Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of a child with disabilities, I have observed that there are some people who get it and some that don't. This includes teachers and even some special education teachers. In the pool of those that don't get it, some will eventually get it when they face it in someone with whom they have significant contact. I have seen my own child convert teachers as he moved through the educational system. That was quite a bit of pressure for him, but he did it admirably. I wish the naysayers on this thread could meet my child and learn from him.

For the pp who posted about having a gap between the 25th and 75th percentiles. That is still within average and the person is unlikely to get accommodations IME. In fact, some tests have 'average' as low as the 16th percentile (one SD above and below the 50th percentile). For my child, his lowest score on tests that tested his disability was in the 1st percentile (for him: RAN), and one test was ruled invalid because he scored so low. On the other side, the scores in his areas of ability were in the 99th and above (eg critical thinking, vocabulary, background knowledge). He needs the accommodations so that the tests accurately reflect his mastery of the material. He has a reader and a scribe (in HS it was a person, in college it is electronic). It takes more time to take a test with these, so he also gets extra time. Technology is great but it is not always efficient. Some children need extra time because it takes more time for them to bubble in the answer. It has nothing to do with how much time it took them to get to that answer. I do not think the ability to bubble in answers quickly is a skill that relates to almost all real life work environments.

There will always be controversy about where the line is drawn - wherever it is drawn, because there will always be someone who just missed it and they will not be very far away from the person who just made it. If the standardized test takers could figure how to go give more time to everyone without making others sit around longer when they don't need it and make it cost effective, then I foresee that the time component to standardized tests will go away. It did for the Virginia SOLs.

I don't disagree with this but this doesn't describe 22% of kids or anywhere close, and there does need to consideration about to what extent accommodations -- particularly if they are very generous and given to a lot of kids -- distort the ability to accurately measure the ability of kids that don't receive them.

We aren't claiming that disabilities don't exist or that there aren't some people who are intellectually capable but need a different mechanism to show their skills. The claim is that the system is being overused to the point of abused by marginal candidates who receive overly generous accommodations due to the wealth / influence of their parents as a method of trying to game the competition. Obviously that's not the intent of every parent or the result in every case but it's a reality that needs to be addressed in order for the system to function properly.

Also, doing not super intellectual things quickly and accurately is important at literally every job. It's not 100% of most jobs, but it absolutely matters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If two kids are taking a test, and one kid gets a calculator and extra time and the other kid does not, THEY ARE NOT TAKING THE SAME TEST.

The idea that one kid should get special accommodations because he's 75% in one area and 25% in another instead of 50% and 50% is absurd.

If the other kid also had a calculator and extra time, he would make fewer careless mistakes and answer more questions too.

Your kid's high test scores depends on a curve that you juiced with unfair testing conditions. It is not a realistic representation of your kid's abilities (or the challenges they will face in the future).

We are going to look up in ten years and instead of 22% of kids at these schools being "disabled" it's going to be 35%. Then 45%. The system will break down from it's own selfishness.

There needs to be a method of giving kids accommodations that don't involve unfairly penalizing other kids (and then obnoxiously bragging about it). I don't think anyone cares about a kid getting an audio textbook instead of a written one, for example.

Agree 1000+. The calculator accomodation - just give it to all the kids.

The fact that so many of these parents are so off put by the idea that some other kid might also get a calculator and more time to finish the test shows what they are really about, and it has nothing to do with fairness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of a child with disabilities, I have observed that there are some people who get it and some that don't. This includes teachers and even some special education teachers. In the pool of those that don't get it, some will eventually get it when they face it in someone with whom they have significant contact. I have seen my own child convert teachers as he moved through the educational system. That was quite a bit of pressure for him, but he did it admirably. I wish the naysayers on this thread could meet my child and learn from him.

For the pp who posted about having a gap between the 25th and 75th percentiles. That is still within average and the person is unlikely to get accommodations IME. In fact, some tests have 'average' as low as the 16th percentile (one SD above and below the 50th percentile). For my child, his lowest score on tests that tested his disability was in the 1st percentile (for him: RAN), and one test was ruled invalid because he scored so low. On the other side, the scores in his areas of ability were in the 99th and above (eg critical thinking, vocabulary, background knowledge). He needs the accommodations so that the tests accurately reflect his mastery of the material. He has a reader and a scribe (in HS it was a person, in college it is electronic). It takes more time to take a test with these, so he also gets extra time. Technology is great but it is not always efficient. Some children need extra time because it takes more time for them to bubble in the answer. It has nothing to do with how much time it took them to get to that answer. I do not think the ability to bubble in answers quickly is a skill that relates to almost all real life work environments.

There will always be controversy about where the line is drawn - wherever it is drawn, because there will always be someone who just missed it and they will not be very far away from the person who just made it. If the standardized test takers could figure how to go give more time to everyone without making others sit around longer when they don't need it and make it cost effective, then I foresee that the time component to standardized tests will go away. It did for the Virginia SOLs.

I don't disagree with this but this doesn't describe 22% of kids or anywhere close, and there does need to consideration about to what extent accommodations -- particularly if they are very generous and given to a lot of kids -- distort the ability to accurately measure the ability of kids that don't receive them.

