Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My TJ kid has a GAI IQ of more than 145. PS 100. That’s three full SDs. It has taken so much effort for them to perform at a school like TJ with such a variation in subtests. Does not get extra time to turn in assignments (which would be pointless, because the workload is so high they would just be digging themselves in a hole). Uses extended time at school for tests in advanced math, Chem and physics only. Does not seem to need it for reading based activities and assessments. Has the accommodation for both sections on the SAT, because it really isn’t an option to only get it for math. But finished the verbal with a lot of time to spare.

You DD is obviously very bright and motivated. While her GAI is above 145 her actual full scale IQ is above 130. She is intellectually gifted by all accounts.

Her processing speed is perfectly average. The deviation between her high scores and low scores is indicative of a possible LD but it’s not an LD by itself. How can being average at something be an LD by itself? It’s not. You allude to her being diagnosed with ADHD.

As a parent you are always going to want to see your child in the best possible way. You choose to look at the score which includes her strengths. You concede processing speed is important enough to warrant an LD and extra time, but you don’t include it in her IQ score or SAT score.

She does not need extra time on reading? Why? Because this is a strength for her. She is an extremely gifted reader. She needs extra time with math because this is a weakness for her. But extra time washes that distinction away. Why? She didn’t need it for one area. Why does she get it for the other?

You are essentially saying “my daughter is smart except for processing speed. So don’t take that into account for her.”

For other kids with average processing speed, yes. Make them rush through the test. Not her though.

Also, kids with high processing speed but relatively low IQ get punished.

DD is strongly ADHD. And the deviation between OS and GAI causes the problems. Also, one of her processing scores is 1%. It’s hard to explain, but her psychiatrist says it’s like putting one foot on the gas and one foot on the accelerator. She has had to learn how to slow down and work through complex problems step by step. She used to do complex problems in her head, make a small error, and just write down an incorrect answer.

She did not use accommodations on the TJ test, because she wasn’t available on accommodations day. Her math test was so low, I was surprised she was admitted (40/50, Old test). Her verbal score was perfect (50/50, old test). She refused accommodations for Math 3 and got a C+. Agreed to use them going forward and is now an A-/B+ math student.

If she understands TJ math, which is very, very deep and hard, not just time constrained, at an A-/B+ level, why should she not be allowed to demonstrate that? Are colleges looking for fast? Or kids who really understand the subject.

BtW, she is killing it in physics and wants to major in that.

Your DD has a gifted IQ and average processing speed for which she gets extra time.

She is diagnosed with adhd for which she gets to take stimulants.

She doesn’t need extra time for TJ which is arguably one of the most rigorous high schools in the country.

She doesn’t need extra time for reading.

But she needs it for math. And I believe she scored a 780 with extra time.

what about the kids with 115 IQs and average processing speed? They get nothing

Now I understand your need for your dd to perform to her potential. But can you not see how unfair this is? The 115 kid is also really bright. He has the same processing speed as your dd but gets zero accommodations. When they would no doubt help him too. How is this system fair? Your dd has more processing power than him too with the higher IQ, but she gets the accommodations. Not him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

That's like saying you want to be able to park in the handicapped spot even though you don't have a disability. Or that you should be able to have a therapy dog on the plane even though you don't have a condition that warrants one. Let's think about that for a sec. If you let everyone have the handicapped spots, there will be none for those who need them. If you let everyone take a dog on the plane, there would be mayhem and those who need the therapy will be stressed.

Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I think what bothers people is the fact that some of these "disabled" kids are also gifted, and providing the accommodations allows them to demonstrate their giftedness. Sadly some people don't like the idea that some kid with autism is outscoring their kid. Really pathetic.

Yes, there are those who "game the system" but the solution to give everyone extra time is not a good one. ACT and College Board must have more stringent standards for approving accommodations -- especially where there is no history of accommodations in school. That alone should be a red flag.

.

