Accommodation Nation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw this article and wanted to post, but saw it was already here. It’s getting crazy. I’d rather a 3.3 student as an employee vs. a 3.8 student with accommodations. How is over 20% of the student population disabled at some of the best schools in the country? Puts a mockery of the system.

Congratulations on your prejudice! I'm sure your children would be very proud to hear what you think, and that your philosophy of disparaging people with disabilities is one that Hitler shared. Plenty of students and adults lead healthy productive lives with accommodations.

I actually have ADHD and had to learn to cope with it in academia and the workplace. That meant struggling a lot in college and sometimes getting poor grades.

Sure the ADA exists for employers, but ask for accommodations for neurodiversity and you will definitely be on the layoff list within the first few rounds.

I hope you can read the entirety of the thread for more enlightened and nuances responses. Your view is terribly antiquated and you are not helping to destigmatize mental health struggles and/or learning disabilities, and you are definitely missing that this is not a zero sum game. Instead, it's about lifting everyone up so that those who would have been shut out of financial independence can work and support themselves, instead of needing a social safety net paid for by taxpapers.

And nowadays, there are DEFINITELY accommodations in the workplace for certain types of neurodivergent needs. It depends on the workplace, of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

p

Wow. I grew up middle class attending Philadelphia parochial schools. I was diagnosed with epilepsy and an autoimmune disease at age six that wreaked havoc on my life. The meds damaged my brain because slowing synapse firing prevents seizures but also dramatically reduces processing speed. I was able to get on a better medication regimen in middle school, which allowed me to perform at a high level in high school. I got a full ride to my elite LAC that gives out a select few scholarships to local kids. I then turned down HYS for law school for a full merit ride at a “lower” T14. I graduated with honors, got a federal clerkship, and worked in big law.

I have been absolutely blessed with many opportunities, and much of my success is attributed to luck. But my disability is NOT an advantage (much less one obtained by being “rich”). My body is utterly broken. I actually feel lucky I have epilepsy, which most people consider a “real” disability, because it insulates me from so much of the hate disabled people get.

I appreciate your honesty. But would you have gotten into big law and a prestigious law school without your disability, or not? I am not being facetious; untimed LSATs are huge, huge, huge — even more so than untimed SATs. What were your LSATs? Only you know the newer to this; it might require soul-searching.

I have no idea. I don’t know the counterfactual. I never practiced the LSAT under my time constraints. I had a 3.73 and a 170 and got a full ride to a T14 plus multiple large merit scholarships to other schools, including University of Chicago. I was not rejected anywhere. In other words, I vastly outperformed my numbers regardless. And before anyone drops the racism assumption, I’m lily white. I have a very, very unique story, an interesting background, great letters of recommendation, etc.

But I hope those who don’t need accommodations are soul searching and asking if they’re only getting into these top schools because they were lucky enough not be ruined by a disability that unfairly prejudices them in multiple areas of life.

OK, so you don’t know if the disability got you into big law. It might very well have. All I’m saying. By the way, I really appreciate your honesty and do not mean to imply you are “lucky” to have your disability. Sounds like you would have been successful no matter what - big law or not.

Nobody knows what got them any job or admission? Unless they’re privy to files.

One thing I’ll add, since it really sucks to have your capabilities doubted like this simply because you hav seizures, is that I made it onto law review with zero accommodations. My grades weren’t high enough to “grade on,” so I was invited solely on the basis of my performance on a two-week writing competition. My note was also selected for publication (one of my 5-10 in my class) despite not being accommodated.

I’d really think hard about the assumptions you make about disabled people and the harm those assumptions can cause others.

I am not making assumptions. You got an untimed LSAT 170. I am not assuming that: you told me. Without it, your LSAT would have been much lower. Yes, that’s an assumption - a valid one supported by statistical evidence. Without that LSAT (which is even more important than grades for law school admissions), you would have been unlikely to get in to every school you applied to, let alone to one top school. Law school does not do holistic admissions in the same way as undergrad (certainly not 10 years ago), as you should know.

