General Admissions Application Short Form: Fill & Download for Free

The two aren't that comparable.SAT is a general-purpose IQ test that only tests basic math, analytics and writing. There are SAT subject tests, but usually not required. When one applies for college, SAT score is only one of the many metrics in his/her application package.Gaokao is a comprehensive exam which covers academic knowledge in all high school disciplines including math, Chinese, English, physics, chemistry, biology, history, geography and political science. Math, Chinese and English are required testing subjects nationwide. In my province, one then had to choose two additional mandatory subjects from the other six. Some other provinces use an integrated test where 3 or 6 of the subjects are mixed into one long exam. In contrast to SAT, GaoKao scores is the ONLY metric in deciding which college one goes to, and usually which major one starts with (or sticks with in the old days) - in China, ‘popular’ majors with great career prospects such as finance, computer science etc. usually require substantially higher scores above the general admission cutoff of each university. Every year there are extremely talented students (measured by their average high school performance) who accidentally tanked their GaoKao score and had to be admitted into lesser schools/majors.In terms of form, SAT is largely multiple choices and essays, while Gaokao is a more diverse mixture of multiple choices, short arguments, essays, derivations/proofs and applied problem solving. You are graded by not only the final answers, but also how you reach them.Gaokao is absolutely much more difficult than SAT, because it serves a different motivation. In America where educational resources are relatively abundant, SAT is used as a mere reference for the students' intrinsic talent. Ideally, the purpose of SAT is to help fit every student into the appropriate educational environment that will maximize their growth and success. (In reality, however, the low difficulty of standardized tests makes them poor identifiers of students’ talent levels. This in my opinion, has given (particularly private) US universities too much leeway in setting admission criteria that advances their own financial interests, overwhelmingly favoring children of wealthy families and legacy families who ironically do not typically need a prestigious college degree to succeed in their lives. )In China, there are far more talents competing for the limited capacity of quality higher education. Gaokao scores, no matter how meritocratic they look, are effectively used as justifications to randomly keep a large portion of prospective students from the quality of education they would have deserved given their talent level. At least when I took it in 2004, Gaokao problems were full of tricks/traps not only to test one's knowledge, but also to make sure most people fail. Gaokao is deliberately designed as a pyramid elimination, and is thus highly selective and difficult.The closest thing to Gaokao in spirit in the US is probably the interview process for entry-level positions in prestigious companies like Mckinsey, Goldman Sachs, Google, etc. As the number of qualified applicants greatly out-numbers the supply of available positions, those companies resort to seemingly rigorous procedures that often include an assortment of brain-teasers, technical interviews, behavioral interviews, etc. — designed mostly just to find superfluous justifications to reject candidates. Yet we all know a person's on-job performance is at best weakly correlated to his/her 'score' in the interview process.10 years out of high school, I'm confident I can take SAT/GRE today and still score reasonably well. However, I don't think I will even hit the median if I enter the Gaokao this year without some serious preparation. I was a top 0.5% in my province (which btw didn't even grant me admission to any top 3 university in China. You need to be around the top 0.05%~0.1%. I ended up in a top 5 and barely above its cutoff grade), but the test just gets exponentially harder every year.