The bolded is ridiculous. The point of the extra time accommodation is to give enough time to be able to fully think through and answer the questions, not to give you a boost because others don't have time to think things through. Extra time for everyone would give everyone the chance to fully think through the questions. That's fair. Wanting an artificial boost for your kid because others had to rush is ridiculous.

Totally agree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

That's like saying you want to be able to park in the handicapped spot even though you don't have a disability. Or that you should be able to have a therapy dog on the plane even though you don't have a condition that warrants one. Let's think about that for a sec. If you let everyone have the handicapped spots, there will be none for those who need them. If you let everyone take a dog on the plane, there would be mayhem and those who need the therapy will be stressed.

Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I think what bothers people is the fact that some of these "disabled" kids are also gifted, and providing the accommodations allows them to demonstrate their giftedness. Sadly some people don't like the idea that some kid with autism is outscoring their kid. Really pathetic.

Yes, there are those who "game the system" but the solution to give everyone extra time is not a good one. ACT and College Board must have more stringent standards for approving accommodations -- especially where there is no history of accommodations in school. That alone should be a red flag.

.

The bolded is ridiculous. The point of the extra time accommodation is to give enough time to be able to fully think through and answer the questions, not to give you a boost because others don't have time to think things through. Extra time for everyone would give everyone the chance to fully think through the questions. That's fair. Wanting an artificial boost for your kid because others had to rush is ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

That's like saying you want to be able to park in the handicapped spot even though you don't have a disability. Or that you should be able to have a therapy dog on the plane even though you don't have a condition that warrants one. Let's think about that for a sec. If you let everyone have the handicapped spots, there will be none for those who need them. If you let everyone take a dog on the plane, there would be mayhem and those who need the therapy will be stressed.

Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I think what bothers people is the fact that some of these "disabled" kids are also gifted, and providing the accommodations allows them to demonstrate their giftedness. Sadly some people don't like the idea that some kid with autism is outscoring their kid. Really pathetic.

Yes, there are those who "game the system" but the solution to give everyone extra time is not a good one. ACT and College Board must have more stringent standards for approving accommodations -- especially where there is no history of accommodations in school. That alone should be a red flag.

I wonder what the actual effect would be, my feeling is that it would not bring other scores up all that much. Wonder what the statistics are for people without accommodations who do not finish the test in time? Some of those may have undiagnosed problems affecting test taking. I got 720/700, finished early, and no I did not spend the extra time going over my previous answers. Back then I really had little awareness of the purpose of the tests (my mom made sure I took them, but I didn't see that they had any purpose other than other standardized tests taken through my K-12 career). In today's competitive world maybe I would have? (I was also sick that day; when I took the GRE my percentile was 99, I think the SAT was 98, and was told by graduate dean--state university--I had the highest GRE he'd ever seen). I wouldn't, I suppose many people would.

Anyway, jobs that really do require college level education (many could be done without a bachelor's but it's a convenient way of screening applicants) require judgment and analysis on a different level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My TJ kid has a GAI IQ of more than 145. PS 100. That’s three full SDs. It has taken so much effort for them to perform at a school like TJ with such a variation in subtests. Does not get extra time to turn in assignments (which would be pointless, because the workload is so high they would just be digging themselves in a hole). Uses extended time at school for tests in advanced math, Chem and physics only. Does not seem to need it for reading based activities and assessments. Has the accommodation for both sections on the SAT, because it really isn’t an option to only get it for math. But finished the verbal with a lot of time to spare.

You DD is obviously very bright and motivated. While her GAI is above 145 her actual full scale IQ is above 130. She is intellectually gifted by all accounts.

Her processing speed is perfectly average. The deviation between her high scores and low scores is indicative of a possible LD but it’s not an LD by itself. How can being average at something be an LD by itself? It’s not. You allude to her being diagnosed with ADHD.

As a parent you are always going to want to see your child in the best possible way. You choose to look at the score which includes her strengths. You concede processing speed is important enough to warrant an LD and extra time, but you don’t include it in her IQ score or SAT score.

