<p>No, not really. But I say this because will an employer hire a slower thinker over a quicker thinker because the slow one has ADD? I think extra time accomodations set up "ADD-suffering" college graduates for a huge disappointment. In life, the blows aren't softened by CollegeBoard.</p>
<p>that you feel that way.</p>
<p>If the slower thinker is a better thinker, I'd hire him/her anyday. Slow and steady wins the race.</p>
<p>Try to think of high school and college as a requirement that everyone must fulfill and a career as a choice. The academics are structured in a way that is sometimes unfriendly to those with learning disabilities because they are weak in certain areas, hence the accomodations. Upon graduation, many with ADD or other disabilities choose a career that works WITH their strengths, thereby eliminating the need for lifelong accommodations, extra presidential votes, etc. Besides, why do you care if someone needs extra time on a test? It doesn't change your score, does it? I used to finish my college exams before everyone else in my classes usually did, but I never thought they had an advantage over me because they spent more time on the same test. Try to think of everyone as individuals who move at different speeds. You are quite right that eventually every person has to make it in the world without special accomodations, those getting help during the academic process are keenly aware of that and work twice as hard to be ready for the challenges they are sure to face.</p>
<p>To answer your rhetorical question of why I care and if it affects my score, I care because the answer to the latter question is "YES". If these students are yielding higher scores as a result of extra time, the curve will be significantly harshened on a national level. And don't forget that college admissions is summed up by the word "competitive". How can competition be fair and standardized if others are attaining higher scores in a way not offered to others (and I strongly believe anyone will see score improvements if they are given extra time, not just LD students)? Maybe I'm just bitter.</p>
<p>that if a non LD person uses extra time, their score is actually lowered as a result of over reasoning the answers. Extra time only truly helps those who are learning or physically disabled. </p>
<p>Imagine the bitterness a learning disabled individual must feel on a full time basis knowing that others may unfairly feel as you do, and there is nothing that can change that.</p>
<p>I'm sure that many LD people would trade places with you in an instant.</p>
<p>I dont think either way anyone would be happier trading places. And the real issue is happiness. In the short term though people are annoying that there is unfair discrimination against middle class white male non-handicapped students who are trying to do their best and serve the world and help others, but are put down and blamed for problems because they are white male healthy people. Its nothing against minorities, the rich, legacies, atheletes, or the learning disabled; its the feeling or not being given a fair shake that drives people insane. And that means they are temporarily unhappy, which is sad, quite literally. :( Anyway, I'd imagine anyone who is learning disabled who was NOT given extra time would feel the same way, of being cheated basically.</p>
<p>Anyway the problem with your argument is that the research is hard to believe, esp. for math when maybe a student didn't finish, or rushed to finish, or could have figured a solution to the harder problem with extra time. Its hard to over-reason a math problem, and indeed the "time squeeze" is the typical explanation for why females do worse on the SAT than males depsite having better grades on average. (Fairtest.org has a lot of information on that hypothesis.)</p>
<p>It would help to post some studies from reputable sources and some of the counter-arguments to have a legimitate debate.</p>
<p>thefailedpilot: There are literally hundreds of organizations and individuals who had done research in this area whose conclusions led to the development of testing accommodations provided in standardized testing over a period of several years. If you really want to read up in this area, check out the National Center on Educational Outcomes, for starters: </p>
<p>"The National Center on Educational Outcomes (NCEO) was established in 1990 to provide national leadership in designing and building educational assessments and accountability systems that appropriately monitor educational results for all students, including students with disabilities and students with limited English proficiency. Since its establishment, NCEO has been:
Working with states and federal agencies to identify important outcomes of education for students with disabilities.
Examining the participation of students in national and state assessments, including the use of accommodations and alternate assessments.
Evaluating national and state practices in reporting assessment information on students with disabilities.
Bridging general education, special education, and other systems as they work to increase accountability for results of education for all students.
Conducting directed research in the area of assessment and accountability. </p>
<p>NCEO focuses its efforts in the following areas:
Research on the participation and performance of students in state and national assessments and other educational reform efforts. NCEO conducts secondary analyses of assessment data and collaborates with other agencies in these efforts.
Dissemination and Technical Assistance through publications, presentations, technical assistance, and other networking activities to facilitate the use of research-based information by states, policy groups, researchers, and other agencies, and in turn improve the educational results of all.
