<p>The Wall Street Journal reported last week that palm scanning technology will be used to verify the identity of GMAT test-takers and to prevent "proxy" test taking by ringers.</p>
<p>It has been a rough PR month for the GMAT. Earlier this month, a test prep firm, Scoretop, was shut down after they were sued by GMAC, the GMAT creators, for distributing live test questions. The firm's data storage was seized to identify their customers.</p>
<p>Here's a Business Week interview with Peg Jöbst of the Graduate Management Admission Council:</p>
<p>Our civil liberties are vanishing and its almost funny that its the smart people who give them up first. Information is evil and now you need to give up identifying information to succeed in life. I find it amazing that people would give into this,</p>
<p>Next we well all have chips in us and be slaves. Its only time.</p>
<p>"Are prospective business school students more likely to cheat than, say, prospective medical school students??"</p>
<p>my daughter was finger printed after each section of the MCATs this year. had to have passport with her(maybe some other id was ok too) and wasn't allowed a sweater in testing room. was startled by the security measures. maybe GMAT just catching up</p>
<p>At least the firm wasn't grilled for distributing previous test questions. To me, once you've taken the test, you've a right to regurgitate the intellectual material you have digested. To forbid otherwise would be a repressive restriction on freedom of thought.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Next we well all have chips in us and be slaves. Its only time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you want to be an MBA, you should not go against "the man". You have to be one with "the man" and understand that MBAs are one of the primary beneficiaries of these chips and the subsequent slave labor that is derived from them.</p>
<p>Can you sign a contract that also makes you renounce your right to the fourteenth amendment, fifth amendment, or hell, sign a contract that legitimises your slavery? I don't think so. Freedom of thought is unconditional.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you want to be an MBA, you should not go against "the man". You have to be one with "the man" and understand that MBAs are one of the primary beneficiaries of these chips and the subsequent slave labor that is derived from them.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My primary interest in economics and business is actually because I've fallen in love with marginal analysis and the Austrian School of Economics as ways to solve societal problems. So maybe "one with the counter-man".</p>
<p>
[quote]
GMAC is limiting its investigation to those individuals who a) posted GMAT questions they saw on their GMAT exam
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Gahh, just what I detest. </p>
<p>If a problem really piqued you, you should have the intellectual right (as a person who is capable of thinking) to discuss it. You can't just tell someone to delete the question from his or her brain.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Can you sign a contract that also makes you renounce your right to the fourteenth amendment, fifth amendment, or hell, sign a contract that legitimises your slavery? I don't think so. Freedom of thought is unconditional.
[/quote]
"Freedom of thought" is a red herring. It simply comes down to agreeing to not discuss problems for the sake of keeping things equitable.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Gahh, just what I detest. </p>
<p>If a problem really piqued you, you should have the intellectual right (as a person who is capable of thinking) to discuss it. You can't just tell someone to delete the question from his or her brain.
[/quote]
No, but you should be able to tell someone to stop sharing the questions on a test with individuals that have not yet taken it -- and are looking to gain a material and unfair advantage. It's really not that hard to understand. No need to "delete the question from (your) brain"... just keep it to yourself!<br>
If you really feel a GMAT question is profound enough to discuss it for intellectual purposes (yeah right), there are many other places to do so than a website that 99% of subscribers use for the superficial reason of maximizing their score.
Twisting intellectual/academic freedom and freedom of speech/thought as a blanket end-all, be-all is a total cop-out.</p>
<p>If I wanted to be a doctor, and I grew up wanting to be a doctor and now the mcat makes you give a fingerprint. How many students and potential doctors will be turned away.</p>
<p>I certainly would never willingly give my fingerprint.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It simply comes down to agreeing to not discuss problems for the sake of keeping things equitable.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In my birth country, the government simply released new exams every year. Failing to generate new test questions is a cop-out. Recycling test questions is a cop-out. </p>
<p>
[quote]
there are many other places to do so than a website that 99% of subscribers use for the superficial reason of maximizing their score.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well at least with my experience with taking the SATs, there would be always a question or two that really interested me, but damn, CC policy wouldn't allow us to discuss it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No need to "delete the question from (your) brain"... just keep it to yourself!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It is well-accepted in political science, I think, that safeguarding the right to express a thought is key to safeguarding the right to thought itself.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In my birth country, the government simply released new exams every year. Failing to generate new test questions is a cop-out. Recycling test questions is a cop-out.
