São Paulo: “Tupi ABA Says Someone (May Have) Messed With Test”

Por suspeita de fraude, OAB-SP suspende exame deste domingo: The São Paulo chapter of the OAB suspends its bar exam today, “on suspicion of fraud.”

G1/Globo reports — and fails to give us any solid information that might help us assess the basis for that suspcicion.

“Suspicion exists.” But why? Or at the very least, why can it not offer a description of the grounds for that suspicion? Sometimes “confidential investigations are ongoing.”

Globo tends to consider the Five Ws purely optional.

See also

Those reports were fairly informative on that point, though they could have been better sourced. Answer keys to an exam for the federal highway patrol here in Brazil were reportedly going for $20,000.

Por suspeita de fraude, a Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, seccional de São Paulo (OAB-SP), suspendeu neste sábado (8) a primeira fase do exame que faria neste domingo (9).

On suspicion of fraud, the Order of Brazilian Attorneys (the “Tupi ABA”), São Paulo section, suspended the first phase of the exam it was to administer today.

Segundo a assessoria da OAB/SP, o presidente da entidade, Luiz Flávio Borges D’Urso, recebeu um comunicado de que teria havido vazamento de algumas questões da prova.

According to its press office, the president of the OAB-SP, Mr. Borges D’Urso, received a communication that some questions from the exam might have leaked.

From whom? What did it say? What did he do, or is he doing, to confirm it?

A OAB/SP informou que as 24.827 inscrições continuam válidas e que os candidatos serão informados sobre a data da nova prova, que ainda não foi remarcada.

The OAB/SP informed that the 24,827 subscriptions remain valid and that candidates will be informed of the new date, which has yet to be scheduled.

Educational standards have been in the news a lot lately.

The official press release:

Nota Oficial divulgada neste sábado (8/12), a Diretoria da OAB SP comunica que suspendeu , por suspeita de quebra de sigilo, a primeira fase da prova do Exame de Ordem que aconteceria neste domingo (9/12), sem prejuízos para os inscritos que, em breve, serão comunicados da nova data da prova. Os candidatos não devem comparecer aos locais de prova.

[tktktktk]

Diante da suspeita de quebra de sigilo do 134º Exame de Ordem, a Diretoria da Seccional Paulista da OAB deliberou pela suspensão da primeira fase do referido exame, que seria realizado neste domingo (9/12) em todo o Estado de São Paulo.

[tktktktk]

Os candidatos inscritos não devem comparecer aos locais de prova, sendo que, em breve, um novo edital de convocação será publicado, fixando nova data para a realização da prova.

[tktktktk]

Dessa forma, a Diretoria da Seccional e a Comissão de Estágio e Exame de Ordem buscam assegurar a lisura e transparência que sempre caracterizaram o Exame da Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil.

[tktktktk]

Update from G1 just now:

Um professor de cursinho seria o responsável pelo vazamento da prova da Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, seccional de São Paulo (OAB-SP), que seria realizada neste domingo (9), mas foi suspensa por conta da fraude, segundo o presidente da entidade, Luiz Flávio Borges D’Urso,

A teacher at a test-preparation course may be responsible for the leaking of the OAB-SP bar exam that was to be given this Sunday, but was suspended, according to OAB-SP president Borges D’Urso.

Em entrevista coletiva na manhã deste domingo (9), D’Urso disse ter recebido um telefonema no sábado (8) à tarde de uma pessoa que denunciou a fraude. Segundo essa pessoa, que não foi identificada pela OAB-SP, um professor de cursinho teria dito aos alunos que possuía questões que estariam no exame.

In a press conference held on Sunday morning, D’Urso said he received a phone call on Saturday night from someone denouncing the fraud. According to this person, who was not identified by the OAB-SP, a test-prep teacher told his students he had questions that would be on the exam.

If this test-prep had the questions, and was not supposed to, then would he not be the party leaked to, rather than the leaker?

In which case the person who leaked the questions to him — if this actually occurred — would be the personal “responsible for the leak.”

You would think.

In other words, someone is to blame other than whoever was responsible for administering the test?

Presumably the OAB-SP, unless they outsource?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s