<p>compmom–my heart goes out to you and your daughter. But I am wondering how she will be able to hold a job after graduating if sometimes seizures leave her unable to focus or write for hours or days.</p>
<p>I hope meds are found to control her physical problems.</p>
<p>Wanted to edit to add that she/we love this school and are not angry at the institution, which is simply slow to change and intent on preserving itself. Viewed with some detachment, the struggles of the Princeton student, my daughter and many others are the unfolding of changes that started in the late 60’s. Campuses are now meritocracies, and “merit” is still being defined. This will all get worked out over time.</p>
<p>Mommusic, you don’t get it. She functions fine for the majority of the time, first of all, and health problems will not be an obstacle in her desired profession, which I prefer not to go into. Ever heard of free lance work, for instance?</p>
<p>Medications will not be found to control any of her issues completely, or forever. I do not want to go into detail. Meds that can be life-saving, such as steroids, have their own problems for functioning. You don’t just find some magic pill that makes everything all better.</p>
<p>Quite frankly, your comment is ignorant. Do you really think that someone for chronic health conditions can’t work? And what are you implying therefore?</p>
<p>Frankly Monmusic’s question was not ignorant. It will be a question that comes up if your D enters a traditional business environment. It is a legitimate question. Your comment about freelancing seems to answer that question. But ignorant…no. It is also a question that the every college will ask directly or indirectly. It is the question of the moment and the basis for the lawsuit. If a student enters a highly competitive environment the question is what reasonble accomodations does the student need to be able to be a productive, successful member of the implicitly defined class and will the accomodations fit the educational environment of that particular college. As this lawsuit and others progress the question regarding a colleges requirements (e.g. finishing in four years, or whatever) are parameters that the colleges legally can make…or not make. I understand how upset all this makes you, but the question is not whether there is a moral imperative to accomodate everyone regardless of the issues, but is there a legal imperative. Clearly, you and your D are emotionally invested in her college choice and for her sake I hope she is able to make it all work. Regardless, exceptional people do well and join the “economic and cultural elite” as you expressed everyday from many different colleges and universities the world over because of who they are as individuals and not on the backs of the institution they attended.</p>
<p>Here is what she has…</p>
<p>attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)</p>
<p>mixed-receptive-expressive language disorder</p>
<p>disorder of written expression</p>
<p>developmental coordination disorder</p>
<p>Here is what Princeton offered…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My thought is that I agree with calmom a bit in that she should have at least tried things out the one time, because that way if things did not work out she would have a fair greater leg to stand on.</p>
<p>Some of y’all will find me batty for thinking this. But, I think if she took the accommodations offered the once. And, if she ran out of time or something the once. Then Princeton would have been able to help her out more in the utmost ADA law abiding way. </p>
<p>I am under the assumption that sometimes the utmost ADA law abiding ways can be mildly tweaked ethically and legally a bit here and there. I am under that assumption because I go to University with a couple of folks who had to have their accommodations tweaked a mite bit depending on their course load and what have you. </p>
<p>I doubt that Princeton, of all places, would have left the gal hanging high and dry if she at least tried things out the once with the one test to no avail. </p>
<p>It also would have been a nice learning experience for her to see what she could do as a young adult with what Princeton offered. I would assume that she must be very diligent with her studies. Some pals of mine with learning differences actually time themselves doing a lot of practice problems for math and make up potential essay questions as practice tests for certain classes and time themselves and most everything else one can do in order to be doubly prepared for when they take their tests. I would bet she sorta does the same or I just know of a couple of odd ducks!</p>
<p>Another example would be compmom’s young adult child trying to go the distance at University. I would assume that she is thriving off the challenge in spite of her health related issues and finds it quite challenging and fulfilling to be a young adult lady at University. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with this. But, once again, no one knows of any of this for sure. It just seems like there is something “there” with some of her diagnoses much more so than with her, if that makes any sense.</p>
