Claiming a disability on the SAT/ACT - have people been gaming the system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we have accommodations at all, except in severe cases? I understand if you're blind and need the test read to you, or you have a phsyical disability and can't easily fill in the circles on the sheet -- then extra time seems warranted.

But isn't the goal of the test to measure against other students? Why not have the same testing environment for all then? I realize some will score poorer than others, but isn't that exactly what it's trying to measure?

As an employer, if an aptitude test reflects your job duties, then it's useful to know how much you can accomplish within a fixed amount of time, because that's part of the job.

Because speed, for example, isn't necessarily an indicator that you can't do well in college. You will need to work harder if you have a disability to master the content, but you should not be deprived of the opportunity because of a discriminatory bar to entry.

As for work, time extensions do not apply. Large scale computer monitors, accessible buildings and so forth do. Most students with disabilities will find jobs that are compatible with theri disability.

My son with significant fine motor challenges has the aptitude and academic record to succeed as a biologist or attorney. He is absolutely NOT capable of being a surgeon (or a chef) and would receive no accommodation to let him enter that specialty.

Then why put a time limit on the test for any kids? My DS's processing speed score was 29th percentile, but he never got a diagnosis or accommodation for anything. He sure could use extra time on tests though.

There should be some time limit, but it wouldn't hurt anyone or anything to extend it by an extra hour to make sure kids have enough time to finish it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here are that the stakes are too damn high. Getting into an elite college does give you a much bigger leg up in life so parents rationally try to do whatever they can to increase the odds their kid will get in.

Some of us are doing what we do just to get our kids to and through college, its not just about elite schools.

Well that's the same thing. The difference in earning power between a kid who goes to college and one who doesn't is tremendous. If it was possible to make a living wage without a college degree, there would be a lot less pressure for all this maneuvering.

My husband went to a no name school and is doing very well. I know others who go to Ivy's doing far worse. It really depends on the person, degree and in some professions ability to learn and actual skill. Some do amazingly well without degrees. Degrees and Ivy's aren't anything. My husband out earns my Ivy league sibling who is a doctor.

Sure, there are lots of anecdotes just like yours. But the statistics prove that by and large it matters a LOT.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/121814/are-us-colleges-still-good-investment.asp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we have accommodations at all, except in severe cases? I understand if you're blind and need the test read to you, or you have a phsyical disability and can't easily fill in the circles on the sheet -- then extra time seems warranted.

But isn't the goal of the test to measure against other students? Why not have the same testing environment for all then? I realize some will score poorer than others, but isn't that exactly what it's trying to measure?

As an employer, if an aptitude test reflects your job duties, then it's useful to know how much you can accomplish within a fixed amount of time, because that's part of the job.

Because speed, for example, isn't necessarily an indicator that you can't do well in college. You will need to work harder if you have a disability to master the content, but you should not be deprived of the opportunity because of a discriminatory bar to entry.

As for work, time extensions do not apply. Large scale computer monitors, accessible buildings and so forth do. Most students with disabilities will find jobs that are compatible with theri disability.

My son with significant fine motor challenges has the aptitude and academic record to succeed as a biologist or attorney. He is absolutely NOT capable of being a surgeon (or a chef) and would receive no accommodation to let him enter that specialty.

Then why put a time limit on the test for any kids? My DS's processing speed score was 29th percentile, but he never got a diagnosis or accommodation for anything. He sure could use extra time on tests though.

Right?! My dd’s is 30th percentile. She does fine, but she could do better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted on the other thread about my DS who scored a 35 on the ACT using time and a half. He had accommodations since 2nd grade when he was diagnosed with ADHD and slow processing. In summer prior to 8th grade, he was tested again, and the same diagnosis held, but with the processing speed improving slightly. He continued with his accommodations through 8th grade and high school. He had time and a half to take the ACT in February of his junior year and scored a 35 -- one and done. He has always been a strong test taker and very intelligent, so it did not come as a huge surprise, and we were thrilled. That summer, in preparation for possibility of need for accommodations in college, he had his third neuro-psych test. This test actually showed a very strong improvement in processing speed. Apparently this is something that can improve as the brain develops. We were thrilled to see this improvement and realized then that perhaps the accommodations he had for the ACT may not have been needed because of the stark improvement in processing speed. Perhaps that explains the high score. We will never know, but in our case, I would not say we "gamed the system." We just got lucky.

no, you did not get lucky. you gamed the system.

You can only do testing every few years so it isn't gaming the system. They have had documented concerns since 2nd grade. Different than someone coming in middle or high school demanding extra time.

I don't think anyone should get extended time for "low processing speed," period. I remember this PP and she has gone on before about how "brilliant" her DS is and how he is such as "strong" test taker ... even knowing that, she STILL finagled the extra time for the ACT. Totally gaming the system. What she had was a bright, quirky kid who seemed a little different as a younger kid, and she decided that she could not stand even the slightest difficulty for him.

Yes. I remember that thread. She was absolutely giddy about it. She seemed delighted in rubbing it in everyone’s faces that her ds got extra time. Something like “he would only get a 30 with no extra time”.

