<p>My son had 2 high school friends who received extra time on the SAT. The parents paid a private educational psychologist to test the kids so they could receive a diagnosis that met the ETS standard for extended time. I’m not kidding! Guess unethical psychologists are to be found out there if one knows where to look and has the check book to back it up.</p>
<p>The family started the process freshman year and was fairly bold about it, didn’t use the diagnosis much at school–didn’t need it really. Both made top-notch grades in high school, just used it for ‘insurance’ to boost the SAT score. Don’t know if they are still ‘milking’ the diagnosis at the college level. As a result, I’m a bit skeptical of special accommodations. I know that’s not a good attitude, but it’s reality…</p>
<p>The studies which have been done vis-a-vis standardized testing prove that extended time does nothing to improve the scores of those who don’t actually require the time. The time does not allow them to know the answers to more questions…oddly enough, D who is allowed time and a half never needs it, except if there is writing involved. And then she only uses it to laboriously re read and re read to make sure she has inane issues like punctuation, spelling and capitalization correct. It never does anything for the answers…per se.</p>
<p>So then you disagree with me, Compmom when I say in post 49 “I am uncomfortable with the idea that a new member should have the right to dictate rules to an establishment the member volunteered to join.” You feel the student should have the right to dictate to the school what additional accommodations the student gets, after the student has enrolled and is attending?
You don’t feel a student should check that out before enrolling?
Can I sue my employer for more pay? Sure, he’s paying me what he said he would, but now that I’m working, I want more. Think that might work for me?</p>
<p>Many here have used an athlete as a comparison. If I enroll in college, and want to be on the basketball team, do I have a right to join the college, then make them change the rules so I make the team? At 50 yrs old, I’m at a disadvantage there. Shouldn’t I check out the liklihood of making the team BEFORE I enroll if basketball is so important to me?
Or, can I join the local chapter of Chamber of Commerce(for example) then require them to hold meetings at 1 a.m. because I work until midnight? And then sue them if they don’t reschedule? </p>
<p>Both examples are to show if I want to join up in something, I need to check out their expectations/requirements BEFORE I join, to see if they line up with what I want/need.</p>
<p>p.s. My compliments to momo’3 and her S, who is progressing so well he may no longer need special accommodations.</p>
<p>I’m somewhat in the middle on this on … the only reason I think Princeton possible has a leg to stand on is that the real world is the next step. Which leads to this question … I know the ADA rules in concept in the workplace but not in relation to time. In every job I have worked time efficiency and effectiveness has been a major compenent of my job performance. If a student got a 50% time accomondation in HS and then in college when that person headed to the workplace would their ADA accommodation at work likely also include allowance to take more time to do the job? Thanks</p>
<p>“The studies which have been done vis-a-vis standardized testing prove that extended time does nothing to improve the scores of those who don’t actually require the time.”</p>
<p>I disagree. Any kid that is given extended time will benefit from that extended time–whether they use that time to better organize an essay, reread passages and questions, go back and check answers, or simply spend more time to thoroughly process each question. Who here honestly believes that extended time will not benefit the average student?</p>
<p>At daughter’s school, those with extended time can take their tests one page at a time. But once they turn in that page, they can’t go back. This is so they don’t read through the whole test, get to the end of the hour (or whatever) and come back the next day having studied those questions they didn’t know. My daughter thinks this is actually worse than trying to get it down in the alloted time. How many times have you taken an exam and come to a question or problem which gave you insight into one that came previously? </p>
<p>However - this whole topic of billable hours makes me consider asking my attorney if he has ever had any accommodations for a learning disability.</p>
<p>“extended time does nothing to improve the scores of those who don’t actually require the time.”</p>
<p>There’s some research supporting this idea re: the SAT, but I don’t believe it’s true regarding the LSAT. The LSAT is specifically designed so that most test-takers cannot complete it in the allotted time.</p>
<p>I also wonder whether, even when it comes to the SAT, this is true for high scorers (i.e. those in the low 700’s shooting for 800). I haven’t seen research that specifically focuses on them. Anecdotally, I think that group may use the extra time more wisely than the average student.</p>
<p>The other problem is that exams in college (particularly at Princeton), are designed so the average student won’t finish the exam. It’s really a question of time management and not freaking out when you know you won’t finish the exam. If I had twice as long to do the exams, I might have done better in multiple classes. But that wasn’t the point. I don’t disagree about other testing accommodations (laptop, quiet place, etc), but it’s hard to decide how much extra time someone needs, and still make it fair to the rest of the class. There are plenty of classes that she could take that don’t have any tests, or only have take homes, and thus wouldn’t need to be given accommodations for.</p>
<p>Younghoss, it is not the student dictating to the school. There is a legal basis for accommodations, and the Federal Dept. of Education, Office of Civil Rights oversees implementation of the ADA/law. This law is based on the principle of equal access to education. </p>
<p>It is true that the disabilities offices are interpreting this body of law differently, and law suits like this are going to be they way things are clarified. Pushing the disabilities office to change is appropriate when they are not up to speed with the law, and it helps many others.</p>
<p>A student and family can check out how a school’s culture deals with accommodations, if they like, but at ANY school they have a right to expect accommodations if there is a documented disability. They shouldn’t have to dictate anything, it should be provided without them asking for anything, just providing documentation.</p>
<p>That is not happening, but it will in the future, I think.</p>
<p>A class action suit is a great idea. Many students with disabilities are starting to organize on campuses, trying to make a difference for students coming up after them.</p>
