Now who’s deflecting from the main issue? As stated in my previous posts, I acknowledge the fact that there is plenty of cheating taking place in Korea, but what I wanted to know is why OP had made up a false rumor about the January 24 exam being a repeat of the June 2014 domestic exam and more importantly, why she had claimed that “Korean” academies were distributing this particular exam based purely on hearsay.
- The rumor that June 2014 domestic = Jan 2014 International is false.
- That I heard the rumor is not false,
- and that some Korean academies actually distributed the particular exam is not false either.
I am glad that such schools that guaranteed a high score based on a false prediction will be skewered by the parents and students who indeed bought the tests.
Its fascinating how quickly some an identify which version of the test was used. Just sayin’.
Yeah we know that most Koreans prepare hard for this test, but We can’t do anything about it. Just report any suspicious of cheating.
@ConcernedK
So what you’re saying is that many Korean academies actually had the June 2014 domestic exam and were predicting that it would come out on the January 24th international exam (and that many parents and students even bought this particular exam), but were either wrong in their “false prediction” or that because of your vigilance in alerting the College Board, they suddenly decided to change exams and issue the October 2012 international exam instead?
I mean, I’m going to stop right here, because without my even needing to say so, your claims are beginning to sound even more ridiculous and contradictory. Anyhow, sorry for bothering you and have a good night everybody.
@AlfredoKim 1. not “many” but “some,” including the one run by one of my college friend’s brother.
- Usually the cram schools predict that one test is likely to be recycled, and give students a couple other unreleased tests in order of probability.
- What I can tell you based on personal experience is that a handful of other cram schools MAY have given students not only 2014 June International but also 2012 Oct international tests beforehand.
I’d like to stop here also because I do not want to be labeled as some inflammatory demagogue. If you have any questions about how some students cheat, please pm me any time.
The original post has lost its validity, but here are what I can tell you
- The rumor that June 2014 domestic = Jan 2014 International is false. (since CB did not have enough time to change the international test)
- That I heard the rumor is not false,
- And that some Korean academies actually distributed the particular exam is not false either.
- Usually the cram schools predict that one test is likely to be recycled, and give students a couple other unreleased tests in order of probability.
- A handful of other cram schools MAY have given students not only 2014 June International but also 2012 Oct international tests beforehand.
just as in
2006 May (Hanyoung foreign language school lost its qualification as a test center as a result)
2007 Jan (all the scores cancelled)
2009 May (two college students stole the test sheets and ran away)
2010 Jan (A teacher messaged his students the answers from Thailand, using the time difference)
2013 May (SAT test cancelled)
2014 Oct (Cheating reported and confirmed; score delayed)
2014 Nov (cheating reported and confirmed by college board; score delayed)
P.S. it is unusual but not impossible for a cram school to predict which test will be recycled and then fail. The school in the vicinity of where I teach asked students for roughly $10,000, convinced that it could predict the 2014 October test in Korea. When the prediction failed some parents claimed a tuition refund.
Anyone read TCB’s response to the WaPo article?
@jym626 I read the article but not TCB’s response. It wouldn’t surprise me if TCB trivialized the scandal.
Actually is was a canned statement released in December
There is no scandal. Isn’t that the point of the last few pages of this thread?
The coverage by the Washington Post’s Valerie Strauss (not a reporter but an “education blogger” who normally addresses such topics as whether kindergarteners should have longer naps) has been pretty pathetic. Since October, Strauss has been serving as the mouthpiece of anti-standardized-testing crusader Bob Schieffer, an opportunist who has relished using these Asian cheating allegations to advance his own extreme anti-testing agenda. For months, Strauss has been parroting Schaeffer’s claims as though he were an expert on cheating in China and Korea, even Schaeffer lives in New England and doesn’t speak or read any Asian languages.
Strauss has made plenty of mistakes herself, getting wrong some pretty basic facts about the SAT and about East Asia.
This time, however, it is Schaeffer who really stepped in it, making specific, unsubstantiated claims that seem very improbable in hindsight. If you don’t know what I mean, look at earlier posts in this thread. Incidentally, the quotes about the June 2014 test are also still up on Schaeffer’s own website (Google “FairTest”), though one suspects he’ll soon go into cover-up mode and take them down before they cause further embarrassment.
I’ve written more about the Schaeffer-Strauss duo elsewhere on College Confidential, so I’ll just put a link to the other thread here rather than go into much more depth here:
Let me say this, though: I know some posters are going to respond with, “So are you saying cheating doesn’t happen?” or “Are you saying cheating is okay?” That simply seems to be the way discourse works in these threads, so let me be clear: yes, cheating does happen, and no, it is not okay. But none of that excuses people like Schaeffer and Strauss who deliberately and dishonestly stir up trouble in order to advance their own agendas–to be clear, Schaeffer opposes all standardized tests on principle and is simply fanatically driven to destroy the SAT.
Ya gotta love it when “new” posters join just to try to convince us that the sky isn’t blue (its an analogy folks–not an invitation to launch into that discussion).
I don’t follow the analogy.
My post specifically anticipated the kind of response you have made here and thus took care to say, “cheating does happen.” Since I have unambiguously conceded that cheating does happen, what obvious truth (i.e., the sky is blue) are you accusing me of denying?
