WSJ article on more students especially the affluent get extra time on SAT

[Anonymous]

Even the ADHD diagnosis is a joke......it's an invented condition to make parents feel better about their children's deficiencies.

ADHD is not an invented condition. My kid has it and is a math whiz - he's accelerated by two grades and one of the top students in his class. But for subjects he doesn't like, it is an incredible struggle to get him to sit still and focus on completing work. Extra time doesn't help, and I don't think he needs it, but breaks to move around help a bit. He also can't cross a street without a traffic light safely, despite being 11 years old, and almost a year and a half of practice, because he has no impulses control. ADHD is real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Even the ADHD diagnosis is a joke......it's an invented condition to make parents feel better about their children's deficiencies.

ADHD is not an invented condition. My kid has it and is a math whiz - he's accelerated by two grades and one of the top students in his class. But for subjects he doesn't like, it is an incredible struggle to get him to sit still and focus on completing work. Extra time doesn't help, and I don't think he needs it, but breaks to move around help a bit. He also can't cross a street without a traffic light safely, despite being 11 years old, and almost a year and a half of practice, because he has no impulses control. ADHD is real.

and this is a disability 'cause.. you don't like it? it's not convenient? he is not good at everything?

i am relatively short.. there is a bunch of things that i struggle with despite being extremely talented for many other things. should this be considered a disability?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An additional issue in Big Law or other work environments where time is billed by the hour is this. If Suzy Speedy and Lennie LD look exactly the same on their transcripts, they will probably be hired at similar salaries and similar hourly billing rates. But if Lennie needs to work 1.5 times longer to do the project, the clients lucky enough to have Lennie assigned to their projects will end up paying 50% more for his work product than if Suzy had done it. Not fair to the client, not fair to the firm.

Unless Lenny is actually smarter and more creative. People who require supports and accommodations can be extremely bright and intellectual and/or have amazing memories, meaning they save a great deal of time looking up cases. They might save more time with their gifts and skills than they lose on their challenges. Extended time helps level the playing field on certain types of tests that are helpful but not extremely accurate identifiers of future success in college. FYI my kid is top of his social science and humanities classes in content knowledge. You gotta ask yourself what's really important for success in life...and the answer is, it depends because there are so many ways to be successful--speed is important for some things, problem-solving for others, mastery and recall of content for others, or a combo. Companies are increasingly looking to increase neurodiversity because the skills that employees with challenges bring are useful to the company's success. There is plenty of literature on this in the media.

[Anonymous]

Meh. Its mostly White people who cannot imagine that their kids are dumb. They would rather say that they have some kind of mental disability and get IEP rather than say that they are not very bright. If someone describes their kid as "QUIRKY" one more time.


I have yet to see Asian-American parents choose to go this route for their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meh. Its mostly White people who cannot imagine that their kids are dumb. They would rather say that they have some kind of mental disability and get IEP rather than say that they are not very bright. If someone describes their kid as "QUIRKY" one more time.


I have yet to see Asian-American parents choose to go this route for their children.

+1
They must be exception one way or the other. even better - both! take a battery of 15 tests and the the very special uniqueness will present itself.

[Anonymous]

Well -- I would say what is really coming out here, and in other similar discussions, is:

1. The College Board "adversity" score is obviously long over due and truly needed although there certainly may still be arguments about calculations.

2. There needs to be a notation that additional test time was utilized by the test taker. Schools then may or may not consider the same in their accept/reject decisions based on the school's policies and what other information they may have on the particular student.

3. The College Board must note how many times a student takes the test regardless of whether scores are sent.

There is still a huge issue of outside test preparation skewing scores. That's obviously more difficult to address, because a company cannot prohibit kids from seeking outside help. It does, however, unfairly skew the scoring system. I would be curious what others think is an appropriate way to address that problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meh. Its mostly White people who cannot imagine that their kids are dumb. They would rather say that they have some kind of mental disability and get IEP rather than say that they are not very bright. If someone describes their kid as "QUIRKY" one more time.


I have yet to see Asian-American parents choose to go this route for their children.

What do Asian-American parents do when their child actually does have a disability then? It happens.

I have a kid with dyslexia. it really IS a thing. I'm baffled that you are that ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An additional issue in Big Law or other work environments where time is billed by the hour is this. If Suzy Speedy and Lennie LD look exactly the same on their transcripts, they will probably be hired at similar salaries and similar hourly billing rates. But if Lennie needs to work 1.5 times longer to do the project, the clients lucky enough to have Lennie assigned to their projects will end up paying 50% more for his work product than if Suzy had done it. Not fair to the client, not fair to the firm.

Unless Lenny is actually smarter and more creative. People who require supports and accommodations can be extremely bright and intellectual and/or have amazing memories, meaning they save a great deal of time looking up cases. They might save more time with their gifts and skills than they lose on their challenges. Extended time helps level the playing field on certain types of tests that are helpful but not extremely accurate identifiers of future success in college. FYI my kid is top of his social science and humanities classes in content knowledge. You gotta ask yourself what's really important for success in life...and the answer is, it depends because there are so many ways to be successful--speed is important for some things, problem-solving for others, mastery and recall of content for others, or a combo. Companies are increasingly looking to increase neurodiversity because the skills that employees with challenges bring are useful to the company's success. There is plenty of literature on this in the media.

