I've heard of them denying accommodations for type I diabetics then denying admission with the pumps that are life-essential. Total BS.

Anonymous wrote:The point of standardized tests is that they are standardized. Other than accommodations for actual physical limitations, they should be exactly the same for everyone. Any accommodation is an unfair advantage, usually gamed by rich parents who can’t bear to think that their baby isn’t in the 99th percentile. I knew a lot of kids in college who’d gotten in with accommodations, and they couldn’t do the work. They ended up in gut majors… but I suppose it was never about the learning, it was about the badge. Most were popular though—and rich. And now they are all sitting pretty in cush jobs with generational wealth.

Must be nice to have kids who don’t have a neurodiversity that creates an inherent disadvantage.

Anonymous wrote:So many clueless adults. The ADHD kids NEED the extra time. They are so easily distracted, even with the extra time mine has trouble and doesn't finish. Should the kid who can't see not be allowed glasses because it's an advantage? It is the same thing!

Are some parents gaming the system? Sure! And yes, there should be outrage there. But the vast majority of kids receiving extra time have had IEPs and 504s for extra support throughout school, and need the support.

Plus one

I agree with the person who said the tests should not be timed. Testing is monitored, it’s not like the kids can look up answers.

Anonymous wrote:So many clueless adults. The ADHD kids NEED the extra time. They are so easily distracted, even with the extra time mine has trouble and doesn't finish. Should the kid who can't see not be allowed glasses because it's an advantage? It is the same thing!

Are some parents gaming the system? Sure! And yes, there should be outrage there. But the vast majority of kids receiving extra time have had IEPs and 504s for extra support throughout school, and need the support.

The point of the test is to determine how many questions one can answer within a specified time limit.

So many clueless adults. The ADHD kids NEED the extra time. They are so easily distracted, even with the extra time mine has trouble and doesn't finish. Should the kid who can't see not be allowed glasses because it's an advantage? It is the same thing!

Are some parents gaming the system? Sure! And yes, there should be outrage there. But the vast majority of kids receiving extra time have had IEPs and 504s for extra support throughout school, and need the support.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP why do you care about the SAT? You have the extra time on the ACT. It's not strategic to have a kid study for both tests.

I've got one kid with extra time (vision problem) and one without.

We can argue about it all day, but it's the wrong argument, because the test is supposed to be about what you've learned, NOT, how fast you can take a test. It should NOT be a speed test.

I say, make it a 6 hour test for everybody, and tell kids they can leave when ever they want.

Many neurotypical kids don't have time to finish the test or check their answers. Those with extra time have an advantage over their peers, period.

No, that is incorrect. For kids with dyslexia reading will always take longer than for their neurotypical peers. So extra time is in fact the ideal way to level the playing field. Many kids with dyslexia and extra time don’t finish the test either.

Anonymous wrote:OP why do you care about the SAT? You have the extra time on the ACT. It's not strategic to have a kid study for both tests.

I've got one kid with extra time (vision problem) and one without.

We can argue about it all day, but it's the wrong argument, because the test is supposed to be about what you've learned, NOT, how fast you can take a test. It should NOT be a speed test.

I say, make it a 6 hour test for everybody, and tell kids they can leave when ever they want.

Many neurotypical kids don't have time to finish the test or check their answers. Those with extra time have an advantage over their peers, period.

OP why do you care about the SAT? You have the extra time on the ACT. It's not strategic to have a kid study for both tests.

I've got one kid with extra time (vision problem) and one without.

We can argue about it all day, but it's the wrong argument, because the test is supposed to be about what you've learned, NOT, how fast you can take a test. It should NOT be a speed test.

I say, make it a 6 hour test for everybody, and tell kids they can leave when ever they want.

If his neuropsych test wasn't within 3 (or 4?) years, then he doesn't qualify for extended time. You need to keep those updated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point of standardized tests is that they are standardized. Other than accommodations for actual physical limitations, they should be exactly the same for everyone. Any accommodation is an unfair advantage, usually gamed by rich parents who can’t bear to think that their baby isn’t in the 99th percentile. I knew a lot of kids in college who’d gotten in with accommodations, and they couldn’t do the work. They ended up in gut majors… but I suppose it was never about the learning, it was about the badge. Most were popular though—and rich. And now they are all sitting pretty in cush jobs with generational wealth.

You seem like a very miserable person. If your child does not have any challenges - be grateful and not snarky about those who do

DP Eh, I largely agree with the PP. there is an absurd amount of abuse and gaming of the system. Life is hard and little Johnnie may not get a 1600 but the playing field should be level.

You mean the same playing field that allows people to pay thousands to outside centers for "testing tricks" to boost their scores by a 100 points or more? That playing field? Doesn't seem all that level to me...

Oh for the love of God. You clearly do not have children with LDs if you think that getting psycho educational testing boosts test scores by 100 points or more and is gaming the system.

