Should people who took the test with extended time be allowed to brag?

Test Preparation ACT Preparation
61

<p>Daeshim2 </p>

<p>I agree 100% the woe is me and feeling threatened by extra time on a test for those that need it. Who really cares if someone got extra time. </p>

<p>Perhaps if you had a brother or sister with a LD maybe walked in their shoes and see how difficult it can be for them. PATHETIC, and self absorbed, and immature is the least of these. </p>

<p>Spend your free time/EC doing something outside yourself for those less "intelligent" than yourself. Maybe volunteering to help autistic or LD kids might shed some light on how fortunate you all are to not need accomodations. You have no idea. </p>

<p>Don't have accomodations, but have a younger brother that does.</p>

62

<p>Let me reiterate my point: As a disabled student (physically though, not mentally), I completely disagree with testing accommodations because they DO NOT PORTRAY WHAT A STUDENT IS CAPABLE OF IN REAL-LIFE SITUATIONS. I'm sorry, but it is the truth. Unlike some of the other people on here, I do not doubt if these ADHD/dyslexic students actually have disorders. Instead, I acknowledge that they have disorders, but I do not believe that that warrants extra help or accommodations in standardized testing.</p>

<p>I, for one, could greatly benefit from being able to lay down while someone wrote my answers for me (no extra time needed), so that my neurological problems do not kick into over-drive. HOWEVER, if I can't even take my own test, and I have to have someone do it for me, then it gives an inaccurate portrayal of what I am actually capable of doing IN THE REAL WORLD!!!!!! I can't emphasize enough that ACCOMMODATIONS WILL NOT BE MADE IN REALITY -- not when you have a job or choose to go to a graduate school, for example. </p>

<p>I'm intellectually capable of writing fantastic essays and answering every question correctly, but if my hands won't move the way that I want them to, it makes no difference. I don't expect to be coddled and have special accommodations made for my disorder. My score was of course lowered by a few points I'm sure, (especially the essay since I couldn't hold my pencil by that point and had to use two hands to write it), BUT, I refuse to act like I can do one thing when in fact I can't if I don't have help. I will NEVER be able to be a surgeon, even though I would be able to do that if I had accommodations made. I accept that. I chose a different field, radiology.</p>

<p>A STANDARDIZED TEST SHOULD SHOW WHAT YOU ARE ABLE TO DO ON YOUR OWN -- THAT'S WHAT IT IS STANDARDIZED!</p>

63

<p>STANDARDIZED tests are supposed to be the same for everyone...or so I thought?</p>

64

<p>Did your friend ever mention a learning disability? You shouldn't jump to the conclusion that your friend is getting them because of the hearing aid.</p>

<p>I kinda skipped down to the bottom of the page here because I am SICK of reading amb3r's posts and I'm tired of hearing the same irrelevant stupid arguments again and again. Hell! I even talk about my disability and amb3r, the truly mentally disabled person here, yells at me saying I'm making it up. ON WHAT GROUNDS?</p>

<p>You must remember that accommodations are not a precise science, if you will. If I remember correctly, testing agencies offer 25%, 50%, and 100% extra time, and in extremely rare instances unlimited time. What if the nature of someone's disability really only requires they get 40% extra time? Guess what, that person just got an extra 10% they don't really need. What if they only really need 70%? Guess what? They were SHORTCHANGED on time when they were only given 50%! No matter which way you put it, it is unfair to one party or the other unless you have the test agency do an EXCRUCIATING review of each student! It is impossible!</p>

<p>Azngamer54 is also a good example of someone who has a learning disability but does not need accommodations. YES these cases exist! However, it should not be treated as the condition of every learning disabled person out there!</p>

<p>Let me post the definition of a learning disability that I found on dictionary.com:</p>

<p>Any of various cognitive, neurological, or psychological disorders that impede the ability to learn, especially one that interferes with the ability to learn mathematics or develop language skills. Also called learning disorder. </p>

<p>Wait.....what did that say? "Impede the ability to learn......" Hmmmmm......... I think I just destroyed amb3r's argument. Giving accommodations does NOT impede work in real world careers! It is called a LEARNING disability for a reason. If it were otherwise, it would be classified as a NEUROLOGICAL disorder!</p>

<p>amb3r, you should hook up with FLBoy from my disability check box thread. You two would make a great couple.</p>

<p>In addition to SillBill, you just destroyed your own argument. You are trying to compare your PHYSICAL disability to MENTAL ones!</p>

<p>I would also like to say something to the posters. (or non-posters, because they're too intimidated by crazy amb3r to join the fray) It is ENCOURAGED that those with disabilities get accommodations. SillBill and Azngamer54 are going against their own doctors' recommendations that they receive them. IMHO, that's JUST AS BAD TO YOUR LIFE as not taking the medication you're supposed to.</p>

