Anonymous wrote:I actually don't think the extra time accommodations are a problem. I think the problem is how many parents are raising young adults to believe they are incompetent and can't make their way in the world without special accommodations. It's so hard to start life thinking there is something this wrong with you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

I don't see why this has become personal but the fact is one of my kids would likely have qualified for testing accomodations, both extra time and writing accomodations. This was an option that some teachers thought we should look into. So no, I am not against kids who have invisible special needs or who have to struggle so much more than other kids for the same result, but I still don't think that pretending that they took the same exact test is fair either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

There is also a school of thought that the more suspect diagnoses are those made earlier because they are more likely to be the result of pushy and educated parents. Maybe you could stop trying to make every diagnosis other than your own child's suspect and accept that you aren't the arbitrator of disability.

Hello again. We got our diagnosis at age 7 when teachers expressed concern. No pushy parent antics here. In fact the teacher provided accommodations before our official diagnosis as it took time to get the appointment with the psychologist, etc. And we re-evaluated again in middle school -- same diagnosis. So no reason for any suspicion with this early diagnosis. Nice try.

College Board and ACT are the ones who find late diagnoses suspect. And rightly so. I don't believe for a second that so many students can suddenly at age 15 discover that they have ADHD. Yes there are a few instances where it can happen, but not at the level it is occurring. I do buy the middle school diagnoses, however, because I know that with my DS, middle school became a much bigger challenge with having multiple classes/teachers, so I can see how the symptoms can be more obvious all of a sudden. And in 6th grade, SAT tests are not on parents' radar as much as in 9th or 10th grade.

Finally, with regard to financially disadvantaged families. If they are truly disadvantaged, they are likely in a public school. Public schools will provide testing for kids who truly have issues. I know if it were my son (who was in a private), he would have gotten the free testing.

"We" got "our" diagnosis? Ugh. Now I understand more why you think only "your" accommodation should be honored. You paid for private school and are annoyed that those public school kids might get the same accommodations. That is indeed awful, but luckily you don't have any say. Public school children who are disabled will also get accommodation, unfortunately for you.

I have to say, you are taking the cake as far as showing appalling entitlement, so much so that I wonder if you are a troll trying to make parents of kids with disabilities look bad.

You completely misread my post. The issue with the less advantaged families is that many are saying that somehow they did not have access to getting their kids a 504 in elementary school. It is easy to do this. You do not need to hire an outside organization and just work with the school. So I don't buy the idea that most kids who are getting a diagnosis in high school are from poor families. Most are from very affluent families paying for their extra time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

There is also a school of thought that the more suspect diagnoses are those made earlier because they are more likely to be the result of pushy and educated parents. Maybe you could stop trying to make every diagnosis other than your own child's suspect and accept that you aren't the arbitrator of disability.

Hello again. We got our diagnosis at age 7 when teachers expressed concern. No pushy parent antics here. In fact the teacher provided accommodations before our official diagnosis as it took time to get the appointment with the psychologist, etc. And we re-evaluated again in middle school -- same diagnosis. So no reason for any suspicion with this early diagnosis. Nice try.

College Board and ACT are the ones who find late diagnoses suspect. And rightly so. I don't believe for a second that so many students can suddenly at age 15 discover that they have ADHD. Yes there are a few instances where it can happen, but not at the level it is occurring. I do buy the middle school diagnoses, however, because I know that with my DS, middle school became a much bigger challenge with having multiple classes/teachers, so I can see how the symptoms can be more obvious all of a sudden. And in 6th grade, SAT tests are not on parents' radar as much as in 9th or 10th grade.

Finally, with regard to financially disadvantaged families. If they are truly disadvantaged, they are likely in a public school. Public schools will provide testing for kids who truly have issues. I know if it were my son (who was in a private), he would have gotten the free testing.

"We" got "our" diagnosis? Ugh. Now I understand more why you think only "your" accommodation should be honored. You paid for private school and are annoyed that those public school kids might get the same accommodations. That is indeed awful, but luckily you don't have any say. Public school children who are disabled will also get accommodation, unfortunately for you.

I have to say, you are taking the cake as far as showing appalling entitlement, so much so that I wonder if you are a troll trying to make parents of kids with disabilities look bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

There is also a school of thought that the more suspect diagnoses are those made earlier because they are more likely to be the result of pushy and educated parents. Maybe you could stop trying to make every diagnosis other than your own child's suspect and accept that you aren't the arbitrator of disability.

