liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Badly. Try to get your grammar correct when you are being derisive to others! Well, thank you for correcting me. I didn't know so many people had scored badLy on this test. I didn't expect to offend a lot of people in here as whatever GRE scores I've observed on signatures have been pretty decent Also, how'd you score on the social intelligence portion? This is a pretty rude comment as some people are very intelligent and successful, but poor test-takers. As far as I know, these types of tests are very poor predictors of scholastic and professional success. I think I owe you guys an apology but let me tell you where this came from. I see US citizens with Phy GRE scores of 600-700 get into places like Harvard. My batchmate who has a 990 on the Phy GRE and 1580 on the general GRE got rejects from these places. His academic record is stellar. He's got as many publications, if not more, as all these other people I saw on the phygre.com site who posted about their results. I now open this thread and find people cribbing about the GRE. If at all anybody should be cribbing, its the people who can't afford the insane amounts of money they charge you for the test and for every additional score report. You have no idea about the financial burden it puts on students coming from third world and developing countries. I've spent about half my family's annual income on my applications! So its a little irritating to know that universities there actually have training programs for subject GREs and still have people complaining about not being able to score on the GRE. I completely agree with you when you say that the GRE is not indicative of future scholastic success. I did not claim to be more intelligent than a guy who scores 1000. I was merely commenting on how people are spoonfed, yet are unhappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Btw, my comments about the quant section of the GRE are reserved for the Engg and Science majors who've been doing math all this while. So yes, I simply don't see how the GRE quant can face a serious problem to any of them. I suspect the answer lies in the level of math at high school because most, if not all, of the questions on the quant section are lower in standard than the matriculation math that is done in schools here. Why do you get offended when I state facts? Its not your fault that math is not given a priority in schools. Instead, you have a rich extra curricular tradition which I absolutely appreciate and love. I love the fact that your schools have bands, lots of music and arts going on, etc. Please do not say things like "lets pack up and leave and have this higher intelligence race take over". Do not make it sound like I was trying to make this personal and racial! I agree though that I could've toned it down and I apologize for the selection of words, it was never my intention to demean American students. Please try to look at this objectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feisty Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I didn't have to take a subject test for history--do people feel differently about them? Are they equally ridiculous? They're much more expensive, right? I don't have any excuses for why I did badly on the GRE. I will say that by the time I took it I was not a student and was working 45-50 hours a week in a new city: I wasn't burdened, but my head (and my time!) was certainly elsewhere. The ETS, wtf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illinoisellie Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I didn't have to take a subject test for history--do people feel differently about them? Are they equally ridiculous? They're much more expensive, right? I don't have any excuses for why I did badly on the GRE. I will say that by the time I took it I was not a student and was working 45-50 hours a week in a new city: I wasn't burdened, but my head (and my time!) was certainly elsewhere. The ETS, wtf. I also did quite badly on the GRE (well, mediocre - which in this distinguished forum means badly)). I was told that any thing above a 1200 was decent. I mean, for someone who is an english or math major, I think it would be more of a subject test, but for the rest of us, sheesh!! But I didn't take the psych subject test because I thought it would be a waste of time. And yeah, I wasn't able to apply to a bunch of schools, but at that time I wasn't very well versed in the history of the field. Now I would probably kick butt. :wink: I think they should add a "science" section like in the ACT. ( that was my best scored section on that test) The biggest problem I have with ETS is not only do you have to pay through the nose for taking the test, for the book, and for the class(which i didn't take), but also for copies of test results. I mean, make it $20 for the first copy, then $5 after that or something. jeez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poiuyt Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I was merely commenting on how people are spoonfed, yet are unhappy. Thanks for that heartfelt apology. I don't know if I could have slept tonight without it... Turns out you are not the only one on this forum from a developing country but the rest of us don't seem to be quite as douchey. Good on your family spending half of their income for your apps - some people here were not as lucky. Here's the world's tiniest violin playing just for you. If your "batchmate" had your attitude that might explain why he/she wasn't accepted. Match of personality is quite important for us spoon fed types. :roll: Please try to look at this objectively. And what would "objectively" entail? Responding in kind instead of making light of your ego trip? Implying you are some kind of an idiot for scoring less then me on verbal even though English is my second language? I mean good on you for realizing you went overboard there but don't be surprised that we made fun of you for it. It's better thank ranting and raving against you personally, we are (hopefully in a light heated way) pointing out your ideas on the GRE are misguided. And though you add all these clauses to your comments now, they were not there originally. Most of us worked hard to get our scores, hardly any of us are happy with them and we have to pay ridiculous amounts to share them with schools... We're cranky! Tread lightly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Thanks for that heartfelt apology. I don't know if I could have slept tonight without it... If your "batchmate" had your attitude that might explain why he/she wasn't accepted. Match of personality is quite important for us spoon fed types. :roll: No amount of sarcasm is going to take away the facts. Your dig at my batchmate is also helping you in no way. I'm sorry that the facts are this way but grow up! I was trying to explore what difference there might be in the schooling systems in the two regions of the world so that I could understand why people in some parts of the world in general find the GRE tougher than people in some other parts of the world. Please try to look at this objectively. And what would "objectively" entail? Responding in kind instead of making light of your ego trip? Implying you are some kind of an idiot for scoring less then me on verbal even though English is my second language? Wow,.. you say these scores don't mean anything and then you say I was trying to imply that I was an idiot because I scored less than you on the verbal! They should include a section on logic too from now on to eliminate your types. Also, you have no clue as to what "objectively" means, do you? There's an objective way that exists that can be used to probe social and cultural factors that go into deciding how people generally perform on certain kinds of tests. I guess you are in no mood for a productive discussion.. go on making sarcastic comments if that's what you're good at. In a way, I'm glad that you're good at something or the other. I mean good on you for realizing you went overboard there but don't be surprised that we made fun of you for it. It's better thank ranting and raving against you personally, we are (hopefully in a light heated way) pointing out your ideas on the GRE are misguided. And though you add all these clauses to your comments now, they were not there originally. Most of us worked hard to get our scores, hardly any of us are happy with them and we have to pay ridiculous amounts to share them with schools... We're cranky! Tread lightly... Well, I'm equally cranky and I stand by what I said about the GRE quants. If you're in a science stream, you'd better be good enough to achieve at least a 750 or at the very least a 700 on the quant. If you are unable to achieve that score, it means the level of math that you did at school was probably lower than that in these parts of the world. Why does this observation irk you so much? You talk of attitude, you have one that is equally "bad", if not worse. Which part of the world are you from anyway? Where were you educated all these years? I'm quite intrigued. You classify yourself under "developing world". Btw, so much for your "light hearted" approach. It doesn't hold anymore with this post of yours where you've made personal remarks. You also don't seem to think that calling a person an idiot doesn't fall under "ranting and raving ..personally". Does anybody know of a place we could get some stats from about quant scores, divided regionally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepotato Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Well, according to ETS's website, ~70% of engineering students score 700-800 on the quant section. Another 21% score 600-690. And there is a standard error of measurement of 50 points, not all that precise IMO. (I'm not a math person, maybe you can crunch the numbers yourself.) So you're really not talking about a large group of people who were scoring 600-690 and below the 600 mark, and given that there are only 30 (?) questions and the test is computer-adaptive, I don't understand why it's so puzzling that every single person didn't ace the exam? Source: Interpreting your Scores, ETS. http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.1488512ecfd5b8849a77b13bc3921509/?vgnextoid=e3d52d3631df4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD&vgnextchannel=b72946f1674f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD And I'm sure you know that even if you could compare international test-taker scores to American scores, it would have a selection bias due to the fact that international test-takers have the means and or/interest to leave their home countries and study in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plisar Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 What about the people who cheat on the GRE? I work in engineering admissions and we see this all the time. "780V, 800Q, 2.5AW"...give me a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEClarke85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I was told that any thing above a 1200 was decent. I mean, for someone who is an english or math major, I think it would be more of a subject test, but for the rest of us, sheesh!! But I didn't take the psych subject test because I thought it would be a waste of time. And yeah, I wasn't able to apply to a bunch of schools I cannot speak for Math majors, but the Verbal section of the GRE is ridiculous, even for us English majors. It is asking all test takers to know and be familiar with words that may not have been uttered outside of text-prep for the last 200 or so years. Majoring in English does not prepare you to kick butt on the Verbal section of the GRE at all. The Verbal section focuses on archaic words, their roots, and their meanings. Therefore, someone with a good background in the History of the English Language and/or Linguistics would be better suited for the test than your average English major. The GRE subject test in English is extremely ridiculous. It more or less asks you to be familiar with every published work from Beowulf until about 3 to 6 months ago. It expects test takers to be well versed in novels, memoirs, criticism, poetry, and drama. Preparing for comprehensive exams in English is less demanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poiuyt Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Calm down liszt85. Once again, I was not attacking you personally but your original post which was both insulting and misguided. You can add all kinds of clauses to it after the fact, as you are doing in every additional post, but that doesn't change to one I replied to. I clearly indicated my own snarkiness by "/snark" in my original post. This little guy -> :roll: should have been a tip off too. I do have a clue what objectively means, I was implying you don't by using your reasoning in my response to you original post. In a way, I'm glad that you're good at something or the other. For example, it seems I have quite the better grasp of the English language than you do. Taking my words out of context does not help you prove your point, it makes me more likely to insult you in return, as I just did. Also, pretending I made comments that I didn't make: ...you say these scores don't mean anything... ends this conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 And I'm sure you know that even if you could compare international test-taker scores to American scores, it would have a selection bias due to the fact that international test-takers have the means and or/interest to leave their home countries and study in the US. This is the first sensible comment I've heard in here. You are right about the bias. If you compare International test takers to the Americans, if the results do show higher scores for the internationals, it could be the result of years of tradition where Universities treated home applicants more leniently than the foreign ones. What I'm trying to say here is that people in my college wouldn't score below 750 even on their worst day, with zero preparation. Again, I request the ones who want to make this personal to stay out of this. This is a fact. 95% of the scores that I know of have a 800 on their Quant sections and I know for a fact that people don't prepare for the quant. They however spend quite a bit of time on the verbal section and come up with quite horrible scores. So as valid as the point about bias may be, I don't think its that huge a factor. I would place my bets on the level of math done in high school or core math courses at the undergrad level. Also its unfair to compare students in this college with the rest because the entrance exam that they write to get in to this particular college is written by about 200,000 students and about 4000 are accepted (2% acceptance rate) into 7 institutions with this "brand name". The level of math in this exam is pretty high. So lets not talk of the students here because the math background is obv strong. The remaining Engg Colleges also accept students through rigorous entrance exams which again have decent standards for math. The only people who don't go through these rigorous exams are the rich kids whose parents pay money to the administrative boards of private Engg institutions. What is the criterion employed by Universities there for UG admissions? Do you have to take entrance examinations? If so, what level of math do the Sc and Engg guys have to do in order to pass these exams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhukora Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 This is the first sensible comment I've heard in here. You are right about the bias. If you compare International test takers to the Americans, if the results do show higher scores for the internationals, it could be the result of years of tradition where Universities treated home applicants more leniently than the foreign ones. What I'm trying to say here is that people in my college wouldn't score below 750 even on their worst day, with zero preparation. Selection bias: I do not think it means what you think it means. :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Taking my words out of context does not help you prove your point, it makes me more likely to insult you in return, as I just did. Also, pretending I made comments that I didn't make: ends this conversation. This was a comment that your "spoonfed" group made. If you can identify yourself as part of that group, this holds just because you agree with it in principle. In any case, I sense that I would be able to have a more coherent and fruitful discussion with orangepotato than with you. You still haven't told me which part of the world you come from and where you were educated. If you want to keep that to yourself, its fine. I suspect however that you do not want to divulge that info because it'd explain wh'y your grasp over the language is better than mine, without making assumptions about your intellectual capacity. You also seem to be acting as if your "group" is somehow better than mine (whatever that means) when it comes to language skills and mine's superior to yours when it comes to math skills. I didn't make a claim about skills, I made a claim about better training in math in this part of the world and probably a better all round training in your part of the world. I personally prefer the latter, but I don't think you'll see my point, ever, because you seem adamant on making this an issue of Developing Countries vs USA. For me, its a comparison of two systems, both of which have their respective pros and cons. Grasp over language is no good without a cogent thought process behind it. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lycoris Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Guys - Chill out. You are clearly not communicating well. Neither of you. poiuyt, liszt, I'm looking right at both of you. I think I posted before that I was working as an SAT tutor when I took the GRE. In truth, it's the same test - just with more difficult content (vocab words, math problems, etc) to accommodate the expected four years of additional education. Are the test-taking tips I taught my students helpful? Sure, as long as the test taker's problem isn't test-taking anxiety. The place I found the SAT test-prep stuff most useful was on the writing section, which is almost exactly the same as on the SAT, and is clearly scored the same way (since I got a 6). It's all formula. Seriously. I'm pretty sure I made up the content in at least one of the essays I wrote, but I made it sound plausible and I wrote it in the order and style I knew they wanted. Someone suggested adding a science section. I'm pretty sure there are subject tests in several science disciplines. The thing about the SAT and the GRE general test is that, unlike the ACT, they are NOT testing you on what you know - they are, instead, testing you (or trying to test you) on your innate learning ability. You should, theoretically, be able to get an 800 on the verbal section without knowing every vocab word on it, as long as you know enough of them that you can infer from clues and eliminate incorrect answers. How well does this work in practice? Not very well, obviously, since folks who can afford $1500 for a test-prep course can raise their scores by 100 points or more pretty reliably. I'd like to note that the benefit of the test prep course vs. studying from a book has NOTHING to do with content - it's all about external motivation. If you need to have a weekly person-expecting-you-to-have-studied in order to get your studying done, then maybe the $1500 is worth it. If you're well-disciplined, you can learn everything they have to tell you from a book. You're also, probably, going to be much more successful in graduate school, where you'll have very little structure and very few people checking to make sure you've been staying on task. I hadn't thought about the extra financial burden of the tests (and other admissions costs) on some international applicants. I mean, those fees are obviously pretty hefty even for Americans, but I'm guessing that even upper-middle-class folks in some countries feel the cost a lot more sharply, since class is relative to others in your country, but those fees are adjusted to American incomes (and paid in USD). liszt, most US undergraduate institutions emphasize a liberal arts education, so no, there are not really "entrance exams" - just the SAT or ACT, either of which is accepted at most institutions these days. The system has advantages and disadvantages, but it seems to me that the large number of international students who wish to obtain advanced degrees at US institutions would suggest that we're doing alright at producing new scholars. You know, I understand everyone's objections, but - at the risk of coming under fire - I'd like to suggest that these costs are part of a necessary barrier to entry. There ARE fee waivers available for low-income test-takers and applicants, but for those of us who can, perhaps with some penny-pinching, afford it, the high price of the fees is one of the ways they make sure that we're really serious about what we're doing. In my field, it's pretty standard for a department to receive 500 applications for 10 (or fewer) spots. So, every time I'm applying to a program, adding to the stack of applications the department is going to review, I have to ask myself - is this place worth $100 to me? Is the 2% chance of admittance worth a $100 bet? (That's about the average, when you factor in the cost to send all the various materials and the schools' application fees. Some schools were, obviously, more or less expensive.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Selection bias: I do not think it means what you think it means. :roll: I'll tell you what I think it means. It means that the international students probably put much more soul into the GRE due their extremely high levels of motivation to go to the US for higher studies. His/her statement about means is however wrong. I was just trying to look for a reason as to why international students inculcated this habit of being serious about this examination and why they obsess about high scores on these tests. I said that its probably because of the tradition of many years when American Universities have treated home applicants much more leniently in terms of test scores than the international applicants. What do you think orangepotato meant by "selection bias"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liszt85 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Guys - Chill out. You are clearly not communicating well. Neither of you. poiuyt, liszt, I'm looking right at both of you. I hadn't thought about the extra financial burden of the tests (and other admissions costs) on some international applicants. I mean, those fees are obviously pretty hefty even for Americans, but I'm guessing that even upper-middle-class folks in some countries feel the cost a lot more sharply, since class is relative to others in your country, but those fees are adjusted to American incomes (and paid in USD). liszt, most US undergraduate institutions emphasize a liberal arts education, so no, there are not really "entrance exams" - just the SAT or ACT, either of which is accepted at most institutions these days. The system has advantages and disadvantages, but it seems to me that the large number of international students who wish to obtain advanced degrees at US institutions would suggest that we're doing alright at producing new scholars. Point well taken. This also tells me why quant scores may be higher with lesser effort in this part of the world. Let me however tell you what the perception about American education is in this part of the world. We believe (from experiences of grad students as tutors, etc) that the quality of undergraduate education is probably better at home while there is a HUGE world of difference when it comes to the grad level. US universities outdo our home ones by miles. We go on internships outside, interact with ug students from American universities too. This (ug education in the US universities) however would not make any difference in the long run since the grad education makes up for all of it. So yes, like I said earlier, I'd prefer an emphasis on liberal arts education in the ug years too provided that the grad level education would take care of all technical deficiencies. When I talked of "quality", it was purely in the technical sense of being able to solve more difficult problems, deal with a lot more course content and a tougher curriculum. We could compare ug curriculum is any of you has done a BS in Physics from the US but we won't have to spend time on that if you get my point and take it well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llcooln6 Posted February 25, 2009 Author Share Posted February 25, 2009 Stop fighting with each other and turn you hatred and aggression towards. ETS lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhukora Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I'll tell you what I think it means. It means that the international students probably put much more soul into the GRE due their extremely high levels of motivation to go to the US for higher studies. His/her statement about means is however wrong. I was just trying to look for a reason as to why international students inculcated this habit of being serious about this examination and why they obsess about high scores on these tests. I said that its probably because of the tradition of many years when American Universities have treated home applicants much more leniently in terms of test scores than the international applicants. What do you think orangepotato meant by "selection bias"? Selection bias (e.g. Berkson's bias)[1] is a distortion of evidence or data that arises from the way that the data are collected. It is sometimes referred to as the selection effect. The term selection bias most often refers to the distortion of a statistical analysis, due to the method of collecting samples. If the selection bias is not taken into account then any conclusions drawn may be wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias What orangepotato means is that the scores you're describing when you talk about foreign applicants (and, more specifically, people at your institution and in your country) represent a