<p>I now have space, compmom.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I’ve witnessed much of what you describe. My son loves chess and began playing it in kindergarten before his dyslexia dx and he’s really great at stuff like that. We used to think he “counted cards” when he was young (5-6) and playing family blackjack and we teased him about that. It is part of the reason the teachers became so alarmed when he could not learn letters/words/etc. They pretty much immediately sensed (and before I “bought in”) that there was something really wrong going on. I also agree with your assumptions regarding average/normal vs. high intelligence and LDs and paths. Adding to that are people struggling with multiple issues or social problems…they seem to have a rougher go post college than single LDs. Unfortunately there is not a one size fits all solution or an “all or nothing” solution. Self esteem plays into the whole scenario, also, with how the kids compensate, over come, etc. By middle school many kids didn’t understand where my son was going when he left the classroom for the resource room. They just knew him as a gregarious sharp student. He started wearing a t-shirt that said “Dyslexics of the world untie” on those days as his “political statement.” He’s a favored physics partner now in high school because many kids can ‘write the report’ but they want him as a partner to do all the calculations and deductive reasoning, they don’t care that he can’t write the report, they just think he’s a ‘bad writer.’ I don’t let ignorant people rattle my cage when they spout out stupid comments. It doesn’t take aware teachers very long to figure him out and how to “deal” with him within the context of the IEP and I assume that same situation will occur in college, some will get it and others won’t and in the workplace. The coaches love him because of his strategic thinking, fire in the gut and he’s ambidextrous. The challenge is “matching” the kid to the school, but isn’t that everyone’s challenge on some level - LDs or not?</p>
<p>Here is a link to the 2008 ADA Amendment that Shawbridge described:</p>
<p>[The</a> ADA Amendments Act of 2008](<a href=“http://www.access-board.gov/about/laws/ada-amendments.htm]The”>http://www.access-board.gov/about/laws/ada-amendments.htm)</p>
<p>Folks here might really learn something by reading this.</p>
<p>I see that it explicitly includes concentration as a life function, as Shawbridge mentioned, that mitigating meds such as insulin no longer exclude people from protection under ADA
(this was a major issue for kids with type 1 diabetes in the schools, whose rights were threatened by previous language), and that episodic disabilities (such as chronic illnesses that wax and wane) are now explicitly protected.</p>
<p>Here is a site that provides a nice summary with focus on the effects of this amendment at places of employment.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adaaa_notice.cfm[/url]”>http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adaaa_notice.cfm</a></p>
<p>Thanks so much Shawbridge.</p>
<p>Shrinkrap post #163</p>
<p>Many of today’s adults with disabilities had to struggle on their own, and unfortunately, did not have any accommodations along the way because the laws weren’t in place yet.</p>
<p>1975 The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) became law. It was renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990.</p>
<p>1990 IDEA first came into being on October 30, 1990 when the “Education of All Handicapped Children Act” (itself having been introduced in 1975) was renamed “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.” (Pub. L. No. 101-476, 104 Stat. 1142). </p>
<p>Shawbridge</p>
<p>Bravo! Beautifully said.</p>
<p>Best wishes to your son!</p>
<p>Shawbridge presents a perfect example of how much intellectual capital can be easily lost by close-mindedness. One of the things I’ve preached over the years is something written by Mel Levine in that only in HS does one have to excel at being a generalist. As he wisely points out, not many kids with severe processing disabilities are going to grow up to be an attorney who charges by the hour, but to cut short their potential at so many other endeavors is a real disservice to more than just that one kid. But what jumped out at me in this case was that as Shawbridge points out, his son despite his interest in lots of things, will probably always need to keep his EC’s very manageable due to the time requirement. On the one hand, it keeps him clearly focused on his passions, but the Princeton student seems to want to be a DI athlete and a successful student. Now, P, as an ivy, offers no athletic scholarship so it’s not as if she loses her scholarship if she doesn’t play (although with private schools, they can do what they want to meet student need). But I wonder if the law requires accommodations to the extent that they will keep her competitive on the field AND help her be successful in the classroom. While I think, if her testing is up to date and recent, accommodations are indeed warranted and necessary, I do worry about the test case being an athlete who - UNlike Shawbridge’s son - may not have had the exceptional intelligence to get into Princeton without whatever bump being an athlete gave her. Plus, as Shawbridge also wisely points out, his son choose a school who was very clear that they would work with his unique set of disabilities and help him be successful. He specifically did not choose the Ivy which seemed to be less than supportive from the onset. </p>
<p>Let me just be really clear here… I think Princeton needs to follow the law here. But at the same time, if I had to do it all over again I would have yanked my kid from her public school if I knew then what I know now. I see the difference adult attitudes can make in a young person’s life and I agree that if you are not genius material and only need a few small accommodations to find success, you can end up so lost in the cracks that to truly rebound takes years, if ever.</p>
<p>My daughter hopes to become an elementary school teacher. She knows what it feels like to be looking for the book while everyone else seems to be on the same page. She will have huge empathy for her students and will be gift to so many. Not an einstein of Pulizer prize winner, but still a huge contributor to the world. To know how much she was picked on as a kid when the law has certainly changed to her favor in HUGE HUGE ways is so completely frustrating and sad to me.</p>
<p>“being literally incapable of doing something that literally every normal human being can do without the slightest challenge.”</p>
<p>If the Princeton plaintiff were literally incapable, then extra time wouldn’t help her. The fact that she’s seeking extra time shows that she believes she IS capable. So again, this doesn’t apply to the case at hand. Let’s talk about THIS case.</p>
<p>It would be helpful to hear about people with this array of LDs who were able to excel in a comprehensive liberal arts setting with accommodations. It sounds like Shawbridge’s son is one of those.</p>
<p>The only thing is, that if our kids all avoid the schools that do not work well with disabilities, then things will never change. The Princeton student is going to have to suffer through a process that many of us do try to avoid, and will be criticized for it: but she is also helping others by suffering through this.</p>
<p>Our daughter did consider the culture of schools in terms of disabilities, while making her decisions about where to apply. But, as someone said, it is hard to find this information out in a meaningful way, before being admitted. And, the deadline for documentation of disabilities to be received by the disability office at our daughter’s college is May 1st, the same deadline the school has for accepting their offer of admission!</p>
<p>For her desired area of study, the dept. at the Ivy was much better than that at the perhaps “kinder and gentler” LAC. A student should not have to make decisions based on which school is more accommodating. Instead, they should be able to choose based on the same criteria that anyone else would.</p>
<p>We make our compromises in favor of reality as well, in various ways, but it helps to restate the principles in their most idealistic form, every one in awhile.</p>
<p>This is a very challenging situation. One problem I see is why 100%? Why not 50% or 200% etc. ?
Given the disability described it seems like it would be different for different types of exams. A separate issue would be discrimination. All the students in the class would know who has a disability because only these students are given extra time. The lawyer for the plaintiff in this case states “The literature is pretty clear that extended time doesn’t do any favors for students who are not disabled”. Is not the only solution in this case to get an accurate assessment of how much time the disabled student needs and allow this for all students?</p>
<p>Very interesting. I have learned a lot. Thank you all!</p>
<p>Thank you, Shawbridge, for such a thoughtful and detailed post. Thank you too to Compmom for the links. I am now going to go read through the various posts in the separate LD forum, beginning my research into college cultures supportive of students with learning differences.</p>
<p>Thank you to all who have described in detail the issues faced by your children or yourselves in dealing with LDs. It has indeed been very illuminating.</p>
<p>Yes, this last page of comments are especially illuminating. The comments are thought provoking and the outcome of the case will be especially interesting as it’s “Princeton”, concerns an “athlete” and encompasses to some extent the less “clearly defined or clearly understood” LDs.</p>
<p>
I agree. That is why it’s puzzling to me why specialized LD colleges like Landmark are frequently suggested to parents. There are also colleges with specific programs for students with Asperger Syndrome. Why shouldn’t these students be encouraged to apply to the same types of places as students without these disabilities? The existence of these places undermines efforts to have these students included everywhere.</p>
