<p>rightwing you should change your name right now cause any good conservative would never call for the government to run an industry when the market is always more efficient. I think you should change your name to left wing my socialist friend.</p>
<p>AcceptedtoCollegeAlready, perhaps you'd like to review the "latest", "updated" comprehensive social profile published by the UN and other major news sources on China. Don't tell me that you've just read the State Department's "everybody-else-sucks-since-I'm-the-best" Report on human rights.</p>
<p>The marque of liberalists is that they are against any kind of structure, any form of standard, while offering nothing as alternatives. If they are allowed to run any of our institutions, there will be no institutions. Standardlessness, baselessness, and free-for-all's. Young minds tend to take fancy at such things. Lucky for us, most of us do grow out of it.</p>
<p>Only an OP with so many content errors could ever have generated such an outpouring of support for an organization such as CB.</p>
<p>"College board is not-for-profit, it isn't not-for-revenue"</p>
<p>Look out people, we got a lawyer on our hands here!
Are you sh!!tting me? The collegeboard is DEFINITELY in the business of making money by any means necessary, no matter who they have to shove their corporate dick into!</p>
<p>They nicely complement the government's FAFSA nicely with their own largely used "CSS Profile" that costs 20 bucks a pop! Oh wait, unless you buy their new book on the Profile in stores now... then you get a reduced fee. Now what would be the point of that tagline? Oh yeah, ADVERTISING and CASH GRABBING. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the point of filing for financial aid to REDUCE THE COST OF COLLEGE?</p>
<p>The costs of AP tests are just hilarious, and I'm sure collegeboard had a hand in the popular ranking high schools by number of AP tests taken. Note: not by scores :) how odd....</p>
<p>some previous idiot poster: "but they have waivers for poor people"
Yeah, they only give these to the absolutely destatute who they know physically don't have the money to donate to collegeboard so might as well make a big show of it by giving them 15 cents worth of papers. Guess what: Pepsi gives out free 20 oz. bottles to all classes of society, I guess they are non-for-profit charity organization. :D</p>
<p>Everything's a godd@mn fee at college board. Sending scores, registering this, the nonsensical late fees.... collegeboard has money coming out the a$$ and if you look at their costs there's a gigantic piece of the pie that's left over. I don't care if the money isn't going directly to shareholders or watever legal loophole their team of lawyers has surely figured out but the only thing the greedy collegeboard cares about is PROFITS.</p>
<p>aaron, the market is most efficient? Yeah, when there are competing companies, you retarded economics flunkie! The collegeboard can simply double the costs of AP tests for next year, and what are you going to do about it? Cry about it then? THEY ALREADY HAVE BOTH HANDS IN YOUR POCKETS AND A MONEY-HORNY DICK UP UR A$$.</p>
<p>That's my two cents.</p>
<p>I agree, I would much rather prefer an IQ test over the SATs.</p>
<p>Im sick of kids just studying non stop and having no lives so they can do better than theyre supposed to on tests. annoying.</p>
<p>I know I'm falling into a trap by continuing this OT discussion, but certain provocations demand a response.</p>
<p>edvest, try climbing outside of your pundit-induced stupor and experiencing the real world. Liberalism, in the sense in which that word is properly applied in the US, consists of two basic principles:</p>
<p>1: Live and let live. Don't poke your head into the private affairs of others.</p>
<p>2: Justice as fairness. Everyone is entitled to a certain minimum level of services, including education, health care and so on. This doesn't mean that liberals are oppose to a market economy (virtually all mainstream Democrats support the idea, and it's not without reason that the economy over the past century has done far better under Democratic presidents than Republican ones), but that we support government intervention when either the general welfare or a basic human sense of decency demand it.</p>
<p>None of this has much to do with the OPs point, of course. The reason that a Fed-run College Board isn't a good idea is that the existing one is doing an acceptable job, not that we should have some boogeyman fear of government in general.</p>
<p>"in the sense that poorer families (more often black than white) may not "conclude" that a CUP goes on a SAUCER, since saucers are usually asssociated with classier places."</p>
<p>Save me...thats dumb. Whether ur rich or poor, noble born or not, everyone knows that. Next ull tell me, "Its unfair to make references to rain and snow as people living in the Sahara wont know what it is..."
