<p>1) Because your ridiculous accusations that the SAT/ACT is intrinsically evil and the College Board is hell-bent on world domination are just that: ridiculous. It’s been said ad nauseum but how else will adcoms compare two applicants? I don’t care if you hate the SAT. To be quite honest you are wasting your time and intelligence advocating for a bitter end to the College Board and the SAT. Like I said, call the waaaaaambulance.</p>
<p>2) I don’t. I have a low tolerance for people who claim things to be immoral that have no reason to have their morality brought up. </p>
<p>3) That was my first post on this thread. So I don’t see where I’'ve refused to listen. I read all 8 pages; your argument against the SAT, which I’ve listened to, is quite stupid. So it’s not convincing me.</p>
<p>4) I’m not biased. Your argument gets me heated because you are actually trying to say that studying for something is inherently wrong. Which is…you guessed it, stupid.</p>
<p>5) I don’t know why you’re making the argument. Your argument seems like the progeny of a butt-hurt highschooler upset with her SAT score.</p>
<p>6) More pseudo-intelligence. Why are you treating this matter to be such a philosopy-defining argument? This is a stupid argument. The SAT exists and will continue to exist regardless of the “truth.” In reality, it exists to level the playing field. And yes, some men and women will profit from it. Oh well; we’re a capitalist society. Cry about it.</p>
<p>7) Because your ONE, SINGULAR belief that studying for the SAT is immoral is so incredibly twisted and stupid I felt like it had to be addressed.</p>
<p>"Some people on the thread need to call the WAAAAAAAmbulance. </p>
<p>The SAT is like a riddle. You have to solve it. You have to employ all of your problem-solving and critical-thinking to solve it. But you know what? By studying, you’re honing those skills. How dare you even attempt to say that that is immoral. </p>
<p>Say there exists a terribly poor kid in the inner city in Detroit. Say he gets his hands on the Blue Book. I guess he’s destroying the foundations of learning by studying for the SAT. He’s really a less-dignified human being now. </p>
<p>Honestly, if you’re going to cry and moan about the morality of the College Board and the SAT do it somewhere else. I’ve never seen such a stupid point in my entire life."
Sat is a riddle…? I don’t recall that you are suppose to study for a riddle… You are suppose to use your knowledge and critical thinking skill to solve a riddle. </p>
<p>The third paragraph I quoted lack info. </p>
<p>Anyway anyone who’s defending the Sat need to open their minds. You cannot be willing to accept this system: a nonprofit organization with the CEO making load of money while it cost 50 to take a test and at least 11 to send scores to EACH colleges. I wants someone to tell me that those price are reasonable.</p>
<p>Just look at the last several posts. Basically you are all acting like the SAT is the best thing that ever happened to you and when one person get attacked for stating that studying for the Sat is lying or immoral you go on a rampage about how studying isn’t immoral and you argue your points about how studying for a higher scores greater your chances of getting in college while it hurt others because other people can’t study. Don’t give me the online free stuffs because even though this is 2012 not everyone have access to a computer let alone the internet.</p>
<p>Do you read what you say? You’re worse than my five year old nephew.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Morality has to do with everything. I can bring it up in relation to anything. Deal with it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re reading. Not listening. There’s a difference. If you were listening, you’d actually be considering what I’m saying.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are biased. It’s evident by the way you defend the test. You like the test. You believe it is necessary. So you are biased.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sweetheart, I am very happy with my score because it is the score I got. It is not my best but I don’t like tests and I have issues with reading. I refuse to retest. I refuse to spend the money. I took it twice. I’m done.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again with the “my opinion is better than your because I say so”… </p>
<p>We are not a true capitalist society. That’d be a hell with the rich exploiting the poor more than they already do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m the only one who believes it? I know that’s not true. I’ve talked to teachers and guidance counselors who hate the SAT because they know it doesn’t work like they claim. </p>
<p>The ones who defend the SAT adamantly like you have are the ones who haven’t questioned it. The ones who have gone along with the societal norm and do not care about the truth. I refuse to be one of those drones.</p>
<p>---------.The ones who defend the SAT adamantly like you have are the ones who haven’t questioned it. The ones who have gone along with the societal norm and do not care about the truth. I refuse to be one of those drones. <------------------</p>
<p>Funny, if you exchange the Bildenburg group with the SAT you get an Alex Jones argument</p>
<p>Also since we now know that the College Board is the anti-Christ, does that make ACT Incorporated The Messiah and Savior of High school Testing?</p>
<p>ACT is a little better but it’s not much different from SAT. Basically take the SAT get rid of the numerous bathroom breaks and shorten some section and add Science and voila! You got the ACT.</p>
<p>Ethics are everywhere and should be considered regardless of the situation. It is entirely unethical for CB or ACT to restrict studying from official test materials for children at a financial disadvantage. As a nonprofit, especially one who claims they “connect students to college success and opportunities,” it’s simply hard for me to trust the aspect of my application that potentially decides my acceptance to an organization that makes more profit than a for-profit.</p>
<p>It’s ridiculous that an organization with such high esteem and standards for itself and from others can get away with such unethical methods when we as individuals get a punishment for it.</p>
<p>It’s not that it affects the test itself, it just gives me a terrible impression of the organization; it makes me question its integrity as an equal opportunity distributor.</p>
<p>But onto the test: I feel the same way about all standardized testing (and I do very well on standardized tests). It’s simply ridiculous. It’s a bunch of adults who think they know how children and teens really are coming together and building tests that judge their intellect.</p>
<p>It tests the obscurities of every subject in the most impractical conditions–considerably less time than both necessary and usually given in colleges, no access to a computer or the internet (making you rely on your memory of such obscurities), waking up early on a weekend (we all hate it), and finally, the lack of collaboration.</p>
<p>In real-world conditions, and in a lot of colleges, such conditions don’t apply–essays are to be finished at home, you can look stuff up online if you forget it during homework, weekend classes are almost certainly not held in the morning, and you can almost always contact a roommate or friend for help in most situations.</p>
<p>So it’s just impractical. Which is why I don’t like it, along with all other standardized tests. They put you in uncomfortable conditions in which a lot of people are sure to panic and perform poorly.</p>
<p>You are suggesting standardized anarchy. How practical would a bff buddy-system be in effect?</p>
<p>Your complaints are valid, and the test may be slightly out of touch with reality, but this is not a take-home college test. In college, there is an honor code; in high school, it is every man for himself. Are you saying that memory has become obsolete?</p>