Claiming a disability on the SAT/ACT - have people been gaming the system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's a solution for timed tests:

Offer a choice - a timed or untimed test. Each child can decide which to take and which one will give them the best advantage. Like choosing between the ACT and SAT, let the kids decide which will give them the best relative scores. Then colleges can look at those test relative to the others that are timed or untimed.

Why is this eye-roll worthy? Extra time is the main point of contention. If you are a kid who does well and has good recall, then a timed test will make more sense for you. Your score might be a smidge lower than if you took the untimed version, but the colleges will know what version you took so you'd be judged accordingly. If taking more time helps you a lot, then you take the untimed one and are evaluated only against everyone else who took the untimed one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The SAT and ACT is testing speed. I don’t care who says it’s not. The SAT and ACT have said it is.

So I have a problem with accommodations that completely take that out of the equation.

SAT: our test is designed to test scholastic aptitude under timed conditions.

Parent: but my kid does poorly under timed conditions.

SAT: well, then your child won’t do as good on this test. Er. Wait. No. Strike that. Then we will give your child more time?

This will never be fair to me. No dog in the fight, though.

What you propose will never be fair to a large number of students with disabilities. Students who are college capable. This would effectively bar students with disabilities from college. That's discrimination and the IDEA is in place to make sure kids with disabilites have a level playing field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you know the answer, why does it matter how fast you can write it down? How often does anyone in the real world even use a pencil anymore? Who has a job that requires perfectly filling in little circles with a No.2 pencil?

Why do they still have to fill in the g-dmnd little circles in a timed setting?

C’mon. Which kid is smarter? The kid who can read all those boring passages and answer the questions in 40 minutes? Or the one who needs extra time?

That’s why it’s timed.

ACT is moving toward computer based testing, and I fear it’s going to be a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT and ACT is testing speed. I don’t care who says it’s not. The SAT and ACT have said it is.

So I have a problem with accommodations that completely take that out of the equation.

SAT: our test is designed to test scholastic aptitude under timed conditions.

Parent: but my kid does poorly under timed conditions.

SAT: well, then your child won’t do as good on this test. Er. Wait. No. Strike that. Then we will give your child more time?

This will never be fair to me. No dog in the fight, though.

What you propose will never be fair to a large number of students with disabilities. Students who are college capable. This would effectively bar students with disabilities from college. That's discrimination and the IDEA is in place to make sure kids with disabilites have a level playing field.

This begs another question though - are they really college capable if they then also need accommodations in college? It's a separate discussion, but one I am not sure I fully understand.

[Anonymous]

Those of you w kids in private schools w lots of wealthy families - ask your kids how many of their class mates get accommodations.

The % in private schools that get accommodations are much greater than in public especially inner city public schools. I wish CB would release the stats.

[Anonymous]

What’s so wrong with flagging tests with extra time? They should be looked st differently. I think it’s great your child with slow processing speed (or not anymore) can get a 35 on the ACT. Why wouldn’t colleges think that too? The test is flagged and maybe there is an explanation as to why. “Student has received 1.5 time because of low processing speed disability.”

If parents are arguing as they are here about it not really giving their child an advantage surely the makers of the test agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds to me as though a poster or two may not believe in the science behind the neuro-psychological testing recommended by board-certified doctors.

This compounds the problem of determining who is deserving of the accommodations and who does not.

My DC was encouraged to drop an AP course in a room full of administrators while looking at a form filled out by the teacher claiming DC didn't need or use any accommodations approved by the same school. The withdrawl of a yearlong course in the middle of April is on DC's transcrip. Teacher refused to provide ANY accommodationst. (Gritting my teeth).

So sorry pp. You should have filed a complaint against the school with your state dept of ed or with the eeoc. Schools cannot deny students access to higher level courses based on the iep. If you student needs support in a subject area, your kid, by law, gets that support in an AP or honors course. They can not pull this. Many parents don't know this. The doe has a letter posted from many years ago addressing this because so many schools deny kids with sns access to advanced classes. The teacher can not refuse to provide accommodations. This is easy to fight. I know. I have a kid with accommodations in AP classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you know the answer, why does it matter how fast you can write it down? How often does anyone in the real world even use a pencil anymore? Who has a job that requires perfectly filling in little circles with a No.2 pencil?

Why do they still have to fill in the g-dmnd little circles in a timed setting?

C’mon. Which kid is smarter? The kid who can read all those boring passages and answer the questions in 40 minutes? Or the one who needs extra time?

That’s why it’s timed.

ACT is moving toward computer based testing, and I fear it’s going to be a disaster.