Thats dumb, ur expected a certain level of General knowledge....</p>
<p>and "I agree, I would much rather prefer an IQ test over the SATs." That means, a genius 130+ IQ who is a rich lazy bum who cant do nething himself will get into HYPSM while a less intelligent but talented and hardworking person will suffer.</p>
<p>Yes, the standards need to be raised as the SAT math is what I did in Grade 7 - 8 in India and is unbelievably simple. </p>
<p>The fact that EC's and stuff are considered and teacher recs will reveal ur personality and shows that morons who slog for decades for a cobveted SAT score arent the guys who r gonna get in</p>
<p>What really hits me as scary is the fact millions took the October SAT, yet the whole tests got corrected due to only 2 kids being stubborn about test corrections. And with that, CB could have easily given the 2 kids their points, seen they messed up thousands of scores, and done nothing about those scores unlessed pushed to due to on a case-by-case basis!</p>
<p>Antarius you hit on an amazing point. I also hate this argument about "Oh I'm poor, sympathize and pity me." I have seen at least 4 kids from my school write an essay on that or how poor their parents were when they came to america, and guess what all of them got deferred or rejected. Colleges don't want to hear you moan and groan, they want your struggle and experience. America is the land of oppurtunity, if you didn't have an oppurtunity and you were poor, that's a different thing. My parents came from India and I remember we used to live in $300 apartments and my mother could only afford to buy one milk bottle from the store every week. Yet through hard work my parents earned their teachers and doctory degrees. When they came they had a combined salary of less than 20k with 4 kids, and had welfare support. Today, with the help of oppurtunities in America, through an honest mean, they probably make 230k+ with their assets. So please, I'm poor doesn't work, I'm lazy is more like it.</p>
<p>The asian success chain is probably the biggest stone in the economic argument of AA. We are probably poorer than blacks and hispanics, and are all almost first generation immigrants, yet through hard work and the determination to outgrow social bounds we succeed and score higher than any other ethnic group in education</p>
<p>pyroclastic,</p>
<p>ARE YOU THE HIGH INQUISITORIAL DELEGATION HIRED BY THE COLLEGE BOARD OR WHAT? </p>
<p>You seem to know seriously A LOT of insiders' info about our "beloved, fatherly" College Board. As well, you also sound like one of those Internet Police hired by the chinese government, constantly trying to correct and settle down critical views about issues such as college board reform. </p>
<p>Well, you know what, the SATs designed by college board have and will affect every aspect of my life. If there has just been the tinniest mistake made by the test makers, that would certainly create a huge impact on countless students' future. I'm not whining or complaining, but I'm simply asking for open investigation, transparency, and reform from college board. </p>
<p>Lastly, just keep this in mind: "All Roads lead to Rome."
We don't have to go along with College Board or SATs forever, since it's just one of the many Roads that will lead us to our ultimate goal, Rome. There are probably hundreds of thousands of other methods out there in this vast world that could perform the same or even a better job at evaluating the bright minds of our future, and they definitely are something that's worth fighting for.</p>
<p>"My parents came from India and I remember we used to live in $300 apartments and my mother could only afford to buy one milk bottle from the store every week"
Well, im not in that situation much better off and thats why im able to apply to the US altho fin aid is a necessity.</p>
<p>"nternet Police hired by the chinese government" whats with u and attaking communities? Its his right to say what he believes in be it collegeboard or cups and saucers...</p>
<p>Also, yes. the SAT is a route to college. Its like this, there is a cliff and ur on it and opposite cliff has the college. There are two ways across, one the SAT (which is like a bridge) and two airlifting (analogy for those with good hooks). As the airlift option is so rare... u got to use the bridge</p>
<p>Also, if u hate the SAT so much, dont take it. There are many cols who dont need it like Bowdoin college (one example at the top of my head)</p>
<p>Finally, I believe the SAT is an excellent exam. It isnt a pushover...yet isnt summat worth losing 4 years of ur life over. Getting to say a 600+ is easy for a good number of college bound people but pushing to that 800 is still a challenge. Those who detest CB for it, please visit India, china, Korea etc. and see. Spend some time and watch the prep that goes on here and ull wonder whether humans live here or not....</p>
<p>haha sorry i wasn't on later last night. had some hw to do.
as for me changing my name to left wing..
