Prepping/Scamming the Cogat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Haha, how many times is "test prep" going to be compared to general preparation for life?

"Test prep" is very different and has been defined many times here, and is what is being discussed, not whether kids should study and work hard.

How many FCPS students use the actual test to "test prep"?

You do understand. don't you, that a sample test does not need to be the "actual test" to be so close to the actual test that it's use is not quite ethical?

Then how is the SAT test prep materials ethical. Is is because the publisher of the test has released past exams and Riverside hasn't?
If you go to Riverside's website it has sample CogAt questions.

[Anonymous]

Why do you care if my kid preps for the test? It isn't illegal on a state or federal level to prepare your child for a test. Carol Horn has zero enforcement authority. The real issue is that preparing for tests is perceived to widen the gap between the haves and have nots. The issue seems to be that folks are mad, rightly so or not, of the haves getting ahead while the have nots stagnate in place. This is neither a moral or ethical issue. It is an issue of financial class and education.

[Anonymous]

+1

Someone stated earlier...if you gave every student in FCPS sample GoCAT exams 6 weeks in advance of the test, the results on the real test would remain about the same.

Children of recent American immigrants would continue to outperform all the others in every corner of the country!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

One can say over and over again that "preparation is the key to life" blah, blah, blah, but it doesn't change the fact that the type of test prep many people in Fairfax County were using was not approved by FCPS and was not appropriate for use by parents and students before taking the tests used here. The type of "test prep" discussed here is very, very different from the many other types of study and preparation referred to in some of the posts on this thread.

FCPS has specifically said that they changed the test because of the inappropriate "prep" materials used by some parents. People react in different ways when a wrong has been pointed out to them. In this particular case, some posters have reacted by disparaging those who have pointed out the wrong: calling them racists, lazy, entitled, anything they can think of to distract attention from the fact that certain types of "test prep" are not considered appropriate by the school district.

Hard work and study and "test prep" are referring to two different processes. FCPS changed the test because people were using inappropriate materials to "prep" their children.

It has been stated repeatedly here that no one has a problem with general education, hard work, study and preparation.

People only have a problem with parents who use materials with their children that so closely mimic the actual second grade test used here that children come home saying that the test was the "same" as the ones they studied together in advance.

[Anonymous]

It has been stated repeatedly here that no one has a problem with general education, hard work, study and preparation.

People only have a problem with parents who use materials with their children that so closely mimic the actual second grade test used here that children come home saying that the test was the "same" as the ones they studied together in advance.

I suspect the level of folk falling into this category amounts to background noise as it is proportionally a very minor element in the whole process. Best to settle down and chiil out.

[Anonymous]

Here is a link to the full case

http://wa.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.asp...ac.20110804_0001768.WWA.htm/qx

Wow. This is fun! I am glad that I did not give up on this thread 50 pages or so ago.

Riverside which publishes one of the CogAT sues Mercer a company that sells COgAT prep materials and the court unequivocally rules in Mercer's favor.

C. Riverside Has Not Proven It Will Suffer Irreparable Harm.

<snip>

E. The Public Interest Favors Mercer.

To the extent that the public interest is implicated in this case at all, it favors Mercer. Riverside seeks to suppress Mercer's speech, which is rarely in the public interest. It is never in the public interest where there is no evidence that the speech infringes any copyright, presents false or misleading information, or is the result of anyone's wrongful conduct. Riverside touts only the public's interest in enforcing settlement agreements. As the court has already held, however, Riverside is not likely to prevail in proving any breach of the Settlement Agreement.

and my personal favorite for all of you throwing out unsubstantiated accusations of stealing, cheating, scamming, etc. without any evidence.

D. The Balance of Hardships Tips in Mercer's Favor.

Riverside faces the possibility that some customers will continue to assume, without evidence, that Mercer obtained inside information about the CogAT.

[Anonymous]

Thank-you for this. That sheds a great deal of light on this issue.

So it is not only ethical - but it would be a supression of free speech to try to stop the test prep material from being available to the public.

[Anonymous]

A previous poster said here before, one doesn't need to steal the elementary school GoCAT test. Any monkey who went to school can use their mental creativity to create a sample test that captures the essence of the real thing. Great surgeons always brag they can teach a monkey to operate and great minds can teach a 7 year-old to ace a test without having stolen any materials but using their creative neuronal energies to create a similar test!

Is this "test prep" illegal, unethical and a breach of intellectual property?

[Anonymous]

This decision relates to a company doing business. It does not deal with the question of whether it is ethical to use their products.

The fact that something is legal does not makes it's use ethically correct.

[Anonymous]

Students, like employees, who do not prepare for their tests and tasks do so at their own peril. And if they fail they have only their foolish selves to blame. Failure favors the unprepared mind.

[Anonymous]

The fact that something is legal does not makes it's use ethically correct.

Is this about what church, synagogue or mosque one attends?

[Anonymous]

Which side has the better (crafty or unethical) lawyers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It has been stated repeatedly here that no one has a problem with general education, hard work, study and preparation.

People only have a problem with parents who use materials with their children that so closely mimic the actual second grade test used here that children come home saying that the test was the "same" as the ones they studied together in advance.

I suspect the level of folk falling into this category amounts to background noise as it is proportionally a very minor element in the whole process. Best to settle down and chiil out.

It may or may not be a small proportion of the parent and child population here. It is, though, the type of "test prep" that people object to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It has been stated repeatedly here that no one has a problem with general education, hard work, study and preparation.

People only have a problem with parents who use materials with their children that so closely mimic the actual second grade test used here that children come home saying that the test was the "same" as the ones they studied together in advance.

I suspect the level of folk falling into this category amounts to background noise as it is proportionally a very minor element in the whole process. Best to settle down and chiil out.

It may or may not be a small proportion of the parent and child population here. It is, though, the type of "test prep" that people object to.

but it's the only kind that is going to be effective. What? You expect them to prep with materials completely different from the real test?

[Anonymous]

The sample tests and drills came from my creative brain? It's hard for me to shut my brain down when interacting with my children. We discuss myriads of topics and problems from many vantage points and perspectives.

Is this an ethical breach when my kids come home and tell me my exercises with them prepared them for most tests they have ever taken in school...down to the topic material most of the time. I am sure I am not alone as a parent, like others, who have already gone to school and have a good idea what will be on an English, Math, Science, History, or Reading exam. Many parents are well versed in classic literature, basic math and sciences to guide their children without the need for the mysterious "materials" and "businesses" you constantly refer to.

And you had better believe this interaction is "test prep" indeed ---the best kind!

Guilty as charged!

Hold on. If you did not steal or obtain the GoCAT but created similar exercises with your own creative mind and frequent interactions with your children over the years the courts may rule in your favor and uphold your first amendment rights to free speech.

Your approach in no different than testing your child on vocabulary (even though you did not steal the words from the dictionary) or geography (even though you didn't steal the globe or atlas but have travelled around the world).