She does not need extra time on reading? Why? Because this is a strength for her. She is an extremely gifted reader. She needs extra time with math because this is a weakness for her. But extra time washes that distinction away. Why? She didn’t need it for one area. Why does she get it for the other?

You are essentially saying “my daughter is smart except for processing speed. So don’t take that into account for her.”

For other kids with average processing speed, yes. Make them rush through the test. Not her though.

Also, kids with high processing speed but relatively low IQ get punished.

DD is strongly ADHD. And the deviation between OS and GAI causes the problems. Also, one of her processing scores is 1%. It’s hard to explain, but her psychiatrist says it’s like putting one foot on the gas and one foot on the accelerator. She has had to learn how to slow down and work through complex problems step by step. She used to do complex problems in her head, make a small error, and just write down an incorrect answer.

She did not use accommodations on the TJ test, because she wasn’t available on accommodations day. Her math test was so low, I was surprised she was admitted (40/50, Old test). Her verbal score was perfect (50/50, old test). She refused accommodations for Math 3 and got a C+. Agreed to use them going forward and is now an A-/B+ math student.

If she understands TJ math, which is very, very deep and hard, not just time constrained, at an A-/B+ level, why should she not be allowed to demonstrate that? Are colleges looking for fast? Or kids who really understand the subject.

BtW, she is killing it in physics and wants to major in that.

I have nothing against your kid and I don’t care for TJ (live in MD). The problem is that the place your child is taking is a place denied to some other kid with some other “problem”. What you are saying is that your kids weaknesses need to be ignored - but that flip side is that some other kids weaknesses become more of an obstacle for that very reason. Kids who are quick don’t get credit for it and forced to compete on the ground that favors “slow” or whatever kids.

Btw I am pretty sure I have “undiagnosed” ADD. I can’t imagine preferential treatment on the account of it. It feels like cheating.

Also, my kids SAT scores and GPA are above average for TJ. She is doing original research that could end up going somewhere long term. She is involved in the school in several extracurricular. She works very hard academics and ECs. She is succeeding. Why you give her spot to someone else?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I vote for untimed tests for all.
My DC's main complaint with SAT was running out of time, as a regular bright kid

Obviously not that bright.

There are too many high school students on this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My TJ kid has a GAI IQ of more than 145. PS 100. That’s three full SDs. It has taken so much effort for them to perform at a school like TJ with such a variation in subtests. Does not get extra time to turn in assignments (which would be pointless, because the workload is so high they would just be digging themselves in a hole). Uses extended time at school for tests in advanced math, Chem and physics only. Does not seem to need it for reading based activities and assessments. Has the accommodation for both sections on the SAT, because it really isn’t an option to only get it for math. But finished the verbal with a lot of time to spare.

You DD is obviously very bright and motivated. While her GAI is above 145 her actual full scale IQ is above 130. She is intellectually gifted by all accounts.

Her processing speed is perfectly average. The deviation between her high scores and low scores is indicative of a possible LD but it’s not an LD by itself. How can being average at something be an LD by itself? It’s not. You allude to her being diagnosed with ADHD.

As a parent you are always going to want to see your child in the best possible way. You choose to look at the score which includes her strengths. You concede processing speed is important enough to warrant an LD and extra time, but you don’t include it in her IQ score or SAT score.

She does not need extra time on reading? Why? Because this is a strength for her. She is an extremely gifted reader. She needs extra time with math because this is a weakness for her. But extra time washes that distinction away. Why? She didn’t need it for one area. Why does she get it for the other?

You are essentially saying “my daughter is smart except for processing speed. So don’t take that into account for her.”

For other kids with average processing speed, yes. Make them rush through the test. Not her though.

Also, kids with high processing speed but relatively low IQ get punished.

