Wall Street Journal on rampant growth in percentage of college students with “disabilities”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The responses from anti-accommodations posters is really disheartening. DCUM has reached a new low.

Have you read the thread? We are not anti-accomodation. We are pointing out how certain groups are abusing the system, we are advocating for extended time and calculators for ALL.

That’s not how the world works. Everyone doesn’t get a trophy. We are not all equal in every way. Deal with it.

Do you not realize the irony of your statement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:look, nobody is going to care about a handful of otherwise able dyslexic students who get acccomodations on exams and standardized tests. But when it starts to get to the point where 20% of highly privileged kids claim a disability ... that becomes an issue.

It isn’t 20% that get accommodations, the 20% number includes mental health services.

+1. College Board reports that 7% of test takers receive accommodations -- not 20%. And of course not all of the 7% are "highly privileged."

Well, there are no stats for that but those complicated neuropsych exams are typically not covered by insurance and run $4000-$6000. If you are paying that —newsflash — you are affluent. Maybe you didn’t realize.

Maybe you didn't realize that not everyone who qualifies for accommodations for the SAT and ACT has had to private pay for a neuropsych?

Here you go: https://www.collegeboard.org/students-with-disabilities/iep-504-eligibility

Exactly.

The problem with posters like the first one here is that many do not know what they are talking about. They get all worked up about something they think is shutting out the poor and just go full steam ahead. The truth is that many poor do have access to extra time. I think an earlier post included an article from the Chicago Tribune that talked about how the wealthy had more access admitted that in their research the found that, "At four schools with high poverty levels, 21 to 25 percent of the students got special assistance, but none scored at the national ACT average of 21, and many posted well below that."

I have a friend who a special needs daughter, now a junior in high school. In elementary school there was clearly a problem, and she was able to get her a 504 without spending a dime. She did not need to hire anyone outside the school system, which gave her the accommodations and support.

When it came time to apply for accommodations for the ACT, any documentation she supplied was strictly from the school and no psychologist outside of MCPS. She managed to secure extended time, use of a keyboard, mark booklet, and multi day testing. Yes, she may have had better supports in place in her public school if she had the advocacy of an outside psychologist, but her financial situation prevented her from doing so. She was, however, able to get the accommodations her daughter needed despite her lack of retaining an outside organization.

I agree the wealthy will always have a leg up in getting their kids what they need and more, but that is the case with everything, whether it be tutoring, membership in a club sport, private school, private college counselors, connections, etc. And yes, there is a very small percentage who might scam the system, but I do not think it is as prevalent as people are stating on this thread.

Keep telling yourself that the poor are just fine if it makes you feel better, ok?
There’s a big difference between a kid with debilitating SN like autism or ID and a kid with a subtle disability.
A kid who can function socially and participate normally in the classroom would be passed through school with good grades in a lower income school, whether he could read or not . He’s not going to be identified as dyslexic or ADHD with neuropsych testing and get special tutoring and accommodations all of his life and go on to college after high school like your kid. He’s going to graduate, feel that he’s stupid and he’ll be in some kind of service job (serving your privileged family ) for the rest of his life if he is lucky. Make sure that you ‘strongly believe’ that a McDonald’s job is only a ‘gateway job’ that doesn’t warrant a decent wage because he’s supposed to work his way up to something better, ok? Icing on the cake!

Like I said, I do not dispute the fact that the wealthy have more access and intelligence to see a problem and pursue support. But the solution is not to deny accommodations to everyone else or do give extra time across the board. That whole notion is ridiculous and just creates a situation where nobody gets accommodations and the level playing field is destroyed. There will always be those who fall through the cracks. The solution should be to create more awareness among the poor about the supports available. If you want to dive into this issue more, we should first look at the public school system. If parents don't know enough identify problems and seek support, it is up the teachers and administration to identify problems and provide the support. It is not the fault of the wealthy who know enough to get help that the poor are not informed and do not get help.

[Anonymous]

A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

Text to speech software, speech to text software, word prediction software

Are you saying there should be no blind or deaf judges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

OMG you are horrible. Do you realize the only people who get these accommodations have very serious conditions? What do you propose we do with this population of kids...just let them rot in institutions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, no, if you request accommodations you have to use those accommodations. You do not get to leave early. You get to sit there and wait. Just like kids do now if they get extra time.

Before you take the test, you can decide if you want to sit there for 4 hours or 8 hours, but if you choose 8 hours and you leave early, your exam is invalidated.

