The very definition of "standardized" means same test/same testing conditions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

That's like saying you want to be able to park in the handicapped spot even though you don't have a disability. Or that you should be able to have a therapy dog on the plane even though you don't have a condition that warrants one. Let's think about that for a sec. If you let everyone have the handicapped spots, there will be none for those who need them. If you let everyone take a dog on the plane, there would be mayhem and those who need the therapy will be stressed.

Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I think what bothers people is the fact that some of these "disabled" kids are also gifted, and providing the accommodations allows them to demonstrate their giftedness. Sadly some people don't like the idea that some kid with autism is outscoring their kid. Really pathetic.

Yes, there are those who "game the system" but the solution to give everyone extra time is not a good one. ACT and College Board must have more stringent standards for approving accommodations -- especially where there is no history of accommodations in school. That alone should be a red flag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I don't think that is true unless time itself is still a component of success on the particular test. Better (harder) tests can be written such that time isn't relevant. Suppose we state the idea as unlimited time for all (ignoring, for a moment, logistics)?

[Anonymous]

The harder tests are already available- APs. Have your child take AP Chem, AP Bio, AP BC Calculus, Physics C- both the mechanics and E&M, AP Language and AP Literature- throw in a foreign language of your choice. The other APs are much easier- so don’t bother with them. Make sure your child gets a 5 on all of them. Then you will not have to worry about SAT scores or who had or who did not have extra time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The harder tests are already available- APs. Have your child take AP Chem, AP Bio, AP BC Calculus, Physics C- both the mechanics and E&M, AP Language and AP Literature- throw in a foreign language of your choice. The other APs are much easier- so don’t bother with them. Make sure your child gets a 5 on all of them. Then you will not have to worry about SAT scores or who had or who did not have extra time.

But some schools start mid-August so ITS NOT FAIR.

WAHHHHH!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

That's like saying you want to be able to park in the handicapped spot even though you don't have a disability. Or that you should be able to have a therapy dog on the plane even though you don't have a condition that warrants one. Let's think about that for a sec. If you let everyone have the handicapped spots, there will be none for those who need them. If you let everyone take a dog on the plane, there would be mayhem and those who need the therapy will be stressed.

Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I think what bothers people is the fact that some of these "disabled" kids are also gifted, and providing the accommodations allows them to demonstrate their giftedness. Sadly some people don't like the idea that some kid with autism is outscoring their kid. Really pathetic.

Yes, there are those who "game the system" but the solution to give everyone extra time is not a good one. ACT and College Board must have more stringent standards for approving accommodations -- especially where there is no history of accommodations in school. That alone should be a red flag.

there is absolutely nothing pathetic about not wanting your kid to be outscored. nobody wants that, least of all on DCUM. if you are so generous and don’t care about outscoring others why do YOU need to make sure that your child scores as high as he can to the point where you are ready to tilt the field for him? I mean at some point I get what you are doing but to then turn around and lecture others on selflessness is beyond rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So if your child has any kind of special needs, they too deserve a lower score?

For example, if they have severe dyslexia, they should not get extra time to decipher the questions? What about a motor impairment, should they not be allowed to type when others have to write by hand?

Let's hope you and yours never have to suffer from anything that requires accommodations!

What is so bad about suggestion? Why do you feel your child need to hide the extra time they are getting in a standardized test?

PP, the extra time is not hidden. Colleges know who got it. So, while you may not know that neighbor kid Larla got extended time, Princeton does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

Nah, the NO EXTRA TIME FOR ANYONE-type poster(s) assert that everyone would get a perfect score with more time, but they don’t actually want to put that to the test. I agree with the point that a PP (whom I otherwise disagree with) made re these tests being too easy — at least for differentiating among very talented and well-prepared students. But time pressure isn’t the way to address that problem because “Who’s the fastest?” isn’t the relevant question. Better to have a more challenging test and give everyone enough time to take it.

+1111

+11111

I'm a SN parent who agree that tests should be untimed. But to the haters: Does your kid really want to spend 5-8 hours on the SAT? 8 would be for the written portion included. And barely get enough food to go that long (breaks are short, my DC has to prioritize bathroom so not enough time to eat much, there is no regular lunch break)? Extended time isn't exactly fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, the extra time is not hidden. Colleges know who got it. So, while you may not know that neighbor kid Larla got extended time, Princeton does.

