Claiming a disability on the SAT/ACT - have people been gaming the system?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
That's not how it works. In most cases, the accommodated students are given a specific set amount of time (like time & a half or 2 hours or 2.5 hours, etc). For example, at my school they have block scheduling so each of their classes is 90 minutes. If a teacher feels it is a harder or longer test, they will get the full 90 mins. for the test but if the teacher feels it's an easier test, they'll start the test when class starts and will be given 60 minutes to complete it. Those with accommodations will get a total of 2 hrs 15 mins to complete the test if it's a longer 90 min. test and only 1.5 hrs. to complete the test if it's a shorter 60 minute test (those are the time + a half kids). If they have set time, then they get just the set time limit of just 2 hrs or just 2.5 hours. The kid with accommodations doesn't take the test with the rest of the class. They usually direct report to the accommodation classroom for their test without ever coming to the normal classroom. This, of course, is to prevent cheating. It is also set up like this to avoid the stigma of having to report to class and then leave when the test begins to go to another area to take your test. To the rest of the class it just appears as if those students are absent. Sometimes it does happen that a student will not finish the exam and that's just how it is. It also happens that many accommodation students don't finish their exams in their allotted time. |
Anonymous
That's not how it works. In most cases, the accommodated students are given a specific set amount of time (like time & a half or 2 hours or 2.5 hours, etc). For example, at my school they have block scheduling so each of their classes is 90 minutes. If a teacher feels it is a harder or longer test, they will get the full 90 mins. for the test but if the teacher feels it's an easier test, they'll start the test when class starts and will be given 60 minutes to complete it. Those with accommodations will get a total of 2 hrs 15 mins to complete the test if it's a longer 90 min. test and only 1.5 hrs. to complete the test if it's a shorter 60 minute test (those are the time + a half kids). If they have set time, then they get just the set time limit of just 2 hrs or just 2.5 hours. The kid with accommodations doesn't take the test with the rest of the class. They usually direct report to the accommodation classroom for their test without ever coming to the normal classroom. This, of course, is to prevent cheating. It is also set up like this to avoid the stigma of having to report to class and then leave when the test begins to go to another area to take your test. To the rest of the class it just appears as if those students are absent. Sometimes it does happen that a student will not finish the exam and that's just how it is. It also happens that many accommodation students don't finish their exams in their allotted time. The bolded statement is pretty interesting, because it could be used as an argument for why no accommodations on time should be made at all. Thanks for the explanation of how the time is calculated, but in your example, let's say the test is the full 90 min test and the kids with 90 mins have trouble finishing it. If the accommodation students also have trouble finishing it, fine, but what if they don't? You've given them say 2.5 hours but they really only need an accommodation of 2 hours. In that case, what would the right thing to do be? What if 50% of the class can't finish the test in 90 mins and the accommodation students do. Do you know whether they would have been in the 50% that finished or the 50% that didn't finish? If you have an exam where time is an actual concern, it seems that an improperly calibrated accommodation (and it sounds to me like no attempt is made to determine how much accommodation a student needs beyond a cursory 1.5 or 2x or untimed level) is meaningful. On a side note, what if the exam is curved because the class, except for the accommodation students, had trouble finishing the exam? If the accommodation students are all at the high end of the curve, would that make one second guess the amount of time they were given? |
Anonymous
| I’m surprised at the level of outrage at other posters shown by the people whose kids have legitimate disabilities. If I were dealing with all of the difficulties that entailed, I would be outraged that non-disabled wealthy kids are out shopping for a doctor who will sign off that Larla is “disabled” and so needs extra time. Do you really think the Big 3 and magnet schools have a student body that is 20 or 30% disabled students? Of course not. There are a LOT of people who are gaming the system. But of course there are also many people who legitimately need accommodations. |
Anonymous
I was poster who mentioned the diabetic kids and I get a response that I am begrudging them their snacks. The stupidity. These same kids are now asking for the same extended time accommodation for LSAT and MCAT. They can have all the snacks they want but they don’t deserve the extra 100% time accommodation . |
Anonymous
|
NP
I know this is dicey territory to wade into. I'm trying to understand. For kids that need more time: my understanding was that the basis for giving more time was that if they were given enough time, they could show their full knowledge and understanding of the material. That is, typical students could show this in less time, and they could show this in more time. It wasn't about needing to put more restrictions on the typical kids, but making sure the kids who needed more time could use it. So I'm not understanding why giving everyone more than enough time wouldn't work (the "untimed" arguments above). Is it that if everyone has virtually unlimited time, there are going to be some kids who are never going to be able to be at the top? Is that the problem? |
Anonymous
Untimed is certainly an option but brings with it other challenges, such as paying proctors for a much longer day. And no one is permitted to leave until everyone in their room is finished uncurrent rules. The additional time is meant to put students with disabilities (whose difficulty requires it) on an equal footing with typical students. A typical student is expected to complete X in 60 minutes. For a student with a disability, the same level of challenge exists when they receive 90 minutes. Most students with a disability won't complete any more answers in 90 minutes than a typical student would complete in 60. |
Anonymous
Thanks for the response. I get that. And I also get that I might come off as a dick by asking further questions, so I'll try to be careful and will listen to criticism. If the issues with paying proctors extra were sorted (and I imagine folding the costs of separate accommodations in would help, although not everyone could be folded in, of course), and if a solution was found to address people not being allowed to leave before everyone was finished -- is there a reason based on unfairness of accommodations to people who need more time than others, to not go for untimed tests? That is, are the issues merely practical problems, or is there a fairness problem, too? |
Anonymous
Except from what it sounds like, this isn't what happens. If you have a continuum of accommodations and needs, then it makes no sense that the accommodations are seemingly limited to 1.5x, 2x and untimed. The reality is that you don't know whether the same level of challenge exists, you just cross your fingers and hope that it does. For some students maybe 75 minutes is all that's needed. If that's the case, then giving them 90 isn't the same. |
Anonymous
| Reality is any bright kid with a high IQ and good education is going to do well regardless of unlimited time as they have been well prepared and can handle it. Its the kid who have some sort of LD, just ok IQ - smart kids in other ways but not great at school, disabilities, etc. are going to struggle regardless of the time issue. I don't get the point of the test and like that some schools are moving away from it as not all kids test well but deserve to go to college. |
Anonymous
For this, the testing organizations typically defer or at least take into account what the student's school tell them they use for every math / English / PARCC test etc. High school IEP/504 teams look at the data from psychologists' evaluation as well as feedback from multiple teachers about how a student is performing with extra time (is 2x too much now because they have improved? should we reduce it?), or in the case of a new plan how they have performed without it and try to allocate the appropriate amount -- and the 1.5/2.0/unlimited amounts -- are standard for every public school in the country. School districts always have someone in an IEP meeting, so the decision isn't only the school level team (which includes a parent btw). Private schools often have more variance and there is not the same oversight. |
Anonymous
|
I'm the PP asking the most recent questions and trying to be careful.