We aren't claiming that disabilities don't exist or that there aren't some people who are intellectually capable but need a different mechanism to show their skills. The claim is that the system is being overused to the point of abused by marginal candidates who receive overly generous accommodations due to the wealth / influence of their parents as a method of trying to game the competition. Obviously that's not the intent of every parent or the result in every case but it's a reality that needs to be addressed in order for the system to function properly.

Also, doing not super intellectual things quickly and accurately is important at literally every job. It's not 100% of most jobs, but it absolutely matters.

Anonymous wrote:
If two kids are taking a test, and one kid gets a calculator and extra time and the other kid does not, THEY ARE NOT TAKING THE SAME TEST.

The idea that one kid should get special accommodations because he's 75% in one area and 25% in another instead of 50% and 50% is absurd.

If the other kid also had a calculator and extra time, he would make fewer careless mistakes and answer more questions too.

Your kid's high test scores depends on a curve that you juiced with unfair testing conditions. It is not a realistic representation of your kid's abilities (or the challenges they will face in the future).

We are going to look up in ten years and instead of 22% of kids at these schools being "disabled" it's going to be 35%. Then 45%. The system will break down from it's own selfishness.

There needs to be a method of giving kids accommodations that don't involve unfairly penalizing other kids (and then obnoxiously bragging about it). I don't think anyone cares about a kid getting an audio textbook instead of a written one, for example.

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of a child with disabilities, I have observed that there are some people who get it and some that don't. This includes teachers and even some special education teachers. In the pool of those that don't get it, some will eventually get it when they face it in someone with whom they have significant contact. I have seen my own child convert teachers as he moved through the educational system. That was quite a bit of pressure for him, but he did it admirably. I wish the naysayers on this thread could meet my child and learn from him.

For the pp who posted about having a gap between the 25th and 75th percentiles. That is still within average and the person is unlikely to get accommodations IME. In fact, some tests have 'average' as low as the 16th percentile (one SD above and below the 50th percentile). For my child, his lowest score on tests that tested his disability was in the 1st percentile (for him: RAN), and one test was ruled invalid because he scored so low. On the other side, the scores in his areas of ability were in the 99th and above (eg critical thinking, vocabulary, background knowledge). He needs the accommodations so that the tests accurately reflect his mastery of the material. He has a reader and a scribe (in HS it was a person, in college it is electronic). It takes more time to take a test with these, so he also gets extra time. Technology is great but it is not always efficient. Some children need extra time because it takes more time for them to bubble in the answer. It has nothing to do with how much time it took them to get to that answer. I do not think the ability to bubble in answers quickly is a skill that relates to almost all real life work environments.

There will always be controversy about where the line is drawn - wherever it is drawn, because there will always be someone who just missed it and they will not be very far away from the person who just made it. If the standardized test takers could figure how to go give more time to everyone without making others sit around longer when they don't need it and make it cost effective, then I foresee that the time component to standardized tests will go away. It did for the Virginia SOLs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If two kids are taking a test, and one kid gets a calculator and extra time and the other kid does not, THEY ARE NOT TAKING THE SAME TEST.

The idea that one kid should get special accommodations because he's 75% in one area and 25% in another instead of 50% and 50% is absurd.

If the other kid also had a calculator and extra time, he would make fewer careless mistakes and answer more questions too.

Your kid's high test scores depends on a curve that you juiced with unfair testing conditions. It is not a realistic representation of your kid's abilities (or the challenges they will face in the future).

We are going to look up in ten years and instead of 22% of kids at these schools being "disabled" it's going to be 35%. Then 45%. The system will break down from it's own selfishness.

There needs to be a method of giving kids accommodations that don't involve unfairly penalizing other kids (and then obnoxiously bragging about it). I don't think anyone cares about a kid getting an audio textbook instead of a written one, for example.

Agree 1000+. The calculator accomodation - just give it to all the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an infant, my daughter had crossed eyes. Strabismus is a condition that can be treated a number of ways and affects many people both rich and poor. We chose to have surgery. There are many children who don't have access to healthcare that have the same condition as my daughter. They grow up with crossed eyes. This puts them at a disadvantage because of the way they look. Fortunately we had the access and means to make that surgery happen and today she is a beautiful young woman with straight eyes. The fact that others do not have access does not mean my daughter should not have had the surgery, correct? Because the argument seems to be that wealthy people should not have an advantage over poor people. I keep hearing that over and over again. The sad truth is that poor people are disadvantaged and always will be no matter how much money we throw at the problem. It is unfortunate, but it does not mean that others should do without.

I can’t understanf how you arrived at such a conclusion. What is being argued is that people w many privileges already are using their wealth and connections to gain bogus accomodations for their children. Unless u are a member of the private prep school scene, you have no idea. And it is not difficult to get an accomodation - we are talking of people w many connections also.

I am the PP. My son goes to a private all boys high school, so I am familiar with the scene. He is on accommodations, which is why I have been following this thread. He is hardly getting bogus accommodations. I don't ask him what friends have accommodations. I don't think it is any of my business.

