Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

A kid with 13th percentile processing speed needs more time that a kid with median (or above median) processing speed.

Why does this bother you so much? Do you actually think that a kid with processing speed is going to have an advantage over a kid with median processing speed, or do you think that a kid who knows the subject matter, but has slow processing speed, is dumb?

DP.

(1) you didn’t address PP’s question as to why the test is timed at all

(2) processing speed is actually one of the primary measures of cognitive ability

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both things can be true. There is a small percentage of students who truly need the accommodations but this system is widely abused. Unfortunately many psychologists who do testing are more than happy to adjust test results for $$$. Testing is an art not a science

Reverse that. Most students getting accommodations need them but there is a small percentage who are abusing the system.

+1

Anonymous wrote:Both things can be true. There is a small percentage of students who truly need the accommodations but this system is widely abused. Unfortunately many psychologists who do testing are more than happy to adjust test results for $$$. Testing is an art not a science

Reverse that. Most students getting accommodations need them but there is a small percentage who are abusing the system.

When they speak of equity issues with this SAT, this is clearly one of those issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

It’s for administrative feasibility. The SAT is an unspeeded test, meaning at least 75% of test takers have time to attempt every question.

But you could give everyone a choice - without needing to prove reason. Untimed SAT could be a separate test. Timed SAT is a separate test. Not everyone takes the SAT anyways with all the test-blind, test-optional.

Personally, I always thought the open book, take home exams were the worst and would take a timed exam any day.

From an equity standpoint, I think we all know there are plenty of students out there who’ve never been diagnosed/evaluated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

It’s for administrative feasibility. The SAT is an unspeeded test, meaning at least 75% of test takers have time to attempt every question.

But you could give everyone a choice - without needing to prove reason. Untimed SAT could be a separate test. Timed SAT is a separate test. Not everyone takes the SAT anyways with all the test-blind, test-optional.

Personally, I always thought the open book, take home exams were the worst and would take a timed exam any day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

It’s for administrative feasibility. The SAT is an unspeeded test, meaning at least 75% of test takers have time to attempt every question.

Attempt every question? Why does the 13% get as much time as the 5%? Make it a sliding scale tailored to each processing speed if we actually care about fairness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

It’s for administrative feasibility. The SAT is an unspeeded test, meaning at least 75% of test takers have time to attempt every question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

A kid with 13th percentile processing speed needs more time that a kid with median (or above median) processing speed.

Why does this bother you so much? Do you actually think that a kid with processing speed is going to have an advantage over a kid with median processing speed, or do you think that a kid who knows the subject matter, but has slow processing speed, is dumb?

It’s bothersome because you’re not consistent. Either the time matters or it doesn’t. It doesn’t matter to you but you damn well want to make sure some kids have to adhere to an arbitrary time limit and yours doesn’t. Why?

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn’t time the tests. I think that’s a simple answer.

Maybe some students are undiagnosed and/or parents didn’t have the resources to get the IEP/504.

Once there is a fairly high percentage with accommodations, you really have to think (statistically) that some are missed/undiagnosed.

They shouldn’t time the tests. I think that’s a simple answer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.

A kid with 13th percentile processing speed needs more time that a kid with median (or above median) processing speed.

Why does this bother you so much? Do you actually think that a kid with processing speed is going to have an advantage over a kid with median processing speed, or do you think that a kid who knows the subject matter, but has slow processing speed, is dumb?

It was interesting to estimate how many students get accommodations. My son had a 504 plan since kindergarten for a mild hearing loss.

In 9th grade when he took one AP class he realized who had accommodations because they put all the kids with extra time in one room. When he took AP exams he realized even more kids received accommodations. He started getting added how he was able to get extra time and at least 2-3 parents tried to broach the topic with me.

By 11th grade he said there was a massive number of kids who were separated to get extra time. Many had straight A’s (he said because they would comment on their GPA’s) and a couple were kids who had asked him how to get extra time.

My son doesn’t care how many kids get extra time, what has affected him is he gets preferential seating to sit in front and with his better ear toward the teacher. He finds it helpful to watch the teachers mouth. There are so many students with preferential seating teachers in high school would tell him it wasn’t always possible for him to be in the front row when over 1/4 of the students in a class have accommodations.

Both things can be true. There is a small percentage of students who truly need the accommodations but this system is widely abused. Unfortunately many psychologists who do testing are more than happy to adjust test results for $$$. Testing is an art not a science

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not a big fan of accommodations.

So, my kid with 13th percentile processing speed shouldn't get more time on tests? Why, exactly?

For the same reason my kid with 13th percentile sprinting speed shouldn't get a 40-meter head start in the 100 meter dash.

That's a stupid analogy.

The 100-meter dash is a competition to run the fastest. Speed is the point.

The SAT is an assessment of knowledge. If you know geometry, it doesn't matter if it takes you 30 minutes to answer a series of geometry questions and not 15. There are lots of areas of study (and professions) that don't require speed.

Then why is the test timed at all? Everyone deserves the chance to take as much time as they need.