<p>What has happened to the need of doing a modicum of research before clicking wildly on the keyboard? </p>
<p>Here's what the journalist did:</p>
<p>
[quote]
I wanted to see how I would do, so I got a sample literature exam -- one of 17 subject choices -- from the Princeton Review, which runs test prep courses for high school students.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Accordingly, should she not use her experience to ascertain the value of the test she took instead of judging a product she failed to purchase? In this case, she analyzed the typical garbage-laden test produced by Princeton Review instead of looking at a REAL sample. Most everyone who has looked at the synthetic test produced by PR, Kaplan, and their ilk, knows how poorly designed their tests are, and how often they contain errors. Simply stated, those companies do NOT have the benefit of the extensive library of ETS nor the integrity to admit that they produce unverified and unverifiable tests. </p>
<p>All in all, this is nothing but shoddy journalism about the product of a company that hardly represents the true conditions of standardized tests. Mrs. Banks drove a Yugo but is attempting to "sell" us a consumer report of a Mercedes. Bravo!</p>
<p>In other words, a story worthy of the National Enquirer, but quite typical of the analysis of the press of a subject they can't understand--even with 30 years of experience.</p>