[/quote]
Do you know how time/resource intensive it is to produce quality questions that are on these standardized tests? It's not surprising why new test questions aren't introduced on a yearly basis.
Besides, following your misguided rationale, testing companies would have to recycle new questions after every single test, since an exam is essentially tainted after it is given out. Does it make sense to generate new test questions XYZ times a year for the sake of the .5% of test-takers that desire the freedom to discuss (for intellectual purposes only, of course) MAYBE one or two questions they feel are profound?</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is well-accepted in political science, I think, that safeguarding the right to express a thought is key to safeguarding the right to thought itself.
[/quote]
Spare me. This is hardly a political science or civil liberties debate -- neither are relevant. Nobody is interested in controlling your thoughts or memories. They are simply trying to prevent test-takers from gaining an unfair advantage by getting the answers beforehand. How hard is that to understand?</p>
<p>Yes they are relevant because this is an issue that has come up personally not for the GMAT (alas I am not there yet) but for other standardised tests.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They are simply trying to prevent test-takers from gaining an unfair advantage by getting the answers beforehand.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The company could do its job and simply generate new questions. It's not that hard. Cambridge and Singapore do it every year for the O and A levels. Maybe schools should look into a new testing company that will actually do its job.</p>
<p>That they recycle the questions means that any "unfair advantage" gained is entirely the fault of the company for BEING LAZY AND SHIRKING THEIR DUTY. Not mine. Why should I be prevented from thinking and sharing my thoughts simply because the company's test designers can't be bothered to think?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The company could do its job and simply generate new questions. It's not that hard. Cambridge and Singapore do it every year for the O and A levels. Maybe schools should look into a new testing company that will actually do its job.</p>
<p>That they recycle the questions means that any "unfair advantage" gained is entirely the fault of the company for BEING LAZY AND SHIRKING THEIR DUTY. Not mine.
[/quote]
My previous post already addresses this. Testing companies would have to recycle new questions after every single test -- not only once a year -- since an exam is essentially tainted as soon as it is released. To truly be able to prevent unfair advantage and enable a miniscule percentage of test-takers to MAYBE discuss ONE or TWO questions for intellectual purposes, they would have to be generating entirely new tests on a daily basis. That tests like the GMAT are given multiple times a day only compounds the problem.
I would argue that if one cannot exercise just a little bit of discretion to limit their discussion of test questions with individuals that won't benefit materially (read: non test-takers) as opposed to on specialized websites such as Scoretop... it is they who are being lazy and shirking their duty.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why should I be prevented from thinking and sharing my thoughts simply because the company's test designers can't be bothered to think?
[/quote]
They have thought about it -- on a much grander scale. Why should test writing companies spend extra millions upon millions of dollars to develop brand new exams every single day just for the POSSIBILITY that a couple of people like you will discuss a question or two?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.studentoffortune.com/?Frawst" alt="StudentofFortune.com: Get Answers To Your Questions. Get Paid for Helping Others.">StudentofFortune.com</a><br><b>Get answers to your questions.<br>Get paid for helping others.</b></p>
<p>Its nice to see so many liberty minded people in this thread. For anyone who wants to know more about this gross attack on our civil liberties, I recommend reading "Constitutional Chaos: What happens when the government breaks it own laws", and "A Nation of Sheep" both by former New Jersey Superior Court Justice and current senior Fox News judicial analyst (I know how it sounds, but he's one of the few good guys at fox) Andrew Napolitano.</p>
<p>Calicartel: Again, Cambridge (that mind you, administers exams for the entire British Commonwealth) does it without complaint, and so does Singapore. Only in America do testmakers expect to get away with recycling test questions AND charging super-high test fees at the same time.</p>
