<br>
<br>
<p>AP = Advanced Placement. That would mean the kid doesn’t just love literature but is an advanced student who can handle copious amounts of reading in a relatively short time. </p>
<p>If my kid had dyslexia, I would not want to put her in that situation. I would encourage her to read great literature and enjoy it at her own speed.</p>
<p>I can’t imagine trying to convince by 15 year old son ( diagnosed and treated for ADHD since age 4; primarily behavioral symptoms ) that sitting longer for a test would be a good thing!</p>
<p>dvm, thank you for ignoring all of my posts and their content, and instead doggedly repeated the same inane request over and over.</p>
<p>
Actually he might have.</p>
<p>From Wikipedia, but backed up by other sources:
“Rather than completing high school, Albert decided to apply directly to the ETH Zurich, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, Switzerland. Without a school certificate, he was required to take an entrance examination, which he did not pass, although he got exceptional marks in mathematics and physics.”</p>
<p>Einstein had continuing difficulties in school because of his unconventional approach and thinking, despite his obvious brilliant understanding of physics and mathematics. Perhaps if the current “test mania” was as strong in those days, he would have had even greater difficulty obtaining a college education.</p>
<p>The amount if ignorance, misinformation and prejudice revolving around this topic makes me think it’s still 1975 when students with learning differences were usually diagnosed as lazy, unmotivated, or intentionally disruptive, with the suggested cure being to “settle down and get to work.”</p>
<p>The research done in the past 30 years provides the following:
[ol][<em>]Learning differences are real and measurable, although we don’t understand the causes.[</em>] Most students with an LD score high on IQ tests.[<em>]Accommodations given have been shown to level the playing field for an LD student.[</em>]Studies show that additional time given to students without LD does not lead to a significant increase in performance.[<em>]NOT providing the appropriate accommodation for an LD student makes their test scores invalid and unreliable.[</em>]The reality is, lower income students with LD are going to be undiagnosed at a much higher rate than upper income. The same goes for the number of lower income individuals who will receive quality medical care. [<em>]We don’t know what percentage of the school population is LD. The percentages quoted for the Washington schools may be the appropriate ones for all schools.[</em>] Back in the 40’ and 50’s LD wasn’t an issue since these folks would accommodate the system by dropping out after 8th grade and getting jobs/starting families.[li] The conditions collective known as learning differences only exist because most educational institutions stipulate that knowledge be acquired and assessed in a specific way that seems to work for most people who then become teachers.[/li][/ol] Sorry for the long post.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I may be feeling the tug of a long chain being pulled by Amb3r and others who are not serious about what they write :)</p>
<p>Nice post, BigIs. All I can say is I hope Amb3r & the like never go into the medical profession, or any that would have to deal with the general population. Amb3r, you seem to have no tolerance, compassion, or understanding. You are just a robot. Go ask your mom for a hug. You need one.</p>
<p>BigIs, don’t tell me I’m spewing out personal thoughts when you’re not giving any sources and research papers to back up your information either. In addition, a lot of what you listed, while true, has no bearing on whether accomodations should be offered. For instance, </p>
<p>
Clearly, in the sense that they will score higher. </p>
<p>
Of course. And intelligence differences are also real and measurable, although we don’t fully understand the causes. So let’s give accomodations to those who are not intelligent, too. Harrison Bergeron, anybody? Anybody? </p>
<p>
This is an opinion.</p>
<p>
That’s nice, but it’s not related to the issue at hand.</p>
<p>I could go on, but I’m going to go shopping now.</p>
<p>Amb3r, clearly you feel threatened. Not only do you not feel your parents’ love, but you are insecure in your place in life. Watch out, these highly intelligent LD kids are very likely to be your boss some day. Look up the research on this…no wonder you feel threatened.</p>
<p>marnik, I don’t particularly agree with amb3r’s comments, but I don’t see how you can infer that he does not “feel his parent’s love” based on his opinions about learning disabilities.</p>
<p>I don’t feel insecure about my scores or threatened by other LD students’ high scores. All of my standardized test scores that universities ask for are perfects, to be honest (SAT I, 3 SAT IIs, ACT). So why would I feel intimidated by any other scores, even if they too are perfects? If I need to learn manners, so do you. I have my adolescence to blame, at least - what is your excuse? I never asked for an analysis of my personal life or my psyche. For you to give one, and a rude one at that, is childish at best, malicious at worst. Furthermore, it is absolutely irrelevant to the matter at hand. Please do not resort to ad hominem attacks; they cheapen the rest of your post.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess you’re not pulling my chain. Since I don’t have any shopping to do, and I don’t want you to continue you assumption that I’m only spouting my opinion, here are some references for you:</p>
<p>Here are some sources regarding the leveling effect of extra time.</p>
<p>TitleThe Effect of Extra Time on Reading Comprehension Scores for University Students with and without Learning Disabilities. Authors:Runyan, M. Kay
**Source:**Journal of Learning Disabilities, v24 n2 p104-08 Feb 1991
**Abstract:**The study, with 16 learning-disabled and 15 normally achieving college students, found a significant difference on reading comprehension scores between groups under timed conditions but no significant differences in test performance when both groups were provided extra time. (Author/DB)</p>
<p>**Title:**The Effects of Timed and Untimed Testing Conditions on the Reading Comprehension Performance of Adults with Reading Disabilities. Special Issue on Reading Comprehension