Admission to the course of M.A in political science in Jamia Millia Islamia is carried out on the basis of entrance exam and interview.Academic qualifications:Those who have completed Bachelors’ program in political science or allied subjects with a minimum of 50% marks are eligible to apply for this course. There will be objective type questions from topics prescribed to graduate level studies in entrance examination.Eligibility criterion for M.A in political scienceEligibility:Candidates who have completed Bachelors’ degree in political science from a recognized University are eligible to apply for this course. Those who have passed Shastri examination in new scheme are also eligible to apply. Candidates are required to obtain a minimum of 50% of marks in aggregate in qualifying examination.In addition to this candidates having completed graduation in Arts/ Science/ Commerce courses are also eligible to apply.Such candidates are required to secure a minimum of 55% marks in aggregate so as to be eligible. Those who have completed Postgraduate Diploma in Human Rights and Duties Education will be given special preference.Admission procedure for M.A in Political science:Admission to Master of Arts in Political Science is carried out on the basis of entrance exam conducted by the department concerned. The entrance test will contain three papers such asConstitution of indiaGovernment and politics in IndiaGeneral knowledge and current eventsPolitical scienceGovernment and politics in india• International politicsQuestions will be asked in multiple choice objective type formats. The maximum time allotted for written test is one and half hours. Medium of instruction will be in English language. There will be sectional cut off in this examination. Those who have cleared the written test will be short listed for next level of selection procedure; personal interview. The weightage allotted for entrance exam is 85% and that for Personal interview is 15%. Those who have secured at least 33% marks in written test are only eligible to attend personal interview.Final selection will be based on the composite marks obtained by the candidates in qualifying examination, entrance test and personal interview. Apart from this candidates are required to submit the originals of relevant documents at the time of admission.Application procedureEligible candidates who wish to apply for Masters Program in Political Science in Jamia Millia Islamia are required to apply in prescribed format. Apart from this, candidates can download the application form cum instructions from the official website of the University. Those who have successfully registered for the examination will receive call letter for entrance examination.I have a question paper of 2016 of M.A in political..So if u need plz do reply.

Not very.There have been some disciplinary cases brought under Rule 8.4(c) and (d), which rather generically prohibits lawyers from “engag[ing] in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation,” and “conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.” I personally wasn’t convinced by the complaint to the effect that administration of justice is really at issue: despite their characterization of Ms Conway as the president’s “counsellor”, she is not his lawyer, but merely an “advisor.”I don’t have ready access to disciplinary opinions from the District of Columbia, so I looked at Pennsylvania case law; there is not a dramatic amount of variation in the way different jurisdictions approach this question, so it’s probably representative.The “fraud” or “deceit” does not necessarily have to do with the practice of law. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Christie, 536 Pa. 394, 639 A.2d 782 (1994). Examples of cases where five-year suspension or disbarment was ordered include Christie (attorney convicted of child sexual abuse, mitigating circumstance psychiatric disorder); O.D.C. v. Radbill, 587 Pa. 371, 899 A.2d 1099 (2006) (conviction of health care fraud, income tax fraud, and inflating damages in slip-and-fall cases). Generally, these cases arise on criminal conviction of a crime of “moral turpitude”. (Disciplinary violations are shown by “clear and convincing” evidence, slightly short of the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard required for criminal convictions.)In O.D.C. v. Czmus, 586 Pa. 22, 889 A.2d 1197 (2005), the attorney was a former physician who failed to disclose this and fact that he had been censured by another state’s medical board, and had made affirmative misrepresentations on his bar admission application.The vast majority of cases where Rule 8.4 “misconduct” was found, however, involve something connected to the practice of law. O.D.C. v. Price, 557 Pa. 166, 732 A.2d 599 (1999) (attorney described himself as a “doctor” on a county assistance office form in course of representing client); O.D.C. v. Costigan, 526 Pa. 16, 584 A.2d 296 (1990) (attorney criminally convicted of theft by deception and other offenses relating to distribution of an estate); In re Anonymous No. 2, 2 D.B. 86, 46 Pa.D.&C.3d 400 (1987) (government attorney convicted of unlawfully accepting gratuities, also lied during investigations); O.D.C. v. Holston, 533 Pa. 78, 619 A.2d 1054 (1993) (knowingly forging court order and certificate, lying to judicial authority upon being questioned as to origins of document, and neglect of legal matter warrant disbarment).There is a notable absence of any cases brought under the sort of circumstances alleged here. The statements by Ms Conway, while apparently patently untrue, don’t amount to much more than political “spin;” they obviously weren’t intended to subvert anything about the judicial system and proving they were maliciously made as opposed to “misunderstandings” might be difficult.I also think the Disciplinary Board will be disinclined to pursue this complaint due to her inactive status; she might have to answer questions about the matter if it were brought up during proceedings on a petition for reinstatement. The purpose, however, of disciplinary proceedings, is to protect the public from unethical lawyers; the misdeeds of people not in active practice nor holding themselves out as lawyers present less of a policy priority.