<p>I don’t mean to be on a soap box, but there is something really central here that people aren’t getting. I think there is some fear that rather than leveling the playing field, accommodations provide an advantage, and perhaps people find that threatening when thinking about their own kids, who do not have accommodations. I really don’t know. Maybe you have to have personal experience with this to get it.</p>
<p>I am promising myself not to look at this anymore. It is kind of fascinating, but frustrating too.</p>
<p>“I think there is some fear that rather than leveling the playing field, accommodations provide an advantage”</p>
<p>Many of us know families that abused the system to gain an unfair advantage. They poison the well for the kids who genuinely need help and aren’t trying to bend the rules.</p>
<p>If Princeton admitted this student with full knowledge of her disability, and/or she has the appropriate documentation to substantiate it, then Princeton will need to accommodate her.</p>
<p>Personally, I think they ought to give everyone in the class the same amount of time they give her.</p>
<p>“All accomodations are for output issues and not input issues.”</p>
<p>What? Imagine a severely dyslexic student that needs someone to read the textbook to her out loud. That’s a reasonable accommodation, and it’s for input, not output.</p>
<p>I think there is some truth to that statement for SAT-math. If you don’t know the formula for solving “if a train leaves Chicago…” a kid could spend 20 minutes on it and still not get it right. (But no one on cc misses that problem anymore thanks to xiggi.) But the ACT is a different animal – it’s almost all about speed bcos the questions are rather straightforward. Indeed, the so-called science section is nothing more than speed-reading graphs and charts – AP Stats is probably better preparation for that subsection than any HS science class…</p>
<p>But, my point is that a time extension on the ACT HAS to help anyone and everyone.</p>
<p>Again, it’s tough to call. A test is standardized for all Princeton students. If you have an hour to do a test, everyone else does, too. If you can’t finish it, you can probably guess others had the same problem. I just wonder how much accommodation is sufficient to justify the same level of performance for this girl, considering that tests are meant to be hard to finish. Even at that, how should we know if she is truly capable of that level (say if she didn’t have the disorder)?</p>
<p>Just as all books are provided to the blind on tape by the blind and dyslexics, the same is true for books for dyslexics who cannot read, or have issues with reading. However, there is absolutely no real accomodation in the information given if somebody listens to a book on tape or reads the same information in a text book. It’s just an alternative way of inputting the exact same information. But, as they say, :rolleyes:</p>
<p>The law requires “reasonable accommodations” not specific ones-- it sounds like this student assumed she would get the same accommodations her brother did… and Princeton has offered something different and feels fairly confident that its decision will stand up in court. The problem is that there is a quandary presented: if the student does well on the midterms with the accommodations offered (distraction-free environment, 10-minute breaks) – then that is evidence that those are sufficient. </p>
<p>I do think that there is a point when you have to ask how far an institution of higher learning has to go to accommodate the needs of students to perform in that setting. I am the parent of a dyslexic son who never sought any sort of accommodations, but did consider academic environment in his choice of colleges. In his case he looked for LAC’s that would offer small classes and an opportunity to work closely with his profs – he didn’t think he would do well in a large lecture setting, and I would tend to agree. (He’s more of a hands on type of learner).</p>
<p>The problem is that with something labeled a “learning disability” - there is a difference between a highly capable student who needs some support to function at her best in a competitive environment, and a student whose disabilities render her incapable of functioning well in that environment – and its not always easy to see where to draw the line. One student belongs at Princeton… the other probably does not – simply because part of what makes Princeton special is that it is (or should be) an academically rigorous and challenging environment. </p>
<p>Here’s an example of what I mean: Metcalf’s complaint alleges, among other things, that her several disabilities “limit her capacity to recall material” and require her to isolate and process material “in small increments.” ([Student</a> files suit against U. - The Daily Princetonian](<a href=“http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/30/24330/]Student”>http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/30/24330/) ). This is different than a difficulty with handwriting or spelling, or a need to take frequent breaks-- it goes to the heart of what is expected of high-level academics. That is – one characteristic of a high level academic environment like Princeton is that students are expected to be able to process and recall a high volume of material. There is a difference between getting “accommodations” and seeking remedial support – and Metcalf seems to be on the wrong side of that line. (If she can’t recall material, how will more time help?) </p>
<p>I mean – its one thing to argue that Oscar Pistorius ought to be allowed to enter any race he wants using whatever technology is available in the construction of his artificial legs - it would be quite another to argue that he should be given a head start in the race to compensate for the fact that he doesn’t have real legs.</p>
<p>Okay, Calmom, what you say makes absolute sense. My D made many assessments of where she would best be able to pursue her interests in the sciences and what the culture was like, as well, and it did factor into her choice. So far, in fact, she has been able to figure it all out without even using any of her accomodations, but she wanted to make sure they were there in case she got a strange, punctuation obsessed, professor…Less common at the higher levels, as we know.</p>
<p>However, if a student actually has trouble with MATERIAL, then that is the wrong place for them to be.</p>
<p>IMHO, accomodations should never be made in the actual material presented, only in the demonstration of knowledge gained.</p>
<p>Since she was diagnosed with all of these issues in Middle School and went on to a very good High School, then someone should have at least tried to help her out… at a minimum… with what is apparently a rather profound processing speed issue rather than just placate her with being allowed to have a plethora of time at her disposal for any and all tests. I think that her LD’s were coddled, not her, but her LD’s. Know what I mean?</p>
<p>Please also note that this gal has more than ADD. Way more. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. It is sad all the same. But, exactly.</p>