Colleges do not know who gets extra time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
THE POINT IS TO GIVE A CHANCE TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T FIT THE MOLD SO THEY CAN BETTER CONTRIBUTE TO SOCIETY.

You have to do away with the notion that if people can't be productive within restrictive and completely arbitrary conditions, they are essentially a lost cause and do not deserve a chance to show what they can do at the next level. Closing doors at any step in their education (testing and tracking start in elementary school) ensures that a portion of potentially productive people are left out and it increases the risk they will become a burden to society.

Just because someone has ADHD, Asperger's, dyslexia, or whatever else, does not mean they are not intelligent and can't invent or create something wonderful for humanity. These people may not all fit into menial jobs if you prevent them from getting a high school or college diploma.

I feel strongly about this because both my husband and son are GT/LD (gifted, talented and learning disabled). My husband has an MD and a PhD. He was given many second and third chances in his life because people recognized his gifts among his quirkiness. He has done research in cancer and other common and deadly ailments. My son has the same quirks and would not be a good fit to work at McDonald's - he is academic like his father. We are grateful that the system allows for such out-of-the-norm people to still get to where their intellect leads them.

Instead of short-sightedly thinking this hurts neurotypical students' chances, please realize that allowing alternate paths for differently-abled students enables society to benefit from the combined work of a plurality of the population.

Well said!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So if your child has any kind of special needs, they too deserve a lower score?

For example, if they have severe dyslexia, they should not get extra time to decipher the questions? What about a motor impairment, should they not be allowed to type when others have to write by hand?

Let's hope you and yours never have to suffer from anything that requires accommodations!

What is so bad about suggestion? Why do you feel your child need to hide the extra time they are getting in a standardized test?

PP, the extra time is not hidden. Colleges know who got it. So, while you may not know that neighbor kid Larla got extended time, Princeton does.

I'm someone strongly in favor of extra time, which evened the playing field enough for my kid to get a 23 on their ACT.

But no, information about accommodations and IEP/504 status is not shared with colleges. It is considered confidential information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
So if your child has any kind of special needs, they too deserve a lower score?

For example, if they have severe dyslexia, they should not get extra time to decipher the questions? What about a motor impairment, should they not be allowed to type when others have to write by hand?

Let's hope you and yours never have to suffer from anything that requires accommodations!

What is so bad about suggestion? Why do you feel your child need to hide the extra time they are getting in a standardized test?

PP, the extra time is not hidden. Colleges know who got it. So, while you may not know that neighbor kid Larla got extended time, Princeton does.

I'm someone strongly in favor of extra time, which evened the playing field enough for my kid to get a 23 on their ACT.

But no, information about accommodations and IEP/504 status is not shared with colleges. It is considered confidential information.

+1 There is are some highly ignorant people on this thread. Many kids get diagnoses in preschool and have struggles you have no idea about. While there may be a few bad actors, kids who are blind and get the test in Braille or read to them on a computer and autistic kids who get more time because of processing speed issues are not making up their struggles just to make your kid look bad.

[Anonymous]

To the parents who manage to get their kids more time on SAT, why can't you admit that fact on the score report?

[Anonymous]

Another poster said it best: some parents cannot accept that their child isn’t the best.

The GT/LD kid above would score slightly lower on the SAT without extra time. He has an learning disability. But nope! He should score higher than he probably would without the LD?

Why? A fair score would be the lower one. Why do you think the fair score dooms your child? It’s a silly, stupid test—made so more stupid by the number of students getting artificial high scores. How bad would he possibly do with extra time? So bad he couldn’t get into any college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the parents who manage to get their kids more time on SAT, why can't you admit that fact on the score report?

As a parent, I didn't write my kid's score report. Did you write your kid's?

SAT chooses what is included on the score report. Given that confidentiality is a concern, they do not include information about extended time, or braille, or scribes, or breaks to check one's blood sugar, or whether one used a ramp to get in the building.

[Anonymous]

Sucks that your kid got a shitty score, OP. I guess he’s just not as smart as you thought.