<p>Your son’s teachers were terrible and ought to be fired.</p>
<p>Adding: If I were you, I’d write that same post to the school board, and name names.</p>
<p>@Bay – On this one, we are in complete agreement.</p>
<p>I look at it this way, if they took away the extra time, my dyslexic son would still be in engineering school somewhere. he would be doing what he’s doing with or without extra time. Extra time doesn’t reflect innate intelligence, it reflects what you can accomplish in a certain period of time as someone upthread said. My son will never, ever read quickly or with ease…ever. If all kids had extra time it would not have changed HIS score. If the cheaters have a different college outcome they still go to college the same person they were the day they took the test, they aren’t “better” for it, they still have to succeed.</p>
<p>And what really is at issue is whether the very top echelon of students, who have already made near perfect grades throughout high school, should also be getting extra time on a test designed to measure skills and speed. No one is arguing that the kid in Atlanta with a 68 IQ who sued the school district and won because they didn’t help him get a decent education isn’t entitled to extra help. What we have now, however, is students who are admitted to Harvard also getting accommodations for a disability that many would like to have…a brain that can get you admitted to Harvard. I can’t think of any other disabilities that anyone would actually want except for this one.</p>
<p>Yes @happykidsmom My daughter was asked to read in front of the class every day when she was in 6th grade. No matter how many times we requested this asinine low iq teacher quit it, she had it in her mind that she was “helping” my dyslexic “get over” her “laziness.”</p>
<p>She had tenure, of course. Nothing could be done. She was “old school.” Nothing could be done. An eleven year old is self conscious enough without that rigamarole.</p>
<p>She had some excellent teachers, too. Not gonna lie. But, the few great teachers will never make up for the horrifying bullies she faced as a high iq dyslexic. She presented a paper on this at a conference in college. But, honestly, the bigotted cruel teachers almost kept her from sticking with college.</p>
<p>Sally Shaywitz, at Yale, is kind of a genius on this subject.</p>
<p>@Bay I’m sure you would believe Shaywitz, the expert at Yale, about the testing. She’s done a lot of research on this and is considered to be “the” expert. Dyslexics don’t get unlimited time, just some extra time. Not much, really. They also have to spend extra time to get their homework done.</p>
<p><a href=“http://dyslexia.yale.edu/Policy_WhyChange.htm”>http://dyslexia.yale.edu/Policy_WhyChange.htm</a></p>
<p>The great news is that when they get out into the real world they do tend to excel beyond their few intellectual peers. I have a feeling all that adversity to get to the end really toughens them up. That and the way they think isn’t taught in schools and gives them a huge edge in terms of innovations and divergent thinking.</p>
<p>Its not that I don’t believe what the experts say about dyslexics needing extra time. It is that I believe it is impossible that every student who has an LD and is taking the SAT has been diagnosed, and that there are not plenty of other students with test-taking disabilities that have not been formerly recognized as LD’s (such as “slow reader”) that would affect their ability to finish the test in the allotted time. There must be plenty of those students. But they are probably the ones who make up the bottom 10% of the test results, and are considered not college material. That is what is not fair.</p>
<p>As I said upthread, I really have no problem with untimed standardized tests for everyone. I’m not sold on the idea of fast but superficial thinking as a measure of intellect, anyway.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You have no clue what you are talking about.</p>
<p>I would hazard a guess that many of us with dyslexics would have no problem with non-timed tests (within limits). The extra 50% time or whatever it is now is somewhat arbitrary anyway. Mine was diagnosed in first grade so has coping skills that were ingrained through virtually his entire educational experience to date. Cesar, I don’t know, but I’m not convinced that any parent would want their kid labeled as having a learning disability and wonder, really, just how many of those "normal’ kids are labeled with learning disabilities at Harvard. Disabilities offices deal with eating disorders and many other mental issues that aren’t “learning disabilities.” I don’t think the College Board gives extra time for ‘eating disorders’ and i just can’t imagine a parent ‘wanting’ to have their kid labeled with a learning disability. </p>
<p>I’m going to guess that most parents don’t want their kids labelled LD, and as a result there are a lot of undiagnosed students. </p>
<p>I have a question that has not been raised here (I think). I understand the accomodations that level the playing field for students with LD. </p>
<p>But what happens when the enter the working world? I know a severely dyslexic student who goes to Harvard and wants to be a lawyer. He gets accommodations at Harvard. Will he be able to get accommodations in law school? What about on the bar exam? What about in the law firm? Lawyers bill by the hour. If he takes 20 hours to complete a task --albeit brilliantly – that would take 15 hours for a non-dyslexic lawyer, does the client cover the extra fee, or does the firm eat it? I am curious how it plays out in the workplace because this is probably the first generation of students who have gone through elem, middle, hs, and college with accommodations. </p>
<p>I think one point people are taking issue at is statements like this " Only the LD kid benefit from extra time." That is absolutely not true. My daughter got slammed on one of her college course midterms because she ran out of time and was not able to show what she knew. Hearing this false assertion being made over and over again is what many people object to and the resentment begins.</p>
<p>Oh, dang. Let’s just have one timed test (no retests) and admit students to all U.S. colleges based on that test score. Each school will admit a certain number of students, highest to lowest score before the offer quota is filled, and all offers must be made on that one score. That’'ll work. :(</p>
<p>One can question it all, fundamentally: the education system. economy, work. The whole world and all of history. How far back do you want to go? Kinda easy to just start and end with accommodations for learning/performance-impairing disabilities in education. </p>
<p>A child is considered having an LD if they are challenged and cannot meet their potential. A disability can take many forms and the gap between their performance and potential is on a case per case basis. </p>
<p>Generally a child will be red flagged if they fall below grade level. How far below will generally dictate how quickly the school system will test a child or provide services. </p>