This thread has not just been about bogus accommodations. There are people saying that everyone should get extra time. There are people saying that accommodations should not be given, period. And some are just attacking the wealthy because somehow we should not be allowed to use our resources to get our kids help.

My DS was diagnosed with ADHD and slow processing in elementary school. He has been using accommodations throughout elementary, middle, and high school. Basically he gets extended time. He used to get preferential seating, but he doesn't seem to need it as much now that he has matured. I would not consider him a "severe" case.

Years ago, before the awareness, he may have been considered a trouble maker. Why? Because he has a hard time sitting still and focusing. Medication is not an option because of side effects, so we have been dealing with it organically. Recently, we had had him work with a tutor to help him prep for the ACT, and the tutor always tells me that any errors he makes on practice tests have been careless errors (errors of calculation--not knowledge of how to do a problem). The tutor helped him realize what was happening and to help him to take a breath and go back, slow down, and check everything. DS did amazingly well on the ACT, because he is gifted and has high working memory. On the other hand, his processing speed is severely low. He is one of these 2E kids people have been discussing. I am grateful that he was able to get the accommodations to truly demonstrate his intelligence and knowledge. He got a 36 on the ACT, and while he is not interested in going to a top 10 school, we have our eyes set on some selective schools.

I know people may consider this a bogus accommodation simply because DS scored so high. As much as you would like to believe this, it is simply not true. Without the accommodations, we don't know for sure what he would have gotten, but he would have made those careless errors, and that perfect score would not have been possible. And because we have the means to help him, we are the evil wealthy that are "gaming the system." Say what you want, but I will NOT let my kid fail by denying him something that will help him succeed and that he is clearly and legally entitled to. I have friends who do not have the same access to finances that we do who also have 2E kids, and they managed to help their kids utilizing the public school resources. One even was able to get her daughter an IEP. So you don't need wealth to help your kids. The money only provides convenience, access to more testing, and other conveniences like tutoring, etc.

I am tired of the attack on the wealthy and privileged. I grew up with no privilege to speak of. Neither of my parents went to college and my family was extremely dysfunctional. I grew up on the third floor of a tenement house with crumbling walls. I was not encouraged nor did not go to college until after I worked for a few years and then took classes at night time eventually getting a degree. Today for various reasons, I am able to give my kids what I did not have growing up, and I will NOT have someone tell me I don't or he doesn't deserve it. I worked my ass off for what I have and I do not appreciate the derogatory comments about my status or how I decide to spend my money.

Anonymous wrote:
If two kids are taking a test, and one kid gets a calculator and extra time and the other kid does not, THEY ARE NOT TAKING THE SAME TEST.

The idea that one kid should get special accommodations because he's 75% in one area and 25% in another instead of 50% and 50% is absurd.

If the other kid also had a calculator and extra time, he would make fewer careless mistakes and answer more questions too.

Your kid's high test scores depends on a curve that you juiced with unfair testing conditions. It is not a realistic representation of your kid's abilities (or the challenges they will face in the future).

We are going to look up in ten years and instead of 22% of kids at these schools being "disabled" it's going to be 35%. Then 45%. The system will break down from it's own selfishness.

There needs to be a method of giving kids accommodations that don't involve unfairly penalizing other kids (and then obnoxiously bragging about it). I don't think anyone cares about a kid getting an audio textbook instead of a written one, for example.

Anonymous wrote:I manage a college disability office. This thread has been...interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As an infant, my daughter had crossed eyes. Strabismus is a condition that can be treated a number of ways and affects many people both rich and poor. We chose to have surgery. There are many children who don't have access to healthcare that have the same condition as my daughter. They grow up with crossed eyes. This puts them at a disadvantage because of the way they look. Fortunately we had the access and means to make that surgery happen and today she is a beautiful young woman with straight eyes. The fact that others do not have access does not mean my daughter should not have had the surgery, correct? Because the argument seems to be that wealthy people should not have an advantage over poor people. I keep hearing that over and over again. The sad truth is that poor people are disadvantaged and always will be no matter how much money we throw at the problem. It is unfortunate, but it does not mean that others should do without.

I can’t understanf how you arrived at such a conclusion. What is being argued is that people w many privileges already are using their wealth and connections to gain bogus accomodations for their children. Unless u are a member of the private prep school scene, you have no idea. And it is not difficult to get an accomodation - we are talking of people w many connections also.

Anonymous wrote:As an infant, my daughter had crossed eyes. Strabismus is a condition that can be treated a number of ways and affects many people both rich and poor. We chose to have surgery. There are many children who don't have access to healthcare that have the same condition as my daughter. They grow up with crossed eyes. This puts them at a disadvantage because of the way they look. Fortunately we had the access and means to make that surgery happen and today she is a beautiful young woman with straight eyes. The fact that others do not have access does not mean my daughter should not have had the surgery, correct? Because the argument seems to be that wealthy people should not have an advantage over poor people. I keep hearing that over and over again. The sad truth is that poor people are disadvantaged and always will be no matter how much money we throw at the problem. It is unfortunate, but it does not mean that others should do without.