Collaboration and Leadership to build on the expertise of others and to develop leaders who can conduct needed research and provide additional technical assistance."</p>
<p><a href="http://education.umn.edu/nceo/About/%5B/url%5D">http://education.umn.edu/nceo/About/</a></p>
<p>The NCEO's Accommodations Bibliography database which can be found on their website contains references to and a summary of the findings from literally hundreds of research studies that have been done on standardized testing.</p>
<p>In addition attached is a link to some of the publications they have available in pdf format relating to issues specifically concerning research on testing accommodations:</p>
<p>I believe there were about 70-80 articles listed relating to "extended time" alone.</p>
<p>What research exists about extended time on tests for students with learning disabilities?</p>
<p>The following articles have been summarized to provide information about extended test time for students with learning disabilities. This list is not exhaustive. For additional details of the studies, the readers should obtain the actual articles.</p>
<p>Weaver, S. M. (2000). "The efficacy of extended time on tests for postsecondary students with learning disabilities." Learning disabilities, 10, 47-56.</p>
<p>Extended time on tests is a frequently used accommodation for postsecondary students with learning disabilities. University and community college students both with and without learning disabilities were administered the Nelson-Denny Reading Test, the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices, and the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory under the following timing conditions: timed, extended time, and untimed. Statistical analysis revealed that students with learning disabilities showed significant gains in test scores over students without learning disabilities when given extended time or untimed testing conditions.</p>
<p>Runyan, M. K. (1991). "The effect of extra time on reading comprehension scores for university students with and without learning disabilities." Journal of Learning Disabilities, 24, 104 - 108.</p>
<p>Thirty-one students attending the University of California were administered the Nelson-Denny Reading Comprehension and Reading Rate Test under timed and extra-time conditions. Of this sample, 16 students had diagnosed learning disabilities and 15 students were identified as normally achieving. Percentile ranks were obtained for both reading rates and comprehension scores under timed and extra-time conditions. The major findings of this study were that normally achieving students performed significantly better than students with learning disabilities under timed conditions but when students with learning disabilities were given extra time, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. In addition, normally achieving students did not perform significantly better with extra time.</p>
<p>Alster, E. H. (1997). "The effects of extended time on algebra test scores for college students with and without learning disabilities." Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 222-227.</p>
<p>Forty-four community college students with learning disabilities and forty-four community college students without learning disabilities each took an algebra test under timed conditions and a comparable test under extended-time conditions. The results were that: (i) the students with learning disabilities scored lower than the students without learning disabilities under timed conditions, (ii) the scores of the students with learning disabilities improved under extended-time conditions, and (iii) the scores of the students with learning disabilities under extended-time conditions did not differ significantly from the timed or extended-time scores of the students without learning disabilities. <a href="http://www.adapts.gatech.edu/general_resources/learning.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.adapts.gatech.edu/general_resources/learning.htm</a></p>
<p>Accomodations simply level the playing field. They don't hurt you in any way, so bug out. Seriously. Research, as shown above, has demonstrated that people with diagnosed learning disabilities do better with extended time because of their disabilty (i.e. "normal" people didn't do better). </p>
<p>We have a reponsibility as a society to accomodate those with special needs when we can. Maybe we should stop having handicapped parking spots and cut curbs because "the real world is tough" and they should just have to deal.</p>
<p>I think an easy way for a Non-ADD person to understand the need for extra time is an exercise in thinking that I read somewhere. Think of a meal that you may have had 10 years ago, then a meal 5 years ago, then a meal 1 year ago, then your meal last night. Then take all those meals and place them in the same place. The majority of persons with ADD will have a very difficult time with this task. Those with ADD associate these meals with other things, possibly the location, time, smells, person you were with, quality of the meal etc... The majority of Non-ADD persons will be able to perform this task easily because they have a linear way of thinking. The majority of people think linearly, does this mean the ADD person is necessarily "broken"? No, but the majority of tests and material in this world is written by and for linear thinking (Non-ADD) persons. Because the ADD persons brain functions diffrently but comes up with the same answer, more time should definately be given!</p>
<p>"Research has repeatedly proven that if a non LD person uses extra time, their score is actually lowered as a result of over reasoning the answers."</p>