And you realize that now you've set up a system that will work just fine for smart kids who need some accommodations, but means average and below average kids with disabilities are now at a significant disadvantage. All because you want to make sure the super smart kid without a disability isn't disadvantaged by a super smart kid with a disability. (Which, seriously, try having a disability. It's not something someone would volunteer for just to get the perk of extra time.)

Well that's unnecessarily strict. What are you trying to test for? And a system where everyone gets all the time up to 8 hours, that creates a new disadvantage for kids with disabilities how? Their situation is exactly the same as before! Do you mean because *gasp* other kids will get more time? Does that mean you are pitting the kids against each other? Aha. Truth comes out. Shouldn't it be level playing field and it's each kid showing what he can do without a time constraint?

Is it unnecessarily strict right now that kids aren't allowed to leave the SAT or ACT early?

I'm suggesting that extra time for average or below average students is still limiting. If you have an average or below average student (with no disabilities) who does notably better on the exam if they have 8 hours instead of 4 hours, then it's reasonable to suggest that perhaps an average or below average student (with disabilities) might do notably better if they had 10 hours.

You can't suggest accommodations for all and just think about the above average students. You have to consider the average and below average students as well. Once you offer accommodations for all, it's quite possible and reasonable for a child with dyslexia to suggest that their disability means more time is of benefit to them. And since you've completely removed the concept of time pressure for above average students, then surely the average and below average students (with and without disabilities) should have as much time as they could possibly want or need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:look, nobody is going to care about a handful of otherwise able dyslexic students who get acccomodations on exams and standardized tests. But when it starts to get to the point where 20% of highly privileged kids claim a disability ... that becomes an issue.

It isn’t 20% that get accommodations, the 20% number includes mental health services.

+1. College Board reports that 7% of test takers receive accommodations -- not 20%. And of course not all of the 7% are "highly privileged."

Well, there are no stats for that but those complicated neuropsych exams are typically not covered by insurance and run $4000-$6000. If you are paying that —newsflash — you are affluent. Maybe you didn’t realize.

Maybe you didn't realize that not everyone who qualifies for accommodations for the SAT and ACT has had to private pay for a neuropsych?

Here you go: https://www.collegeboard.org/students-with-disabilities/iep-504-eligibility

Exactly.

The problem with posters like the first one here is that many do not know what they are talking about. They get all worked up about something they think is shutting out the poor and just go full steam ahead. The truth is that many poor do have access to extra time. I think an earlier post included an article from the Chicago Tribune that talked about how the wealthy had more access admitted that in their research the found that, "At four schools with high poverty levels, 21 to 25 percent of the students got special assistance, but none scored at the national ACT average of 21, and many posted well below that."

I have a friend who a special needs daughter, now a junior in high school. In elementary school there was clearly a problem, and she was able to get her a 504 without spending a dime. She did not need to hire anyone outside the school system, which gave her the accommodations and support.

When it came time to apply for accommodations for the ACT, any documentation she supplied was strictly from the school and no psychologist outside of MCPS. She managed to secure extended time, use of a keyboard, mark booklet, and multi day testing. Yes, she may have had better supports in place in her public school if she had the advocacy of an outside psychologist, but her financial situation prevented her from doing so. She was, however, able to get the accommodations her daughter needed despite her lack of retaining an outside organization.

I agree the wealthy will always have a leg up in getting their kids what they need and more, but that is the case with everything, whether it be tutoring, membership in a club sport, private school, private college counselors, connections, etc. And yes, there is a very small percentage who might scam the system, but I do not think it is as prevalent as people are stating on this thread.

Keep telling yourself that the poor are just fine if it makes you feel better, ok?
There’s a big difference between a kid with debilitating SN like autism or ID and a kid with a subtle disability.
A kid who can function socially and participate normally in the classroom would be passed through school with good grades in a lower income school, whether he could read or not . He’s not going to be identified as dyslexic or ADHD with neuropsych testing and get special tutoring and accommodations all of his life and go on to college after high school like your kid. He’s going to graduate, feel that he’s stupid and he’ll be in some kind of service job (serving your privileged family ) for the rest of his life if he is lucky. Make sure that you ‘strongly believe’ that a McDonald’s job is only a ‘gateway job’ that doesn’t warrant a decent wage because he’s supposed to work his way up to something better, ok? Icing on the cake!

PP wasn't saying that poor kids are just fine. PP was pushing back against the claim that the kids with accommodations on these tests are all rich kids scamming the system.

I am one of the posters with a dyslexic child and I agree that it is grossly under-identified, and terribly under-supported when it is identified. I agree that children are harmed for life because of this.

But denying my child accommodations because he had the luck to be born into a family that could identify it doesn't solve this problem. Supporting his need for accommodations can help make sure it's understood what sorts of accommodations children with dyslexia need and deserve. By forcing my child's school to offer him effective supports, those supports are now in place for other children. (Because while in the moment I might feel like my child's school is just trying to save a buck, often I think the lack of appropriate accommodations is simply ignorance.)

Instead, we have posters who argue that because my child is generally bright and from an UMC family, he isn't deserving of accommodations because that might allow him to evenly-compete or over-shadow their bright but non-disabled child. That's an argument for continuing to refuse to identify disabilities and refuse to accommodate them. And that's who the PP was pushing back against.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

OMG you are horrible. Do you realize the only people who get these accommodations have very serious conditions? What do you propose we do with this population of kids...just let them rot in institutions?

I work in the public schools. Believe me, many of these kids who obtain accommodations are a looooong way from "rotting in institutions." They actually very intelligent but receive a diagnosis of ADHD--sometimes appropriately but often not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

I imagine you have a job, yes? But you haven't read this thread, or if you did you haven't retained the information. And yet you have a job. There are all sorts of different jobs for all sorts of different people with all sorts of different skills!

As has been said before, people get jobs that match their skills. Academia requires a very specific set of skills, and in this country reading for knowledge is a common one. Reading is not the only way to acquire knowledge, but it is an easy way to impart knowledge to a lot of people. Some people have difficulty reading, so there are options. Braille and audio books for example. A blind student is unlikely to become a race car driver, but that shouldn't prevent them from going to college. A dyslexic student may never become a copy editor, but that shouldn't prevent them from going to college.

What would be wrong with a person who's a judge who has difficulty reading and writing? It's possible to get audio versions of texts they'd need, or to read carefully through the few they might not be able to audio versions of. And to dictate what they would like to write, or write it slowly. Do you think a blind person couldn't be a judge?

I guarantee there are blind and dyslexic teachers.

What are you having difficulty understanding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

OMG you are horrible. Do you realize the only people who get these accommodations have very serious conditions? What do you propose we do with this population of kids...just let them rot in institutions?

I love the hyperbole here. Yes - That’s what we all want. For kids to rot in institutions.
You’re borderline hysterical on this topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, no, if you request accommodations you have to use those accommodations. You do not get to leave early. You get to sit there and wait. Just like kids do now if they get extra time.

Before you take the test, you can decide if you want to sit there for 4 hours or 8 hours, but if you choose 8 hours and you leave early, your exam is invalidated.

And you realize that now you've set up a system that will work just fine for smart kids who need some accommodations, but means average and below average kids with disabilities are now at a significant disadvantage. All because you want to make sure the super smart kid without a disability isn't disadvantaged by a super smart kid with a disability. (Which, seriously, try having a disability. It's not something someone would volunteer for just to get the perk of extra time.)

Well that's unnecessarily strict. What are you trying to test for? And a system where everyone gets all the time up to 8 hours, that creates a new disadvantage for kids with disabilities how? Their situation is exactly the same as before! Do you mean because *gasp* other kids will get more time? Does that mean you are pitting the kids against each other? Aha. Truth comes out. Shouldn't it be level playing field and it's each kid showing what he can do without a time constraint?

Is it unnecessarily strict right now that kids aren't allowed to leave the SAT or ACT early?

I'm suggesting that extra time for average or below average students is still limiting. If you have an average or below average student (with no disabilities) who does notably better on the exam if they have 8 hours instead of 4 hours, then it's reasonable to suggest that perhaps an average or below average student (with disabilities) might do notably better if they had 10 hours.

You can't suggest accommodations for all and just think about the above average students. You have to consider the average and below average students as well. Once you offer accommodations for all, it's quite possible and reasonable for a child with dyslexia to suggest that their disability means more time is of benefit to them. And since you've completely removed the concept of time pressure for above average students, then surely the average and below average students (with and without disabilities) should have as much time as they could possibly want or need.

Of course. 8 is an arbitrary cutoff. Excusing the fact that there will be diminishing returns as students get tired. But you still haven't explained why there is a new disadvantage to disabled kids by giving all kids (above average too, ok) more/unlimited time! It's because you are pitting the kids against each other rather than viewing them individually as they achieve their personal best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

Here is one: http://www.aish.com/sp/so/The-Blind-Judge.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Sorry, no, if you request accommodations you have to use those accommodations. You do not get to leave early. You get to sit there and wait. Just like kids do now if they get extra time.

Before you take the test, you can decide if you want to sit there for 4 hours or 8 hours, but if you choose 8 hours and you leave early, your exam is invalidated.

And you realize that now you've set up a system that will work just fine for smart kids who need some accommodations, but means average and below average kids with disabilities are now at a significant disadvantage. All because you want to make sure the super smart kid without a disability isn't disadvantaged by a super smart kid with a disability. (Which, seriously, try having a disability. It's not something someone would volunteer for just to get the perk of extra time.)

Well that's unnecessarily strict. What are you trying to test for? And a system where everyone gets all the time up to 8 hours, that creates a new disadvantage for kids with disabilities how? Their situation is exactly the same as before! Do you mean because *gasp* other kids will get more time? Does that mean you are pitting the kids against each other? Aha. Truth comes out. Shouldn't it be level playing field and it's each kid showing what he can do without a time constraint?

Is it unnecessarily strict right now that kids aren't allowed to leave the SAT or ACT early?

I'm suggesting that extra time for average or below average students is still limiting. If you have an average or below average student (with no disabilities) who does notably better on the exam if they have 8 hours instead of 4 hours, then it's reasonable to suggest that perhaps an average or below average student (with disabilities) might do notably better if they had 10 hours.

You can't suggest accommodations for all and just think about the above average students. You have to consider the average and below average students as well. Once you offer accommodations for all, it's quite possible and reasonable for a child with dyslexia to suggest that their disability means more time is of benefit to them. And since you've completely removed the concept of time pressure for above average students, then surely the average and below average students (with and without disabilities) should have as much time as they could possibly want or need.

Of course. 8 is an arbitrary cutoff. Excusing the fact that there will be diminishing returns as students get tired. But you still haven't explained why there is a new disadvantage to disabled kids by giving all kids (above average too, ok) more/unlimited time! It's because you are pitting the kids against each other rather than viewing them individually as they achieve their personal best.

Because you weren't talking about unlimited time. You mentioned 8 hours. To repeat myself, that could give average and below average students without disabilities enough time, but that might not be enough time for average and below average students with disabilities. If they're offered 10 hours, then I assume you would want all children to be able to use 10 hours. And so on.

Some students get breaks as an accommodation. I would assume that, plus a reader/scribe/quiet room/etc accommodations would still be available for children with documented disabilities who need those accommodations. Or do you need all of those accommodations available to all? The cost of the ACT and SAT is going to skyrocket of course, but I suppose that's the consequence of children without disabilities feeling like children with disabilities are getting it "easier." I've been paying for therapies for my child forever, having to pay a a grand in order to get him the testing environment he needs would just be another expense. Although, now we're back to poorer students, with and without disabilities, being disadvantaged even further. So now it's not wealthy kids with disabilities scamming the system, it's all wealthy kids scamming the system (by increasing the costs to the point only wealthy kids can take the test). An improvement in your eyes?

I also didn't see your answer - Is it unnecessarily strict right now that kids aren't allowed to leave the SAT or ACT early?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

OMG you are horrible. Do you realize the only people who get these accommodations have very serious conditions? What do you propose we do with this population of kids...just let them rot in institutions?

I love the hyperbole here. Yes - That’s what we all want. For kids to rot in institutions.
You’re borderline hysterical on this topic.

Posters: "It's not quite fair that your bright child got extra time on the ACT and got a perfect score and got into Pomona and my equally bright child didn't finish one of the sections, got a few points off and only got into UMD. Shouldn't all the kids have the time they need to finish the test and then we can see who actually knows their stuff on an even playing field?"

Responders: YOU ARE SO EVIL YOU JUST WANT MY CHILD TO ROT IN A MENTAL INSTITUTION.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A reader. A scribe. Etc. What kind of career would ever allow for such accomodations? Will your child become a judge who can',t reAd and write? An elementary teacher who can't read? A journalist who can't write? Hard to understand this?

You are clueless. There are lots of interventions people use every day in their jobs that you may or may not realize they are using. There is a very famous lawyer who is dyslexic. He can read, but I would imagine it takes longer. In interviews, he has mentioned that he does to use notes at trial. He memorizes everything. So yes, it is indeed possible.

Oh, and by the way, want to know the one thing I do NOT do everyday at work? Take tests!!! Someone's ability to take a test without accommodations has nothing to do with their ability to do a job. The tests are a rough guess of how someone might do in college. Plenty of kids with LDs do just great in college (and after), despite getting accommodations on tests.