65

<p>Start worrying about urselves... Stop *****ing about those who get extended time, though I'm sure if you wrote everything you wrote here to us, the ACT and SAT will get rid of accommodations. You should try it.</p>

66

<p>Heres the thing people those who are complaining about the people who get extra time are jealous. They feel that those who NEED extra time have it easy. But they are obviously ignorant and stupid, because I bet that most people who have a disability would gladly trade it away and lose their accommodations. But that is not the case at all. SO just because some people are bitter that they dont have enough time to finish does not mean that those who get extra time still have time to finish either. Have they thought of that? The fact of the matter is that these people who make their selfish comments should do the best they can. Worry about yourselves not others. If the worst injustice that happens to you in life is a mentally disabled student gets more time then you on a test then WOW you have a great life, seriously it doesnt effect your life at all... so can you just worry about yourselves... pretend its a round of non-PGA golf, play against the course not the other golfers...</p>

67

<p>Lets just say I know this kid who is in all AP's and very smart who got an 800 math. I later found out he had 2.5 hours for his math section. A dog could get an 800 in that amount of time. I was mad.</p>

68

<p>I get 50% extra time, I'm in Calculus, and I got a 690. Extra time isn't cheating! THAT is his intelligence in the subject in the amount of time he apparently needed. (Seriously though, how does 2.5 hours work? The only way for that to happen was for him to have unlimited time. In addition, the math sections are separated on the SAT, so how are you calculating this?)</p>

69

<p>Thats what he told me. He took it at my school over the course of two days and said he got about 2.5 hours roughly on each section. Maybe more? idk. It's just unfair. If I got twice the time I would have enough time to answer each question, check them twice, and solve the daily crossword puzzle.</p>

70

<p>Samiamy</p>

<p>I’m not sure I quite understand your post….but for the record:</p>

<p>the reason why I feel so strongly on this subject is because my sister IS learning disabled. I witness her struggle and hardship daily; I have also witnessed her many hard earned accomplishments. I resent the implications made on this thread that LD’s are not an impairment, and that people with LD’s are less deserving of an equal opportunity to succeed.</p>

<p>As for PATHETIC, self-absorbed, immature and INSECURE this is my opinion of those who have complained on this thread about the unfairness of accommodations in standardized testing for students with legitimate LD’s, while at the same time posting their 2400/36 scores.</p>

71

<p>Daeshim2</p>

<p>I guess my post wasn't very clear,I reread my post and it did seem it was directed at you which of course it was not in the least. like you I have a sibling that truly struggles with a LD yet is in Gifted and talented program( yeah for the teachers at school to be able to pick up his giftedness yet his inability to get it out) </p>

<p>The rest is for those that whine about accomodations:</p>

<p>I also agree on the immaturity/self-absorbed whining on being in the top 90%+ in the country denying a kid the same opportunity of an education by getting extra time. What are they afraid of, someone taking their seat at an IVY?, if you don't deserve to be there then you don't get in, simple as that. Remember admissions people can spot a narcissist a mile away</p>

<p>Remember that the higher education system is the most PC in regards to this matter, way more accomodations given in University system than anything you will come accross in high school, so if you think extra time is unfair, wait till those LD kids that get in, get extra time, that and way more in college.</p>

72

<p>They are supposed to be tests of aptitude, and kids who have a verifiable disorder (such as low processing IQ) will get extra time to level the playing field. You could argue that it's unfair, but that's the way it is.</p>

<p>The accommodations have been tougher to get (according to my friend) due to the fact that everyone is applying for them, including kids who are not LD.</p>

<p>By the way, with ADHD I understand that it's rare to get extended time. Another LD classmate (ADHD) applied for extended time and all they approved him for was 5 minute breaks between sections as needed.</p>

<p>If you do better than average on the PSAT (or SAT) without accomodations, my GC says, it is extremely difficult to get accommodations of any sort without months of cat & mouse (rejection and reapplication), expensive psych testing to verify the LD, and just good luck.</p>

73

<p>FYI, there is solid, documented research that reveals students with no "learning issues" (learning disabilities, ADHD, etc.) score no better if given extended time/accomodations on standardized testing. This means those with normal neurological processing (as opposed to IQ, there is a difference between processing and IQ) do not benefit from extra testing time. The question then, is, are attempts to "level the playing field" regarding learning differences bogus, a result of manipulation, or, is "leveling the playing field" based on measurable and distinct neurological processes (again, NOT IQ). For those who feel it is bogus, think again about throwing research out the window, as well as the opportunity to reevaluate a narrow, blaming and rigid view of others. God help your kids should they have any of these issues. Perhaps it's not bragging, but just the same as everyone else who wants to talk about their scores.</p>