**Authors:**Lesaux, Nonie K.; Pearson, M. Rufina; Siegel, Linda S.
**Source:**Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, v19 n1 p21-48 Feb 2006
**Abstract:**This study examined the effects of extra time on the reading comprehension performance of a heterogeneous group of adults with reading disabilities. Sixty-four adults participated. A clinic that assesses learning disabilities identified 22 as reading disabled, and 42 as normal readers. The 64 adults took a reading comprehension test under both timed and untimed conditions. Other skills measured included vocabulary, word reading, non-word reading, spelling, arithmetic, and short-term memory. Under timed conditions, there were significant differences between the participants with reading disabilities and the normally achieving participants. All of the reading disabled participants in the present study benefited from extra time, but the normally achieving readers performed similarly under the timed and untimed conditions. Further, in the untimed condition, the performance of the individuals with a less severe reading disability was not significantly different that of the Average readers. The study suggests that extra time during testing is an appropriate accommodation to help individuals begin to compensate for reading disabilities.</p>
<p>Effects of Extended Time on the SAT® I: Reasoning Test Score Growth for Students with Learning Disabilities. College Board Report No. 98-7</p>
<p>Testing With Extended Time on the SAT I: Effects for Students With Learning DisabilitiesWayne J. Camara; Dianne Schneider
available at [Testing</a> With Extended Time on the SAT I: Effects for Students With Learning Disabilities](<a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/portal/site/Professionals/menuitem.6bec168db1037bda0cca134011a161ca/?vgnextoid=aa4997793fc94110vcm-02000000aaa514acRCRD&vgnextchannel=50424ada81814110VgnVCM200000121a16acRCRD]Testing”>Higher Education Professionals | College Board)
Regarding validity and reliability of scores of LD students in timed tests.
**Title:**Mathematics Assessment for Students with Mild Disabilities: An Exploration of Content Validity.
**Author(s):**Parmar, Rene S.; And Others
Source: Learning Disability Quarterly, v19 n2 p127-36 Spr 1996
**Abstract:**This study used the Assessment Standards of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics to evaluate the appropriateness and adequacy of selected standardized tests of mathematics achievement as they pertain to students with disabilities. Problems with content validity included inadequate representation of content domains, inappropriate sequencing and placement of items, and inappropriate use of age and grade-equivalent scores.</p>
<p>Performance and Persistence: A Validity Study of the SAT for Students with Disabilities
Marjorie Ragosta;Henry Braun;Bruce Kaplan;
Available at [Students</a> with Disabilities](<a href=“http://professionals.collegeboard.com/data-reports-research/cb/disabilities]Students”>Higher Education Professionals | College Board)
</p>
<p>As far as my point about the high percentage of LD diagnoses in Washington DC, this hearkens back to the original premise of this thread - the high percentages of LD diagnoses in “fancier” schools indicate a lot of bogus diagnoses. I meant to suggest that the high level at these schools may be a more realistic number than the lower numbers elsewhere, which my indicate an under-reporting of students who actually have LD.</p>
<p>I can provide more sources if you’d like on other statements.</p>
<p>Then do something about it.