You think you deserve to have gotten in because of your performance in law school. Maybe, maybe not. A lot of people who were rejected would have been able to say the same had they been admitted. But you got in - and they did not. Have some self-awareness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

p

Wow. I grew up middle class attending Philadelphia parochial schools. I was diagnosed with epilepsy and an autoimmune disease at age six that wreaked havoc on my life. The meds damaged my brain because slowing synapse firing prevents seizures but also dramatically reduces processing speed. I was able to get on a better medication regimen in middle school, which allowed me to perform at a high level in high school. I got a full ride to my elite LAC that gives out a select few scholarships to local kids. I then turned down HYS for law school for a full merit ride at a “lower” T14. I graduated with honors, got a federal clerkship, and worked in big law.

I have been absolutely blessed with many opportunities, and much of my success is attributed to luck. But my disability is NOT an advantage (much less one obtained by being “rich”). My body is utterly broken. I actually feel lucky I have epilepsy, which most people consider a “real” disability, because it insulates me from so much of the hate disabled people get.

I appreciate your honesty. But would you have gotten into big law and a prestigious law school without your disability, or not? I am not being facetious; untimed LSATs are huge, huge, huge — even more so than untimed SATs. What were your LSATs? Only you know the newer to this; it might require soul-searching.

I have no idea. I don’t know the counterfactual. I never practiced the LSAT under my time constraints. I had a 3.73 and a 170 and got a full ride to a T14 plus multiple large merit scholarships to other schools, including University of Chicago. I was not rejected anywhere. In other words, I vastly outperformed my numbers regardless. And before anyone drops the racism assumption, I’m lily white. I have a very, very unique story, an interesting background, great letters of recommendation, etc.

But I hope those who don’t need accommodations are soul searching and asking if they’re only getting into these top schools because they were lucky enough not be ruined by a disability that unfairly prejudices them in multiple areas of life.

OK, so you don’t know if the disability got you into big law. It might very well have. All I’m saying. By the way, I really appreciate your honesty and do not mean to imply you are “lucky” to have your disability. Sounds like you would have been successful no matter what - big law or not.

I should be clear that part of the problem is big law and their only hiring from “top” law schools to begin with, many of which have 80% graduating with “honors” and many of which do not do give class rank. The top 5% at almost any law school is better than the bottom 25% at a T14 — maybe more like the bottom 50%. Big law is partly responsible for the abuse of accommodations both in law school and law school admissions….kids do whatever they need to in order to enter a ridiculously hierarchical profession…

Which T14 gives honors to 80% of the class? Certainly none of the ones with grades.

[Anonymous]

Where are y’all going to school where accommodations are being handed out like candy? Getting a 504 after IEP (which was mostly executive function issues) for my DC diagnosed in 3rd grade with ADHD, very low processing, dysgraphia & dyslexia has been a struggle. We’ve recently paid out of pocket to provide updated data that —surprise! LD don’t disappear!—bc the school has been reluctant to even formalize audiobook options.

Additionally, I second pp that at least part of higher percentage of disabled kids in college than past is because increased special ed services in school. Without that, college wouldn’t be on the table.

[Anonymous]

My kid with dyslexia has extra time in high school but he’s not going to take that with him to college. His choice. You’re welcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw this article and wanted to post, but saw it was already here. It’s getting crazy. I’d rather a 3.3 student as an employee vs. a 3.8 student with accommodations. How is over 20% of the student population disabled at some of the best schools in the country? Puts a mockery of the system.

Congratulations on your prejudice! I'm sure your children would be very proud to hear what you think, and that your philosophy of disparaging people with disabilities is one that Hitler shared. Plenty of students and adults lead healthy productive lives with accommodations.

I actually have ADHD and had to learn to cope with it in academia and the workplace. That meant struggling a lot in college and sometimes getting poor grades.

Sure the ADA exists for employers, but ask for accommodations for neurodiversity and you will definitely be on the layoff list within the first few rounds.

