Nearly 40% of Stanford's undergraduates are disabled

[Anonymous]

https://www.thetimes.com/us/news-today/article/40-percent-stanford-undergraduates-claim-disabled-sw99r3k8c

While some may disagree with Stanford leaning into admitting such a high percentage of disabled students, it's welcoming to see that the stigma of having a disability is gone.

It's also a testament to the strength and resilience of a Stanford student. In addition to having to achieve top SATs, rigor and amazing extra curriculars, they needed to overcome extreme challenges. Hopefully this filters out into society, be it law, medicine, business, etc.

[Anonymous]

That's not what this article or the overall discussion is about. It's about gaming the system.

[Anonymous]

//Stanford leaning into admitting such a high percentage of disabled students//

You obviously haven’t read the article. The author was candid about how many are gaming and even openly joking their lenient system. For comparison, only 3% of community college kids claim “disability.”

[Anonymous]

OP, the point of the exposé FLEW over your head faster than Ted Cruz to Mexico when there's a snowstorm. The point is that the process for aquiring ADHD accommodations isn't foolproof and is pay-to-win.

[Anonymous]

Now you wonder why Stanford attracted folks like Elizabeth Holmes and Caroline Ellison!

[Anonymous]

Uhm, I think OP understood the article perfectly and above posters missed the satirical tone of her post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.thetimes.com/us/news-today/article/40-percent-stanford-undergraduates-claim-disabled-sw99r3k8c

While some may disagree with Stanford leaning into admitting such a high percentage of disabled students, it's welcoming to see that the stigma of having a disability is gone.

It's also a testament to the strength and resilience of a Stanford student. In addition to having to achieve top SATs, rigor and amazing extra curriculars, they needed to overcome extreme challenges. Hopefully this filters out into society, be it law, medicine, business, etc.

Sarcasm right?

No, it's borderline cheating.

You know darn well, 4 out of 10 students don't need testing accommodations.

Get real.

[Anonymous]

No wonder my able bodied kid w/ 3.9/1600 sat couldn’t get in

[Anonymous]

OP is clearly sarcastic in their tone. This however has been discussed ad nauseum, with parents of "disabled" kids fervently defending their "disability" in that one long thread on this topic. "What real jobs require anyone to perform under significant time limitation?" is often these parents' excuses. They wish to legitimize their kids' "disability" by even claiming that more than a single digit percentage of the population is disabled; they just didn't have the disability diagnosed. It stinks.

[Anonymous]

I’ve become more and more skeptical about Ivy resumes. So many of them seem to be slick sheisters

[Anonymous]

Why not just give everyone extra testing time? I never really saw why it particularly matters that you completed your test in 3 hours or 4 hours, outside time constraints of the professor. Then you don’t have to set up these extra time blocks or worry about liars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now you wonder why Stanford attracted folks like Elizabeth Holmes and Caroline Ellison!

For the most part, Silicon Valley and VC is a bunch of BS. Stanford has a lot of real important research in its CS department, Stanford med, and even humanities departments. It’s sadly also an amazing feeder into a BS industry.

[Anonymous]

Wow. When everyone gets accommodations, no one gets accommodations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. When everyone gets accommodations, no one gets accommodations.

Seems fine.

[Anonymous]

50% of our Md private HS has accommodations for its students. Really?