The Test From Hell

Parents Forum
1

<p>Not all of this is new material to some of us, but some of the facts about CB were eye-opening, and all of it confirmed my suspicions about their increasing denial-mode. I similarly have friends with 2-inch-thick legitimate accommodation histories and professional, credentialed testing & scoring, done so to the letter per CB, and similarly denied. The only difference between them and the author is that the student was denied in the long run and will be attending a super-safety this fall, in the hopes of transferring to a match school the following year.</p>

<p>I should post this on the LD thread, too, but I have to run. Someone can do it for me.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/17/CMGSFQ1TV01.DTL%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/17/CMGSFQ1TV01.DTL&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

2

<p>The CB is cracking down because for every two legitimate cases of need for accommodations, there is at least one bogus case, or a case where parents have paid thousands of dollars in testing fees in order to position their child for accommodations.</p>

<p>Think this doesn't happen? I have witnessed it first hand, more times than I can count, with requests for extended time, in particular.</p>

<p>And while not every student will do better with more time, an awful lot of kids will improve without time constraints. </p>

<p>I am sorry that kids with legit needs are suffering, but I have seen so much abuse of this system that it has made the SAT a joke of a test. Between accommodations, endless tutoring, etc., the SAT doesn't begin to resemble an "aptitude" test.</p>

3

<p>I agree with Allmusic. Living in the private boarding school world, I have seen many parents "buy" a diagnosis in order to get extended time.</p>

4

<p>My oldest son was granted extended time due to a diagnosed and well documented learning disability - and then didn't use it. He figured that sooner or later he had to compete on an even playing field without accommodation, and that it made more sense to get a test score that would direct him to a college that would be a good "fit" for him based on his performance under the same circumstances as all the other students. Other people with different issues might have a different set of parameters, but that was good enough for him. Besides - he thought the test was to frigging long anyway.</p>

5

<p>Kluge:</p>

<p>In college, it's easy getting accommodation for tests. It can mean time and a half, use of computer or some other assistance. Last fall, an email went out to math majors on behalf of a blind student who needed assistance with a test. I do not think the documentation required is as stringent as for the SAT.</p>

6

<p>Mathson's little brother ditched his 504 plan in middle school. He regularly runs out of time in both Chemistry and math even though he knows the material. He thinks it's worth it not to have to take the tests in separate room with more distractions. I have my doubts, but I'm sure while he's closing some doors, like Kluge's child has said, there's a limit to what sort of accommodations the real world would offer anyway.</p>

7

<p>"five years after 9/11, National Public Radio reported that high school kids in Washington, D.C., were more worried about their SAT scores than about terrorism."</p>

<p>How in the world is that a negative thing?</p>

8

<p>I think that the decision made by ACT and the College Board several years back to stop flagging the test scores of students who take the tests under extended time conditions has fueled two problems. First, as noted, it has led to an increase in the number of unscrupulous families buying a diagnosis of disability. But I also think it has reduced support from the broader community for some of the kids who do have legitimate documented disabilities. I’m focusing here exclusively on students who get extended time. It strikes me as somewhat misleading to withhold from a college the fact that a particular student received extra time to take the ACT or SAT. In both college and the real world, speed does count.</p>

9

<p>Well first of all, only an extremely poorly run company, or one lacking the fundamental educational mores that should guide it, would punish the just along with the unjust. They're incompetent, lazy, or venal -- perhaps all 3.</p>

<p>Secondly, what I find extremely hard to stomach in these rationalizations about the supposed gamesmanship of it all, is that many of the same CC posters that decry the cynical tactics of some parents about the SAT are the same parents that feign shock & outrage about supposedly "non-meritorious," holistic, comprehensive, & other descriptors of Elite admissions reviews. ("How come so-and-so got in? My best friend's D/S didn't get in, but he/she had 'higher scores.' ")</p>

<p>The SAT "a joke of a test"? One that doesn't show aptitude? Well you'll get no argument from me on those grounds, but plenty from those who only want the SAT "counted" or "weighted" when it benefits themselves or their children.</p>

<p>Ya know, it's either a valid test or it isn't. It either tests ability or it doesn't. And if it does, and if it's "important for admissions," the real crime is not that some rich parents of rich boarding school students (not self, probably not kluge, probably not EK) are able to obtain even greater privileges than they already have, but that those who deserve an even playing field (which is all accommodation gives a genuine LD'er), are once again denied that opportunity. Do not blame clever, illegitimate liars for CB's incompetency. Please. </p>

<p>And I actually don't buy that it's the ploys of the rich that have caused CB to behave as it does. I think it's actually the greater awareness, understanding & legitimate diagnosing that has overwhelmed an organization not prepared to deal with this, and random No's are just much more convenient. Further, there's a streak of sadism in the way CB operates. Or hasn't anyone noticed. Sorry, that's just the cynic in me. </p>