DD is strongly ADHD. And the deviation between OS and GAI causes the problems. Also, one of her processing scores is 1%. It’s hard to explain, but her psychiatrist says it’s like putting one foot on the gas and one foot on the accelerator. She has had to learn how to slow down and work through complex problems step by step. She used to do complex problems in her head, make a small error, and just write down an incorrect answer.

She did not use accommodations on the TJ test, because she wasn’t available on accommodations day. Her math test was so low, I was surprised she was admitted (40/50, Old test). Her verbal score was perfect (50/50, old test). She refused accommodations for Math 3 and got a C+. Agreed to use them going forward and is now an A-/B+ math student.

If she understands TJ math, which is very, very deep and hard, not just time constrained, at an A-/B+ level, why should she not be allowed to demonstrate that? Are colleges looking for fast? Or kids who really understand the subject.

BtW, she is killing it in physics and wants to major in that.

I have nothing against your kid and I don’t care for TJ (live in MD). The problem is that the place your child is taking is a place denied to some other kid with some other “problem”. What you are saying is that your kids weaknesses need to be ignored - but that flip side is that some other kids weaknesses become more of an obstacle for that very reason. Kids who are quick don’t get credit for it and forced to compete on the ground that favors “slow” or whatever kids.

Btw I am pretty sure I have “undiagnosed” ADD. I can’t imagine preferential treatment on the account of it. It feels like cheating.

Do you really think the only place genuine ADHD shows up is speed on math tests? The TJ workload is crushing. My kid has completed every assignment and is penalized when they are late. It has taken an enormous of effort by her and us to help her keep up with the workload and learn to balance so many competing demands. ADHD affect everything— mood, socializing, anxiety, workload management. . She gets an accommodation in one small area. Don’t worry, she is being punished enough for an LD.

And ADHD isn’t a weakness. It’s a learning disability for which she has been diagnosed and for which she receives support and treatment. I have no problem with other kids with LDs getting accommodations.

And BTW, I have diagnosed ADHD and get a work accommodation. If I have a lot of reading to do, I am allowed redact PII and print it when I need to work from home so I can highlight and take notes, which helps me stay on task. The general rule is no printed materials leave the office. Accommodations granted based on the ADA. It has zero negative effect on anyone and makes me better at my job. And it does not make me less qualified to do my job. Why is it cheating?

My kid will not be a surgeon. She would wash out early. She is medically ineligible for the army (medicated ADHD) and would be a terrible policeman because of reaction time in shooting. We are looking at colleges with her ADHD specifically in mind.

But she is brilliant and works hard and has a lot of options where she needs a deep understanding of math and physics, but a small slowdown in calculations does not affect the job. Where the ADHD hyper focus on one problem or issue (rather than 30 timed problems) would work to her benefit. She does a beautiful job with highly complex data. That is likely where she will end up.

She knows her strength and weaknesses. I’m confident her career will reflect her strengths.

And how about this? My kid’s accommodations do not harm you or your kid. So you do you. If your kid needs support, get it for them. If they don’t, say a silent prayer of thanks. ADHD is a high workload, high stress environment is a b***h.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering where is this place that a child with a disability has the field tilted for them. They have an uphill slog regardless of extra time or not. The extra time makes the hill a little bit less steep.

I agree.

My kid's disability played role in what his teachers write in recommendations. It played a role in what extracurriculars he could manage. It played a role in what courses he could handle. It played a role in the grades he got. Many college doors will be closed for him because of those things. His ACT score, taken with double time over multiple days, was a chance for him to show that yes, under ideal circumstances he is capable of grade level work. But it's not like it somehow undid all the other ways that his disability impacts him. He's not stealing anyone's spot because of an unfair score. He's using it to add one more thing to the picture. And since he'll use the same kinds of accommodations in college that he had on the test, such as spreading his coursework over 5 years and summers to allow him extra time for assignments, his ACT is an accurate predictor for how he'll do.

And how's this going to play when he gets a job?

My son (I am not PP) had double time and took the ACT over multiple days and he is an accountant and tutors kids in math.