Yes. You can take a bright kid’s 30 and turn it into 35 with extra time. But the 30 is more accurate. It’s a good score. And there’s no shame in it.

A 30 would not be accurate. Nobody with that type of lack of ability would score a 35 even if given unlimited time. The kid who scored a 35 probably would have gotten a 33-34 if he is as bright as the PP claims.

[Anonymous]

A good chart on why -- and which -- colleges matter:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted on the other thread about my DS who scored a 35 on the ACT using time and a half. He had accommodations since 2nd grade when he was diagnosed with ADHD and slow processing. In summer prior to 8th grade, he was tested again, and the same diagnosis held, but with the processing speed improving slightly. He continued with his accommodations through 8th grade and high school. He had time and a half to take the ACT in February of his junior year and scored a 35 -- one and done. He has always been a strong test taker and very intelligent, so it did not come as a huge surprise, and we were thrilled. That summer, in preparation for possibility of need for accommodations in college, he had his third neuro-psych test. This test actually showed a very strong improvement in processing speed. Apparently this is something that can improve as the brain develops. We were thrilled to see this improvement and realized then that perhaps the accommodations he had for the ACT may not have been needed because of the stark improvement in processing speed. Perhaps that explains the high score. We will never know, but in our case, I would not say we "gamed the system." We just got lucky.

no, you did not get lucky. you gamed the system.

You can only do testing every few years so it isn't gaming the system. They have had documented concerns since 2nd grade. Different than someone coming in middle or high school demanding extra time.

I don't think anyone should get extended time for "low processing speed," period. I remember this PP and she has gone on before about how "brilliant" her DS is and how he is such as "strong" test taker ... even knowing that, she STILL finagled the extra time for the ACT. Totally gaming the system. What she had was a bright, quirky kid who seemed a little different as a younger kid, and she decided that she could not stand even the slightest difficulty for him.

You don't do neuropsych testing if everything is ok starting in 2nd grade. Do you realize the costs involved for the average family? You have no idea what some of the challenges some of our kids face.

NP here. I think the trouble is that there's no black and white line for what constitutes a disability and where that leads you. DSM has many diagnostic criteria but its up to an individual doctor to make a qualitative assessment and it's a gray area at best for most learning and emotional issues. My personal concern isn't that your kid gets accommodations or and IEP or whatever to help him. My concern is that there are millions of other kids who don't get that help.

My child doesn't get help. We removed the IEP as it was worthless. There was no point in fighting it and we heavily supplement at home instead. It made no sense to pay for a neuropsych and an advocate given he does well, but he does well because of what we do, not because of what the school does. There are so many kids like mine who fall through the cracks as the teachers just ignore them vs. providing that extra minute of support that could make the world of difference. The only difference with my kid is we knew it early on and poured every dollar we had into it and heavily work at home, but those are things you'd never know or see just meeting our child. Plenty do game the system but many of us are trying to focus instead on getting our kids to the highest level of functioning because the school system has failed us and it makes no sense to spend $5K on a test when we know what is the issues (as does the school) and another $3-8K for an advocate right now. That is what you are missing. We've had our child in daily services from 2-7 privately, but again, you are slamming families like us when you'd never know seeing our kids from the outside.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here are that the stakes are too damn high. Getting into an elite college does give you a much bigger leg up in life so parents rationally try to do whatever they can to increase the odds their kid will get in.

Some of us are doing what we do just to get our kids to and through college, its not just about elite schools.

Well that's the same thing. The difference in earning power between a kid who goes to college and one who doesn't is tremendous. If it was possible to make a living wage without a college degree, there would be a lot less pressure for all this maneuvering.

My husband went to a no name school and is doing very well. I know others who go to Ivy's doing far worse. It really depends on the person, degree and in some professions ability to learn and actual skill. Some do amazingly well without degrees. Degrees and Ivy's aren't anything. My husband out earns my Ivy league sibling who is a doctor.

Sure, there are lots of anecdotes just like yours. But the statistics prove that by and large it matters a LOT.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/121814/are-us-colleges-still-good-investment.asp

No, Ivy's are not always the best investment in less you are going into business, medicine or big law. Otherwise most places don't care where you go to school.

[Anonymous]

The college board should extend the time for EVERYONE. That will remove the processing speed gaming and truly test the knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good chart on why -- and which -- colleges matter:

All I see is a small x

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DDs experience was exactly opposite. She’s had verified testing and accommodations since age 8. And lengthy neuropsych testing and reports every 3 years. She was denied extra time on the ACT. Our appeals were denied. (My full time day job is writing appellate briefs — usually successfully.) She’s since graduated college (where she chose not to continue accommodations) and is well employed. So I’d love to know how so many others were able to get accommodations.

My child has a bizarre illness which included below the lowest levels of white bloods, antibiotic immunity, blood pooling at lower extremities if they sat for more than 30 minutes, and parasympathetic nervous system symptoms. This kid fought to keep up in school and to do the best they humanly could. Neuropsych and cardiologist reports sent to ACT.

Rejected from accomodations by the ACT until the night before the test.

How unfair and stressful.