<p>I had a classmate last year who had anxiety problems that entitled him extra time to tests and quizzes when he needed it. Specifically, there was one physics test (one of the few tests in which he consistently worked) where the last problem was fairly brutal, and he couldn’t figure it out in the ten minutes left in the period. But, because of his ‘disability,’ he was able to use an entire extra period figuring out that one problem. I don’t consider that fair.</p>
<p>While I may sound ignorant and harsh, I think that there is a very strong argument that learning-disabled students should not be given any extra favors, and where they end up should be dependent solely on their ability. Some students have bad memories–do you give them their notes to use during the test? I agree with whoever has said about real-world conditions–just because you have a disability does not mean you will be given any extra slack. You need to learn to deal with it, and if that means having to attend a school other then Princeton, so be it.</p>
<p>Yes and no Siren. Think about it this way: In some aspects of real world putting forth the greatest amount of accurate material in the shortest amount of time is the objective. In some aspects of real world the quality of the material is the most important regardless of the time. Time, cost, quality are the variables - different applications have different requirements in order of importance. Think about your physics example, what was being measured? Quality of response or “amount” of material over time? Different profs/colleges/unis may have different criteria for measurement just as there are different criteria in the world after college. Just a thought.</p>
<p>Most of the LD’ers I work with on a daily basis are not the very-highly-intellectually functioning variety; they will not have illustrious intellectual futures (such as being admitted to an Ivy, doing well there, and/or having a career in academia), though they may become capable in a variety of areas – some of them including roles in medicine and business.</p>
<p>However, there is a significant component of the intelletually gifted who do have one or more LD manifestations. Again, Princeton has accepted some of these very gifted high-performing/ low-deficit students before, if their strengths were exceptional.</p>
<p>And there is a segment of LD"ers with so many learning issues that it is miraculous that they graduate from high school, even with diligence on their part and compliance (accommodations) on the K-12 schools’ part. Some of the ones I work with are in that category and are at best community college- or vocational school- headed.</p>
<p>From what has been printed and posted, I don’t know enough about the student in question to determine what category she falls in, but I doubt that it’s the one in my second paragraph. But I certainly agree that it’s important as a first step to be realistic about the scope of the LD combined with the intellectual demands of the 4year institution before selecting a college list. No, Princeton should not reduce its standards of achievement and scholarship, but as they have provided tutoring support for others who struggled because, for example, of subprime preparation in high school (possibly students like Sotomayor), they should also provide similar reasonable support for anyone they have admitted and who has the necessary and current documentation (testing). (= another controversy about this case) Or, they should have thought long and hard about weighing the special consideration admissions of her athletic ability against her special learning needs and what those would mean in light of their educational standards.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed, but they either did or failed to do so. Thus, my earlier post in that P’ton needs to go the extra mile since they chose to add her to their Ivy League winning soccer team. What is “reasonable” to any of us on this board does not matter. It’s up to a judge to decide if the two parties cannot agree, since Congress did not define it. Princeton admitted her. They are responsible for knowing – they could easily add questions to their app – or not knowing – they choose to not know…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Unless Congress specifically wrote that into their legislation, we can never know. But, I would argue that yes, Congress did mean for the ADA to compromise academic standards bcos, by definition, “accommodations” are compromised standards. (Good public policy, btw.) Of course, this case is clearly about where you draw the line on those compromised standards.</p>
<p>According to a local article, Legette informed P’ton of her disabilities during the “application process”. Thus, the either did not tell her that extra time would automatically be denied - as per new Ivy policy? – or they told her and she chose to sue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.centraljersey.com/articles/2009/11/06/topstory/doc4af422c4aec29442270463.txt[/url]”>http://www.centraljersey.com/articles/2009/11/06/topstory/doc4af422c4aec29442270463.txt</a></p>
<p>bluebayou, it sounds like you’re saying that because Princeton (or, I assume, another elite school) admits a student, the college is responsible for making sure the student succeeds, even if that means compromising standards.</p>
<p>I don’t know whether this student ought to get the accommodations she requests. But I do know I’m completely opposed to what you suggest. I want schools to take a chance in admitting some students. That might mean that the students and the school discover, after admission, that unfortunately the student can’t make it. But some-- the vast majority, if the school is careful in admissions-- of those students <em>will</em> succeed if given a chance. This applies not just to students with disabilities, but students who have other challenges. Do we want Princeton not to admit a promising student from a terrible school, just because Princeton is afraid that even with extra tutoring the student will still fail? No!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well that just raises a whole new set of questions. </p>
<p>Gosh darnit.</p>
<p>CF:</p>
<p>I’m not suggesting anything. The ADA is very clear: reasonable accommodations MUST be provided. This case is all about what is reasonable. Clearly the plaintiff and P’ton disagree on that definition.</p>
<p>^^agree that is the essence of the case…what is reasonable.</p>
<p>Does anyone have any more information about this policy change on extended time by the Ivies described in the CentralJersey.com article (link above)? Penn, for one, still lists extended testing time as an potential accomodation.</p>
<p>[Guidelines</a> for Addressing Academic Issues of Students with Disabilities](<a href=“http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/osl/disabil.html]Guidelines”>University Life)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you mean that Princeton could easily have added questions to their app about what disabilities a student has, and what accommodations the student receives? Princeton certainly could not do that; it’s against the law.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, the law just says that they can’t discriminate. It does not say that they can’t request the information. For example, colleges currently request info on sex, race, ethnicity, veteran’s status, and some even religion, but, if provided, they are not allowed to use such information in a discriminatory manner. </p>
<p>But in any event, the local article indicates that the plaintiff voluntarily disclosed her LD during the app process.</p>
<p>Thank you, momofthreeboys, and to compmom–sorry if I appeared “ignorant” to you, and I apologize if you took my comments the wrong way.</p>
<p>Perhaps your post made your daughter’s condition sound worse than it is, but you did say, “It would be easy to say that she should only be at school when she is stable, but she is never stable.”</p>
<p>I am a total stranger, and I am worried about your daughter. And if college is so difficult, I can’t imagine that the workplace will be easier. Perhaps it will, especially if she does freelance, as you mentioned. </p>
<p>Your first post mentioned meds that had her in equilibrium but waned in efficacy over the months. Your second post stated that a permanent medical fix does not exist. I had no way of knowing this, thus my sincerely expressed wish that the right meds be found.</p>
<p>I have a stupid question. </p>
<p>Does the soccer team of Princeton fall under the NCAA?</p>
<p>If it does, then this gal having had extended time for her SAT(S) and ACT(S) would have been flagged by the NCAA, for that is one of their rules. And Princeton would have known of it that way.</p>
<p>Yes, Princeton soccer is Division 1 in the NCAA.</p>
<p>Just dipping in one more time to say that the ADA also covers the workplace. </p>
<p>Neither colleges nor workplaces can discriminate based on disability. </p>
<p>A person who is not stable with health can still get an enormous amount accomplished, whether at school or at work. It is a matter of timing, and whether things are especially difficult during a week when papers are due, for instance. But many accomplished people had chronic health conditions: FDR and JFK, for instance.</p>
<p>I think that we will just worry about one life phase at a time, right now. If anyone wants to introduce anything else that we should be worrying about, please don’t!</p>
<p>bluebayou-- that’s really interesting about extended time no longer being offered at the Ivy’s for any student. That makes me even more interested to see what the courts say about this.</p>
<p>I almost wonder if Pton isn’t trying to force an actual court decision vis-a-vis the extra time issue, as it seems to be relatively controversial among those who have no learnding difference to manage.</p>
<p>I also wanted to note that D1 athletes are asked to commit to a college at a very early date, letters of intent can be signed before senior year even begins, so that colleges asking for this kind of a committment really do have an obligation to assist the student and make it possible, note the word “possible”, for them to succeed. It is unfair to invite a student to come to your school, which is essentially what occurs during D1 recruitment, to ask them to forego other college options, and then not meet accomodations. Really sketchy and too heavily in favor of the institution, not taking enough of what is best for the student into consideration is a major failing, at times, of athletic programs, imho.</p>