So it worked out pretty nicely for him.

His English score though... not so great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet, the argument is always made in terms of take away the extra time for SN kids instead of give everyone more (or enough) time, so that the tests assess knowledge/ability rather than speed.

That is incorrect - people are asking for untimed tests or extra time for all. The ones opposing are the parents who have accomodations for their kids with their reasonings that extra time does not help, you don’t understand SN, etc. They protest too much hence one begins to suspect that too much time has been given which helped their kids more than it should have.

That's like saying you want to be able to park in the handicapped spot even though you don't have a disability. Or that you should be able to have a therapy dog on the plane even though you don't have a condition that warrants one. Let's think about that for a sec. If you let everyone have the handicapped spots, there will be none for those who need them. If you let everyone take a dog on the plane, there would be mayhem and those who need the therapy will be stressed.

Giving everyone the extra time does one thing. It puts those who have the disabilities in the same position as having no extra time. That's because the scores of those who don't need the time will potentially increase and adjust the curve to a point that ends up putting the special needs kids at the same disadvantage before the increased time. If that is the case, why bother even giving the extra time.

I think what bothers people is the fact that some of these "disabled" kids are also gifted, and providing the accommodations allows them to demonstrate their giftedness. [b]Sadly some people don't like the idea that some kid with autism is outscoring their kid. Really pathetic.[/b

I am wondering where is this place that a child with a disability has the field tilted for them. They have an uphill slog regardless of extra time or not. The extra time makes the hill a little bit less steep.

Yes, there are those who "game the system" but the solution to give everyone extra time is not a good one. ACT and College Board must have more stringent standards for approving accommodations -- especially where there is no history of accommodations in school. That alone should be a red flag.

there is absolutely nothing pathetic about not wanting your kid to be outscored. nobody wants that, least of all on DCUM. if you are so generous and don’t care about outscoring others why do YOU need to make sure that your child scores as high as he can to the point where you are ready to tilt the field for him? I mean at some point I get what you are doing but to then turn around and lecture others on selflessness is beyond rich.

Those examples are completely irrelevant to giving all kids extra time.
There are a finite number of handicapped spaces in any parking lot. Therefore you can't give them to all.
There is a finite amount of room on an airplane (and dogs don't all get along) so you don't want the chaos of everyone flying with their pets.

But how does giving everyone unlimited time on the SAT will not affect those who have disabilities. Everyone can function to the best of their ability.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My TJ kid has a GAI IQ of more than 145. PS 100. That’s three full SDs. It has taken so much effort for them to perform at a school like TJ with such a variation in subtests. Does not get extra time to turn in assignments (which would be pointless, because the workload is so high they would just be digging themselves in a hole). Uses extended time at school for tests in advanced math, Chem and physics only. Does not seem to need it for reading based activities and assessments. Has the accommodation for both sections on the SAT, because it really isn’t an option to only get it for math. But finished the verbal with a lot of time to spare.

You DD is obviously very bright and motivated. While her GAI is above 145 her actual full scale IQ is above 130. She is intellectually gifted by all accounts.

Her processing speed is perfectly average. The deviation between her high scores and low scores is indicative of a possible LD but it’s not an LD by itself. How can being average at something be an LD by itself? It’s not. You allude to her being diagnosed with ADHD.

As a parent you are always going to want to see your child in the best possible way. You choose to look at the score which includes her strengths. You concede processing speed is important enough to warrant an LD and extra time, but you don’t include it in her IQ score or SAT score.

She does not need extra time on reading? Why? Because this is a strength for her. She is an extremely gifted reader. She needs extra time with math because this is a weakness for her. But extra time washes that distinction away. Why? She didn’t need it for one area. Why does she get it for the other?

You are essentially saying “my daughter is smart except for processing speed. So don’t take that into account for her.”

For other kids with average processing speed, yes. Make them rush through the test. Not her though.

