Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

As a mother I am dealing with a totally devasted teen who was accpeted by the University of Portland only to be sent a rejection letter a month later. Despite our appeal they are upholding the rejection saying they have raised the standards. Without an apology or anything until petitions reached the President. Now there is a hollow apology and the same rejection. Beware.

By Dadster on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 06:51 pm: Edit

Tamwitch, can you explain a bit more about how this happened? Were many students affected, and did the press cover the issue?

I've heard of schools honoring acceptances sent by mistake if only a tiny number of applicants are affected. A larger number would make that approach more difficult.

By Tamwitch (Tamwitch) on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 07:12 pm: Edit

I know how confused you are because I still can't believe it. I have sent a suggestion to the Oregonian that they look into the situation. I worry that my daughter, who is still in the process of looking at schools may suffer some negative fallout from other schools if they know we are stirring things up. It is a tough one. I have no idea if it is just her. I thought at first it must not be, but a student went into the admissions offcie to ask for the fax number so she could fax in a complaint and a man pulled her into his office and asked her if it was about my daughter. I really don't know what makes it worse, my daughter alone so many students. Either way it is simply wrong. Especially from a school who speaks about their ability to educate the mind, heart and soul. Once again, they have not been forthcoming with us. They say its the first time they have done this in 4 yrs, but they did not say how many people were affected. Either way it is just wrong. They have not filled their Freshman Class yet. The Dean said if he admitted our daughter he would have to turn down a future applicant who was better qualified.

By Dadster on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 07:36 pm: Edit

Sounds bizarre... do they claim it was an error, e.g., someone checked the "admit" box by mistake and it wasn't caught until later? Or are they saying that they are rescinding a valid admission due to a change in standards?

By tamwitch on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 07:40 pm: Edit

They are saying their Director of Admissions for our area didn't have the authority to admit anyone. His recommendations have always been taken in the past,according to the Dean, but because the pool of applicants was so much higher, the Dean was using his authority to overule the Director.

I know that is an employee of mine makes a committment, my clients woudl expect, and I would insist it be honored. My gutt level feeling is that this may be some sort of power struggle at UP and my daughter go in caught in the middle.

By tamwitch on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 07:42 pm: Edit

This is the text of the email she received prior to Christmas, "Hello from the University of Portland. I am the Northern California
representative for the Office of Admissions. I wanted to drop you a
short note to let you know that your application came to my desk
recently. Allow me to be the first to personally congratulate you on
your acceptance into the University of Portland!!! Your official letter
will be sent to you very soon. I wanted to you know of our decision
before the holidays."
An email was also sent to her school counselor. Nearly a month later the rejection letter with no reference to this email.

By tamwitch on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 07:45 pm: Edit

Also..in answer to your question. The reason why the Dean said he was overturning this decision was because they were raising the standards. Of note is that U or Portland has rolling admissions and some students have been admitted under the old standards.

By Kevin on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 09:23 pm: Edit

Wow! That is really an incredible (in a bad way) experience. It is absolutely ridiculous. I am so sorry your daughter has to go through this, but I get the feeling she'll have gained a little from this experience. A question, though, if this is how UP is treating your daughter, does she really still want to go there, or is it more the principle? Good Luck!!!

By your local mayor on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 09:31 pm: Edit

sue

By tamwitch on Sunday, February 09, 2003 - 09:57 pm: Edit

At this point we all can see that it isn't a place that she would want to go. She has been accepted elsewhere and is waitig to hear from others. I just think that something like this should be made known so another kid won't have to suffer the way she has. I was more taken back by their reaction to the situation to the screwup. The avoidance, the "I have been instructed not to talk to you." that kind of thing. I had such high hopes for this University.
I mean we spend all this time teaching our kids the meaning of integrity - that their word should be their bond, that responsible behavior is rewarded and then to have an institution like a Catholic University, go back on its word, avoid responsibility and be shown as not trustworthy...it kind of makes you think...Will graduates from this school believe it's okay to unfairly terminate employees to help the bottom line? Will they leave spouses when a better model comes around? Will they perpetually be taking the fifth?

