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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

+1...surely admissions officers glean this from the kids' ECs and essays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should not be allowed to score above a 1300 with accommodations.

That will cut down on fakers and cheats.

Those with real learning disabilities can choose extra time or not. Whichever is best for them. This is a way to endure kids with learning disabilities are not shut out from higher education. They may continue to learn in college with their accommodations. I agree it’s best for society when more people are educated.

The kid who scores a 1560 using accommodations will either need to take the 1300 or see what they can actually do with standard time.

. Okay, but I think this should include ALL types of accommodations. Like glasses. No one should be able to take the SATs with glasses without also taking the hit to their score.

It makes more sense just to do this for extra time. We have a child who qualifies for extra time and would be ok with this.

Other accommodations actually make taking the test take longer, so they also need extra time because of those accommodations. For example, a person who needs a scribe automatically gets 50% more time because it just takes longer to take the test with a scribe.

If you need a scribe or have profound dyslexia use the accommodations! Nobody is taking them away in this scenario.

. In this scenario, they will be further penalized for being disabled.

If you cannot read I’m not sure you should be taking the SAT anyway. Those are serious accommodations needed for college and an SAT score would be the least of my worries. If you are needing to show you are college capable a 1300 is sufficient—you will get into a college. Does it really need to be a top 25?

So what you are saying is that kids who have overcome significant LDs to get good grades , contribute to their community, and have the knowledge base and aptitude to do well on the SAT with an accommodation should not be admitted to top schools. They can’t benefit from the education, don’t deserve it because they are defective, and will never make a meaningful contribution to society.

I guarantee that kid who succeeds at TJ despite ADHD has worked harder than your kid, accomplished more than your kid, has more Grit than your kid and is as bright, if not brighter than your kid. Why does he deserve a UVA, or even a Princeton education?

I say if you cannot read you shouldn’t get into a top college—if you did so because you had someone else read for you. I’m sure there are smart kids who cannot read. They can go to a less selective school with the 1300 they will score. I’m sure there are geniuses with profound dyslexia. A not-top-50 school won’t hurt them.

ADHD is a made up diagnosis. I believe kids should be allowed accommodations to access a curriculum but not for measures of achievement.

Top colleges what kids that will go back into the community and become a leader.

They want a blind student who will improve lives for the blind.

They want dyslexic kids that will lead research to improve education for dyslexic people (not to mention they have a higher rate of owning huge companies... so they want the money.)

They don't want your... I want to be a doctor or I want to do Big Law kids. Go to your state college... do the honor program.... tell everybody... But it's the honor program.

I can promise you that Harvard doesn’t want kids who cannot read or write. But there are laws to protect them from discrimination.

Yes. There are many CEOs who report to have been dyslexic to some degree. Also many prison inmates. Let’s not go there. Dyslexia does not make you smarter or more likely to own a business.

I wouldn’t say kids with LDs or ADHD have more grit either. They are just normal kids.

I can promise you that Harvard wants a kid that is able to perform within a certain range and if that child is blind and/or profoundly dyslexic... all the better.

Sorry, a perfect score ... good for your state schools honor program... not Harvard.

FFS why are you against disclosing accommodations then?

I’m not. It’s against the law. You want to get rid if hipaa? Disclose all medical information.

Also disclose how much test prep.

I’m all about transparency.

Sorry your kid failed so miserably that you must pull everyone else down...that's the ticket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

+1...surely admissions officers glean this from the kids' ECs and essays.

There isn’t enough time to read all the applications and essays

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Set aside the rational, Darwinian attitude of making sure my kids get theirs vs. other kids. Which is actually brutally logical. I respect that.

But what about really smart kids trapped inside some condition that impairs their ability to abide by normal rules. Dyslexia, ADHD, autism. There are likely some truly creative bright minds that we would miss as a society if we just hammered these kids with zero accommodations.

We as a society would be poorer for it.

I agree they are amazing. But if they’re truly amazing they will not be missed. These are the kids who score 1600 with extra time. Without accommodations they may score a 1400. They will be just fine. They will go to college and prove their brilliance. Why they should deserve a Harvard seat over a 1600 kid without extra time is what’s really up for debate.