<p>I can't speak to other tests, but this is decidedly untrue about the LSAT. It is deliberately designed so that the average test taker cannot finish the test in the time allotted. The Games section, in particular, is largely a test of performance under time pressure, and the score of a non-disabled person will be much, much higher when they are given additional time. I used to teach this test, and time is the name of the game.</p>
<p>Well if LD people need more time for most things, wouldn't they be at an even further disadvantage than people who don't need more time for most things?</p>
<p>Time is money. You can spend your whole life taking a long time on everything, and you will make a living, but you won't be competitive.</p>
<p>That's one of the reasons I've tried to avoid getting accommodations in college. I'm learning how to work like everyone else does. It's not easy but it's not impossible. I've been treated differently since I was 3 and a half and I don't want to deal with that any more.</p>
<p>But you can do many a thing to make your life more accomodating and easier. You can be plenty competitive. Most LD people don't need an extra week to do their report on whatever for their boss...but for a test it's a different story. </p>
<p>And then you probably don't have problems as severe as many people...</p>
<p>"Well if LD people need more time for most things, wouldn't they be at an even further disadvantage than people who don't need more time for most things?"</p>
<p>Actually most LD people only need extra time on tests. Papers are passed in on time and so are other projects. In the real world most jobs don't require mutliple choice tests every week. LD people should have no problem with jobs in the "real world" beucase most times assignments are given ahead of time. It worries me when people think that there is an unfair advantage to people who had extra time. But I for me, being dyslexic, I think my peers have an unfair advantage becuase they can read and spell with ease. Also if it were not for extra time then I would probablly not be excelling they way I am currently in school. Honestly, it all evens out.</p>
<p>Many people can do better on tests with additional time.</p>
<p>Herein lies the controversy, and the reason that the College Board has cracked down (along with a lot of shady diagnoses in order for kids to qualify). It's really too bad, because the kids that suffer are those who need the extra time most.</p>
<p>what olddoc was saying was that studies have shown that ld people do considerably better with extra time. I'm sure everyone would do somewhat better, but the degree is what is important. </p>
<p>You're right, it's the kids that suffer that need it the most. Shady diagnosis....this too is controversial. Who are we to say someone isn't suffering? </p>
<p>Of course there needs to be some boundaries and requirements, but it's a very sketchy line.</p>
<p>I know next to nothing about Learning Disorders. I just read this thread.</p>
<p>Like -Allmusic- says, I think 75% of HS students would see a significant jump in SAT scores if given time and a half. How do we know which are ADD or ADHD or whatever? More importantly, how do the men in the white coats figure out which have true difficulties concentrating, and separate those kids from those who just don't like to read? I can imagine kids without a LD classification who, for reasons ranging from boredom to dislike of reading passages, would presumably let their minds wander, let their eyes jump all over the text, work very slowly, get distracted easily, lose focus, forget what they had read... all symptoms displayed by kids with ADHD, right? And I know that someone might answer "But ADHD kids really <em>try</em> and still can't focus/xxx" well, aren't there others who try but can't focus or not get distracted?</p>
<p>I'm aware that these questions have probably been asked a million times on CC, but humor me please, because I'm really curious :)</p>
<p>I'll answer your question. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>The point isn't whether anyone could do better with extra time on a test like the SAT, that gives very limited time. I think you're right, almost everyone would, because they give such limited time. Please refer to my comment aboug the LSAT. The isssue is whether the LD kids would do better than they would otherwise do, or what they are capable of doing if it weren't for their learning disability. Think of it as giving non LD kids an hour extra and LD kids two hours extra. LD kids still feel the time pressure with extended time, because to them, extended time is really just normal time. </p></li>
<li><p>They have extensive scientific testing beyond "ooh, do you not like to read? Tell me about your feelings." to determine ADHD. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>ADHD, for example, has to do with executive functioning, which is how your brain processes and responds to "new feedback." So for instance, there is one test where you are given a series of cards and the "rules" of the game constantly are changing, and you have to identify the new pattern of the rules with the cards. Now this isn't a direct symptom of ADHD, not recognizing changing patterns, but the key thing is that having this deficiancy is indicative of a larger mental process that causes all the symptoms of ADHD! A lack of executive functioning leads to not only having a hard time with the new feedback thing, but with concentration, reading, memory, etc. </p>
<p>The tests are conducted by professionals who really know their stuff. I had this testing done. They do a barrage of tests, and they dont' tell you what each test is for. So you can't really "fake it." I was actually rather convinced I had straight up ADHD until I did this testing and found out after that my executive functioning was quite good. There are other tests too. </p>