You don't seem particularly bright if you're making sweeping and inaccurate generalizations like that, so perhaps you are finding yourself on the layoff list for other reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't have a grasp on the material, then no amount of extra time is going to change that . . . but be angry about extra time if it makes you feel better.

Wrong. Extra time students often get to come back to finish. That extra time in between testing gives them time to look up answers.

That is far less common. Most are 50% extra. 100% is next most common. Both of those are typically in one sitting. Splitting over multiple sessions, much less common.

Not in college because exams are 2-3 hours long. So they are generally split into 2 days.

My autistic kid gets double time, making her college exams 6 hours. She gets a 15 minute supervised lunch break. That's all. Needing this extra time (during which she can't relax or start preparing for her next final) is a huge disadvantage.

[Anonymous]

In some respects, this isn’t anything new. Wealthy people often have the means to take advantage of laws, loopholes, etc. I mean, we have a POTUS that got out of serving by finding a medical provider that would claim “bone spurs.” But, it also doesn’t mean there aren’t real and legitimate invisible disabilities that impact a student’s ability to learn and can meaningfully benefit from a reasonable accommodation. Moreover, the language used in the article is pretty ableist and offensive (ie. suggesting that only people with wheelchairs are worthy of accommodations).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks to IDEA and 504, more students with disabilities are able to graduate from high school and go to college than ever before. This is a *good* thing.

It is indeed good that the ideas behind IDEA and 504 plans are now ubiquitous throughout the English language world. 43% of kids at private schools in Britain -- Eton, Sevenoaks, St Paul's, Charterhouse, et al -- were able to get extra time on exams. Growth is rapid; by next year more than half the kids will have their rightful accommodations. Luckily, we're not far behind.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2025/apr/23/extra-exam-time-why-do-so-many-schoolkids-suddenly-need-it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw this article and wanted to post, but saw it was already here. It’s getting crazy. I’d rather a 3.3 student as an employee vs. a 3.8 student with accommodations. How is over 20% of the student population disabled at some of the best schools in the country? Puts a mockery of the system.

Congratulations on your prejudice! I'm sure your children would be very proud to hear what you think, and that your philosophy of disparaging people with disabilities is one that Hitler shared. Plenty of students and adults lead healthy productive lives with accommodations.

I actually have ADHD and had to learn to cope with it in academia and the workplace. That meant struggling a lot in college and sometimes getting poor grades.

Sure the ADA exists for employers, but ask for accommodations for neurodiversity and you will definitely be on the layoff list within the first few rounds.

+1000

[Anonymous]

1. I propose making the SAT untimed. This eliminates this issue.

2. Barring that, I wish the colleges would require the college board to disclose anyone taking the test with an accommodation and the date which the accommodation was put in place. (I'm aware this can't happen). But two things: colleges are accepting students as they are. There may be private colleges that can't handle every accommodation. This is true in NYC high schools - if you apply to a private school, they can say: we can't provide xyz like public schools can. You can get services via the city, but we don't offer it here. Also, the date thing: too many kids get these accommodations within 6 months of the SAT. It's a game. Disclose it.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think of my adhd kid as disabled, doesnt mean she learns the same way other kids do. Most adhd kids don’t need extra time, at least when they’re younger, thats just an easy accommodation. The adhd kids I know rush thru academic stuff and need to slow down. Extra time isn’t helpful

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember this from law school. The only “kid” with an accommodation was the “bro” with the rich family. All this sssst about “slow processing” and specific versions of “adhd” that just amount to “let my kid take the test at their own speed but yours has to do it timed.” More for the rich, once again, undermining the truly needy.

The funny thing about law school exams is that I credit my version of adhd with my ability to score well on timed las school exams. I could hyper focus for three hours and knock it out. I always scored lower on the take home exams where you get something like 8-12 hours to finish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember this from law school. The only “kid” with an accommodation was the “bro” with the rich family. All this sssst about “slow processing” and specific versions of “adhd” that just amount to “let my kid take the test at their own speed but yours has to do it timed.” More for the rich, once again, undermining the truly needy.

