Reply to Feds uncover large-scale college entrance exam cheating plot

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Feds uncover large-scale college entrance exam cheating plot"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Test prepping, tutoring, accommodations, and affirmative action are not the same thing as cheating.

Admitting people who will affect the lives of many other people due to their position (e.g. a crown prince in one example) is not unfair.

Accepting large donations that benefit the entire school community with a wink that a dum dum kid will be admitted, isn't fair, but it's not cheating. Lower expectations for student athletes during admissions isn't fair, but because they attract more students/more money which helps the school community, so it's not cheating.

Paying someone to take a test, lying about achievements, falsely representing learning disabilities for accommodations, bribing school officials to assert that you are a student athlete, while doing nothing to contribute to your school community such as excelling at a sport or adding prestige, is cheating.

There is a difference between what is unfair, and what is cheating. I think it's super unfair, but not cheating, that other people have trust funds, safety nets, inheritances, private schools educations and connections that they can leverage for more privilege- while I just had hard work and a state school where I owed student debt, because that's what we could afford...but such is life. I have advantages too--it's relative. [/quote]

Thanks.
Where do we place the amphetamines prescriptions on this continuum and the questionable ADHD diagnoses used to procure them?[/quote]

+1.  There is a continuum, with a lot of grey area.  Perhaps cynical, but maybe it's human nature to try to obtain more resources for your offspring.  Maybe the main difference between the questionable ADHD diagnoses and accommodations and those who swept up in the current scandal is just that the latter have access to more money, power, and connections.  (Along with a greater sense of entitlement that comes from being rich and/or famous, since they obviously thought they'd get away with it.)[/quote]

These families got the fake accommodations in order to:

1) get extra time [b]so that their answers could be corrected [/b] once the kid was finished

2) to allow testing a a solo location so that someone else could take the test without detection

Singer had people at SAT and ACT in on the scam.

This is not at all equivalent to what people whose kids have legitimate disabilities and accommodations do.[/quote]

PP here.  I'm not talking about the legitimate cases--I'm talking about those who pursue [b]questionable [/b]diagnoses and accommodations for their kids.  All of the above parents want a leg up--but those in the college admissions scandal have a bigger leg up, with more money to throw at the problem.[/quote]

In the last 2 years the College Board at least is deferring to schools wrt needed accommodations. High schools must apply for accommodations on students' behalf (not families) unless the child is homeschooled.

The school must attest that the student has XYZ accommodations and has used them consistently throughout high school. It is not automatic and counter to what has been stated in this thread, "slow procesing speed" alone is not sufficient to get accommodations.

Some of what happened with the Singer clients happened under the older policies. I would never dispute that some parents have pushed for accommodations for borderline cases to get an edge, but the College Board seems to be trying to address that problem while still meeting the legally required ADA reasonable accommodations.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics