Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

It actually is that hard. You can't force other people to refrain from prepping. Even if the test is supposed to be secure, people will find a way to prep. Your only choices are
1. Bury your head in the sand and keep insisting that people just shouldn't prep. Wring your hands when half of them ignore you and prep anyway.
2. Help everyone prep, so everyone is on a more equal footing. Recognize that the absolute scores are not valid, but the scores relative to the other preppers are useful.
3. Eliminate standardized testing and instead rely on more subjective, more easily gamed, and/or more random selection criteria.

Option 2 is the best to me.

Yes, obviously some parents will cheat no matter what.

Just because people are doing it doesn’t mean that prepping for cognitive tests is ok.

Go ask any gifted coordinator/education psychologist and see what they say about prepping.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

.... that's the opposite of the point here. Admissions exams like the Quant-Q are SUPPOSED to measure, in a sense, IQ and intellectual ability. But there's not much point to exams like it when you have people showing you how to do the problems on the exam.

The point of the exam is to give you problems to solve that you've never seen before and therefore extrapolate your ability to solve OTHER problems you've never seen before, because it's about your ability, not your knowledge. Curie doesn't help with your ability - it helps with your knowledge.

The students who know more knowledge are usually more capable.

Nobody knows exactly what questions will be used for the exam. But they can guess from what they have learnt. You cannot blame them just because they made efforts to get things done better but you didn't do it. It's your choice to not work for it and you take the consequence. It's a shame to request to change the rule in order to get better benefits and hurt others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

The very idea of tests you shouldn't prep for is absurd - especially when the test is a determinant of admission to a selective school. Who gets to decide when we should or shouldn't prep, and on what grounds?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

It actually is that hard. You can't force other people to refrain from prepping. Even if the test is supposed to be secure, people will find a way to prep. Your only choices are
1. Bury your head in the sand and keep insisting that people just shouldn't prep. Wring your hands when half of them ignore you and prep anyway.
2. Help everyone prep, so everyone is on a more equal footing. Recognize that the absolute scores are not valid, but the scores relative to the other preppers are useful.
3. Eliminate standardized testing and instead rely on more subjective, more easily gamed, and/or more random selection criteria.

Option 2 is the best to me.

So you'd provide any student who requests it Curie level prep? Or by help everyone do you mean give the poor kids a couple of work books and an hour or two with an underpaid tutor who doesn't actually understand the test?

Exactly. There's a reason these courses cost 5K a pop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APA explains it somewhat here:
https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/test-security-faq
The reproduction and inclusion of copyrighted test items in scholarly and scientific publications and presentations might not only be a copyright violation but may also undermine test security by potentially placing test items in the public domain, making test takers’ pre-knowledge of test items a major threat to the utility of an instrument. Indeed, it would seem that this concern should not be limited to only copyrighted measures but to any and all tests whose validity would be compromised if test takers had pre-knowledge and could thus "practice" the items.

We are agreed that it is unethical to wrongly obtain the test questions in advance. That does not mean that all preparation is therefore unethical.

Literally no one said that “all preparation is wrong”.

You’ve beat that strawman to death.

Selective outrage, of course. If my kid prepares it is fine. If my righteous indignation can stop the other kid (specifically from a certain race who is walloping my kid), from preparing to make it easier for my kid, I will do that.

Why are you bringing race into it?

I don’t think any parents should prep their kids for cogat or use prior questions for TJ.

That’s why we didn’t do either for our kids.

That's great. I think kids shouldn't prepare for sports or music. Else how will you recognize true genius. That's just me though. I am not going to try and force my beliefs down other people's throats.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

.... that's the opposite of the point here. Admissions exams like the Quant-Q are SUPPOSED to measure, in a sense, IQ and intellectual ability. But there's not much point to exams like it when you have people showing you how to do the problems on the exam.