As to our daughter, she held out hope that this was the action of one man at the school, not the school's position. Once we received the letter from the President it was obivous that this is their position and they will not change it...then the Unversity moved to a different place in her mind and mine.

By Morgantruce (Morgantruce) on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 08:40 am: Edit

"...go back on its word, avoid responsibility and be shown as not trustworthy"

Catholics are viewing many of their institutions in the same manner lately---definitely not a good omen. (No flames, please: it's just a general observation.)

I would think that the original email was written by an overzealous individual--without the full authority of the Office of Admissions. But since he is somewhat like an "agent" as far as you're concerned--they should have officially admitted your daughter. Doing so would not have made their institution's walls crumble.

By tamwitch on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 03:41 pm: Edit

I hope I didn't sound like I was Catholic bashing! Didn't mean to if I did. This is about a Catholic UNiversity however, who goes to great length to tell everyone how ethics are important . They say they are proud that they educate the "heart and soul and well as the mind" at UP.
As far as an over zealous assistant over stepping his boundaries. If my assistant oversteps hers, it is a problem with my assistant and me, I do not punish the client to get my point across to the assistant...y'know?
If my daughter was qualified for Up I would be upset but not be quite as angry. Under any circumstances however this is wrong, mean spitited and not in keeping with what the University says they are about.

By Morgantruce (Morgantruce) on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 04:08 pm: Edit

More than a few colleges hire "Admissions Associates" that graduated the previous June, are well-spoken, nice looking, and meant to serve as examples of what type of individual the college turns out. Perhaps these recent hires are more prone to making mistakes than more senior staff.

Your last point is right. The college is punishing the wrong person. Given enough publicity, they may come around to admitting your student (while not admitting anything else!)
They seem to have no clue how bad any publicity of this is going to hurt them.

The bright side of this is that you found out soon enough about Portland University's administration. P.U.

By tamwitch on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 04:25 pm: Edit

The assistant was a man about 40. He has been with them for at least four years. So I guess that blows that theory. I actually felt him to be a bit of the used car saleman when we met. He pushed very hard to have our daughter choose UP.or PU

By Morgantruce (Morgantruce) on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 06:53 pm: Edit

"The Dean said if he admitted our daughter he would have to turn down a future applicant who was better qualified. "

Hey, fella---that's what "rolling admissions" is all about! If you don't want to play by it's rules, go and switch to "regular decision" and see if you can compete with the other college for students.

-----

You might want to send your story to ethics@nacac.com after looking around their website: http://www.nacac.com/ National Association for College Admission Counseling

They would probably want to know about it if U.P. happens to be a member.

By tamwitch on Monday, February 10, 2003 - 06:55 pm: Edit

Thank you so much I will follow up on this with them.

By Katwkittens (Katwkittens) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 01:45 pm: Edit

To the original poster,
If you don't mind sending your daughter's last name, (really don't need the first name, keep her privacy somewhat) to my email.....my son will definitely refer to your(her) situation when in contact with Univ of Port. We have received many letters, brochures, and a phone call from them for his recruitment and having this knowledge of what they have done leaves us with an extremely sour taste and, HE is the type that will mention it and end it with a NO THANK YOU, NOT INTERESTED!
Understand the concept of a Cath uni and with this attitude, there are a plethora more to choose from...so yes, word of mouth works. My email is katblair2002@yahoo.com. And thanks for the heads up, that takes one more off the list!

By Indian on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 02:21 pm: Edit

This is unbelievable. My son is offered an admission by another catholic college elseware. I have to be double careful now.
I suggest that you shouldn’t leave this even though you don’t want your daughter to go there. Please contact the local newspapers as well as send the information to major news papers and news agencies with copies of email and the subsequent letter.
Also post this question to the expert in USNews forum .
They should not be left scot-free like this.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 02:57 pm: Edit

As a small consolation, reading this thread prompted me to look up University of Portland (as opposed to Portland State University) in my Barrons, and one interesting bit of data was that 18 percent of incoming students do not continue beyond their first year. This strikes me as high compared to a lot of the colleges that I'm familiar with. U of Oregon is about half that, though to be fair, Oregon State is at 20 percent.

This is a more difficult situation that appears on the surface, however. I don't think _any_ university can let itself be bound by what a regional admissions officer represents. Regional officers have lots of power, including in some very selective schools...but they are not the final word.

As a thought experiment, suppose the R.O. had indicated acceptance to a) a relative or b) someone he hoped to have a relationship with or
c) at whimsy made a peculiar call or d) some other scenario you can construct...the University can't afford to be bound by the statements of one staff member.

Against that scenario is another stat from Barrons: they accept 89 percent of applicants. Or did for the 2000 incoming class.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 03:02 pm: Edit

Btw, I also checked Lewis and Clark. On paper, at any rate, it looks to be a better school. (I think you had mentioned L&C elsewhere.)

Hmm. Just checked PR's THE BEST 345 COLLEGES. Nice write-up there.

By CZLAW on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 03:37 pm: Edit

Thanks for sharing the original email. I'd asked on a different section here about it. There's no way that could be misinterpreted. Sigh. Sorry for questioning whether your daughter could have misunderstood and you are right to pursue this.

By tamwitch on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 04:45 pm: Edit

Well, "thedad" in regards to the idea that a University shouldn't be bound to the Assistant Directors' offers of admission. If the offer was made for some whimsy or self serving reason I suppose you are right. When the offer is made because applicant exceeds the last years averages, and based soleyl upon the qualifications both the applicant and the University Admissions Director were under the impression were needed for admissions, then the University should honor the committment made. Especially in a school with rolling admissions where surely others had been admitted already under the old standards.
But they didn't choose to do that, they chose instead to coldly refuse to discuss it.

By NYLawyer on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 07:01 pm: Edit

Sorry, "the dad", your analysis doesn't make sense. A regional officer has what we lawyers call "apparent authority" to extend an offer of admission. That is, a reasonable person would assume that the officer speaks for the university.

By tamwitch on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 08:08 pm: Edit

Someone asked me today what UP could do to make me happy. I answered "Nothing" but then thought and said, I would like them to fire the Dean of Admissions and publish an apology to any student treated unfairly by him and the University... What do you think my chances are???

By Thedad (Thedad) on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 08:55 pm: Edit

NYLawyer, I got twenty that says the school would
rather take a legal hit and have a court tell them they have to admit this student than to endorse
the notion that an R.O. can ride solo. Of every case that I'm aware of, an R.O. in a system where the R.O. gives the single-read "Admit" verdict STILL must be reviewed by the Dean of Admissions for concurrence...the single-read merely means that it doesn't go to a second reader or a committee unless the Dean decides the first reader blew it.

Btw, wouldn't this be a matter of state law and are you sure the laws of NY and OR are the same or similar?

===

tamwitch, I regard that scenario as "Not Happening." Who decides what is "unfair"?

They've botched your daughter's case horribly. But a good rule in life is not to let one mistake force you into making a second. Fwiw, I agree with you
that they should have accepted your daughter in this case, based on what you've posted.

Lacking any constructive thing they could do at this point--like admitting your daughter--I think any action you pursue at this point is likely to aggravate you more than it will aggravate them. Just imo.

