AIUI, these schools see their mission as training the next generation of leaders and elites. They aim for people with strong abilities, and moral character.

And, the way you guide youth to act in a certain way is by treating them that way. If you want them to be trustworthy, you trust them. This is not a totally fringe idea.

>If you want them to be trustworthy, you trust them.

sure, but it seems exceptionally silly to continue to blindly trust them when a sizeable portion of them admit to not being trustworthy

You can game theory it out and see that everyone gets to cheat and nobody reports is the best outcome for the group. Defectors must be punished in some way or perhaps the profs are not carrying through with punishments for cheaters.

The worst people in society right now are immoral elites. Why would any elite be moral when it’s obvious that you get more by being immoral?

No, they frame their mission that way.

Clearly the actions were helpful for maintaining that illusion,

while also maintaining the illusion of academic excellence,

despite rigorous courses.

Seems like it's had the opposite effect.

This has to be one of the most pretentious things I've ever read about post secondary education.

I'm completely flabbergasted to learn that an Ivy League holds students to a far different and much lower standard than I what I was held to at a regular university in Canada.

From now on I don't see how I can't be skeptical of the credentials of someone from Princeton knowing that their exams weren't proctored.

[dead]