different group of people than the scores that are cited for U.S. applicants, and that while they may be comparable to a degree, they are not directly comparable because of that difference in groups. I don't know anything about average GRE scores in India so I'll have to take your word that virtually everyone aces the Quant section, but the difference comes in when we consider who, exactly, is taking the GRE in India. As you mentioned, it is a huge financial burden for your family for you to apply to schools, and I would imagine a similar situation exists for most other people at your college who are doing the same. This means that only people who have the necessary familial support and personal assets to take the enormous financial and emotional risk of paying for the GRE and applying to American schools will do so. Because there is risk involved (i.e. there's no guarantee that even if you get top scores across the board, a perfect GPA, and shell out tons and tons of money, that you will be admitted anywhere), students who want to apply to U.S. grad programs have to do a careful cost/benefit analysis to determine whether they stand enough of a chance of succeeding to make it worth it to take on the risk. As a result, foreign students who take the GRE and apply to U.S. schools self-select into a pool of people who are the creme de la creme of training, determination, intelligence, access to top quality education, and ability to carry the financial burden. By contrast, taking the GRE and applying for grad school for native U.S. students may still be quite expensive, but as lycoris mentioned, nowhere near the degree it would be for people whose countries' currency can't match up to the American dollar, and involving nowhere near the risk since, it's true, American institutions cater primarily to American students and don't make any secret about the fact that that is who they primarily admit. As such, just about any American with a Bachelor's degree and a little bit of income or savings can opt into the U.S. graduate applicant pool. This means that it's not a very exclusive group (exclusive, yes, very exclusive? probably not), and represents a much wider cross-section of society in terms of educational history, test-specific training, IQ, etc. In this kind of cross section you can reasonably expect to see a much wider range of scores than if you took only the top end of the applicant spectrum. Without examining the factors that go into the average scores that come out of each situation, then yes, it would appear that foreign students might receive a much better education than American students, or are far more intelligent, depending on how you interpret it. In reality, the people who comprise each group being compared are vastly different, and that shouldn't be ignored. This is selection bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthla Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Without examining the factors that go into the average scores that come out of each situation, then yes, it would appear that foreign students might receive a much better education than American students, or are far more intelligent, depending on how you interpret it. In reality, the people who comprise each group being compared are vastly different, and that shouldn't be ignored. This is selection bias. I wish there was a :clapping: smiley or something similar. Great explanation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plisar Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I still think the poster is ignoring the systemic cheating that happens in Middle Eastern and Asian countries on the GRE and the TOEFEL. I also disagree with his issue that we are more lenient with "home" applicants. My department admits four times as many international students as domestic students, and funds three times as many. When we do turn down candidates from foreign universities, it is because students from those universities have had difficulty adjusting to standards of education in the US in the past. Trust me, no one is getting a free pass at top universities because of their nationality. That is patently absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepotato Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 ^^^ Yes, exactly zhukora. Thank you for explaining that so clearly. I'm also not saying that the math/science education internationally is not better than that in the US (forgive the double negative...). I am simply saying that using the GRE as a tool for determining this is shoddy analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limeinthecoconut Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I still think the poster is ignoring the systemic cheating that happens in Middle Eastern and Asian countries on the GRE and the TOEFEL. ??? :evil: Now I am insulted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhukora Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 I wish there was a :clapping: smiley or something similar. Great explanation! Haha, thanks. :bows: :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plisar Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Again, this isn't a secret: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v4 ... 8711b.html http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/ ... 2003351671 http://www.ethics.org/resources/article ... sp?aid=765 http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-79124117.html http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2003/03/05/7516/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/200 ... cashepherd I'm not being a jerk, this is a systemic problem, and graduate admissions committees are fully aware of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthla Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Again, this isn't a secret: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v4 ... 8711b.html http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/ ... 2003351671 http://www.ethics.org/resources/article ... sp?aid=765 http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-79124117.html http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2003/03/05/7516/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/200 ... cashepherd I'm not being a jerk, this is a systemic problem, and graduate admissions committees are fully aware of it. Plisar, plisar, plisar... don't you realize, this is just another example of how much smarter and better international applicants are. You have to be truly gifted to cheat in such elaborate manners. shoupista 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now