<p>And all though I don't actually have ADHD, I have its symptoms, because of other neurological problems and their medications. And what's interesting about that, is that typical ADHD medications, which I actually take for Narcolepsy, don't affect me like they do ADHD people. My ritalin keeps me awake, it doesn't calm me down and keep me focused, because my brain, though it functions quite similarly to that of an ADHD person, isn't set up chemically like one! </p>
<p>This testing isn't always followed. It, or something very similar, should be. Or at the very least, a very trained professional who knows how to qualitatively recogonzie the symptoms with accuracy should be reffered to.</p>
<ol>
<li>ADHD kids try, but can't do as well because of chemical problems in the brain. It's different than a non-LD kid who is just bored. I don't know if you have LD of some kind, but it's been found that the same words are used to describe the problems of LD people. Like "the information is all there but there is a wall blocking it from going on the page" etc. Also, there are patterns that you can recognize in young children. Often LD children will spend an inordinate amount of time on a very, very small assignment, like writing 3 sentances. And if they mess up one little thing, like writing a letter backwards, they will erase the entire thing and start over. This kind of thing is not observed in non LD kids. There is a lot of real research out there, and real scientific testing and evidence to support conclusions of LD.</li>
</ol>
<p>I'm sure overdiagnosis and misdiagnosis happens. It happens with almost every kind of condition. My mom was once diagnosed with a rare seizure disorder when the doctor really just read the tests wrong. Bummer for her. I'm sure there are kids that are diagnosed that shouldn't be. But I just say err on the side of caution so that suffering people dont' suffer more. But that's just me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The isssue is whether the LD kids would do better than they would otherwise do, or what they are capable of doing if it weren't for their learning disability.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ok this argument has very poor logic, but I am sure I will have troubles explaining why. I'll give it a shot though. Assume EVERYONE has a LD. Then, EVERYONE would do better without their 'LD'. Do you see what I mean? What if my LD is that I am lazy? Wouldn't I do better in school without that LD? Basically if you characterize any academic weakness as an LD you can argue that the student will perform better without that weakness as an obstacle.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Think of it as giving non LD kids an hour extra and LD kids two hours extra. LD kids still feel the time pressure with extended time, because to them, extended time is really just normal time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What if those kids are just slow? I know a non-LD girl who works slow as a snail. I'm sure that if she was given an extra hour on teh SAT she would still feel as much of a time crunch as I feel <em>without</em> that hour. And, not to be blunt, but what if the kid is just a slow-thinker or not too bright? Wouldn't that kid feel pressed for time even with extra time? Are all dumb kids LD then?</p>
<p>
[quote]
instance, there is one test where you are given a series of cards and the "rules" of the game constantly are changing, and you have to identify the new pattern of the rules with the cards. Now this isn't a direct symptom of ADHD, not recognizing changing patterns, but the key thing is that having this deficiancy is indicative of a larger mental process that causes all the symptoms of ADHD! A lack of executive functioning leads to not only having a hard time with the new feedback thing, but with concentration, reading, memory, etc.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sounds like kids who are not so bright, LD aside, would not 'catch on' to this amorphous game very quickly, either. Again, are all kids with below average intelligence LD? Seems so based on this 'executive function' test.</p>
<p>
[quote]
ADHD kids try, but can't do as well because of chemical problems in the brain
[/quote]
Like I said, not everyone is naturally intelligent. I am sure kids who are not smart will try very hard and not do well, and while the neural basis of intelligence is still difficult to define, I'd guess that there are some "chemical" problems barring them from success. How do you differentiate between "simply not very smart, needs a lot of time to think things through" and "LD"? Could they be the same thing?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Often LD children will spend an inordinate amount of time on a very, very small assignment, like writing 3 sentances. And if they mess up one little thing, like writing a letter backwards, they will erase the entire thing and start over.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This sounds like obsessive compulsive disorder.</p>
<hr>
<p>I'm still somewhat confused. I suppose that deep down I'm one of those horrendous 'LD-Doubters' who isn't so sure that a LD is a true disability. Some people naturally multitask and concentrate quite well. Others, not so well. Some are smarter, some are simply not academically inclined. There's a whole spectrum. I suppose doctors draw an arbitrary line and say to all the people below that line: you have a disability! We'll give you some drugs and extra time, and watch your grades go up. But everyone's grades would go up with extra time, perhaps even the brighter kids would perform better and concentrate better if given ritalin or one of those other medications. And I'm primarily confused about how to tell a kid who's plain unintelligent/slow thinker from one who is handicapped.</p>