It’s the kids who don’t have an high IQ you should worry about as a society. The kids who with extra time only score a 1200. They would be shut out from college without accommodations and they are capable with a little help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If your kid has a slow processing speed they deserve a lower score. This charade will end soon. Affluent parents gaming the system so their kid can bump their 1400 to a 1500 is going to end. They have to have a non-timed test, call it something else and offer it as an addition to the traditional ACT or SAT. Call it the NTSAT (non-timed SAT) offer to anyone with a 504 or to any kid who doesn't want to take the SAT with time constraints. Let the colleges then decide then. But the colleges should KNOW who is getting more time on these tests and this seems like the only fair way. NO MORE EXTRA TIME ON SAT OR ACT FOR ANYONE

And, as others have said, if you want to go down this path and level the playing field, let’s only allow people to take the test once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should not be allowed to score above a 1300 with accommodations.

That will cut down on fakers and cheats.

Those with real learning disabilities can choose extra time or not. Whichever is best for them. This is a way to endure kids with learning disabilities are not shut out from higher education. They may continue to learn in college with their accommodations. I agree it’s best for society when more people are educated.

The kid who scores a 1560 using accommodations will either need to take the 1300 or see what they can actually do with standard time.

. Okay, but I think this should include ALL types of accommodations. Like glasses. No one should be able to take the SATs with glasses without also taking the hit to their score.

It makes more sense just to do this for extra time. We have a child who qualifies for extra time and would be ok with this.

Other accommodations actually make taking the test take longer, so they also need extra time because of those accommodations. For example, a person who needs a scribe automatically gets 50% more time because it just takes longer to take the test with a scribe.

If you need a scribe or have profound dyslexia use the accommodations! Nobody is taking them away in this scenario.

. In this scenario, they will be further penalized for being disabled.

If you cannot read I’m not sure you should be taking the SAT anyway. Those are serious accommodations needed for college and an SAT score would be the least of my worries. If you are needing to show you are college capable a 1300 is sufficient—you will get into a college. Does it really need to be a top 25?

So what you are saying is that kids who have overcome significant LDs to get good grades , contribute to their community, and have the knowledge base and aptitude to do well on the SAT with an accommodation should not be admitted to top schools. They can’t benefit from the education, don’t deserve it because they are defective, and will never make a meaningful contribution to society.

I guarantee that kid who succeeds at TJ despite ADHD has worked harder than your kid, accomplished more than your kid, has more Grit than your kid and is as bright, if not brighter than your kid. Why does he deserve a UVA, or even a Princeton education?

I say if you cannot read you shouldn’t get into a top college—if you did so because you had someone else read for you. I’m sure there are smart kids who cannot read. They can go to a less selective school with the 1300 they will score. I’m sure there are geniuses with profound dyslexia. A not-top-50 school won’t hurt them.

ADHD is a made up diagnosis. I believe kids should be allowed accommodations to access a curriculum but not for measures of achievement.

Top colleges what kids that will go back into the community and become a leader.

They want a blind student who will improve lives for the blind.

They want dyslexic kids that will lead research to improve education for dyslexic people (not to mention they have a higher rate of owning huge companies... so they want the money.)

They don't want your... I want to be a doctor or I want to do Big Law kids. Go to your state college... do the honor program.... tell everybody... But it's the honor program.

I can promise you that Harvard doesn’t want kids who cannot read or write. But there are laws to protect them from discrimination.

Yes. There are many CEOs who report to have been dyslexic to some degree. Also many prison inmates. Let’s not go there. Dyslexia does not make you smarter or more likely to own a business.

I wouldn’t say kids with LDs or ADHD have more grit either. They are just normal kids.

I can promise you that Harvard wants a kid that is able to perform within a certain range and if that child is blind and/or profoundly dyslexic... all the better.

Sorry, a perfect score ... good for your state schools honor program... not Harvard.

FFS why are you against disclosing accommodations then?

I’m not. It’s against the law. You want to get rid if hipaa? Disclose all medical information.

Also disclose how much test prep.

I’m all about transparency.

Sorry your kid failed so miserably that you must pull everyone else down...that's the ticket.

Sorry you are afraid of transparency with you kid but demand it for others.

My kid didn't fail because we were smart enough to put her in rowing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

You’re not very bright. Who would be stupid enough not to prep for a standardized test? Probably the stupid and lazy. It doesn’t have to take long and it doesn’t have to cost anything with Khan Academy and other free online resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Set aside the rational, Darwinian attitude of making sure my kids get theirs vs. other kids. Which is actually brutally logical. I respect that.