Hello again. We got our diagnosis at age 7 when teachers expressed concern. No pushy parent antics here. In fact the teacher provided accommodations before our official diagnosis as it took time to get the appointment with the psychologist, etc. And we re-evaluated again in middle school -- same diagnosis. So no reason for any suspicion with this early diagnosis. Nice try.

College Board and ACT are the ones who find late diagnoses suspect. And rightly so. I don't believe for a second that so many students can suddenly at age 15 discover that they have ADHD. Yes there are a few instances where it can happen, but not at the level it is occurring. I do buy the middle school diagnoses, however, because I know that with my DS, middle school became a much bigger challenge with having multiple classes/teachers, so I can see how the symptoms can be more obvious all of a sudden. And in 6th grade, SAT tests are not on parents' radar as much as in 9th or 10th grade.

Finally, with regard to financially disadvantaged families. If they are truly disadvantaged, they are likely in a public school. Public schools will provide testing for kids who truly have issues. I know if it were my son (who was in a private), he would have gotten the free testing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

Not the pp, but why should a kid with typical ability who has worked hard to achieve an SAT score of 1350 and a GPA of 3.7 under standard time constraints, often running out of time on tests (because, you know, that actually happens to typical kids too) lose a spot at a college to a kid who had extra or unlimited time to turn their 1350 into a 1500 and their 3.7 into a 4.0? There is no such thing as a level playing field when kids who are perfectly capable are getting accomodations to get ahead. The college has no idea who needed or didn’t need accommodations, or who got or didn’t get accomodations, and therefore can’t judge who will be most successful in their program.

Well to bad. The kids who actually have the diagnosis have a condition that prevents them from demon strating their true capabilities. Your kid does not have that disadvantage. Hence the extra time for the disadvantaged kid to create the level playing field. I am sorry your kid is too dumb to get a good SAT score. That is just the way it is. Mine happens to be gifted and the extra time gives him the opportunity to demonstrated that he is.

Then you shouldn’t care then if his/her scores are flagged that extra time was given since he is gifted....

You can say that forever. What is it about medical privacy you don’t get. You want to send your entire medical chart in with your resume? Then we can talk mandating disclosure of medical conditions to college. Maybe you are in perfect health with a 25 BMI and great cholesterol and not pre-diabetic and no BRACA gene and no abnormal Pap smears or abortions and no STDs, etc. but 80% of Americans are not. In fact, POTUS apparently can’t even be honest about his pre-election health exam. Which every member of the military must undergo to serve.

I’m sorry your kids scores disappoint you. Trying to make my kids scores lower are not going to raise them any. Or make her GPA higher. Geez. Personal responsibility and all that.

As soon as you drag politics into it, you lose all credibility

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

Not the pp, but why should a kid with typical ability who has worked hard to achieve an SAT score of 1350 and a GPA of 3.7 under standard time constraints, often running out of time on tests (because, you know, that actually happens to typical kids too) lose a spot at a college to a kid who had extra or unlimited time to turn their 1350 into a 1500 and their 3.7 into a 4.0? There is no such thing as a level playing field when kids who are perfectly capable are getting accomodations to get ahead. The college has no idea who needed or didn’t need accommodations, or who got or didn’t get accomodations, and therefore can’t judge who will be most successful in their program.

Well to bad. The kids who actually have the diagnosis have a condition that prevents them from demon strating their true capabilities. Your kid does not have that disadvantage. Hence the extra time for the disadvantaged kid to create the level playing field. I am sorry your kid is too dumb to get a good SAT score. That is just the way it is. Mine happens to be gifted and the extra time gives him the opportunity to demonstrated that he is.

Then you shouldn’t care then if his/her scores are flagged that extra time was given since he is gifted....

You can say that forever. What is it about medical privacy you don’t get. You want to send your entire medical chart in with your resume? Then we can talk mandating disclosure of medical conditions to college. Maybe you are in perfect health with a 25 BMI and great cholesterol and not pre-diabetic and no BRACA gene and no abnormal Pap smears or abortions and no STDs, etc. but 80% of Americans are not. In fact, POTUS apparently can’t even be honest about his pre-election health exam. Which every member of the military must undergo to serve.

I’m sorry your kids scores disappoint you. Trying to make my kids scores lower are not going to raise them any. Or make her GPA higher. Geez. Personal responsibility and all that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

I don't see why this has become personal but the fact is one of my kids would likely have qualified for testing accomodations, both extra time and writing accomodations. This was an option that some teachers thought we should look into. So no, I am not against kids who have invisible special needs or who have to struggle so much more than other kids for the same result, but I still don't think that pretending that they took the same exact test is fair either.