<p>the concern is not confiscation.<br>
the concern is the 'search' part of 'search and seizure.'</p>
<p>and since the 'search' is for one express purpose only and the 'searcher' would not be able to use any irrelevant material from said search against the accused, and since the 'searcher' is charged with ensuring test integrity, the search is most certainly legal.</p>
<p>moreover, once suspicion has been piqued, there is an element of eventual discovery (that the information would have been found anyways). and since college board likely has lower evidentiary standards than the us justice system, the technical term for your 'friends' (if this isn't just you pretending to be innocent) is 'screwed up a sensitive area'</p>
<p>And for any other wise-a$$es out there, in the process of finding this information, I ran across several other orgnaizations that some of you might care about who DO take this sort of behavior even more seriously:
1) National Merit Scholarship Corporation, who gets a copy of Student Irregularity Reports and then decides if the student ought to be continued to be under consideration for a NM Scholarship;
2) ETS in connection with TOEFL administration;
3) ETS in connection with LSAT administration (and they state they WILL report the reason for an invalidated score to every law school to which you apply);
4) ETS in connection with teacher certification (and they also state they will report to all states and school systems to which you want to have praxis/certification exams sent.</p>
<p>'bloody' is an idiomatic tendency. can be used by anyone who reads harry potter. spelling is a behaviour that is much more ingrained and thus more indicative.</p>
<p>but i suppose you could have someone who just uses 'proper' spellings even though they don't speak her majesty's tongue.</p>
<p>quittddqq that was a rlly dumb comment. of course the people who received the text and looked at it should be penalized. They werent supposed to have their phone out in the first place, even if it was during a break</p>
<p>collegeboard officials can tell the schools whatever they want. And if you want to sue them, they'll just go under the identidy of "outside work" as in under the identidy of a random citzen reporting you and not under collegeboard. Don't cheat next time.</p>
<p>haha ok man. Whoever has the guts to sue ETS i honor them tremendously. They prob have like 5000 lawyers representing them and they got a #$%@ load of money</p>
<p>or...pretend he has a disease where he believes everything he is told. That way he can sue ETS for putting a controversial essay, which directly advocated cheating in the quote.</p>
<p>In a setting such as this, administrators have the right to search without a warrant if "reasonable suspicion" exists. A phone hidden a bathroom at a test where phones are prohibited definitely qualifies as "reasonable suspicion". This was ruled on by the supreme court years ago.</p>
<p>CB is known for vigorously defending itself in cases where folks aren't happy with scores, etc. -- they have the exams' integrity to defend, and courts have given CB pretty wide latitude in that regard.</p>
<p>Hey plz i am facing the same problem nw i got caught in December trial in the bathroom with cell phone contains a msg for Maths grid in section , all my scores are all locked down . i know this incident happened with ur friends long ago but i don’t really what is gonna happen :s the manager of investigation and secure test material is contacting me and all what he is doing is asking me about who is the sender . he doesn’t inform me about what will happend</p>