504s give you an unfair advantage

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/17/upshot/nyc-schools-shsat-504.html

Second chart in this article- it gives an advantage across all races. Want to show this every parent who santimoniously claims they wish their kid didn’t need a 504 for ACT/SAT.

My DC received 50% extra time along with a reader and a scribe. It just takes longer to take a test with a reader and a scribe. He was ina room alone with his reader/scribe. No sanctimony about it. I think most people would prefer their children not to have disabilities, perhaps you are the exception.

If someone is using a reader and a scribe the test is no longer testing reading comprehension and written expression but listening comprehension and oral expression. It fundamentally alters the test. If every student were tested almost all of them could be diagnosed with some disability that a crafty psychologist could write up as needing extra time. If the psychologist didn't, they wouldn't get new referrals. All they have to do is continue giving tests until something inevitably will be lower because everyone has strength and weaknesses.

Clearly, Asian families who have kids who struggle make them work harder 365 days a year while white students get their kids diagnosed with something to get extra time.

My Aisian child has 504 with extra time because he needs it. Not a matter of how hard he could or does work

+1 Does PP really think that Asians and other minorities are systematically withholding needed supports from their kids need? Knowledge of disabilities and the ability to get expensive evaluations are more limited in those communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another thing to think about OP is that kids who get 504 are often highly gifted, with some learning challenges. For example a lot of kids with high verbal or performance IQs have slow processing speed as measured by neuropsych tests. So the ones who qualify for 504 are generally high functioning students who may have certain strengths but may need accommodations to level the playing field vis a vis their challenges, with the main accommodations being extended time. Hence the term twice exceptional (2E). Kids who are exceptional in terms of ability without any special challenges will do very well on the tests regardless.

+1

[Anonymous]

The article states that 323 out of over 27,000 test takers had a 504. 42% of those were white, that's 135 kids. 18% of the 27,000 test takers who tested under typical conditions were white, that's 4,860.

So 135 out of 4,860 white kids that took the test had an 504, or 2.8%.
For comparison, in 2015, nationally, 1.5% of students had a 504.

It is a huge problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not every student with a 504 is automatically afforded accommodations on the SAT or ACT. And if they do receive accommodations on one or both of these tests, it is often quite different than what they have in their 504 plan.

Perhaps the OP and the NYTimes don't understand this, but students with disabilities do.

The NY Times Upshot is a pretty reliable source & it seems like some affluent kids know what's up too.

https://newtriernews.org/news/2018/05/11/testing-accommodations-four-times-national-average/

This article about New Trier (a high school in an affluent suburb of Chicago) is shocking! 24% of students got accommodations on the ACT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I found the racial disparity shocking because you either believe the 504's are legitimate and minority students are identified in a manner that is way out of bounds to not raise equity concerns or there are some people using 504's to game the system.

I think the answer is probably both for fwiw.

Or you believe that 504s are legitimate but schools have no incentive to identify children who don't have serious issues, so it's left to parents with money (which means more white kids) or the kids who are fortunate enough to get excellent and tenacious teachers (of whom there aren't nearly enough).

[Anonymous]

SHAME ON YOU, OP.

Why don’t we switch, and your kid can take my kid’s disabilities?

Remember, he’ll have them for LIFE. Not just until the test is over.

NASTY IDIOT. Think about your intolerance when you’re old and need help, or if your grandchild is born with a disability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article states that 323 out of over 27,000 test takers had a 504. 42% of those were white, that's 135 kids. 18% of the 27,000 test takers who tested under typical conditions were white, that's 4,860.

So 135 out of 4,860 white kids that took the test had an 504, or 2.8%.
For comparison, in 2015, nationally, 1.5% of students had a 504.

It is a huge problem.

It is. When you consider that it's likely that close to 20% of the population has a reading-language based disability, we are grossly underserving our kids. It's criminal.

[Anonymous]

what if the disproportionate number of white kids getting accommodations is actually the effect of racism in a completely different way?
To explain:
There's a kind of rule of thumb that 10% of students qualify for IEPs. Long time since I have seen a breakdown, but a (smallish) portion of that is kids with cognitive disabilities ("mental retardation" in IDEA). (that proportion related to the percentage of kids it is expected will take alternate testing when assessing schools' performance).

Some proportion of these IEP kids are going to want to go to college and will take SATs/ACTs. I have no idea what % of kids with disabilities require extended time on tests, but given the potential rage of disablities--not just processing, there's also kids with tics, there's kids with ADHD, there's kids with physical disabilities--I can see where quite a few would need that.