<p>But being below grade doesn’t red flag all students with disabilities. Many students have the potential to do far better than average. (When tested they have a high IQs.) These children may still be at grade level in the classroom, but should be performing higher. </p>
<p>These are the students who can intellectually do the work at high level institutions, but may need services or accommodations to achieve those levels–especially in testing situations. </p>
<p>Ultimately their weak areas may keep them away from certain majors or occupations, but their strengths can produce leaders in their chosen fields. </p>
<p>It’s not good enough to accept “at grade level” for this population if their potential is much higher. And they should have the opportunity to be their best and go to the best schools if that is their potential. </p>
<p>@happykidsmom<br>
My heart goes out to you and your son. My S was generally lucky enough to have supportive teachers and schools, except for the time that a principal sent me a note as the end of the year stating that my S wasn’t doing well because I wasn’t involved enough in his schooling! (This was at a time when I was helping him several hours a night with scribing, reading practice etc)</p>
<p>I am concerned that in the future even fewer students who are gifted with LD will be identified and given intervention/accommodations. In the past part of what the school did to identify LD was to look for a significant discrepancy between IQ and performance that couldn’t be explained by other causes. Now my understanding is that they are primarily using a “response to intervention” model where when a child is having significant difficulties compared to peers, they are given interventions, ideally without testing or labeling to get them up to average performance. I believe that this approach is more likely to miss gifted LD students early, when interventions would be most effective. My son was in a public school, but was lucky enough to get things like typing class in elementary, individual specialized grammar and spelling instruction and occupational therapy help with his handwriting, in addition to accommodations. I believe that it was this specialized intervention that helped him progress and no longer need accommodations.</p>
<p>With regard to the SAT, it’s purpose as I understand it, is primarily to help colleges compare students who are attending diverse HS and predict their college performance. Not sure how well it does this, but…Anyway, for students who have a long history of LD and documented/used extra time accommodations they will likely also get these accommodations in college while other students will have time limits on college work. If you give all students unlimited time, I doubt that whatever predictive value the SAT has would be as effective. I do hope that there are more efforts to identify all students with LD so that they can perform up to their potential.</p>
<p>I’d like the OP to find the specific kid who got into HYPSM because of their LD accommodations, especially a student who somehow did not have an LD. Again… somehow you think only a kid with a lower IQ can be truly disabled. Can a kid with a high IQ also not have disgraphia, ADHD, a non-verbal learning disability, etc? To say that they can’t indicates that you have no idea what these LDs ever are.</p>
<p>These schools certainly look at a lot more than test scores to admit students to those schools. I doubt there is even one student in those schools who is there because they got slightly better test scores due to accommodations than they would have otherwise. If this is so common, find that student. . </p>
<p>And I think this poster very conveniently is “new” and starting controversial threads. I don’t agree that he is just posting because he cares about these issues and found our community to chat with. He is re-stirring a pot that I believe he has brought up before under other identities.</p>
<p>@intparent, well perhaps the kid mentioned in post #90? </p>
<p>I’m also interested in hearing an answer to that question about the lawyer billing by the hour. Any takers? </p>
<p>"somehow you think only a kid with a lower IQ can be truly disabled. " No, I don’t think anyone is saying that. We are concerned that only high SES students are being identified as disabled. </p>
<p>I also asked about how a level of ability that is considered normal in one child can be considered a disability in another? I sincerely don’t understand this. Blind is blind but “slow processing” is not “slow processing”?</p>
<p>Would it not be more fair to measure every child’s processing speed and use an actual formula (instead of an apparently random amount of extra time wher even the LD families don’t seem to understand how that particular amount of time is determined). Whatever the average processing speed is, kids that are higher will get proportionately less time and kids that are lower will get proportionately more time. It would be done in accordance with the actual level of extra or disability. Not a randomly picked 25% or 50% extra time. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the OP is saying that. This paragraph indicates that a kid with a high IQ could not actually have a disability. I beg to differ. Here is what the OP said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He is saying that essentially if you were born with a high IQ, but still have processing issues, you should sit down and shut up because that is not a true disability. Who knows how many Einstein equivalents have dropped out of school and NOT made great contributions to society because of attitudes like those being expressed on this thread? Every kid (smart or not) has the right to an education that is suited to their abilities, and every kid should get the individual support they need to reach their full potential. Why is that so hard to understand? The same people who complain about this likely don’t want low income families to have access to low cost or subsidized health care, which is where parents need to go for testing for these disabilities to start with.</p>
<p>P.S. - Could we get rid of that fricking smiley at the top right that you can’t see behind when typing in that corner? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There was an article in “Above The Law” some years back which touched upon this written by a former biglaw lawyer and psychologist who now counsels lawyers seeking to move into other professions. </p>
<p>Basically, if a lawyer’s taking too long to produce work product by deadlines, especially ones set by the partners/clients…he/she gets a bad reputation and partners/of counsel/senior associates divert work to “more productive” associates. Eventually, the lack of billable hour work means he/she cannot meet his/her annual billable hour requirement in the firm and he/she is living in fear of being called into a partner’s office to be told he/she needs to have a new job lined up within the next several months as he/she has no future with their firm. </p>
<p>The anonymous associate being discussed found out he/she had LD only after graduating law school and landing his/her biglaw job when he/she found he/she was much slower in getting work product finished on time and/or missing several critical deadlines which caused him/her to get berated and warned about his/her “poor performance”. </p>