The point of the exam is to give you problems to solve that you've never seen before and therefore extrapolate your ability to solve OTHER problems you've never seen before, because it's about your ability, not your knowledge. Curie doesn't help with your ability - it helps with your knowledge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

It actually is that hard. You can't force other people to refrain from prepping. Even if the test is supposed to be secure, people will find a way to prep. Your only choices are
1. Bury your head in the sand and keep insisting that people just shouldn't prep. Wring your hands when half of them ignore you and prep anyway.
2. Help everyone prep, so everyone is on a more equal footing. Recognize that the absolute scores are not valid, but the scores relative to the other preppers are useful.
3. Eliminate standardized testing and instead rely on more subjective, more easily gamed, and/or more random selection criteria.

Option 2 is the best to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APA explains it somewhat here:
https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/test-security-faq
The reproduction and inclusion of copyrighted test items in scholarly and scientific publications and presentations might not only be a copyright violation but may also undermine test security by potentially placing test items in the public domain, making test takers’ pre-knowledge of test items a major threat to the utility of an instrument. Indeed, it would seem that this concern should not be limited to only copyrighted measures but to any and all tests whose validity would be compromised if test takers had pre-knowledge and could thus "practice" the items.

We are agreed that it is unethical to wrongly obtain the test questions in advance. That does not mean that all preparation is therefore unethical.

Literally no one said that “all preparation is wrong”.

You’ve beat that strawman to death.

Selective outrage, of course. If my kid prepares it is fine. If my righteous indignation can stop the other kid (specifically from a certain race who is walloping my kid), from preparing to make it easier for my kid, I will do that.

Why are you bringing race into it?

I don’t think any parents should prep their kids for cogat or use prior questions for TJ.

That’s why we didn’t do either for our kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

The very idea of tests you shouldn't prep for is absurd - especially when the test is a determinant of admission to a selective school. Who gets to decide when we should or shouldn't prep, and on what grounds?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

It actually is that hard. You can't force other people to refrain from prepping. Even if the test is supposed to be secure, people will find a way to prep. Your only choices are
1. Bury your head in the sand and keep insisting that people just shouldn't prep. Wring your hands when half of them ignore you and prep anyway.
2. Help everyone prep, so everyone is on a more equal footing. Recognize that the absolute scores are not valid, but the scores relative to the other preppers are useful.
3. Eliminate standardized testing and instead rely on more subjective, more easily gamed, and/or more random selection criteria.

Option 2 is the best to me.

So you'd provide any student who requests it Curie level prep? Or by help everyone do you mean give the poor kids a couple of work books and an hour or two with an underpaid tutor who doesn't actually understand the test?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

It actually is that hard. You can't force other people to refrain from prepping. Even if the test is supposed to be secure, people will find a way to prep. Your only choices are
1. Bury your head in the sand and keep insisting that people just shouldn't prep. Wring your hands when half of them ignore you and prep anyway.
2. Help everyone prep, so everyone is on a more equal footing. Recognize that the absolute scores are not valid, but the scores relative to the other preppers are useful.
3. Eliminate standardized testing and instead rely on more subjective, more easily gamed, and/or more random selection criteria.

Option 2 is the best to me.

Anonymous wrote:It never ceases to amaze me how many people think that it's a good idea for a school to have only one type of kid within its walls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.

It actually is that hard. You can't force other people to refrain from prepping. Even if the test is supposed to be secure, people will find a way to prep. Your only choices are
1. Bury your head in the sand and keep insisting that people just shouldn't prep. Wring your hands when half of them ignore you and prep anyway.
2. Help everyone prep, so everyone is on a more equal footing. Recognize that the absolute scores are not valid, but the scores relative to the other preppers are useful.
3. Eliminate standardized testing and instead rely on more subjective, more easily gamed, and/or more random selection criteria.

Option 2 is the best to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the same logic, it's also unfair that some kids have higher IQ than others. Eventually the only solution that can make you satisfied is to make TJ admission a lottery.

Better nobody studies and nobody works. We all stay at home waiting for the god send us food. As long we study and work, there will be differences. Somebody who's smarter and works harder will have a better performance and therefore it is unfair.

No. Just don’t prep for certain tests that you shouldn’t prep for.

It’s not that hard.