<p>I'm not accusing the posters above of being the SAT-when-I-want-it crowd, but I sure have seen those contradictions among parent & student posters in general over the last 2+ years. And <em>that</em> makes me much more cynical than the ploys of boarding school parents.</p>

<p>mathmom & kluge, my younger D has resisted even being diagnosed for several yrs., due partly to what you mention, partly due to her raw competitiveness & pride. Unfortunately, now that Judgment Day is less than a year away, she's realizing how much she does justifiably need that accommodation & wishes she had it. And now we're out of time. CB sent the forms, but with all the history I've read about, & with the level of her GPA (obtained with grit & spite), I can hear them laughing already all the way from NJ if I submit those forms. </p>

<p>It's interesting, though, that people are focusing on aspects of personal (related) knowledge, rather than some of what I thought were important revelations in the article that I didn't think had been discussed on CC: the salaries at CB, the preference of even a very old IEP as legitimizing accommodation (which directly contradicts CB's stated policy of wanting recent testing & recent classroom accommodation, not old history). And other matters. </p>

<p>As to the argument that "they'll have to face [the speed problem] some day," I am divided on that concept. I have thought about it a lot over the years. To me, it's more important to be realistic about college programs & college choices than to pretend you don't have a processing disability, & forge ahead without assistance. I think there are some colleges & some atmospheres that work against the LD'er whether assisted or not assisted. However, in some cases, that infrequent accommodation can be just the tip that enables a brilliant student to thrive among true peers. What is more important to me is locating excellent teaching. The most generous accommodation cannot replace superior teaching methods. When LD'ers are given excellent teaching, many of them can meet the challenges met by their classmates without the accommodation. Depends partly on whether they have temperaments such as my D's or mathmom's, kluge's sons, partly how "multi" the disability is & how it manifests. </p>

<p>The field is still very much evolving as more & more is learned about intellectual processing, given increasingly updated brain research. But what will apparently not evolve is the efficiency level & integrity leel of CB, which is much more critical to millions of students than the lack of integrity by rich boarding school families.</p>

<p>Lots of people cheat on their taxes, too, but the IRS had damn well better not punish me on account of others. What an argument. What a cop-out.</p>

10

<p>Feel free to accuse me of all kinds of things, but hypocrisy isn't one of them. If nothing else, I am very consistent in my view of the SAT.</p>

<p>I have always contended that the SAT was vulnerable to prep, to accommodations, etc. I have also contended that there is a minority of "pure" candidates, who take the test unprepped, unaccommodated, and we see a "pure" score. Don't begin to compare for me the prepped/accommodated kids and the unprepped ones, and claim that their scores mean the same. Perhaps the test would be an aptitude test, if the kids all took it under the same conditions, meaning they all walked in, and took it blind, without prep or accommodations. We all know that it doesn't work that way.</p>

<p>The joke is that the CB isn't required, due to disability laws, to report the acccommodations, nor are colleges supposed to know who was prepped and who wasn't. So the "pure" score of 750, to the eye of the Adcom, means the same thing as the prepped or accommodated one? That is the joke!</p>

<p>The request for long term documentation, of a lifelong disability is to prevent exactly the type of abuse that has been occurring for almost a decade now. People will decide that their children will benefit from extra time, due to "ADD" or another recently determined diagnosis, and get an evaluation fall of junior year, for spring testing. That is absurd. </p>

<p>For children with legitimate processing delays, the problem didn't pop up when they were 15 or 16, but has been present all their lives, or certainly since work required quicker processing...at least since middle school (and the CB has no problem with documentation from even only 8th grade...even if there are not earlier IEPs or 504s). </p>

<p>The salary of the execs at the CB interests me very little, because in any big corporation, the head honchos are making big money. Do I think this impacts a kid asking for accommodations? No. I think those are apple and oranges arguments.</p>

<p>Children with legitimate problems will still be able to get extra time. I haven't seen one denied. It is those with the "recent diagnoses" who may not, and I understand the reasoning very well.</p>

11

<p>My D got several accomodations on the basis of a visual convergence insufficiency that greatly slows reading. The first one was a larger font for the booklet and the answer sheets for the PSAT. She took the test and had a terrible time with the size of the booklet. Since she wasn't in a separate room, the noise of the huge pages turning caused other kids to give her dirty looks. She also had a hard time with the booklet cause it was bigger than her desk! Why they couldn't just make it smaller and more easily handled with more pages is beyond me. We reapplied and got her 1/2 extended time for the SAT. She kept her bigger answer sheet but gave back the giant test booklet. