Subject:
|
Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 05:04:12 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
lpieniazek@novera#spamcake#.com
|
Viewed:
|
697 times
|
| |
|
|
Again, selectively snipping for the heck of it.
Sproaticus wrote:
> And remember, this method of testing isn't policy; it's an *experiment*. In a
> *private* college. I would hope that they can do whatever the hell they want
> to with their admissions.
I agree with you, private colleges *should* be able to. But it's a
forlorn hope. They provide public accomodations so they're stuck with
the same loony regulations as everyone else. Even if they avoid taking
any federal dollars (which is very very hard to do)...
--
Larry Pieniazek - larryp@novera.com - http://my.voyager.net/lar
http://www.mercator.com. Mercator, the e-business transformation company
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to lugnet.
Note: this is a family forum!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds"
|
| (...) You're assuming that the entire reason for these tests is to get around these court decisions. What if there was a larger, more important reason -- like attempting to make testing the applicants more realistic and fair (see below)? It is a sad (...) (24 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
89 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
