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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

Nope. HIPPA, ADA, etc.

There is no requirement that an accomodation not be disclosed. They have to be provided. They should be disclosed.

Further, and more to the point, the problem is not so much a kid getting to take an extra hour for the exam. Rather, poor kids and middle class kids who do not have the resources to get outside tutoring, or to take multiple tests, multiple times. Isn't a kid from not so great inner city schools who pulls a 25 on the one time they took the ACT way, way ahead of a kid who gets a 34 on their 4th time after 20 hours of outside tutoring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
There is no requirement that an accomodation not be disclosed. They have to be provided. They should be disclosed.

https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2018/10/08/act-ends-practice-over-which-it-was-sued-advocates-students

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1. IT's sad that people can't be flexible enough thinkers to understand that people think different ways and those different thinkers contribute greatly to society. I guess they feel threatened that their little snowflake won't get into the school they think the child "deserves."

[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.

There is no requirement that an accomodation not be disclosed. They have to be provided. They should be disclosed.

Further, and more to the point, the problem is not so much a kid getting to take an extra hour for the exam. Rather, poor kids and middle class kids who do not have the resources to get outside tutoring, or to take multiple tests, multiple times. Isn't a kid from not so great inner city schools who pulls a 25 on the one time they took the ACT way, way ahead of a kid who gets a 34 on their 4th time after 20 hours of outside tutoring?

Then College Board should not have purposely made the exam based even more on knowledge (specifically, Common Core and the quality of the high school education) rather than ability and even more amenable to prep than it already was. The test has changed multiple times over the past 20-30 yrs to get rid of the aptitude angle, so much that SAT ceased to be an acronym a long time ago now. College Board even promotes a study whereby Khan Academy users gained an average of something like 100 pts with some particular number of hours of use.

Anyone with access to a computer and a little guidance can find 8 official practice tests online for free (or get the book from the library), not to mention another several QAS available on reddit. The motivation part a lot of kids of all income levels struggle with, but college guidance is what seems especially to fall short for poor kids -- they don't know what they don't know. (That part I find heartbreaking. It takes a certain level of curiosity and determination to even begin to hunt down college admission info and wisdom on the web, not to mention time. As a parent, I have plenty of time to do that, but most teens do not.)

[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.

There is no requirement that an accomodation not be disclosed. They have to be provided. They should be disclosed.

Further, and more to the point, the problem is not so much a kid getting to take an extra hour for the exam. Rather, poor kids and middle class kids who do not have the resources to get outside tutoring, or to take multiple tests, multiple times. Isn't a kid from not so great inner city schools who pulls a 25 on the one time they took the ACT way, way ahead of a kid who gets a 34 on their 4th time after 20 hours of outside tutoring?

No kid is going to get a 34 after 20 hours of outside tutoring. Tutoring helps clear up minor issues - it’s the entire education and relative intelligence of the test taker that gets a kid their score.

If tutoring were to really make a difference it would have to be extensive (months or years - which some people do) and that may or may not make a difference.

The extra time for connected rich kids really is giving poorer kids short shrift though. Perhaps these rich testing companies should do more to identify less advantaged kids who need more support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College Board approves 94% of requests??? So there is no real investigation? Who ever said it was difficult to get extra time accommodation is full of hog wash. A 94% approval rate is not an indication that it is difficult to get approval.

College board requires proof of diagnosis for accomodations. Once you have a qualified diagnosis, who is the College Board to say that the kid's diagnosis isn't valid? Getting an evaluation to get a diagnosis is an $$$ multiday process. All of you people implying that parents and kids are faking should count your lucky stars that your kid doesn't have a learning disability or other learning challenges.

I am a parent whose child has been tested for delays, though not HS age yet. I have posted on the SN boards. So that where I'm coming from.

I certainly believe that there are students who need the extra time and who have true LD. They need it, and it's a shame that their need for it will be questioned. But I also think it's an area that has a high potential for abuse.

There are parents like those in the college admissions scandal who will intentionally abuse it, and know very well their child has no LD. They did it in this scandal, and I don't think it's that hard to do. Coach your child to act a certain way, they will get a diagnosis. Especially if you have money, you can do this.

I also think there are other parents who I don't think are intentionally faking it, but who just can't seem to accept that their child is anything less than the best. If the child is not top of the class, mom or dad is having everything tested up the wazoo, doctor shopping, and I think if you put enough effort into it, you can probably find someone who will diagnose your child with something -- low processing speed or ADHD. It's not like there's a blood test for these, it's all a judgment call interpreting symptoms.

I also think there is under-diagnosis in low SES communities. It takes money to get these diagnoses, time to get all this testing done, and certain know-how about the system and how to apply for it. Private schools and schools serving an affluent community are on the lookout for LDs, they help students get the help they need through the system. Probably not so much in lower-performing schools.