By tamwitch on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 09:21 pm: Edit

Actually, it gives me personal satisfaction to know that I am not someone who will letan institution do whatever they want, regardless of who they hurt. I do intend on letting people knwo what happened. I have no intention of suing. I intend on educating. I want college counselors to be aware of what happened and how the school chose to respond. My daughter is in total agreement that if we can save one person from this kind of hurt, it is right ot peruse.
I do believe that legal action would be more than aggravating. Short of that. There is the internet, newspapers, perhaps a KOIN investigation, Catholic orgainzations, Alumnae and student organizations, and good old word of mouth. If love of you tell five potential students this story, and they tell five people then at least people have the information to make an informed decision about what they think of this school. Had we known that anyone was treated this way, my daughter would not have been interested. If UP is meaning to reduce the numbers of people applying, since they have so many qualifies applicants, mean to help them with that. Does this aggravate me? NO. What aggravates me is seeing my daughter's tears.

By NYLawyer on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 09:36 pm: Edit

To "thedad" -- I'm referring to general principles of agency & contract law. Yes, there are slight differences from state to state, but the general principles are the same. Anyway, you are missing the point -- a high school student is not expected to be familar with a college's internal admissions policies -- an e-mail from an admissions officer that states "congratulations, you are admitted" presumably means what it says. Legally, the burden would be on the university to show that the student's reliance was unreasonable under the circumstances. In any event, the problem here isn't proving authority -- the real problem with a lawsuit here is proving damages, and, as I've said previously, unless you can show that the student suffered a detriment (quantifiable in monetary terms), a lawsuit won't succeed. Well, let's hope all this bad publicity and maybe a complaint or two to some organizations will straighten this school out and force them to exercise more supervision over their employees.

By tamwitch on Tuesday, February 11, 2003 - 09:48 pm: Edit

Or they are better at letting their employees know when there has been a change in policy or standards. I really think the person they need to deal with is the Dean and not the Assistant. And sorry guys for my very bad typing skills and lack of time to edit or correct the mistakes in my posts.

By Student Lawyer on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 01:39 am: Edit

'thedad' seems to be too enthusiastic in letting the UP go free. Is he a spokesman of the UP ???
NY lawyer is correct. Apart from the difference in the state laws the basic Contract law does not change. The original email is a legally enforceable offer unless it can be proven by the UP that it was sent ‘malafide’ ( i.e. in bad faith and the onus of proof in on the University).
A ‘question of facts’ will be the origin of the email. Is it from the UP domine or the officers privet address. If it is from UP domine there is NO WAY they can get out of the responsibility. Evan if it is from a privet address the UP has to prove that the officer has NOT acted as an AGENT and it is next to impossible for them.
I think you have to receive a public apology.

By NYLawyer on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 08:29 am: Edit

To Student lawyer -- nice analysis, what year are you in law school? Just had an interesting discussion with a colleague about suing for specific performance (for admission as opposed to monetary damages). I didn't address this because I assumed that the student wasn't interested in attending under the circumstances. We agreed that an action for specific performance would have a high likelihood of success -- pretty easy to show that each college is unique (use the college's own admissions brochures as evidence).

By Morgantruce (Morgantruce) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 09:55 am: Edit

The student has benefited---she found a nicer place to go to college.

University of Portland (I like P.U. better...) is the one getting hurt. They shot themselves right in the foot--several times!

By Thedad (Thedad) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 11:44 am: Edit

Not a spokesman for UP or any other institution.
I am an adult with extensive experience with
contracts and agency, public relations, and the mind set of upper-level administrators at academic institutions as seen from the inside. (Alas, Admissions has figured only tangentially in my experience.) I am not, however, a lawyer.

Though upon reflection that if it came to a court case, if the university could show that the R.O.'s e-mail was against established written admissions policy--and that such e-mails had not been routinely sent and validated by subsequent admission in the past--that the university's case in court would be interesting.

Starting to dissect student lawyer's analysis a bit further, I don't think the argument of the point of origin of the e-mail would stand up.