The struggles many students and their families face are very very real. These students have a broad range of challenges that usually requires a close partnership between school and home and medical professionals to manage effectively. When not managed properly, the fall-out can be devastating. When managed effectively their many gifts are out to good use and they are not a burden on society and their families.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point of standardized tests is that they are standardized. Other than accommodations for actual physical limitations, they should be exactly the same for everyone. Any accommodation is an unfair advantage, usually gamed by rich parents who can’t bear to think that their baby isn’t in the 99th percentile. I knew a lot of kids in college who’d gotten in with accommodations, and they couldn’t do the work. They ended up in gut majors… but I suppose it was never about the learning, it was about the badge. Most were popular though—and rich. And now they are all sitting pretty in cush jobs with generational wealth.

You seem like a very miserable person. If your child does not have any challenges - be grateful and not snarky about those who do

DP Eh, I largely agree with the PP. there is an absurd amount of abuse and gaming of the system. Life is hard and little Johnnie may not get a 1600 but the playing field should be level.

It is in society’s interests to help those with LDs to succeed - when they get the supports and accommodations that many many experts agree they need, they can harness their gifts for good in society rather than sink into substance abuse and joblessness. I have seen this in many students with LDs who do not get the supports they need.

You clearly have little direct experience with managing LDs if you see accommodations as gaming the system.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point of standardized tests is that they are standardized. Other than accommodations for actual physical limitations, they should be exactly the same for everyone. Any accommodation is an unfair advantage, usually gamed by rich parents who can’t bear to think that their baby isn’t in the 99th percentile. I knew a lot of kids in college who’d gotten in with accommodations, and they couldn’t do the work. They ended up in gut majors… but I suppose it was never about the learning, it was about the badge. Most were popular though—and rich. And now they are all sitting pretty in cush jobs with generational wealth.

You seem like a very miserable person. If your child does not have any challenges - be grateful and not snarky about those who do

DP Eh, I largely agree with the PP. there is an absurd amount of abuse and gaming of the system. Life is hard and little Johnnie may not get a 1600 but the playing field should be level.

You mean the same playing field that allows people to pay thousands to outside centers for "testing tricks" to boost their scores by a 100 points or more? That playing field? Doesn't seem all that level to me...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DS was denied an extended time accommodation on the SAT, but got less important ones like small group testing. This was shocking to us because he's had an ADHD diagnosis since 1st grade and uses extended time regularly (slow reader), so there's a clear history. He got extended time and other expected accommodations for the ACT. Our school told us that the Collegeboard is getting much stricter with the extended time accommodations, specifically. Maybe in light of the Varsity Blues scandal? Is that what other people are finding or hearing? Or is it possible the school messed up his application and is just covering?

Serious question: at one point do kids stop relying on these crutches? Do you think an employer will give him extra time to complete tasks? It doesn’t work that way.

I hate this argument because it kinda does - First, in a professional workplace, an employee has much more say over their schedule and can work when they have the most focus. Deadlines are incredibly useful to an ADHD brain - creating tension and hyperfocus where otherwise there wouldn't be (but three-hour timed exams aren't that type of deadline). Second. very few workplaces have tasks that must be completed in three hours with pencils down - I guess if you work in a factory producing widgets, but even court deadlines are usually not a three hour turnaround time. That said, an adult with ADHD must learn how to prioritize, focus, and intentionally create a distraction-free environment - but for a high-stakes exam like the SAT that's simply not possible, so extra time makes up for that. Finally, and just as an aside, there are ADHD skills - like the ability to hyperfocus despite outside distractions (when the topic is of interest), diving deep into areas of interest, that are much more beneficial in the workworld but may not appear in the test world. If you look at ER Drs, EMTs, trial attorneys, and other high-stress jobs, you might find quite a few people with ADHD that thrive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point of standardized tests is that they are standardized. Other than accommodations for actual physical limitations, they should be exactly the same for everyone. Any accommodation is an unfair advantage, usually gamed by rich parents who can’t bear to think that their baby isn’t in the 99th percentile. I knew a lot of kids in college who’d gotten in with accommodations, and they couldn’t do the work. They ended up in gut majors… but I suppose it was never about the learning, it was about the badge. Most were popular though—and rich. And now they are all sitting pretty in cush jobs with generational wealth.

You seem like a very miserable person. If your child does not have any challenges - be grateful and not snarky about those who do

DP Eh, I largely agree with the PP. there is an absurd amount of abuse and gaming of the system. Life is hard and little Johnnie may not get a 1600 but the playing field should be level.

It is in society’s interests to help those with LDs to succeed - when they get the supports and accommodations that many many experts agree they need, they can harness their gifts for good in society rather than sink into substance abuse and joblessness. I have seen this in many students with LDs who do not get the supports they need.

You clearly have little direct experience with managing LDs if you see accommodations as gaming the system.