Accommodation Nation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you don't have a grasp on the material, then no amount of extra time is going to change that . . . but be angry about extra time if it makes you feel better.

Wrong. Extra time students often get to come back to finish. That extra time in between testing gives them time to look up answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Accomodation Nation" article in the Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-university-student-accommodation/684946/

There's a paywall, but the main context is in the quotes below. Bottom line: a lot of UMC and wealthy families are misusing the testing accommodations process.

DCUMers rail on TO ( and ascribe it to URMs) but avoid this topic.

I wonder why?


"Accommodations in higher education were supposed to help disabled Americans enjoy the same opportunities as everyone else. No one should be kept from taking a class, for example, because they are physically unable to enter the building where it’s taught. Over the past decade and a half, however, the share of students at selective universities who qualify for accommodations—often, extra time on tests—has grown at a breathtaking pace…”

“The change has occurred disproportionately at the most prestigious and expensive institutions. At Brown and Harvard, more than 20 percent of undergraduates are registered as disabled. At Amherst, that figure is 34 percent.”

Said a professor at a selective university: “You hear ‘students with disabilities’ and it’s not kids in wheelchairs. It’s just not. It’s rich kids getting extra time on tests.”

This is anec-data, but my DD's best friend got an ADHD diagnosis in late grade 10. She shared with my DC that the goal was to get extra time on standardized test so she could try and get a high enough score to go to her parents' ivy school where she's a double legacy. After confering with a college counselor, she picked the ACT over the SAT because the questions are easier than SAT and the test is essentially a speed test to get easier questions right in a shortest amount of time. DD's friend was told that was the best test to take if you get "time and a half" accomodation, which she did. She still prepped for the ACT and took it 3 times. But each time she had time and a half. As expected, she got a high score (34 or 35) by the third test with the extra accomodation.

My DD thought it was shady, but said nothing to anyone.

[Anonymous]

The problem is, as anyone who has looked into this well knows, anyone can get these extra time accommodations. They are for sale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not this again.

You know why rich kids get more accommodations than poor kids? Because poor kids who SHOULD receive accommodations do not because their parents don't know they're eligible for it or don't have time to argue their case, and the schools they attend aren't as attentive to these things as the rich kids' schools.

One of my kids is supremely functional and fast-thinking. The other has severe ADHD, dysgraphia, dyscalculia, low processing speed and a speech impediment, diagnosed when he was little and confirmed at 10 and 17. He needed a lot of school services and accommodations, but the biggest help was double time for his low processing speed, measured below the 5th percentile. He had double time for his ACT test, and he has double time in college, that he is trying to wean himself off, because he knows workplaces will not have any accommodations for him.

My son's issues won't go away magically. They will always be there. He might be fired from multiple jobs for lack of productivity. He absolutely needed his accommodations in K-12 and to suggest that our money bought unnecessary services is outrageous. On the contrary, we were sufficiently educated and wealthy to get him the help he needed, and that's why he made it into college in the first place.

Healthcare and mental health evaluations and services NEED TO BECOME CHEAPER, so that poorer families can benefit from them too.

What this article is missing is that modern society is uncovering a host of variability in brain function. That is particularly true for autism diagnoses. It doesn't mean people are gaming the system and being diagnosed when they don't have whatever it is. It means our methods of diagnosis have improved significantly and are covering more and more of the population, and that's why there are more people being diagnosed. And because scientists advance to a more granular understanding of mental health differences, the threshold for diagnosis keeps getting lower. But still, due to cost, it's the rich people who get diagnosed first. It doesn't mean they're lying about their symptoms.

All this poses a greater societal question of how to think about brain variability. We should accept that people function differently and that some are entitled to more time, or noise canceling headphones or whatever it is, without pathologizing their condition and labeling them as "disordered". Because this is really the crux of your complaint: that people with no perceived handicap are acting as if they deserve pity, community resources and extra attention, and that it's not fair, because they're not handicapped.

Instead, you should think about it as: people with different brain functioning are entitled to a different learning or working environment, even if they're just as smart than others, so that they can contribute to society instead of not being able to fit in at all and thus become a drain on society.

ESOL students who need accomodations are often overlooked because, 1. They tend to be low income, parents cannot afford testing, 2. Because the teachers assume they are “slow” because they are not fluent in English yet. These poor kids have two strikes against them already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't have a grasp on the material, then no amount of extra time is going to change that . . . but be angry about extra time if it makes you feel better.

Wrong. Extra time students often get to come back to finish. That extra time in between testing gives them time to look up answers.

That is far less common. Most are 50% extra. 100% is next most common. Both of those are typically in one sitting. Splitting over multiple sessions, much less common.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't have a grasp on the material, then no amount of extra time is going to change that . . . but be angry about extra time if it makes you feel better.

Wrong. Extra time students often get to come back to finish. That extra time in between testing gives them time to look up answers.

That is far less common. Most are 50% extra. 100% is next most common. Both of those are typically in one sitting. Splitting over multiple sessions, much less common.

Not in college because exams are 2-3 hours long. So they are generally split into 2 days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember this from law school. The only “kid” with an accommodation was the “bro” with the rich family. All this sssst about “slow processing” and specific versions of “adhd” that just amount to “let my kid take the test at their own speed but yours has to do it timed.” More for the rich, once again, undermining the truly needy.

I remember a law school test that nobody could possibly finish. Teacher was defensive and said, “well, one kid finished.” Turns out that was the kid with accommodations. Whether the kid really needed accommodations, I can only guess; the point is that is should not have negatively impacted the rest of us. With curves etc., it too often does…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't have a grasp on the material, then no amount of extra time is going to change that . . . but be angry about extra time if it makes you feel better.

Wrong. Extra time students often get to come back to finish. That extra time in between testing gives them time to look up answers.

That is far less common. Most are 50% extra. 100% is next most common. Both of those are typically in one sitting. Splitting over multiple sessions, much less common.

Eh. So give them the test in two parts so they don't have the opportunity to cheat like you assume they will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is, as anyone who has looked into this well knows, anyone can get these extra time accommodations. They are for sale.

Yep.

Hence why they are primarily found among the rich and UMC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

p

Wow. I grew up middle class attending Philadelphia parochial schools. I was diagnosed with epilepsy and an autoimmune disease at age six that wreaked havoc on my life. The meds damaged my brain because slowing synapse firing prevents seizures but also dramatically reduces processing speed. I was able to get on a better medication regimen in middle school, which allowed me to perform at a high level in high school. I got a full ride to my elite LAC that gives out a select few scholarships to local kids. I then turned down HYS for law school for a full merit ride at a “lower” T14. I graduated with honors, got a federal clerkship, and worked in big law.

I have been absolutely blessed with many opportunities, and much of my success is attributed to luck. But my disability is NOT an advantage (much less one obtained by being “rich”). My body is utterly broken. I actually feel lucky I have epilepsy, which most people consider a “real” disability, because it insulates me from so much of the hate disabled people get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

Uh, the question is whether people who can get testing accommodations in school can function in the workplace. Evidently this poster can, despite accommodations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

p

Wow. I grew up middle class attending Philadelphia parochial schools. I was diagnosed with epilepsy and an autoimmune disease at age six that wreaked havoc on my life. The meds damaged my brain because slowing synapse firing prevents seizures but also dramatically reduces processing speed. I was able to get on a better medication regimen in middle school, which allowed me to perform at a high level in high school. I got a full ride to my elite LAC that gives out a select few scholarships to local kids. I then turned down HYS for law school for a full merit ride at a “lower” T14. I graduated with honors, got a federal clerkship, and worked in big law.

I have been absolutely blessed with many opportunities, and much of my success is attributed to luck. But my disability is NOT an advantage (much less one obtained by being “rich”). My body is utterly broken. I actually feel lucky I have epilepsy, which most people consider a “real” disability, because it insulates me from so much of the hate disabled people get.

I appreciate your honesty. But would you have gotten into big law and a prestigious law school without your disability, or not? I am not being facetious; untimed LSATs are huge, huge, huge — even more so than untimed SATs. What were your LSATs? Only you know the newer to this; it might require soul-searching.