My perspective is that in general, kids who face additional challenges (physical, academic, mental health, whatever you chose) can do better -- with appropriate supports -- than most people think they can. And those supports are generally less burdensome or problematic than people who do hiring usually think they will be. That's the point of ADA and other progressive legislation. An if there is a question about erring on one side or the other, I'd much rather err on the side of giving chances than taking them away. I think there are some deep waters ahead regarding the current scandal. I think a lot of underlying prejudice and bigotry is going to come out in our public conversations. I thought about the untimed proposition after reading the threads at DCUM, but something seemed like it was out of my grasp. Maybe I am reading the posts arguing for it in a particular tone of voice, but I read them as judgmental or with a sort of vindictiveness, although the idea itself seemed to have merit on the surface. I know I am not clear on this. |
Anonymous
I'm the PP who answered before, and your question and approach is fine with me (parent of a kid with a disability). I think the answer is that the SAT/ACT people have designed the current test to have a timed element -- speed and efficiency isn't the only or likely a major factor -- but converting to an untimed test for all really would mean the creation of an entirely new test that's designed and normed as an untimed test. This would be a large undertaking, colleges would have to be consulted about whether it gave them the data they need. In addition, many states are now using the SAT/ACT in lieu of a statewide state=designed test for high school proficiency (they don't use something like the VA SOLs, or PARCC) you'd also have to again go through the US Dept of Ed process to ensure the new test would be aligned to the Common Core standards. I think it could be possible but would be time-consuming and present new challenges. |
Anonymous
I'm one of the PPs with a very challenged DC who sees exactly why you are confused. Unfortunately, there are some posters on here, whose children get extended time, who think that time is to give them a different advantage that neurotypical kids don't have in order to "level the playing field." They are not doing those students who need only this particular accommodation service by continuing to promote this line of reasoning. You are correct. The test is structured for students to finish a certain number of questions in a given, reasonable amount of time, and see how many they can answer correctly. Not to test how fast students can complete the test. If that were the case, wouldn't those who finish the fastest be considered smarter, and therefore entitled to a higher score, than the slowest who finish in this time? Since for those with certain disabilities cannot finish the number of questions in that set amount of time--and this is proven through years of testing and evidence--extended time is allotted for them to have the opportunity to illustrate their aptitude. I really wish those who think the accommodations are to give a leg up to regular kids would just stop and better understand what the accommodations are in place for. For all our sake, please. |
Anonymous
I am arguing for the untimed tests and not sure why u would read them as judgmental or vindictiveness. Simply that untimed tests will get rid of abuses and unfairness especially to the poor/rural/clueless families. Currently the system as it stands today only benefits wealthy families who abuse the system and families w accommodations who are getting too much time (example diabetics). The current system actually does not help current families w extended time accommodations if the time allotted is not enough for the disability since none of the time allotment is personalized. What I don’t understand is all the posters saying we don’t understand about SN kids etc. No, we do understand and am telling u that the current system is not as good as u believe. |
Anonymous
Thanks, PP. I agree with you. It seems to me that our society functions better the more educated and productive people we have, and so we should make sure that people with disabilities, who are 10% of our population, have an opportunity to show what they can do AND receive REASONABLE accommodations. But I'm the parent of a highly intelligent child with some significant deficits. There is a ton of bigotry in this debate, and toward people with disabilities generally. It doesn't seem to be getting better with successive generations. Personally, I think it stems from the overall worry among parents that children of this generation will likely not meet or exceed the standard of living of their parents (us) or grandparents. Higher education helps ensure that a person will be better prepared for the workforce and people think that getting their kids in the 'best' or highest prestige schools will give them a leg up. We're like crabs in a barrel clawing away and trying to pushing each other down when perhaps we should be figuring out how to lift everyone up in our country. There are a lot of challenges facing us right now as a country and a planet, and I think we need all minds -- ones that work typically and ones that do not -- to solve them. -Pollyanna mom |