I am conservative on a lot of issues, but sometimes I cross "party lines".. i prefer to think i'm right (in the sense of being correct!) on most of the issues! lol. I'm not socialist, i just thikn that it should be fair.. i mean i'm against AA but there is a whole diff. thread for that.</p>
<p>i didn't list an opinion on whether i thought the questions are baised or not. i simply said that an issue has been raised about it. (i agree, you can't make a test perfect for every single group) </p>
<p>a post earlier stated that the test wasn't created in the 30's, that colleges developed it in the late 19th century.. wrong. 'tis not me that has his facts incorrect. i quote my ap psych book "the modern intelligence testing movement began when the pioneering french psychologist alfred binet began assessing intellectual abilities. when the french govt passed a law requireing all children to attend [elementary] school, teachers soon faced an overwhelming range of individual differences. some children, especially those of a lower socioeconomic class, seemed unable to benefit from the regular school cirriculum and were in need of special needs"
these tests were standardized. in addition, after binet, lewis terman was a professor at stanford (dont get all excited) and he adapted the original version FOR CALI SCHOOLCHILDREN in 1916. (thats early 20th century). he adapted/created what is known as the stanford-binet test. once the US got involved in world war 1, terman worked with govt to determine if recruits were suitable for officer positions. he later worked with govt to test immigrants, and lower test scores w/ immigants led to 1924 law reducing immigration from southern and eastern europe [drastically]. STILL wanna argue motives? here is a quote from lewis terman. he envisioned the use of intelligence tests would "ultimately result in curtailing the reproduction of feeble-mindedness and in the elimination of an enormous amount of CRIME, pauperism, and industrial efficiency."
sounds like a nazi right? makes ya wonder....
the Weschler scale was developed in the early 1930's by david weschler (one of the 'feeble minded' immigrants who got a low score). it was not widely distributed/administered to college students until the 1960's! (it is an aptitude test, not IQ test)</p>
<p>Therefore, i guess we were both wrong? i was closer though.. :)</p>
<p>it may not be worth losing 4 years of your life over, but no matter who gives the test, it's always going to be several years of obsession/worry. the whole college admissions process impacts students even as sophs. i was interested in colleges as a frosh. i wasnt interested in the SAT as a frosh. so it's always going to be a concern.. but what is happening is the CB is banking off of this "fear" or "paranoia obsession" by charging so much money. that is why i think we need to get rid of it, and i proposed the govt begin some role in this.
IF YOU DONT want the government to do anything.. then propose your own solution, and maybe i'll think it better than mine! but you can't deny that there is a problem here and reforms are needed. (wow i scare myself, i kinda sound like a socialist lol)</p>
<p>hey I'm with you man...Collegeboard is a joke.</p>
<p>A very important joke.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, you know what, the SATs designed by college board have and will affect every aspect of my life.
[/quote]
It is sad and depressing at times how much emphasis teenagers put on the whole elite college issue. Speaking as somebody in their 50's, there has been nothing in my own life (as an engineer) to indicate that it matters much where you go to college. I know about Harvard Law and Wharton MBA but that is really about it and that doesn't affect that many people. People on CC seem to either think 1) once they are accepted to an ivy, they can sleep at their desks for the rest of their lives, or 2) if they don't go to an ivy, they will be scrubing toilets. Try to relax a little.</p>
<p>I understand what you're saying about we have too much emphasis on colleges. My dad has told me this too. I know if I don't get into an Ivy, it isn't the end of the world. My rationale though, is that while an education at say, American University is certainly going to be great, there are going to be many more OPPORTUNITIES at say, an Ivy or a school like G'town. Yes it is possible to succeed (in the sense of becoming VERY successful) at a lower tier school. However, it is probably MUCH easier/higher chance at succeeding to a great extent at an ivy or top tier school.
Also, who was the last president/ presidential candidate who did not attend a top tier school/ivy? And what percentage of senators went to an ivy/top tier school? and where did the supreme court justices attend school? (Alito went to Princeton and Yale, Scalia went to Harvard and Georgetown, Roberts went to Harvard, John Paul Stevens went to Northwestern and Uchicago, Kennedy went to Stanford, Souter went to Oxford, Clarence thomas went to yale, Ginsberg went to Columbia, Breyer went to stanford, harvard, and oxford.. and retired justice Oconnor went to stanford. So you can see the reasoning for wanting to go to a top tier school.. few, if any of today's leading politicians went to, say, UCF (still a good school!). and yes, i want to go into politics.</p>
<p>Pyro, My complaint is with people who take pot shots at our institutions and people who go along with them, while not having a clue about better alternatives. Furthermore if such people form the core of our society there will be no government because they are natively against any kind of structures. </p>
<p>I merely want to point out the danger of free fall for young minds which adopt this attitude readily. </p>
<p>"Live and let live". Never any arguement about that. But instead I pose this question: if we are a society of individualists so much so that allegience to one's country is not required, would we still have country ? We will just have tribes, not nation, and along with everything that is great about America. Incidently, I don't know if more people have noticed this, have you recognize it's usually the natives who bad-mouth our government or institutions, foreign-borned citizens who came to America love this country for what it stands for, imperfect it maybe, and work hard everyday to achieve its dreams.</p>
<p>Although the SAT is flawed, I think it is the best way to test everyone because it is uniform.</p>
<p>If colleges relied on individual state tests, that would be completely unfair. Who's test is gonna be harder, Arkansas or Massachusetts?</p>