Let's take a hypothetical using UCLA, the institution with which I am most familiar:

An e-mail comes from UCLA telling a student that they're going to be admitted. UCLA has tens of thousands of e-mail accounts. Step through the hierarchy and decide at what point the e-mail would hold the university responsible:

Any UCLA e-mail address.
Any staff UCLA e-mail address.
Any UCLA staff e-mail address from someone working
in the admissions office.
Any UCLA staff e-mail address from someone with a rank/title/responsibility as Admissons officer.

and...finally, for the latter, an e-mail sent out in accordance with UC policy and one "freelanced" without such authority behind it. Bearing in mind that nothing is legally true until a court says so, I think it would be an intereting argument.

I make a distinction between "what is legal" and "what is worth pursuing." Worth it to a claimant, not a lawyer. Other than publicizing this matter, my view is that any other pursuit is going to cost tamwitch more aggravation than she will inflict.

As morgantruce points out, the student has found a nicer place to go to college.

Fwiw, I read of a case where someone mistakenly was sent an acceptance into Wesleyan on a "same name, wrong number" mix-up. The difference here was that it was the formal acceptance. Wesleyan honored the admittance; student did not stay for graduation.

Anyway, I have nothing against tilting at windmills but am fairly selective about it. In any event, shrug, it's not my rice bowl. Have a nice life.

By tamwitch on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 12:02 pm: Edit

The point for me is not whether our daughter goes to a better school. I think she will, I hope, since it hard to imagine a school right now that wouldn't be better. Although her only acceptance right now in Seattle U and I don't really know much about that school (fill me in if you do) She is still waiting on the other schools. The point for me is accountability. They are acting as if they can do this, lay low and it will all blow over and they will suffer no consequences. I do not believe that this should go without consequences. As far as the email thing goes. UP account. The UP account was the email address for the Offical of the Admissions department. He "wanted to be the first to congratulate you on your acceptance". That is pretty darn clear. So glad he was thoughful enough to let us know before the holidays "so she can relax"
This was sent to my daughter because she met their standards. Not to someone with the same name, different person. The Dean saw her file and changed the standards. NO excuse.

By tamwitch on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 12:59 pm: Edit

And...she could have taken SATs in January to raise her scores which were up on each try, but didn't since she had been accepted already and UP was a top choice school.

By NYLawyer on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 01:09 pm: Edit

Well, thedad, I guess UP would want you on the jury. Pretty heavy burden for UP, however, especially in light of the President's admission that ROs had this authority until now. I wonder how you would feel about this if it happened to your child -- can you honestly say that you would not have assumed that this email (which was sent to her guidance counselor as well!!) was an acceptance? The guidance department at my kid's school would be in an uproar over this and would be filing grievances all over the place if one of their students was treated so shabbily.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 02:32 pm: Edit

Seattle U. is listed in Barrons (2001 ed.) as "Very Competitive." Avg. SAT I's 560 verbal, 560 math.
Looks to be just a shade under 3,000 students. Another Catholic-affiliated school, fwiw. A quick scan of the whole listing and no yellow flags jump out at me...nor are there any "Oh, wow!" kinds of highs. I thought I read in another thread that you were asking about Lewis & Clark?

NYL, I wouldn't be on the jury...an attorney would spend a premptory on me because of my spouse having a high-level job at a university.

The points you raise: how I would feel (pissed as hell) and what I would have assumed (that this was a bonafide acceptance) have nothing to do with what prognosis I would come to regarding pursuing a remedy: beyond inflicting painful publicity upon UP, let it go and move on. [N.B., I realize that attorneys are both self-selected and trained with an adversarial outlook...and there are times that that's useful...I just don't think this is one of them.] And you're quite right about the guidance department getting into a major snit about this.
Philosophically I don't believe that every "hurt" should have a legal redress and I would be a poor person if I changed opinions as a matter of convenience when my daughter was involved.

I really would be interested in hearing a statement from UP about this...probably not going to happen because of concerns about legal liability.