Also, kids with high processing speed but relatively low IQ get punished.

DD is strongly ADHD. And the deviation between OS and GAI causes the problems. Also, one of her processing scores is 1%. It’s hard to explain, but her psychiatrist says it’s like putting one foot on the gas and one foot on the accelerator. She has had to learn how to slow down and work through complex problems step by step. She used to do complex problems in her head, make a small error, and just write down an incorrect answer.

She did not use accommodations on the TJ test, because she wasn’t available on accommodations day. Her math test was so low, I was surprised she was admitted (40/50, Old test). Her verbal score was perfect (50/50, old test). She refused accommodations for Math 3 and got a C+. Agreed to use them going forward and is now an A-/B+ math student.

If she understands TJ math, which is very, very deep and hard, not just time constrained, at an A-/B+ level, why should she not be allowed to demonstrate that? Are colleges looking for fast? Or kids who really understand the subject.

BtW, she is killing it in physics and wants to major in that.

I have nothing against your kid and I don’t care for TJ (live in MD). The problem is that the place your child is taking is a place denied to some other kid with some other “problem”. What you are saying is that your kids weaknesses need to be ignored - but that flip side is that some other kids weaknesses become more of an obstacle for that very reason. Kids who are quick don’t get credit for it and forced to compete on the ground that favors “slow” or whatever kids.

Btw I am pretty sure I have “undiagnosed” ADD. I can’t imagine preferential treatment on the account of it. It feels like cheating.

Nah, you are probably just not intelligent, just like your kid. There's a big difference between a "weakness" and a diagnosed brain disorder. Just accept that your kid is average.

Going back to OPs premise about the definition of standardized. That's correct--BUT the decision to use these particular standardized tests as criteria for college admissions is a separate topic. If the effect of requiring the same testing conditions for all test-takers is to pre-emptively deny access to people with legitimate conditions (psychological-educational or physical) who are capable of meeting academic requirements then there must be accommodations.

Building codes standardize parameters for staircases, but buildings intended for public access must provide alternative means for getting from one level to another.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My TJ kid has a GAI IQ of more than 145. PS 100. That’s three full SDs. It has taken so much effort for them to perform at a school like TJ with such a variation in subtests. Does not get extra time to turn in assignments (which would be pointless, because the workload is so high they would just be digging themselves in a hole). Uses extended time at school for tests in advanced math, Chem and physics only. Does not seem to need it for reading based activities and assessments. Has the accommodation for both sections on the SAT, because it really isn’t an option to only get it for math. But finished the verbal with a lot of time to spare.

You DD is obviously very bright and motivated. While her GAI is above 145 her actual full scale IQ is above 130. She is intellectually gifted by all accounts.

Her processing speed is perfectly average. The deviation between her high scores and low scores is indicative of a possible LD but it’s not an LD by itself. How can being average at something be an LD by itself? It’s not. You allude to her being diagnosed with ADHD.

As a parent you are always going to want to see your child in the best possible way. You choose to look at the score which includes her strengths. You concede processing speed is important enough to warrant an LD and extra time, but you don’t include it in her IQ score or SAT score.

She does not need extra time on reading? Why? Because this is a strength for her. She is an extremely gifted reader. She needs extra time with math because this is a weakness for her. But extra time washes that distinction away. Why? She didn’t need it for one area. Why does she get it for the other?

You are essentially saying “my daughter is smart except for processing speed. So don’t take that into account for her.”

For other kids with average processing speed, yes. Make them rush through the test. Not her though.

Also, kids with high processing speed but relatively low IQ get punished.

DD is strongly ADHD. And the deviation between OS and GAI causes the problems. Also, one of her processing scores is 1%. It’s hard to explain, but her psychiatrist says it’s like putting one foot on the gas and one foot on the accelerator. She has had to learn how to slow down and work through complex problems step by step. She used to do complex problems in her head, make a small error, and just write down an incorrect answer.

