<p>"For another example of administrative stupidity - <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/0...n.ap/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/0...n.ap/index.html</a>"</p>
<p>I'm just enraged.... that is TERRIBLE!</p>
<p>oh my goodness - the blood pressures are sky high on this thread! we could go on for days with this anecdotal evidence of 'admin idiocy' -and you could probably make a case for it in several areas at any school in the nation....but none of this applies to the OP....she put herself above the posted and/or announced rule...seriously doubt that there was a footnote that said 'this rule applies to everyone, but you, Honey....'</p>
<p>Rules are rules are rules - the 'illegal' angle is a bit out of left field - she made a conscious choice to disregard - that's certainly her choice.....but no whining or laying blame elsewhere when her decision comes back to bite her...blame goes directly to the OP's friend....now she faces the consequences and maybe uses that high achieving brain a little more effectively next time.</p>
<p><<i think="" one="" concern="" about="" cell="" phones="" now="" is="" that="" photos="" of="" the="" tests="" can="" be="" taken="" by="" those="" little="" digital="" cameras="" within="" them.="">></i></p><i think="" one="" concern="" about="" cell="" phones="" now="" is="" that="" photos="" of="" the="" tests="" can="" be="" taken="" by="" those="" little="" digital="" cameras="" within="" them.="">
<p>Ok, you mean like Get Smart. I doubt that any cell phone camera has the capacity to take a high enough resolution photo of a test paper. But if a student tried to do that, that is cheating. Having your cell phone ring is not cheating.</p>
</i>
<p>Having your cell phone sitting in ur pocket turned off is not cheating either.</p>
<p><<as far="" as="" getting="" days="" off="" for="" participating="" in="" a="" "school"="" event,="" if="" you="" know="" ahead="" of="" time="" the="" consequences,="" then="" student="" was="" making="" an="" informed="" decision.="" do="" this,="" this="" is="" how="" we="" deal="" with="" it.="">></as></p>
<p>You make it sound like they are doing something wrong. What they are doing is representing their school in a positive manner in an academic competition. There should be no adverse consequences. In fact, they should be rewarded. It's ridiculous to penalize a student for taking part in an academic pursuit that not only benefits them but also the school's reputation.</p>
<p><<remember, schools="" get="" money="" (public="" anyway)="" based="" on="" enrollment="" each="" day.="" teachers="" have="" to="" give="" tests="" and="" make="" accomadations="" for="" missing="" kids.="">></remember,></p>
<p>They should make accomodations for kids who are participating in positive activities. And attendance at an academic event outside of the school building should be counted as a day in school. In fact, for state funding purposes, my bet is that it is. I know our senior trip days count as school days. So, there is no reason whatsoever why a day spent at an academic competition can't be counted as a school day. Except administrative incompetence and/or apathy and/or laziness.</p>
<p>ummm... wow i didn't htink it'd get this out of hand....</p>
<p>"I fully acknowledge the fact that I broke ETS's rules. So what? It doesn't make me a "dishonest" person."</p>
<p>No, it just makes you a person who assumes that the rules shouldn't apply to him/her. Whether or not you think the rule is stupid, it was definitely implemented for good reason. Fact is, an alarming and unacceptably growing trend was starting to develope: that of kids using cell phones and pagers to receive or provide an unfair advantage during standardized testing. </p>
<p>How are test administrators and proctors to know which of these O-so-smart kids are honest and above reproach, and which ones are willing to cheat in order to ensure a high score? Collegeboard testing is a high stakes game. The results very often mean the difference between an admissions acceptance and an admissions rejection. </p>
<p>Most of us wouldn't dream of stealing from a department store, but the anti-theft tags and video surveillance are in place because some people (too many, as a matter of fact) have no scruples about taking things they aren't willing or able to pay for. Therefore, even those of us who are honest and above board, have to deal with the inconvenience and breach of our privacy caused by the store's anti-theft precautions.</p>
<p>In the case of the OP's friend, she gambled with disregarding the No Cell rule, and now has to scramble to explain her actions. That's life. But the consequences of her decision to disregard the rules, whatever they may turn out to be, will not be the fault of the proctor, or the testing service.</p>
<p>This is the offical AP=collegeboard page regarding AP security. Its pretty clear. What Collegeboard-Proctor-ETS decide to do is clear, IF student disregarded agreement they signed. But, there could be wiggle room. </p>
<p>Hope that helps.</p>
<p>It does say NO cell phones, pagers, pdas, in test room. It also says if you receive help from banned items. Help - even the APPEARENCE of use of banned items seems to be enought. But, again, it depends if proctor bothers to report and how they report it. Collegeboard seems pretty strict on what they will do- through out test, etc, but it depends on what they are presented with.</p>
<p>Lesson learned- as annoying as it is, rules is rules...</p>
<p>I wonder if anyone has done bad on a test and purposely made up something to get the class to retake the test for his/her benefit.</p>