StudentLawyer, I hope you read briefs better than
you read posts. If you review posts made before
your suggestion that I was a spokesman for UP,
you will note that I said I thought they should have admitted tamwitch's daughter. UP has blundered at least twice in this matter: the way they handled the file in the first place and the way they responded to the error. I really really wish there _was_ a spokesman for UP here to say something beyond blah blah blah.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 02:35 pm: Edit

Seattle U. is listed in Barrons (2001 ed.) as "Very Competitive." Avg. SAT I's 560 verbal, 560 math.
Looks to be just a shade under 3,000 students. Another Catholic-affiliated school, fwiw. A quick scan of the whole listing and no yellow flags jump out at me...nor are there any "Oh, wow!" kinds of highs. I thought I read in another thread that you were asking about Lewis & Clark?

NYL, I wouldn't be on the jury...an attorney would spend a premptory on me because of my spouse having a high-level job at a university.

The points you raise: how I would feel (pissed as hell) and what I would have assumed (that this was a bonafide acceptance) have nothing to do with what prognosis I would come to regarding pursuing a remedy: beyond inflicting painful publicity upon UP, let it go and move on. [N.B., I realize that attorneys are both self-selected and trained with an adversarial outlook...and there are times that that's useful...I just don't think this is one of them.] And you're quite right about the guidance department getting into a major snit about this.
Philosophically I don't believe that every "hurt" should have a legal redress and I would be a poor person if I changed opinions as a matter of convenience when my daughter was involved.

I really would be interested in hearing a statement from UP about this...probably not going to happen because of concerns about legal liability.

StudentLawyer, I hope you read briefs better than
you read posts. If you review posts made before
your suggestion that I was a spokesman for UP,
you will note that I said I thought they should have admitted tamwitch's daughter. UP has blundered at least twice in this matter: the way they handled the file in the first place and the way they responded to the error. I really really wish there _was_ a spokesman for UP here to say something beyond blah blah blah.

By Thedad (Thedad) on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 02:36 pm: Edit

Sorry about the double post...interrupted
by a phone call and forgot where I was.

By NYLawyer on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 03:40 pm: Edit

Ah! So you do know more about the admissions process than the average person. Explains your outlook. Have to say I agree with you wholeheartedly about not every hurt having a legal remedy -- see above. But I am puzzled that there was no backlash from the guidance department. Tamwitch?

By tamwitch on Wednesday, February 12, 2003 - 03:47 pm: Edit

The guidance counselor and the Director of our daughter's school have written and called and not receieved any response from the school. Our daughter's school is very small only 100 kids. I don't think they care at all what this school thinks. The only direct conversation since this happened between was between the guidance couselor and the Asst. Dir. who told he he was instructed not to talk with anyone, including her.

By Student Lawyer on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 02:22 am: Edit

Hi Thedad/ NYL
I am neither a student or Lawyer or even an American. I am a Chartered Accountant from India– something like your CPA- but has studied the basics of all Comon Law. I am here as my son will be coming there for his undergrad this Fall. He is admitted to UChicago and another in EA and is waiting for RA from some other colleges.
I am learning about US through these forums. I find it more informative than the books and articles where you get the ideas of one person only. Here I can feel the pulse of the common man from different backgrounds.
On UP .
1 If the RO was fired then they can argue that he exceeded the limit and can put forward ‘malafide’ argument . If he is still in employment it won’t stand. I don’t know how the jury will look at this. We don’t have jury system in India, but it a fact that ‘Common man’ in general is more ‘just’ than the Justices .
2 It is not impossible that all the cards are not on the table. But if the facts are correct there is a contract enforceable for ‘specific performance’
3 NYL – Since the college has collected an application fee will the university has any specific duties under ‘consumer protection’ laws as by virtue of paying the fee which is a service charge the applicant can be deemed to be a consumer. Is not the legal action under such rules much cheaper .

By Student Lawyer on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 07:32 am: Edit

Please read the Para 2 as ‘ It IS possible that---‘ .