I don't think so - I think they would be looked at separately. You'd see that if you get a 29 in the timed version and a 33 in the untimed you might choose the untimed. But if you get a 32 in the timed and a 33 in the untimed, you might decide that while it's not the best score of the two, you will look relatively stronger than the cohort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s so wrong with flagging tests with extra time? They should be looked st differently. I think it’s great your child with slow processing speed (or not anymore) can get a 35 on the ACT. Why wouldn’t colleges think that too? The test is flagged and maybe there is an explanation as to why. “Student has received 1.5 time because of low processing speed disability.”

If parents are arguing as they are here about it not really giving their child an advantage surely the makers of the test agree.

+1.

I believe some parents prefer to hide that inconvenient fact that gives their kids an obviously unfair advantage.

If you won the sprint gold medal by running 100m in 10 seconds, you don't want anyone to know you actually started running 20 seconds earlier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The extra time issue is rampant in the private high schools regardless of whether it extends to SAT/ACT testing. DD has ADD and does work a bit more slowly since she is so easily distracted. DH and I have never gotten her tested or asked for accommodations because we feel that she needs to figure out how to manage in the world at large. But now in high school she sees 25-50% of her class getting extended time on tests, while she loses tons of points by not having time to finish or check her work. The really frustrating thing is when they have a particularly short test, and many of the kids who have qualified for extra time finish it way before she does!! It is hard to argue that they are not gaming the system.

One of the biggest mistakes that you can make is not getting your kid tested. The ADD brain is different and needs different approaches. One of the things that a neuropysch test will do is show you the difference in specific sub area performances. A kid can have a very high IQ and low processing speed. With the legally required accommodations, this kid can be very successful in college and the work place. Many successful people have ADHD. There is an energy, ability to see things that others miss, and risk taking propensity that can lead to great success. Untreated in the worst outcomes, it can lead to depression, substance abuse and suicide.

Surely you know the meds can lead to suicide.

Hi scientologist dcumer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the SAT/ACT should just change their process. One fee pays for two tests. First test is untimed, and everyone can take as long as they want. Second test is timed and no accommodations. Scores and test type submitted for both tests to schools.

This would be cheaper, clearer, and more fair in the long run.

Which would allow colleges to discriminate against kids with disabilities.

[Anonymous]

Why don't they make the SAT/ACT untimed for everyone? Or just provide very generous timing for each section (thereby decreasing the need for exceptions to a much smaller percentage of people)?

Also, as a person who does not have any disabilities, I do think that being able to take the test in a separate, private space would provide an advantage to many people. I took dozens of standardized tests. The only test I took in "privacy" was the GRE which was offered as a computer based test in a Kaplan center - I took the test in a small room, with either no other people or maybe one or two. It was way quieter, and also, I could go at my own pace. When I was finished with a section ahead of time, I could move to the next section, without getting bored/distracted waiting for time to be called. I scored higher on the GRE than any other standardized test I ever took, and I did not study at all for the GRE. I chalk it up to not being distracted/bored in a large room with noise, sniffling people, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SAT and ACT is testing speed. I don’t care who says it’s not. The SAT and ACT have said it is.

So I have a problem with accommodations that completely take that out of the equation.

SAT: our test is designed to test scholastic aptitude under timed conditions.

Parent: but my kid does poorly under timed conditions.

SAT: well, then your child won’t do as good on this test. Er. Wait. No. Strike that. Then we will give your child more time?

This will never be fair to me. No dog in the fight, though.

What you propose will never be fair to a large number of students with disabilities. Students who are college capable. This would effectively bar students with disabilities from college. That's discrimination and the IDEA is in place to make sure kids with disabilites have a level playing field. [/quote]

That's actually not true. IDEA is supposed to ensure that kids have "access to the curriculum." not a "level playing field." kids with IEPs can still be graded on their actual performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How will all these kids with “disabilities” actually work a job.

That's what I want to know! My guess is that mommy and daddy will give the kid enough money to not worry about anything but a play job. All just to keep up appearances.

It's all so incredibly pathetic.

Many of these kids have gown up and function perfectly well. Some of these kids are incredibly successful - more successful than you. See, I can generalize as well. I just have been around longer than you and worked at places where we had people with disabilties. You are both incredibly ignorant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reality is most of us posting on this thread are typically middle to modestly wealthy families with salaries from $80-500K per year.

Certainly enough to keep roofs over our head, but not enough to transfer significant wealth to the next generatin.

The people who are really gaming the system are those who can boost chances of admission to selective schools

1) through athletic talent and cultivation of that talent via travel sports, private coaches and the like

2) by applying ED and not applying for financial aid

Having one or both of those advantages helps far more than a slightly higher SAT or ACT score -- secured through extra time on standardized tests for legitimate or questionable reasons.

We are arguing with each other over details and not getting at the systemic problem.

College admissions (like many other parts of our society) is not based on merit. The notion of being able to succeed if you are willing to apply yourself and put in the effort is a myth.

Sure a few pull it off, but most do not.

This.