Extra Time on the SATS is a Joke

Test Preparation
81

<p>Bescraze, The definition of a learning disability is more than a 20 point descrepency in testing. This is more than being a slow reader. Other tasks may be performed at amazing speed, so LD does not mean slow to accomplish all tasks. Quite the opposite, if a person was consistently slow that would be a sign of a lower IQ and not a learning disability. The lack of consistency is the very thing that identifys a learning disability and not just a developmental delay. I just want people to understand that there is a big difference! Please stop making comments like "where do we draw a line between stupid and LD", it's like comparing an apple and an orange. They are completely different issues. A person with a learning disabilty can achieve excellent results with extra time, no amount of extra time could help someone know something that they don't already know. Do you understand?</p>

82

<p>No one has answered my question yet. Why do we not vary the amount of extra time given to individuals based upon the severity of their LD instead of just giving them double time, or150% time or whatever it is now?</p>

83

<p>tom we do that is why....there I believe is 50% extra time or 100%. Ok Happy than here is my question, why do you think only somebody with a learning disability can achieve excellent results with extra time and not someone who is "stupid". I know for a fact my friends as well as I would do much better on certain sections if we had an extra 10+ minutes, and we do not have learning disabilities. Time matters for everyone, maybe just some need it more than others. That goes back to my original point--this is a standardized national test everyone should be treated equally---period</p>

84

<p>There is so much misinformation on this thread I hardly know where to begin, but I will just correct one piece of totally incorrect info, which is that a 20 point discrepancy does not always indicate a learning disability. There are many ways that LDs are diagnosed, and relying on IQ "splits" is out dated. That is one reason that the WISC-IV was developed (which relies on four sets of scores, not two), because too many people who didn't know any better were drawing all kinds of incorrect conclusions, based on nothing more then discrepancies.</p>

<p>Wechsler is also really clear about the standard deviations and differences that are considered significant.</p>

<p>Of course there are kids with discrepancies who have learning disabilities. But the split alone is not indicative of the type, scope, or anything else.</p>

85

<p>Allmusic, The law in my state governing a learning disability stipulates a 20 point decrepency, but it is not an IQ split. The series of testing, which has varied several times over the past 12 years that I have been involved in the IEP proccess, is far more in depth, more than could be easily explained on a post. My point was that a LD student is not slow in everything. Significant discrepencies are indicative of a disability, but the proccess of determining the type and severity is much more complex. My son had a 40 point discrepency in complex proccessing and a 60 point discrepency in simple processing. The main areas he had problems with was learning languages. He is still a slow reader, but an amazingly bright student.</p>

<p>Bescraze, "stupid" to me means the student has not learned the information, so no amount of extra time would help them answer a question/problem that they don't know.</p>

86

<p>After reading both sides of the argument closely, and understanding that it is really a bunch of 16 and 17 year olds who are writing these comments here is my conclusion.</p>

<p>First of all, most of the "kitties" on here cannot even fathom how the college board works and how intricate every detail of every test must be.</p>

<p>Second, emerging science is showing us brain scans of people with learning disorders. They are real debilitating disorders, such as ADD, ADHD, dyslexia etc.</p>

<p>Third: Don't you little "kitties" think the college board has thought about what your arguments AGAINST time are. They are much more educated and experienced than you are, and you really don't have a clue about psychology even though you took that "Intro to Psychology" class in your junior year. </p>

<p>Fourth: To get extended time you must be diagnosed well before your college bound years. There must be extensive documentation run and extensive tests to see if you really do have a disability. Though doctors do hand out ADD a little too often, this practice is stopping since the public is recognizing what is happening, and the medicine which is prescribed, amphetamines, has a high risk of abuse. </p>

<p>I do not think "little children" on an internet forum can decide whether one should get extra time or not, even if the person with a disability is in the 99 percentile. It is a job best left to the professionals.</p>

87

<p>mc3, You are right. I try and only get involved in a thread if I think people really want information. I made a mistake replying to Bescraze, because all he really wants is to complain!</p>

88

<p>Mc3, I am a person, not a cat or "kittie", and I think your are the same age as me if you were reffering to me being under the age of 18. I do think bescraze is little immature in his reasoning, but you all have made him very defensive in his reasoning. Your point has been made, and I am mostly on your side, but if you want to change his mind, don't call him an idiot and try to "win" the argument. Your most powerful tool is your ability to change someones mind, not your ability to beat them with a large "intellectual" stick like you just did.</p>

89

<p>Ahh, Bescraze, there's no need to resort to "Nanny-nanny-boo-boo. " Well, actually, in your mind, I guess there is. Who was it who said "you're only young once, but you can be immature forever?"</p>

<p>I sense that you aren't much of a "win-win" kind of guy. To you it isn't a win for you if the other guy, or anyone else for that matter, also wins. It's only a win if you win and the other guy loses and is humiliated and embarrassed and you get to do your touchdown dance in his face. That is why, unless you grow up and realize that not only do you not know it all but even if you know more than anyone who ever lived, you still don't know very much. That's why true success in college, career, and life requires a win-win mentality because you are going to need others to achieve anything of substance. Keep up with this distorted version of "people skills" and you will spend your college years and your work career as the guy whose name elicits groans and eye rolls.</p>

<p>I find it interesting that any criticism of or disagreement with your ideas is labeled by you as a "personal attack" to which you respond with a personal attack in which you resort to name calling. Interesting also that your definition of "elitist" is someone who disagrees with you by advocating on behalf of those you have labeled as "mentally deficient." </p>

<p>You can't possibly go to a better college than I did because I went to the absolutely best college for me. In fact in the K9Leader College Rankings it has held the number one spot every year since 1693. </p>

<p>Oh, and if you try that "it's not important enough for me to spell check" excuse for laziness and indifference in college or at work, you'll get whacked upside the head so hard you'll be crying and whining even more than you have been on this board. </p>

<p>As my fellow alum and fraternity brother Jon Stewart is fond of saying, "Good day, sir! I said, GOOD DAY, SIR!"</p>

90

<p>k9leader you live in your own little fantasy world. You attempt to call me immature, when you started personally attacking people on a forum. Please grow up. If you read carefully, very few people resorted to such childish attacks as you did, wake up and realize this is about you not them or me. Congrats on attending the College of William and Mary--you must be so proud. Grow up please.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>You realize the SAts do not test information....they test reasoning. So your argument thus would not apply to them and would be void for this discussion. For those who disagree with me, that is fine. But attempting to belittle the argument or speaker is simply moronic. My view is a very widely held one and just because the college board does not agree, does not make it wrong. If you always believe that the authorities are right, than you must believe that George W Bush is a good president and then you are among the 30% of this nation that is retarded. OK that is a little extreme, but I am just making a connection. The college board has a lot of other influences going on, /cough cough money.....so form your own opinion.</p>

91

<p>Bescraze, Are you for real? Why do you think people study for the SAT?! If it was only reasoning no one would benefit from reviewing the material. Studying vocab lists and do math reviews are the norm, maybe your lack of preperation was why you needed more time!
By the way, if you think your view is widely held, you need diversity in your surroundings. Your opinions are narrow minded at best.</p>

92

<p>The idea of standardized tests is to test certain qualities--reasoning, focus, testing endurance, testing speed, intelligence, etc. </p>

<p>The reason that LD's get extended time is because some quality of theirs NOT related to the above qualities is impeding their testing, making it look like they can't reason, or have bad focus when in fact, their eyes don't pick up the words right, or something else is wrong which has nothing to do with the actual qualities the test is testing for.</p>

<p>Thus, those who get extended time have a problem that has nothing to do with the actual items being tested.</p>

<p>If a person does have a disability that impairs their ability to reason, their focus, or their testing endurance, then they should not qualify for extended time, since the whole point is to find out their ability in these areas. The same goes for the person who naturally reads slowly or who just can't seem to focus well. If they are poor in these areas--because of mental disability or simply because that is their natural tendency--then they should and will get a low in the test that is testing these abilities in the first place. </p>

<p>Bottom Line:
Blind- gets extra privileges
Motor Coordination Difficulties- gets extra privileges
ADD- no dice
Slow at Reading- no dice</p>

93

<p>i don't mean to be mean... but i believe people shouldn't get extra time for disabilities... i believe they should be given a completely different test that way they can be compared to people who have their same situation... but i think what they should do is put an asterisk next to the score if they keep it as is with the extra time...</p>

<p>the idea is is that you aren't going to given extra time or the easy path all the way through out life even if you are disabled in some way... the truth is that even if you were born with a problem (and nobody deserves it) you are going to be screwed over</p>

94

<p>


</p>

<p>I got a 2270, I am fine thank you. BUt my view is widely held and the last two posters have shown why. So how did you do?</p>

95

<p>Although I think the OP comes across as way too blunt and jerkish, I need to agree. I have ADD and refuse to take extra time on any tests. There is no reason too. If you're medicated for a disability then you don't need extra time. If you're not medicated then it is most likely you're decision and you need to deal with it. The SAT is supposed to put people on level footing, and if someone with ADD can't do well at any time without more time, why do they think that they will be good students and successful people? I think people who take this extra time and refuse to take medicine really need to stop and evaluate themselves. Sure, you can get into a good college now, but once you graduate no one will care that you have a "learning disability". You'll either need to fix it yourself (meds) or struggle. Not fixing it now is just putting them at a disadvantage. So yeah, I think that the extra time offered on these standardized tests are wrong because people with disabilities won't be given advantages like that after university.</p>

96

<p>

Learning differences are not an impediment to performing in the "real world." It's only in "academic land" that they are a factor.</p>

<p>

It's called the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and requires "reasonable accommodations" for disabilities. </p>

<p>The basis of current requirements and extra time decisions is based on the ADA, other laws, and decisions made in court cases.</p>

<p>aranyra has presented a good explanation of why accommodations are made on norm-referenced tests, though I would repeat something said previously -- anyone who is a "slow reader" should be test for a learning difference, just as someone who is a "daydreamer" should be test for ADHD (which is NOT the same as a learning difference).</p>

97

<p>Bescraze, your attitude is uninformed and disappointing - mainly because you have been so close-minded and hurtful throughout the discussion. The SAT does not exist to test how QUICKLY students can perform the tasks, but simply to see if they can perform them. The time constraints are reasonable (I finished all of my sections early, without extra time) and if a student can perform a task, such as reading comprehension, very well but not within the allotted time, it is time to explore the possibility that he or she is LD.</p>

<p>And since you've decided to turn this into a petty and personal competition, here are my credentials: I'm a student at a university consistently ranked number one in the country. I got a 2310 on my SATs. I work at a nonprofit for educational resources, and I was astounded to start learning about what learning disabilities really are. Like you, and apparently many others, I thought learning disabilities like dyslexia were just a way of being "stupid." They are not. They are differences in learning that are nearly impossible to understand without experiencing them; I read of one mother who made a device to show resistant educators what the words on a page looked like to her LD son. They were shocked at how difficult it was to make out the words. However, these are superficial disabilities. Many LD students are very sharp with the important parts - creative thinking, critical analysis, comprehension, and so on - once they are able to approach the work the correct way. Academia is the most difficult part of life for most LD students, and they were left behind throughout many generations of education. We are finding now that helping them is beneficial for everyone - by facilitating the learning of these people, we are adding valuable people to the workforce. They may be competition for you, just like all of us, and that's too bad. But they are good for society. </p>

<p>That's all I have to say, since you've clearly made up your mind. But I do hope you consider doing some more research on the nature of learning disabilities and opening your mind a bit.</p>

98

<p>^Agreed. Maybe you should take a psych class and learn about some of this stuff before making inaccurate assumptions. Oh yea, and get some friends who have a problem like this, and maybe you'll see why extra time is not a joke.</p>

99

<p>This post has been dead for like a week...I do sympathize with people with learning disabilities, but the system is poor and abused. I know plenty of people, who couldn't finish sections on time and did not get "extra time". MY point is simple and straight forward, the SATs is a nationwide standardized test and everyone should be tested on the same footing. Furthermore if they must have the system in place, at least put an asterisk next to the score of students with extra time as they used to do, so colleges can see and make their own conclusions. This seems to be the best way to solve this issue and make it fair for everyone. I am sorry you disagree with me, but that does not mean I am uninformed. More than a few of my friends have extra time and I would say at least three quarters of them do not really need it (as they admit).</p>

100

<p>


</p>

<p>True. It's what you say that shows that you are uninformed.</p>

<ol>
<li> Learn what the phrase "standardized test" means.</li>
<li> Ditto for "on the same footing."</li>
<li> Learn the requirements of the ADA.</li>
<li> Learn the case law that dictates how accomodations and scoring are handled.</li>
</ol>

<p>The fact that you know people who are cheating doesn't mean that the system is wrong. It means your friends need a morality adjustment.</p>

<p>Grow up, learn, and then come back and make an informed statement.</p>