By tamwitch on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 02:02 pm: Edit

Just got word that the guidance counselor received a letter, mispelling our daughter's name throughout saying her SAT scores were 1000 and other inaccuracies. I resent them the SAT scores after recieving the rejection letter, in case they hadn't recieved the most current ones. The other schools all had the correct SATs. I don't know why they wouldn't. We made note of her correct scores, GPA and all throughout our communications. They never at any time said that she had 1000 SAT until now. Could it be an effort to create a reason for their actions? If so they should at least spell her name right.

By Please spare us... on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 05:20 pm: Edit

As if lawyers aren't bad enough. Now we have student lawyers trying to imagine how they would make a case out of this. You guys are completely shameless.

Go chase an ambulance!

By tamwitch on Thursday, February 13, 2003 - 09:52 pm: Edit

Please spare us...I suppose your name says alot. Sounds like you are fed up with more than just the idea of holding U of Portland accountable. I for one believe there are times when it is appropriate to hold people accountable. It is my opinion that a lawsuit would be completely worthwhile since the University has shown the kind of arrogance that is difficult to reach in conventional ways. Why is important to have them be held responsible for what they have done? So they don't do this to someone else. Maybe if you saw my daughters tears and understood the feelings of betrayal that was behind them you would feel differently. We are choosing not to file a lawsuit though I agree there are merits, one one reason alone. I don't want my daughter to be put through that, she has been through enough. We are choosing to explore other avenues and hope that through one of them UP gets the message. I applaud people who look for ways to address the wrong in the world. For you lawsuits are wrong - for me one of the biggest wrongs of all is doing nothing.

By Mike (Mike) on Friday, February 14, 2003 - 11:58 am: Edit

I wouldn't want my parents to sue over this. I would want them t0 do what Tamwitch is doing and publish the info. And I would want them to hassle the school. Unless U of P can come up with an explanation they won't get my fee next year (well my parents fee).

By tamwitch on Saturday, February 15, 2003 - 10:05 am: Edit

The explanation they have come up with doesn't hold water.

By tamwitch on Saturday, February 15, 2003 - 10:38 pm: Edit

I just read the letter the Dean sent to the guidance counselor. OMG he lied throughout it. Said he tried to apologize numerous times. That my husband wouldn't listen to his explanation and all we wanted was for him to overturn the rejection. He got her SAT scores wrong, he also spelled the name wrong throughout. I just want to scream at him I am so angry. Apologized??!! Yeah right! I guess he is going to take the tack of lying to protect his backside. What a horse's patooie. GRRRRRRR.

By bump on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 01:05 am: Edit

bump

By Marcie on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 01:22 pm: Edit

I think you should FORGET University of Portland. Seattle University has an excellent reputation here in Seattle. My neighbor (age 21) is a senior nursing student there and loves the school, a friend received her master's there, and a very accomplished young woman from my church is going there next fall (her first choice school). Seattle U. has interesting graduate programs in religion, very liberal for a Jesuit college. I think your daughter would receive a lot of personal attention there. Obviously U of Portland has treated you poorly; consider that reflective of the potential way your daughter would be treated and take your money elsewhere.

By tamwitch on Monday, February 17, 2003 - 01:29 pm: Edit

I am in total agreement. Thank you so much for the feedback on Seattle U. My sister is going to Seattle U to get a second Masters and she is impressed with the Graduate school, but knows little about the Undergrad school.

By Marcie on Tuesday, February 18, 2003 - 10:34 pm: Edit

My neighbor who is a nursing student transfered to Seattle U. in her junior year. She is a VERY shy young woman and made a nice transition there. She made lots of friends and is in a school-monitored apartment now in her 5th year (because of transfer). She seems to have blossomed there.

The friend from our church is just a stellar young lady. She was hospitalized due to illness during the time when she was supposed to write a scholarship essay for Seattle U. at the college, and they agreed to let her write it later in the high school counselor's office. Compare that anecdote with the negative one you have from U. of P.

I also recently read somewhere that the Seattle U. area is safe and you can walk downtown in 10 mins.

By tamwitch on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 - 01:03 am: Edit

Bless you for the Seattle U update.
I think it would be a very tough assignment to find anywhere as bad as UP has been throughout this.