We can complain all we want here; it won’t help.</p>
<p>If my LD child only needs extra time on the writing section to accomodate the disabillity, can my child get that or is it time and a half or double time on everything?</p>
<p>BigIs: You stated, “As far as my point about the high percentage of LD diagnoses in Washington DC, this hearkens back to the original premise of this thread - the high percentages of LD diagnoses in “fancier” schools indicate a lot of bogus diagnoses. I meant to suggest that the high level at these schools may be a more realistic number than the lower numbers elsewhere, which my indicate an under-reporting of students who actually have LD.”</p>
<p>If that is true, then more than half of my S’s classmates are LD. I am sure you do not really believe this? And, has anyone performed enough testing to deliver the quantitative measure – the acutal percentage with LD? And, how much of an LD makes one LD-applicable for extra time? Or, whose LD entitles him or her to the extra time? Like som,any neurologically related questions, the answers are not easily, if at all, ascertained.</p>
<p>This thread started with one premise: many people are asking for extended time for the SAT, but not similarly requesting extra measures for class work – exams at school, curriculum at school. . . Those are the usual suspects. If a student tests and studies in the normal curriculum – or even advanced curriculum at school (AP tests and the like) – why would that same student ask (or better – why would that same student be entitled?) for extended time for the SAT? I think the answer is self explanatory.</p>
<p>I just asked my junior D and her friends how many kids in their class got extra time on PSAT and they estimated about 12 percent. I asked how many kids in their class usually get extra time to finish regular classroom exams and they estimated about one percent. Which leads me to believe some kids were specially diagnosed with LD for PSAT purposes.</p>
<p>Or maybe that’s just at whatever level she’s at for her classes at school? If she’s advanced, then I’d expect less students in those classes to receive extra time. (Not because it isn’t allowed, but because a lower percentage have a LD)</p>
<p>Amb3r, you’re going back to your “I got perfect scores so my opinions are more valid than yours” attitude. I know you didn’t say it directly, but you’ve mentioned your perfect scores so many times now in this thread and the ACT one that you just come off as extremely insecure.</p>
<p>Not only that, but every valid, researched argument presented to you is combated with an opinion. Heck, some of yours don’t even make sense.</p>
<p>(Accommodations given have been shown to level the playing field for an LD student.)</p>
<p>—Clearly, in the sense that they will score higher.—</p>
<p>Isn’t that the POINT?</p>
<p>(Learning differences are real and measurable, although we don’t understand the causes.)</p>
<p>—Of course. And intelligence differences are also real and measurable, although we don’t fully understand the causes. So let’s give accomodations to those who are not intelligent, too. Harrison Bergeron, anybody? Anybody?—</p>
<p>Ever heard of socio-economic factors? Look at the statistics; they’re pretty self-explanatory.</p>
<p>(NOT providing the appropriate accommodation for an LD student makes their test scores invalid and unreliable.)</p>
<p>—This is an opinion.—</p>
<p>No. Yours is the opinion. Here’s some research. Where’s yours? [Accommodations</a> Research on the SAT Reasoning Test](<a href=“http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:duezg3gMcI0J:maine.gov/education/nclb/reconsideration/4.2.6-Accommodations%2520on%2520the%2520SAT.pdf+test+accommodations+validity&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=28&gl=us]Accommodations”>http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:duezg3gMcI0J:maine.gov/education/nclb/reconsideration/4.2.6-Accommodations%2520on%2520the%2520SAT.pdf+test+accommodations+validity&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=28&gl=us)</p>
<p>(We don’t know what percentage of the school population is LD. The percentages quoted for the Washington schools may be the appropriate ones for all schools.)</p>
<p>—That’s nice, but it’s not related to the issue at hand.</p>
<p>I could go on, but I’m going to go shopping now.—</p>
<p>I hope you’re shopping for some books about learning disabilities.</p>
<p>No one in this thread has ever asserted that extended time absolutely must be prohibited. And, much of the spewing anger within this thread appears to be derision amongst the masses about who deserves to receive this benefit and who does not. The issue is being fought because all appear to conceded that extended time does affect the numbers – there is improvement with additional time. Naive comments like “don’t think extra time on the SAT would help much. Unless you’re a non-native English speaker.” are not taken seriously. After all, those with disabilities – not foreign speaking parties – are the lobbyists for the extended time. And, those who are against freely allowing the same are native speakers who see the issue benefitting those with “less” LD than what they deem to be the allowed amount for authorizing extended time.</p>
<p>When all of this arose, little debate existed as there was an asterisk next to the score. Now, the asterisk is removed. A voluntary removal by the testing agency – not a court ruling requiring the same.</p>
<p>And, when that change arose in the news in 2002, the ever conservative National Review foretold the future when it wrote: “It turns out that, since the College Board’s decision in July to ditch the asterisk, parents of college-bound high-school seniors have been flocking with their sons and daughters to psychologists and M.D.s in hopes of obtaining the kind of diagnosis that translates into time-and-a-half or double time on the SAT.”</p>
<p>So, in 2003, the economically advantaged had their advantages increased. First, private schools remained as option one. Secondly, it was commonplace to pay for Kaplan or other test prep organizations – presently hovering at “ $1,499 per person (for groups of 3 or more)” as quoted on the Kaplan page. Thirdly, you can increase that SAT-prep course with private tutoring. Fourthly, you can obtain a college advisor to aid in the essays, choices, high school curriculum decisions and the like which he or she – through their alleged expertise – determines the “schools of your child’s choice” will admire. And, now the realty of hiring an edu-shrink. The edu-shrink prepares the papers required by SAT for allowing your child to receive extended time.</p>
<p>As the National Review well pointed out “The services of the edu-shrinks aren’t cheap, but dollar for dollar, they probably deliver better results than the companies that merely prep students for the college boards. After all, for most students the hardest part of the SATs is working under the pressure of the clock.”</p>
<p>In short, suburban affluent college prep parenting is a schooled group of intensive adults who can see loopholes in the testing system as readily as an educated tax attorney finds loopholes in the Tax Code. And, the removal of the asterisk for extended time appears to be a loophole.. Like all loopholes, it was created for a purpose other than that which it is most used. Removal of the asterisk was to comfort the LD test takers, but now it appears to be the triumph among a majority of students who take tests in classes and elsewhere without this advantage.</p>
<p>To the test givers’ credit, the loophole is being cinched a bit. It is no loner “automatic” to receive extended time with a doctor’s slip. The time to obtain the same appears to be increasing, which either means some may be lost in the paperwork or people are actually reviewing the applications. But, as the testers increase their scrutiny, the parents and agents will improve their requests – it will be a never ending cycle until change is made.</p>
<p>The easiest resolution may be reimplementing the asterisk. Stigmatize the extended time, one may ask? First, LD applicants should not deem disclosure of their disability with rejection by the college admissions’ office. Secondly, disclosure will maybe stigmatize the bad ET users – those who are not wishing to be characterized as such, e.g. those who do not want to take tests in school with ET or elsewhere with ET. This seems appropriate for an immediate response to the grotesquely abusive practices by some parents. </p>
<p>In the meantime, in light of the time of the year, I would hope some of the rhetoric dim to discourse of the subject as opposed to the person. I say this because I find this thread very invigorating and insightful, BUT some of those arguments are defeated by the personal affronts which serve no legitimate purpose.</p>
<p>A lot of you have no understanding as to what would make a student qualify for more time. And it is disgusting that you would write about it without knowing what you’re talking about. I am not saying that the more time thing is never abused, yes, it is abused a lot. HOWEVER one of the groups of children that is granted more time is the teens that get cancer and as a result have to have chemotherapy. Having chemotherapy is like,no, IS having toxic chemical poisons pumped into your body. Once you are cured from cancer people think it’s over. It’s done. Welcome back. But no, the treatment burns you out, sometimes for the rest of your life. You get “chemo brain”. Fatigue. Side effects. Things you could do a day before treatment, afterwards can be a complete puzzle. You think it’s easy to get more time on the SAT? A gross exaggeration. Nothing is for free. Mostly if these teens have these extended times it is because they earned it, and they need it. Would you like to trade with them? Get cancer for more time on the SAT? Even though you need it more then? Get a disease that puts in in pain every minute of everyday? Or one that could kill you? Get over it. Stop whining. And be ****ing thankful that you don’t get more time on the SAT.</p>
<p>Again I am not saying there is no abuse, and I’m just saying there is a need, and not everyone is “abusing” it, so do not assume otherwise. Also I’m am aware that some of you do know what you are talking about, like the poster above me, whom I agree with completely.</p>
<p>I think most of the posters agree that an SAT under standard conditions is not an appropriate way to measure the aptitude of certain students. But fewer people would abuse the system if those who did not take it under standard conditions were flagged with an explanation (“got time and a half due to medication side effects” or something like that). One of my kids has to do all schoolwork on the computer because no one can read the handwriting!!! Would do much MUCH better on the essay with a typewriter and I would have no problem with the test being flagged that way.</p>
<p>this is madness…i tried reading through this thread but then all the posts got to be 100 lines each and i was like whoaaaaaaaaa so i skipped to the end and the posts are still 100 lines each…gives me a headache to even try reading it lol</p>