RM> CB> Finally - an argument that makes sense!  You are correct - there 
RM> are 
RM> CB> too many colleges needing to fill their hallowed halls and until 
RM> CB> competition forces the closing of a goodly number, we are not 
RM> likely 
RM> CB> to get colleges accepting only students with good high school 
RM> grades. 
RM> 
RM> 
RM> MS> Or to deny admissions to kids with bad SAT scores.  
RM> MS> Many colleges are so hard up for students they will take anyone, 
RM> and 
RM> MS> they simply cannot realistically be expected to voluntarily go 
RM> broke 
RM> MS> (faster) by getting tough on admissions to help public schools 
RM> "motivate"
RM> MS> kids.
RM> 
RM> I'm pretty sure that you don't see that your position here is
RM> in opposition to the one you're taking on uncertified and
RM> undegreed teachers, so I'll point it out to you....  Above
RM> you are saying that the lack of standards for acceptance of
RM> college students is a bad thing, but in a previous message
RM> you imply that a lack of standards for acceptance of teachers
RM> would be a GOOD thing.  I submit, counsellor, that your
RM> arguments are inconsistent with one another;
    My arguments are _not_ inconsistent.
    In the above one, I'm just telling you why colleges cannot be expected to 
help K-12 schools motivate students.
    In the other, I told you why K-12 education, like much of the rest of 
America, is putting too much emphasis on _credentials_ as opposed to skills.
    College admission is more about different skill levels, not about the 
"credential" of a HS degree.  Different colleges rightly see different skill 
levels, particularly in math, as essential on that campus.  And that's why 
tougher colleges rely on the SAT instead of the credential of HS graduation.
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------