By Anon on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 - 07:34 am: Edit

Tamwitch, you are upset now but this, too, will pass. Those who have discouraged you aren't doing it to protect the college, they're giving apparently heartfelt advice to let it go for your own well-being. You're too close to the situation to have much perspective but in 10 years you'll barely remember what happened. This is but a blip on the screen of life (and that doesn't mean it doesn't hurt.) Hang in there and good luck.

By tamwitch on Wednesday, February 19, 2003 - 12:26 pm: Edit

Anon, Thanks for the good wishes. I know we all will be all right, despite the fact that this was very damaging to my daughter's sense of right and wrong. It is for that reason that I won't let this slide, even if it is a little blip on the screen of life. I feel, now that we have received the copy of the letter to the guidance counselor from the Dean, that it is extremely important to hold this man accountable for his misrepresentations, avoidance of the truth and his need to find scapegoats for his misdeeds. This is a man in charge of the futures of 1,000s of young people. If he is allowed to go unchallenged and unaccountable, he will proceed in the way of many mini tyrants and believe he is above reproach.
I truly hope that things we have set in motion will result in him losing his job. Short of that I hope his fate, will be deferred (better than they did for my daughter) and re-evaluated in a year.
I was brought up to believe that it is important to stand up and call out injustice when you see it. Although I am married to an attorney, and realize that lawsuits are often the only thing that can get some people and institutions attention, I am firmly in the belief that this kind of action is to be avoided whenever possible. Especially considering it involves the emotions of a 17 year old girl.
I am upset by this. I don't think that will go away. It will be put in the old memory bank, that unfortunately tells me that you need to keep your guard up. That people aren't always what they seem, and that it is up to us to be our own advocates. A reminder that the world doesn't always play fair and that some people will lie when they feel it is in their best interests, despite the fall out.
So no worries here. We are doing what we can, short of a lawsuit to know that we held this University and its Dean accountable. In doing that we can in clear conscience move on to better things. My daughter is too good of a person to let this define her, and too many other people know that to let her forget.

By SMITH on Thursday, February 20, 2003 - 09:36 am: Edit

Tamwitch -If you can AFFORD to take legal action then you should do it. It is all the more important for your daughter to learn that when people of position act like this they should be held accountable and for that there is nothing better than legal action. In future your daughter will appreciate it or she will always wonder ,why you did not do it.
Ten years back my son had a comparable incident from his school management. I too made a lot of noise but shrunk away from legal action. Later in life many times my son asked me why I did not take a stern action. I think , that even now he feels that I did not do enough to defend him

By NYLawyer on Thursday, February 20, 2003 - 12:33 pm: Edit

Smith -- I understand your feelings, but the problem for Tamwitch's daughter is that she probably has no claim for monetary damages. She may very well succeed on a claim for "specific performance" -- that is, admission to UP, but, does she really want to go there at this point?
Note to tamwitch -- if you are considering legal action at all, you should consult a local lawyer.

By Butterfly2 (Butterfly2) on Friday, February 27, 2004 - 04:27 pm: Edit

Hi!

I hope this message is added to the others above. About three years ago, I attened the University of Portland Nursing program. In 1998, the school reassured me that I would get through the program and it seemed like a good one. By the year of the Milinum (2000-2001). The school made suggnificant changes. Changes in that I did not get through the first semester of nursing school. I was devistated. I had to move home back in California, attending a new school. Was I happy about this, no, not one bit. The school was not nice to me. No body supported me when there were many issues needing to be addressed. The School didn't acknowledge me and my problems, pushed me out the door and didn't even say there were sorry. I was so, so, so mad. If you want money, go ahead get as much as you can. Going away to college is worth it. University of Portland seem great on the outside but ruthless on the inside. I definately have issues with it, even today. I wish you and your daughter the best of luck. UP is not worth it for your daughter. If you want to make change, look at who's leading.