74

<p>Gosh, lets just take away people's glasses, contacts, and hearing aids too.
Those are "processing problems", why should those folks get special help?
The issue is recognizing when we need to understand what we don't know (or what threatens us). In the end, it's a shame the ACT/SAT pressure generates the need to outperform others . Sort of a commentary on the human race and competition: belief in the greater good (if someone gets help I won't suffer), or each man for himself.</p>

75

<p>^^^^^^ Then I guess that at least 75% of America is learning disabled. Practically everyone I know made careless mistakes on the SAT because they didn't have enough time to do the questions carefully. And the majority of Americans don't have enough time to finish the test. Even the top scorers (top 5%) benefit from extra time to check answers. Give me 10 randomly picked american HS seniors, and I'll find 9 of them who score significantly higher given extra time.</p>

<p>Perhaps you will reply that those who qualify as LD see greater improvements with extra time than do those without LD who are given extra time. Is that really a justification? That certain people benefit more from extra time simply indicates that they crack more easily under time restrictions. That's a problem standardized test scores should reflect.</p>

<p>Physical impairments do not impair our ability to <em>think</em>. Learning disabilities do. So do the other impairments for which students receive accomodations that I do not support.</p>

76

<p>
[quote]
They were SHORTCHANGED on time when they were only given 50%! No matter which way you put it, it is unfair to one party or the other unless you have the test agency do an EXCRUCIATING review of each student! It is impossible!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There is one way to make it fair for all parties. The SAT is a standardized test. Thus, conditions should be 100% standardized for all test-takers. If all are given the same conditions, then differences in scores will reflect differences in ability - ability to perform within time restraints, as well as ability to answer accurately and think deeply. Extra time accomodations are not only, as you (but not I) have said, impractical and inaccurate, but also unfair. Nevertheless, I don't find that impracticability is a good reason to eliminate a practice. We should try to make testing conditions as fair as possible, even if that requires an "excruciating review" of every "LD" student. If I supported these kinds of accomodations, I would not be upset that it is difficult to evaluate every student's needs. Likewise, the reason I do not support these accomodations has got nothing to do with the practibility of thorough evaluation of time-gifts for each student.</p>

77

<p>
[quote]
Wait.....what did that say? "Impede the ability to learn......" Hmmmmm......... I think I just destroyed amb3r's argument. Giving accommodations does NOT impede work in real world careers! It is called a LEARNING disability for a reason. If it were otherwise, it would be classified as a NEUROLOGICAL disorder!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fine. Learning disorders impede ability to learn. I see nothing in that definition that states that learning disorders impedes ability to regurtitate what has already been learned, or to analyze based on skills that have been learned. The SAT is not a teaching lesson, but rather an evaluation of already acquired knowledge. Since the SAT does not involve any sort of learning, and LD students have learning impairments (but not any other kind), your argument perfectly supports my recommendation that it is absolutely unnecessary to given LD students time accomodations for the SAT. Thank you for contributing evidence to my claim.</p>

78

<p>Ambr3,</p>

<p>as one previous poster wrote, hopefully you will never have a child of your own that you will need to obtain accomodations for. But the likely hood of that at the rate of special education blossoming in the younger elementary population, WAY MORE than what you or I have yet to experience in the classroom, it is unlikely you will be spared the job of trying to be an advocate for your own. </p>

<p>My brothers 1st grade teacher told me 3 years ago, that the training they must obtain over the next few years is taking into consideration that 1 out of every SEVENTEEN children will have a learning disability, and or Autism spectrum disorder if the rate of increase keeps up. So don't be so judgemental and educate yourself on learning disabilities before you spew off nonsense as you do not know .... about what is and what is not considered a learning disability, it is a catch all phrase that incorporates processing, data transfer, dyslexia, auditory processing disorders, it is not JUST learning material that may or may not be an issue.</p>

79

<p>Remember you also have to "learn" the question. In other words, a processing issue!</p>

<p>I'm kinds sick of you.........</p>

<p>On another note, I just got my ACT score for the test I took in November (arranged, of course) and got a 32, up from my old 30. Yes!</p>

80

<p>
[quote]
Wait.....what did that say? "Impede the ability to learn......" Hmmmmm......... I think I just destroyed amb3r's argument. Giving accommodations does NOT impede work in real world careers! It is called a LEARNING disability for a reason. If it were otherwise, it would be classified as a NEUROLOGICAL disorder!<br>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Remember you also have to "learn" the question. In other words, a processing issue!

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Dvm, you're telling me you learn during a 4 hour test, but not during a thirty year career... You're telling me you use processing skills on one Saturday morning, but then you never use them again in countless hours on a job, doing complex assignments and learning new skills. That's great, I guess the only job for which this actually makes sense is .. what, newspaper boy? Not even that.</p>

<p>your point is collapsing under its own weight. maybe that's why you're sick of arguing with me. That's okay, I understand.</p>