But here's another thing about IDEA--classification. It has long been noted that white kids are more likely to be classified LD or autistic or OHI with the same presentation as kids of color who are classified ED or MR. And I will bet anything that the kids classified ED or MR are going to be less likely to be steered towards college than kids in those other categories.

In other words, the 2.8% of white test takers getting extended time compared to 1.5% overall COULD be a result of other systemic holding back of kids of color (this is not even getting into different SES stats, worse health stats, and whatever else)--as opposed to white having a chance to game the system their own way.

I have NO problem with kids who need accommodations getting them through the post-secondary application and, yes, educational process. Is life different when you're looking at employment? Depending on the specific job, maybe or maybe not. Regardless, disability should not prevent someone from getting the knowledge, regardless of what they do afterwards.

Anyway, nobody gave me EXTRA SAT points for finishing my tests in a third of the time it took other people and having to endure sitting in the testing room with NOTHING to do, no paper to draw on, no book to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article states that 323 out of over 27,000 test takers had a 504. 42% of those were white, that's 135 kids. 18% of the 27,000 test takers who tested under typical conditions were white, that's 4,860.

So 135 out of 4,860 white kids that took the test had an 504, or 2.8%.
For comparison, in 2015, nationally, 1.5% of students had a 504.

It is a huge problem.

Could you clarify? 4860 whote kids took the test under typical conditions but 135 had 504s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article states that 323 out of over 27,000 test takers had a 504. 42% of those were white, that's 135 kids. 18% of the 27,000 test takers who tested under typical conditions were white, that's 4,860.

So 135 out of 4,860 white kids that took the test had an 504, or 2.8%.
For comparison, in 2015, nationally, 1.5% of students had a 504.

It is a huge problem.

Could you clarify? 4860 whote kids took the test under typical conditions but 135 had 504s?

Read the article. Take double time and use a calculator if you must.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I found the racial disparity shocking because you either believe the 504's are legitimate and minority students are identified in a manner that is way out of bounds to not raise equity concerns or there are some people using 504's to game the system.

I think the answer is probably both for fwiw.

Or you believe that 504s are legitimate but schools have no incentive to identify children who don't have serious issues, so it's left to parents with money (which means more white kids) or the kids who are fortunate enough to get excellent and tenacious teachers (of whom there aren't nearly enough).

Pp here. I agree with this but it is troubling

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The article states that 323 out of over 27,000 test takers had a 504. 42% of those were white, that's 135 kids. 18% of the 27,000 test takers who tested under typical conditions were white, that's 4,860.

So 135 out of 4,860 white kids that took the test had an 504, or 2.8%.
For comparison, in 2015, nationally, 1.5% of students had a 504.

It is a huge problem.

Could you clarify? 4860 whote kids took the test under typical conditions but 135 had 504s?

Read the article. Take double time and use a calculator if you must.

Do “typical conditions” include accommodations under a 504?

[Anonymous]

Why the focus on 504s? Kids with IEPs and Child Study plans get accommodations for the major tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Worked with kids for years. Have seen LD kids think circles around speed demon straight A students. You know, some kids are athletic, some kids crunch numbers fast, some debate on their feet, some innovate, some are leaders, some contemplate at depths you’ll never know. No one’s entitled to anything; some people are just lucky they start with more advantages. A tiny little subset of scores does not necessarily make you a better thinker than someone with an incrementally different set of scores. Yes, some people are “smarter” than others, but you will not necessarily know it by their tests scores. Sure, you can glean some info on whether they appear to be prepared for basic college level work. If you want to tell colleges who to admit, get a job in an admissions office. All this griping suggests there’s only one kind of human who deserves everything. Be glad everyone doesn’t think this way or you wouldn’t be reading your bloody smart device and sitting in air conditioning with the lunch of your choice right now. You have no idea what other people have figured out that you benefit from every minute of the day. And if they were just like all these entitled complainers, we’d be without.

(The merits of which are a different conversation

I agree with everything you say. This isn't inconsistent with the idea that the College Board should just report the test scores of all students (taken under the same time constraints), and let the colleges decide if they matter or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another thing to think about OP is that kids who get 504 are often highly gifted, with some learning challenges. For example a lot of kids with high verbal or performance IQs have slow processing speed as measured by neuropsych tests. So the ones who qualify for 504 are generally high functioning students who may have certain strengths but may need accommodations to level the playing field vis a vis their challenges, with the main accommodations being extended time. Hence the term twice exceptional (2E). Kids who are exceptional in terms of ability without any special challenges will do very well on the tests regardless.

But isn't processing speed a part of the test? Don't the schools have a right to know that the playing field was "leveled?" Why wouldn't you tell the school that the kid got extra time? Then, the answer is, "the kid is super smart, but needed more time." That is an accurate representation of reality.