ProPublica:

[Wahoo Redux]

ProPublica: The Newest College Admissions Ploy: Paying to Make Your Teen a "Peer-Reviewed" Author

A group of services, often connected to pricey college counselors, has arisen to help high schoolers carry out and publish research as a credential for their college applications. The research papers — and the publications — can be dubious.

As these differentiators recede and the number of applications soars, colleges are grappling with the latest pay-to-play maneuver that gives the rich an edge: published research papers. A new industry is extracting fees from well-heeled families to enable their teenage children to conduct and publish research that colleges may regard as a credential.

[apl68]

Did not know that this was even a thing.  Apparently in some circles it's already coming to be considered common.

They start off profiling a student in New Jersey, but the rest of the article gives the impression that it's largely well-healed international students trying to buy their way into the American Ivy League.

Sounds like most of these "papers" are published in fairly egregious predatory vanity journals.  Surely admissions offices at selective universities know better than to be taken in by this sort of thing?  If not, somebody had better be educating them about it quickly.  Otherwise they might damage the competitive schools' brand. 

It may be that the main people getting scammed are the students and their parents who imagine that buying their way into a "peer-reviewed published article" status will help their chances.  In reality any students who try this and get into the school of their choice may getting in more in spite of their "publishing," rather than any thanks to it. 

Apart from any privileging of students whose families can afford to do this, there's also this objection raised in the article:

"You're teaching students to be cynical about research," said Kent Anderson, past president of the Society for Scholarly Publishing and former publishing director of the New England Journal of Medicine. "That's the really corrosive part. 'I can hire someone to do it. We can get it done, we can get it published, what's the big deal?'"

I initially read "Scholar Launch" as "Scholar Lunch."  Which made the fact that the first student mentioned did a paper on marketing at Chick-fil-A seem more natural.

[dismalist]

Oh, hell, auction off the admissions slots!

[Hibush]

There are egregious predatory vanity journals making the same pitch to faculty and those who want to be. Some are getting scammed.

As someone who reviews grad applicants for a competitive program and tenure dossiers for peer schools, these pubs are really obvious. They count negative.

My citation reports alerts often show review papers by Indian authors publishing in an Indian vanity journal. I don't think anyone but the authors ever reads these reviews. But in some of the bureaucracies there, the pub meets the productivity requirements. I hope they don't feel scammed.

But it does make me cynical about research as an enterprise.  I even see prominent people on the author line in some of the vanity journals, but on reading the paper it is clear that it is really the novice lead author's work. I come to appreciate the value a good editor provides, and that is not part of the package when you pay the OA fee at these.

Did not know that this was even a thing.  Apparently in some circles it's already coming to be considered common.

They start off profiling a student in New Jersey, but the rest of the article gives the impression that it's largely well-healed international students trying to buy their way into the American Ivy League.

Sounds like most of these "papers" are published in fairly egregious predatory vanity journals.  Surely admissions offices at selective universities know better than to be taken in by this sort of thing?  If not, somebody had better be educating them about it quickly.  Otherwise they might damage the competitive schools' brand. 

It may be that the main people getting scammed are the students and their parents who imagine that buying their way into a "peer-reviewed published article" status will help their chances.  In reality any students who try this and get into the school of their choice may getting in more in spite of their "publishing," rather than any thanks to it. 

Apart from any privileging of students whose families can afford to do this, there's also this objection raised in the article:

"You're teaching students to be cynical about research," said Kent Anderson, past president of the Society for Scholarly Publishing and former publishing director of the New England Journal of Medicine. "That's the really corrosive part. 'I can hire someone to do it. We can get it done, we can get it published, what's the big deal?'"