She did not use accommodations on the TJ test, because she wasn’t available on accommodations day. Her math test was so low, I was surprised she was admitted (40/50, Old test). Her verbal score was perfect (50/50, old test). She refused accommodations for Math 3 and got a C+. Agreed to use them going forward and is now an A-/B+ math student.

If she understands TJ math, which is very, very deep and hard, not just time constrained, at an A-/B+ level, why should she not be allowed to demonstrate that? Are colleges looking for fast? Or kids who really understand the subject.

BtW, she is killing it in physics and wants to major in that.

I have nothing against your kid and I don’t care for TJ (live in MD). The problem is that the place your child is taking is a place denied to some other kid with some other “problem”. What you are saying is that your kids weaknesses need to be ignored - but that flip side is that some other kids weaknesses become more of an obstacle for that very reason. Kids who are quick don’t get credit for it and forced to compete on the ground that favors “slow” or whatever kids.

Btw I am pretty sure I have “undiagnosed” ADD. I can’t imagine preferential treatment on the account of it. It feels like cheating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering where is this place that a child with a disability has the field tilted for them. They have an uphill slog regardless of extra time or not. The extra time makes the hill a little bit less steep.

I agree.

My kid's disability played role in what his teachers write in recommendations. It played a role in what extracurriculars he could manage. It played a role in what courses he could handle. It played a role in the grades he got. Many college doors will be closed for him because of those things. His ACT score, taken with double time over multiple days, was a chance for him to show that yes, under ideal circumstances he is capable of grade level work. But it's not like it somehow undid all the other ways that his disability impacts him. He's not stealing anyone's spot because of an unfair score. He's using it to add one more thing to the picture. And since he'll use the same kinds of accommodations in college that he had on the test, such as spreading his coursework over 5 years and summers to allow him extra time for assignments, his ACT is an accurate predictor for how he'll do.

And how's this going to play when he gets a job?

Are you just stupid or have you never worked? People gravitate toward succeed in jobs that value their strengths and don’t punish their weaknesses. PP’s kid has already been introduced to that strategy. And/or, if speed is an issue for him, he’ll compensate by wasting less time at work than most of his colleagues or putting in longer hours when needed or figuring out more efficient ways to do things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am wondering where is this place that a child with a disability has the field tilted for them. They have an uphill slog regardless of extra time or not. The extra time makes the hill a little bit less steep.

I agree.

My kid's disability played role in what his teachers write in recommendations. It played a role in what extracurriculars he could manage. It played a role in what courses he could handle. It played a role in the grades he got. Many college doors will be closed for him because of those things. His ACT score, taken with double time over multiple days, was a chance for him to show that yes, under ideal circumstances he is capable of grade level work. But it's not like it somehow undid all the other ways that his disability impacts him. He's not stealing anyone's spot because of an unfair score. He's using it to add one more thing to the picture. And since he'll use the same kinds of accommodations in college that he had on the test, such as spreading his coursework over 5 years and summers to allow him extra time for assignments, his ACT is an accurate predictor for how he'll do.

And how's this going to play when he gets a job?

Here’s the thing, we all should want every kid (not just our own) to be able to show their strengths. And it’s hardly a weakness in most real world situations if it takes a kid (any kid) a little longer to do that than the length of time that the College Board or some other standardized test company had determined is optimal for their business model.

Computers make it possible to extend time in ways that don’t hold quicker test-takers hostage to those who need more time. They also make test-until-failure possible, so more advanced/difficult material could be included for students/schools who want info to differentiate among obviously capable students.

As for jobs where speed is of the essence (and note that speed does not equal intelligence), those employers can always test that in their hiring process. And people who know from experience that time pressure doesn’t enable them to do their best work are likely to self-select out of such jobs anyway.

Most jobs that demand high levels of intelligence aren’t structured around making mathematical calculations or reading as quickly as possible. And many job where speed matters require quick physical reflexes (which there’s no guarantee that quick thinkers possess).