But what about really smart kids trapped inside some condition that impairs their ability to abide by normal rules. Dyslexia, ADHD, autism. There are likely some truly creative bright minds that we would miss as a society if we just hammered these kids with zero accommodations.

We as a society would be poorer for it.

I agree they are amazing. But if they’re truly amazing they will not be missed. These are the kids who score 1600 with extra time. Without accommodations they may score a 1400. They will be just fine. They will go to college and prove their brilliance. Why they should deserve a Harvard seat over a 1600 kid without extra time is what’s really up for debate.

It’s the kids who don’t have an high IQ you should worry about as a society. The kids who with extra time only score a 1200. They would be shut out from college without accommodations and they are capable with a little help.

But you don't get to decide what Harvard wants.

They want these kids and they want to know how they can perform with extra time. Harvard does not care if the kid spends 10 hours or 5 hours to write a paper, that want kids with LDs in their school and they have decided this is how they will find them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

You’re not very bright. Who would be stupid enough not to prep for a standardized test? Probably the stupid and lazy. It doesn’t have to take long and it doesn’t have to cost anything with Khan Academy and other free online resources.

Kids who.are actually smart don't prep. It doesn't have to get you pay for a tutor.if Mahn is so good, why did you hire a tutor?

Really smart kids take 1 PSAT and 1 Sat.... They re-read the instruction, nothing more.

These are the kids that impress. Why does you kid need so much prep, that sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

You’re not very bright. Who would be stupid enough not to prep for a standardized test? Probably the stupid and lazy. It doesn’t have to take long and it doesn’t have to cost anything with Khan Academy and other free online resources.

Kids who.are actually smart don't prep. It doesn't have to get you pay for a tutor.if Mahn is so good, why did you hire a tutor?

Really smart kids take 1 PSAT and 1 Sat.... They re-read the instruction, nothing more.

These are the kids that impress. Why does you kid need so much prep, that sad.

Go back inside your trailer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

You’re not very bright. Who would be stupid enough not to prep for a standardized test? Probably the stupid and lazy. It doesn’t have to take long and it doesn’t have to cost anything with Khan Academy and other free online resources.

Kids who.are actually smart don't prep. It doesn't have to get you pay for a tutor.if Mahn is so good, why did you hire a tutor?

Really smart kids take 1 PSAT and 1 Sat.... They re-read the instruction, nothing more.

These are the kids that impress. Why does you kid need so much prep, that sad.

LOL, the nutcases coming out of the woodwork now.

My kid got extra time and scored a 36. He took a mock test as a sophomore and scored a 33. His second mock test (after a few weeks of prep) he scored a 34. His third mock test (after a few more weeks and now a junior) he scored a 35. His first and only actual test (in his first semester as a junior), he scored a 36. Who knows how he would have done without the prep. I imagine he would not have done as well on the science section, which tends to trick a lot of very smart people.

There's this thing called competition that will be a big part of your kid's life. People and companies engage in it. They do whatever is needed to win. If you work for a company and want to win a contract, you prepare by doing the appropriate research and spend lots of time writing and revising a proposal. This is what preparation is about. It's about winning. If you want to be a loser, then don't prep. It's as simple as that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

You’re not very bright. Who would be stupid enough not to prep for a standardized test? Probably the stupid and lazy. It doesn’t have to take long and it doesn’t have to cost anything with Khan Academy and other free online resources.

Kids who.are actually smart don't prep. It doesn't have to get you pay for a tutor.if Mahn is so good, why did you hire a tutor?

Really smart kids take 1 PSAT and 1 Sat.... They re-read the instruction, nothing more.

These are the kids that impress. Why does you kid need so much prep, that sad.

LOL, the nutcases coming out of the woodwork now.

My kid got extra time and scored a 36. He took a mock test as a sophomore and scored a 33. His second mock test (after a few weeks of prep) he scored a 34. His third mock test (after a few more weeks and now a junior) he scored a 35. His first and only actual test (in his first semester as a junior), he scored a 36. Who knows how he would have done without the prep. I imagine he would not have done as well on the science section, which tends to trick a lot of very smart people.

