navarro June 1, 2004 at 5:43 pm | | Reply

    dude the guy that posted this up has my name how creepy is that…..well nice to know that we share the same name…email me if u have any ?’s

Say What?