The funny thing about law school exams is that I credit my version of adhd with my ability to score well on timed las school exams. I could hyper focus for three hours and knock it out. I always scored lower on the take home exams where you get something like 8-12 hours to finish.

Well, at least you took an exam that could be finished in that time - by anyone!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I have no idea how this generation of kids will cope in jobs with deadlines and noise and without parents to run interference. But I guess the workforce will adapt. Maybe everyone will get a week and a soundproof pod to write an email.

I’m a high achiever with neurological, learning, and anxiety issues who received accommodations in high school, college, and law school. No issues at my big law job or in my federal clerkship. The only accommodation I need is flexible work scheduling to accommodate my many doctors appointments.

The time constraints associated with school assignments, exams, and standardized tests do not reflect the real world at all. Even litigation, which has strict, inflexible deadlines imposed by egotistical judges are more generous than what I typically get in school. In my seven years of practice, I have encountered only one assignment remotely equivalent to an exam, and it was a mediator who gave us a set of questions at the beginning of the day to which he wanted answers by the end of the day. I had time to do it myself but could have brought in others if I needed it.

In other words, you grew up high income. Do you lack the self-awareness to know that you likely took the place in your prestigious law school (or you would not have gotten a federal clerkship, since law is so hierarchical) of someone who does not need accommodations and/or did not grow up high-income? Your justification is that, hey, I can do the job so everything is cool; but I think the person whose place you took likely is/wouls have been a better lawyer.

p

Wow. I grew up middle class attending Philadelphia parochial schools. I was diagnosed with epilepsy and an autoimmune disease at age six that wreaked havoc on my life. The meds damaged my brain because slowing synapse firing prevents seizures but also dramatically reduces processing speed. I was able to get on a better medication regimen in middle school, which allowed me to perform at a high level in high school. I got a full ride to my elite LAC that gives out a select few scholarships to local kids. I then turned down HYS for law school for a full merit ride at a “lower” T14. I graduated with honors, got a federal clerkship, and worked in big law.

I have been absolutely blessed with many opportunities, and much of my success is attributed to luck. But my disability is NOT an advantage (much less one obtained by being “rich”). My body is utterly broken. I actually feel lucky I have epilepsy, which most people consider a “real” disability, because it insulates me from so much of the hate disabled people get.

I appreciate your honesty. But would you have gotten into big law and a prestigious law school without your disability, or not? I am not being facetious; untimed LSATs are huge, huge, huge — even more so than untimed SATs. What were your LSATs? Only you know the newer to this; it might require soul-searching.

I have no idea. I don’t know the counterfactual. I never practiced the LSAT under my time constraints. I had a 3.73 and a 170 and got a full ride to a T14 plus multiple large merit scholarships to other schools, including University of Chicago. I was not rejected anywhere. In other words, I vastly outperformed my numbers regardless. And before anyone drops the racism assumption, I’m lily white. I have a very, very unique story, an interesting background, great letters of recommendation, etc.

But I hope those who don’t need accommodations are soul searching and asking if they’re only getting into these top schools because they were lucky enough not be ruined by a disability that unfairly prejudices them in multiple areas of life.

OK, so you don’t know if the disability got you into big law. It might very well have. All I’m saying. By the way, I really appreciate your honesty and do not mean to imply you are “lucky” to have your disability. Sounds like you would have been successful no matter what - big law or not.

I should be clear that part of the problem is big law and their only hiring from “top” law schools to begin with, many of which have 80% graduating with “honors” and many of which do not do give class rank. The top 5% at almost any law school is better than the bottom 25% at a T14 — maybe more like the bottom 50%. Big law is partly responsible for the abuse of accommodations both in law school and law school admissions….kids do whatever they need to in order to enter a ridiculously hierarchical profession…

Which T14 gives honors to 80% of the class? Certainly none of the ones with grades.

How do you think we know that Michelle Obama was the bottom 20% of her class, and that Barack’s receiving honors was no biggy?