There's this thing called competition that will be a big part of your kid's life. People and companies engage in it. They do whatever is needed to win. If you work for a company and want to win a contract, you prepare by doing the appropriate research and spend lots of time writing and revising a proposal. This is what preparation is about. It's about winning. If you want to be a loser, then don't prep. It's as simple as that.

I can only imagine the loser that brags about not preparing for an important undertaking. But you’re correct, that’s why there are winners and losers in this world and that’s also why the losers will incessantly complain about the unfairness of it all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The long game is life. Tests, college, etc, are practice for life.

Everyone has different abilities and brings different talents. That is a good thing.

Pretending that a student who takes twice as long to complete a test is the same as a student who doesnt need extra time is a fraud.

It doesnt help the student with extra time. It sets them up for failure when they hit the real world where performance matters and everyone is taking the same "test" with the same amount of time.

Instead of trying to pretend they are the same as everyone else, the students should be trying to develop other qualities which distinguish them.

This is the damage that the everybody-gets-a-trophy trend has done to our society. It’s no longer acceptable to have strengths and weaknesses. If you’re strong at math but struggle with reading, you simply must get a diagnosis and accommodations so that you can do everything perfectly. If you struggle with math...same story. It is simply required that everyone be great at everything. Bs are not acceptable. Cs are considered failure. Everyone must stand on the appropriate size box so that we all appear the same height, and we can all reach things that we may or may not even want...and when we finally do get that first job, some will still rise to the top while others lag behind. Accomodations don’t make the playing field level. Everyone’s skill set and abilities do not become even. It’s all an illusion. Instead of focusing on hiding what may keep us from being successful in one thing or another, why not choose genuine success in another discipline or career?

That's what they do after college. Not every job requires speed. I didn't have accommodations in college because I didn't need them, but I still picked a job that doesn't have huge time pressures. There are many jobs without time pressures. Colleges prepare students for all types of jobs. We can't relegate students who would excel in the many jobs that don't have extreme time pressures to subpar jobs because there are jobs that require speed. Also, your assumption that accommodations somehow will give the student great or perfect scores is off. My colleague's daughter had accommodations and still struggled. She didn't go to a great school. I'm sure once she graduates, she'll end up in a job that matches her strengths, not the job your kid is competing for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids with no accommodations should start voluntarily disclosing that.

And kids that don’t test prep ... a 32 with no prep is way more impressive than a 34 with years of prep.

Bragging about being lazy on a college application isn't a good idea. I'd take the kid who studied and got the 34 over the kid who didn't and got a 32. I'd assume one has work ethic and one doesn't.

Sorry your kid can't learn.in the classroom and needs a private tutor to teach him/her/them. You should disclose to colleges that your child is inept at learning in a traditional way.

You’re not very bright. Who would be stupid enough not to prep for a standardized test? Probably the stupid and lazy. It doesn’t have to take long and it doesn’t have to cost anything with Khan Academy and other free online resources.

Kids who.are actually smart don't prep. It doesn't have to get you pay for a tutor.if Mahn is so good, why did you hire a tutor?

Really smart kids take 1 PSAT and 1 Sat.... They re-read the instruction, nothing more.

These are the kids that impress. Why does you kid need so much prep, that sad.

LOL, the nutcases coming out of the woodwork now.

My kid got extra time and scored a 36. He took a mock test as a sophomore and scored a 33. His second mock test (after a few weeks of prep) he scored a 34. His third mock test (after a few more weeks and now a junior) he scored a 35. His first and only actual test (in his first semester as a junior), he scored a 36. Who knows how he would have done without the prep. I imagine he would not have done as well on the science section, which tends to trick a lot of very smart people.

There's this thing called competition that will be a big part of your kid's life. People and companies engage in it. They do whatever is needed to win. If you work for a company and want to win a contract, you prepare by doing the appropriate research and spend lots of time writing and revising a proposal. This is what preparation is about. It's about winning. If you want to be a loser, then don't prep. It's as simple as that.

I can only imagine the loser that brags about not preparing for an important undertaking. But you’re correct, that’s why there are winners and losers in this world and that’s also why the losers will incessantly complain about the unfairness of it all.

The work hard attitude is do 1980’s.... school wang kids that work smart.

Geez took the test 4 time and peeped each time... what a waste of time. Imagine the good he could have done for others in that time.