I think this is it. I don't think there are very many parents who are actually encouraging their kids to lie about having problems to get a fake diagnosis, but I do think that when a lot of successful parents have average kids, they think that there must be some kind of disability that's causing their kids to not be top performers, hence they see a "problem" and get the kids tested. So I don't think there are really very many wealthy parents who are truly trying to scam the system, but rather they assume that their kids are most likely smarter than what they actually are, and when they don't see the performance that goes with what they perceive the intelligence is, they assume a LD or ADHD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tidbits from article:

At Scarsdale High school north of NY city, one in five students is eligible for extra time or another accommodation such as a separate room for taking the SAT or ACT college entrance exam.
At Weston High School in CT, it is one in four.
At Newton North High School outside Boston, it’s one in three.

Public schools in wealthier areas: where no more than 10% of students are eligible for free or reduced lunches, an average of 4.2% of students have the 504 designation compared to only 1.6% of kids in public schools where 75% or more are eligible for free and reduced cost lunches.


The evidence there - the system is being gamed and tilted to those w extra time. Extra time for all.

I just don't understand this sort of thinking. You worry about you. Their getting extra time doesn't take anything away from your kid. Are you suggesting they don't NEED it?

IMHO, the test should be untimed and completion times recorded and weighted. But that's another conversation entirely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

+1
This is a personality difference. Yes, it sucks and causes a hardship, but it is not a "disability". Are people who naturally have low energy levels (lazy) considered to be disabled as well?

[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.

Are we sure that ADHD is a disability covered under the ADA?

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/cms_011495.aspx

https://www.upcounsel.com/list-of-disabilities-covered-under-ada

. A diagnosis of ADHD is not enough to qualify for protection under the ADHD, however. To qualify for coverage, the disorder must significantly impact an individual's ability to perform major life activities or functions and the individual must be regarded as having a disability and have a record of having been viewed as disabled.
http://www.disabilityresource.org/47-adhd-and-the-protection-under-the-ada

In some cases yes. I’m other cases no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

+1
This is a personality difference. Yes, it sucks and causes a hardship, but it is not a "disability". Are people who naturally have low energy levels (lazy) considered to be disabled as well?

+1000 I graduated high school in the prehistoric 1980s and there were no accommodations but children had anxiety and attention issues etc. and everybody just dealt with it or suffered the consequences......that's life. All of this over-diagnosing of phantom conditions is absurd.

[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.

All of this can come out in strong teacher recommendations and essays. You don’t have to fake test scores to communicate these things.

[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.

There is no requirement that an accomodation not be disclosed. They have to be provided. They should be disclosed.

Further, and more to the point, the problem is not so much a kid getting to take an extra hour for the exam. Rather, poor kids and middle class kids who do not have the resources to get outside tutoring, or to take multiple tests, multiple times. Isn't a kid from not so great inner city schools who pulls a 25 on the one time they took the ACT way, way ahead of a kid who gets a 34 on their 4th time after 20 hours of outside tutoring?

That's what the adversity score everyone is complaining about is mean to capture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

+1
This is a personality difference. Yes, it sucks and causes a hardship, but it is not a "disability". Are people who naturally have low energy levels (lazy) considered to be disabled as well?

+1000 I graduated high school in the prehistoric 1980s and there were no accommodations but children had anxiety and attention issues etc. and everybody just dealt with it or suffered the consequences......that's life. All of this over-diagnosing of phantom conditions is absurd.

Luckily you aren't making decisions on who should "suffer the consequences."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why not give all of the test takers extra time. If they finish early, they can leave. If they need the extra time for whatever reason (maybe undiagnosed LD) they will have it along with the test takers who need the additional time.

As a teacher, I can say that one big problem is that leaving early creates noise and disruption for the others. The best you can hope for is that the early finishers take a nap. They can't take out a book to read during the SAT administration, or they would invalidate their test. Maybe there could be a room for people who think they'll finish fast, a room for middle-of-the-road kids, and a room for kids who like to take their time. Also, there are some (with OCD, maybe) who would go over their answers all day if you let them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not give all of the test takers extra time. If they finish early, they can leave. If they need the extra time for whatever reason (maybe undiagnosed LD) they will have it along with the test takers who need the additional time.

I agree with this. Our child needs additional time because of diabetes. They need to measure blood sugar and inject insulin if blood sugar is high or eat/drink something if blood sugar is low. My friend's child gets additional time because of epilepsy: their brain sometimes stops working for a few seconds here and there. Therefore it would be unfair to the truly sick kids to disallow the additional time for all. Everybody should be able to take as much time as they need.

We have a friend’s DC who had extra time for the ACT and scored 36 out of 36. DC has diabetes. What should have been given was time in between the sections for the DC to eat and test sugar/insulin levels - not extra time to do a speed based test. DC is now seeking extra time on MCAT.

There is an accommodation for a personal proctor to "stop the clock" for a medical condition that needs attention, such as the above scenario.