<p>It seems to me that there is no harm in having a range of options available. Different individuals flourish in different environments. LDs and Asperger’s cover a wide spectrum of disability.</p>
<p>The reason these places exist is because not everyone can do the work at certain schools. You are assuming that anyone could succeed at Princeton, Harvard, Amherst? The truth is, accommodations may HELP, but the subject of fit is a very real one. And bigger truth is, a kid can apply to anywhere they want, but even the best and the brightest (with no disabilities whatsoever) are rejected from these schools every year.</p>
<p>I agree, a range of options is helpful because there are a range of students needing and requiring different degrees of support. I do not believe there is a one size fits all solution and my best guess is that the law will gravitate toward legally requiring the minimum of supports which leaves the option for schools (such as Landmark and others) to give “more than the minimum support” which is fine with me since I tilt more toward “less laws” than “more laws” and letting society find its tolerances. I want all colleges and unis to acknowledge LDs but I don’t “need” all college and unis to subscribe to one fixed set of prescribed guidelines. We have one elevator in our building which is in reality a freight elevator at one end of a quarter mile long building. We do have employees in wheelchairs. There may be wheelchair bound people who decide not to work for our company because of the inconvenience factor but they have that choice. Others may not mind and it may not be an “issue.”</p>
<p>Sometimes students with ADD or Aspergers need extra help, quite a lot of extra help, to learn a system that will help them be organized enough to succeed in a mainstream college. Schools like Landmark help such students transition.</p>
<p>The support might include social support for navigating the extra-academic part of school, as well as academic support.</p>
<p>
I never said that at all. My criticism is with folks usually first mentioning places like Landmark, assuming that the student couldn’t hack it at a regular university or college (and, perhaps in some cases as illustrated by some of the mean-spirited responses in this thread, not wanting that type of student at a college or university).</p>
<p>Part of the frustration in this thread is that emotions are getting the better of some here, for a variety of reasons. Some may be losing focus on the issue at hand(the student suing P for additional accommodations). One that seems clear to me is this thread began seeking comments about the individual suing P for greater accommodations. Many here have expressed an opinion on that. Some have strayed from the topic. Some others who have different circumstances are arguing with those commenting on the student in question just as if the posters here were talking about other posters. Hope that makes sense. For example, TwistedX has told us much about his learning difficulties. It is interesting, and enlightening, but doesn’t really address the student litigant. Some may be commenting on the focus of this thread, but it may be misinterpreted as disagreeing with Twistedx.
Gosh, I don’t mind people that disagree, but please let’s focus on what we may be disagreeing with. I may make a comment(referring to the original student) that another poster may disagree with(applying it to himself). I believe strongly in the personal responsibility of that student and her parents to look thoroughly at P to see if they were likely to accommodate the student in the way she needed before she enrolled. If some disagreee with me, that’s ok, let’s have a polite debate. BUT please do not interpret my comments about that student as if I were saying no student should get accommodations.</p>
<p>p.s. one of the criteria my S considered what “what school best suits his needs”. Why doesn’t that apply to the student litigant?</p>
<p>Modadun, I bet your child will be a great teacher. Both my sons had a wonderful teacher who had struggled with dyslexia as a child. He was great with kids on all ends of the spectrum.</p>
<p>I’ve been following this conversation with interest, uncertain really what I think. I’ve got a kid with mild disabilities. He never got much of a diagnosis - but WISC test scores varied from average to off the charts. He has short term memory issues, had trouble copying things off the board, was the last kid to learn his multiplication tables and still makes a lot of careless mistakes in math. He had a 504 plan in middle school, but hated the way it was implemented and preferred to take the approach that not everyone is equally good at everything. I’m sure some of his B’s would be A’s if he had extra time, but I also respect his choice. OTOH if he’d chosen to continue with the accommodations I’d support him every step of the way. If his issues had been more severe, I probably would have insisted on keeping the 504 plan.</p>