Or am I simply wasting time trying to engage you? Your post seems designed to draw attention away from substance and to focus it instead on personal motives ("‘new’ posters," etc.). That sort of strategy might be effective rhetorically, if your goal is simply to perceive yourself–or to be perceived by others–as “winning” an argument, but it’s entirely counterproductive if your goal is to reach agreement, truth, etc.
Oh hogwash. You must be new and clairvoyant. What a talent.
@jym626 What’s with the snipe remarks towards us so-called “new” posters." For some reason, you seem to think that with your 30-thousand something posts on here, you have some sense of entitlement, although one must wonder whether 30 thousand something posts on this forum is really deserving of any type of entitlement to anything at all. I just wanted to correct the OP on what was obviously a grossly mistaken and unsubstantiated rumor that besmirched many innocent and hard-working Korean teachers and students, and you basically retort that it’s something of a well-known fact that Koreans cheat. I mean, c’mon, is that really fair? I’m not trying to be smart with you or start some sort of argument. Just speaking my mind on what is obviously discriminatory and biased towards one particular race (I assume you’re not Korean).
This argument gets old, and pointless. You may try to change the subject all you want to try to sweep the cheating scandal under the rug and convince yourself its not real. Good day to you.
And clearly you have no interest in actually discussing this topic and understanding it better.
I’m guessing you are neither from nor in East Asia, so let me clue you in to some basic facts of which you may not be aware.
In mainland China, the SAT is offered only at a small number of international schools. By law, those schools generally may enroll only students with foreign passports. As a result, Chinese nationals who wish to take the SAT generally must travel to do so. Many choose to go to Hong Kong, where the AsiaWorld-Expo Center alone can accommodate 10,000 or so students, most of whom are usually mainlanders.
In October 2014, however, something curious happened. No one–other than ETS, I suppose–quite knows why, but the SAT was not offered in Hong Kong on the official October 11 test date. A makeup was scheduled for October 25, but many students considered that date too late for their college applications. As a result, on October 11, 10,000+ mainland Chinese students who would otherwise have taken the SAT in Hong Kong instead dispersed across Southeast Asia.
Here is where some knowledge of the region is helpful. Many countries in Southeast Asia have an ethnic Chinese minority that exercises disproportionate power in the economy and/or government. (This minority is sometimes referred to as a “Chinese business elite.”) Many countries in Southeast Asia have a history of violence toward that ethnic Chinese minority–Google “anti-Chinese violence Indonesia,” for a start. For this reason, many Chinese students and families were apprehensive about traveling to Southeast Asia (aside from friendly Singapore, where spaces filled up very quickly), but they did so anyway; they had little choice.
Shortly after the October 11 test, reports started appearing from all over Southeast Asia that visiting Chinese students had cheated in large numbers. How to explain these reports? Surely some Chinese out of the 10,000+ had cheated, but had there really been more cheating than usual? Or had proctors in Southeast Asia applied different standards than proctors in Hong Kong? Or had the students been victims, to any extent, of the region’s anti-Chinese bias?
These are the sorts of questions that a true reporter, knowledgeable about both East Asia and the SAT, would have asked. Unfortunately, as already mentioned, Strauss and Schaeffer are not reporters, and they know nothing about East Asia. (Strauss’s coverage shows no sign she even knew about the October test cancellation in Hong Kong, a key piece of information for anyone trying to try to make sense of what happened on the October test.) Instead, they are opportunistic advocates and ideologues, who saw in these rumors of Chinese cheating an opportunity to advance their own domestic agendas–the defeat of Common Core, No Child Left Behind, or whatever else. The allegations became a weapon with which to attack the entire testing industry, and as anti-testing advocates, they therefore had every reason to keep the allegations alive.
Meanwhile, real students suffered. Most Asian students would not know how to go about cheating even if they wanted to, but huge numbers saw their scores delayed as application deadlines past.
Given these real-world results for real human beings, I think it is more than reasonable to question Strauss and Schaeffer’s agendas and to wonder–quite openly, in light of what has been revealed, both in this thread and elsewhere, about Schaeffer and yesterday’s test–whether they didn’t simply make things up to advance their own goals. Please, @gym626 and anyone else who is interested–go back and review Strauss’s coverage of these various “cheating scandals” with a skeptical eye, and ask yourselves, fairly, whether she provides any evidence at all, beyond the say-so of Bob Schaeffer, an anti-testing crusader with no knowledge of East Asia?
Now, @jym626, if you have some reasoned retort, I will be happy to read it and to reply tomorrow (it’s quite late here in Asia), but if you weren’t aware of the facts laid out above, you might wish to reconsider whether you are really qualified to discuss these issues, before you simply post another snide one-liner.
You make a lot of assumptions that are unfounded. So no, not interested in “engaging”. Feel free to read or participate in the many other threads on his topic. Maybe someone else will bite.
You sound like some guy making cracks to a buddy in a bar. If you think that schtick is effective among educated people having a real discussion, you are rather sadly mistaken.
Again, if you decide you are interested in doing more than cracking wise, I’ll be back on tomorrow.