I'm so sorry others went through this also. I can only pray for justice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A good chart on why -- and which -- colleges matter:

As someone posted earlier, correlation does not prove causation. George W Bush went to an Ivy League University and he did well because his family is already rich. That's pretty much the case for these legacy students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we have accommodations at all, except in severe cases? I understand if you're blind and need the test read to you, or you have a phsyical disability and can't easily fill in the circles on the sheet -- then extra time seems warranted.

But isn't the goal of the test to measure against other students? Why not have the same testing environment for all then? I realize some will score poorer than others, but isn't that exactly what it's trying to measure?

As an employer, if an aptitude test reflects your job duties, then it's useful to know how much you can accomplish within a fixed amount of time, because that's part of the job.

Because speed, for example, isn't necessarily an indicator that you can't do well in college. You will need to work harder if you have a disability to master the content, but you should not be deprived of the opportunity because of a discriminatory bar to entry.

As for work, time extensions do not apply. Large scale computer monitors, accessible buildings and so forth do. Most students with disabilities will find jobs that are compatible with theri disability.

My son with significant fine motor challenges has the aptitude and academic record to succeed as a biologist or attorney. He is absolutely NOT capable of being a surgeon (or a chef) and would receive no accommodation to let him enter that specialty.

Then why put a time limit on the test for any kids? My DS's processing speed score was 29th percentile, but he never got a diagnosis or accommodation for anything. He sure could use extra time on tests though.

There should be no time limits for anybody since the research show more time does not increase test scores for those that don't need it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted on the other thread about my DS who scored a 35 on the ACT using time and a half. He had accommodations since 2nd grade when he was diagnosed with ADHD and slow processing. In summer prior to 8th grade, he was tested again, and the same diagnosis held, but with the processing speed improving slightly. He continued with his accommodations through 8th grade and high school. He had time and a half to take the ACT in February of his junior year and scored a 35 -- one and done. He has always been a strong test taker and very intelligent, so it did not come as a huge surprise, and we were thrilled. That summer, in preparation for possibility of need for accommodations in college, he had his third neuro-psych test. This test actually showed a very strong improvement in processing speed. Apparently this is something that can improve as the brain develops. We were thrilled to see this improvement and realized then that perhaps the accommodations he had for the ACT may not have been needed because of the stark improvement in processing speed. Perhaps that explains the high score. We will never know, but in our case, I would not say we "gamed the system." We just got lucky.

no, you did not get lucky. you gamed the system.

You can only do testing every few years so it isn't gaming the system. They have had documented concerns since 2nd grade. Different than someone coming in middle or high school demanding extra time.

I don't think anyone should get extended time for "low processing speed," period. I remember this PP and she has gone on before about how "brilliant" her DS is and how he is such as "strong" test taker ... even knowing that, she STILL finagled the extra time for the ACT. Totally gaming the system. What she had was a bright, quirky kid who seemed a little different as a younger kid, and she decided that she could not stand even the slightest difficulty for him.

You don't do neuropsych testing if everything is ok starting in 2nd grade. Do you realize the costs involved for the average family? You have no idea what some of the challenges some of our kids face.

NP here. I think the trouble is that there's no black and white line for what constitutes a disability and where that leads you. DSM has many diagnostic criteria but its up to an individual doctor to make a qualitative assessment and it's a gray area at best for most learning and emotional issues. My personal concern isn't that your kid gets accommodations or and IEP or whatever to help him. My concern is that there are millions of other kids who don't get that help.

My child doesn't get help. We removed the IEP as it was worthless. There was no point in fighting it and we heavily supplement at home instead. It made no sense to pay for a neuropsych and an advocate given he does well, but he does well because of what we do, not because of what the school does. There are so many kids like mine who fall through the cracks as the teachers just ignore them vs. providing that extra minute of support that could make the world of difference. The only difference with my kid is we knew it early on and poured every dollar we had into it and heavily work at home, but those are things you'd never know or see just meeting our child. Plenty do game the system but many of us are trying to focus instead on getting our kids to the highest level of functioning because the school system has failed us and it makes no sense to spend $5K on a test when we know what is the issues (as does the school) and another $3-8K for an advocate right now. That is what you are missing. We've had our child in daily services from 2-7 privately, but again, you are slamming families like us when you'd never know seeing our kids from the outside.

PP here. I'm not slamming you. I would do the same thing. But providing support at home is very different from asking for accommodations for standardized tests. It sounds like you are doing exactly what one would want- helping your kid learn and demonstrate his learning. When he goes to take a standardized test, he will be able to perform well because he's had help learning how. That's wildly different from changing the test itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The college board should extend the time for EVERYONE. That will remove the processing speed gaming and truly test the knowledge.

I agree. The problem with that is that the questions are actually pretty easy as it stands. Especially the ACT. So you would see a lot of 35-36s. I don’t think people realize this.

Maybe the solution is more a hybrid. A timed test and an Untimed test.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A good chart on why -- and which -- colleges matter:

As someone posted earlier, correlation does not prove causation. George W Bush went to an Ivy League University and he did well because his family is already rich. That's pretty much the case for these legacy students.

The overwhelming majority of students are not alumni kids. Come on.