David Bois has dyslexia. I would say his clients probably don't mind . . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well -- I would say what is really coming out here, and in other similar discussions, is:

1. The College Board "adversity" score is obviously long over due and truly needed although there certainly may still be arguments about calculations.

2. There needs to be a notation that additional test time was utilized by the test taker. Schools then may or may not consider the same in their accept/reject decisions based on the school's policies and what other information they may have on the particular student.

3. The College Board must note how many times a student takes the test regardless of whether scores are sent.

There is still a huge issue of outside test preparation skewing scores. That's obviously more difficult to address, because a company cannot prohibit kids from seeking outside help. It does, however, unfairly skew the scoring system. I would be curious what others think is an appropriate way to address that problem.

I don't think that outside test preparation has anything to do with the design of the test, the way it is administered or the way scores are reported. Some things are not within the College Board's control.

A kid who spends his afternoons on Khan Academy doing SAT prep is probably going to have an advantage over a kid who spends his time playing video games, instead. A kid who does their Algebra 2 homework, asks questions and puts the time into learn the material is going to have an advantage over a kid who scribbles and daydreams during class. Kids with parents who prioritize their children's educations are going to have an advantage over kids whose parents do not prioritize education. A kid with a high IQ is going to have an advantage over a kid with a low IQ.

The College Board should work on better ways of detecting cheating. No parent should be able to pay a middle aged man to sit and take their child's SAT for them. There needs to be some sort of control over the testing environment.

[Anonymous]

2. There needs to be a notation that additional test time was utilized by the test taker.

Nope. HIPPA, ADA, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College Board can fix a lot of this ....
All scores get sent - they are either cancelled immediately with no visibility to score OR they are part of your record. No options for ... let me see.

Colleges can help -
no super scoring


I would love to see in the financial records for College Board.

Super scoring makes sense because you can have a bad day and get a low score, but you generally can't guess your way into a high score-- you actually need to know what you're doing.

I'm ok with super scoring, but I think the colleges should see ALL scores. There is a huge difference between a kid who takes it twice and gets a good score, vs. a kid that takes ie 10 (or more!) times to get the same score.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

2. There needs to be a notation that additional test time was utilized by the test taker.

Nope. HIPPA, ADA, etc.

Why can’t a kid without extra time indicate they took the test under normal conditions? What about their rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2. There needs to be a notation that additional test time was utilized by the test taker.

Nope. HIPPA, ADA, etc.

Why can’t a kid without extra time indicate they took the test under normal conditions? What about their rights?

Go ahead and write that in the Common App. There is nothing stopping you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

2. There needs to be a notation that additional test time was utilized by the test taker.

Nope. HIPPA, ADA, etc.

Why can’t a kid without extra time indicate they took the test under normal conditions? What about their rights?

Perhaps lobby Congress. You do realize if they do that, they are disclosing that others had accommodations by negative implication, which is against the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do we accept in sports only the best available performers? In sports we don't distinguish poor kid with no special coaching but with innate abilities versus rich kid with years of high priced one-to-one coaching but with moderate abilities. We don't give others any allowance for them being subpar at their sport due to their physical limitations because of genetics or economic reasons. Based on athletic provess and interest, athletes go to D1 and professional level, D3 and semiprofessional level, intramural and private club level, weekend warrior level, and finally couch potato level. Then why do we give all sorts of allowances when it comes to admission to colleges? We give extra time for standardized tests, accept lower GPA and test scores for recruited athletes, URM, first-gen, economically poor students and now students with adversity scores. Do we, as a society, come to a common understanding that most if not all students should be given a shot at studying at highly selective colleges regardless of whether, once they get there, they will succeed academically or not? Not every student should be escorted to the gates of highly selective colleges. We have thousands of colleges, community colleges, and trade schools and they are all looking for students to educate.

What is prompting us to treat admission to colleges differently from selection to sports teams? Is it because we view education as a ticket to earning livelihood and a degree from a highly selective college is viewed as the best means to achieve it? If so, instead of strengthening education system from early childhood level to high school for every child in the society, which of course is a daunting task, we are resorting to a quick band aid that is not a solution that will give lasting benefits to the society.

You can't compare sports to academics...sorry. You don't NEED to do a sport, but you NEED to get an education. Nice try though.

I agree. You NEED to get an education. But it doesn't have to be at a highly selective college only!

See- but it’s about the parents and their egos, it’s not at all about the child. If the child doesn’t get into a top University they are a family failure.

Please understand that those of you who operate this way are awful people who are psychologically damaging their children for life.

+1. All of this accommodation nonsense is about parental egos.....not what’s best for the child. None of this idiocy existed 30 years ago and we all ended where we belonged in life.

This is some of the most ignorant, nonsensical crap posted. "We all ended up where we belong?" Kids with disabilities didn't. Most kids with sns were drummed out of school and many ended up, and still do, in the criminal justice system. Many of the kids were kept hidden away and even kids with mild disabilities were shunned. This is why there are federal laws protecting people with disabilities. There are too many idiots with little knowledge who think they have the solution. You are ignorant, uneducated, and shouldn't be participating in this discussion.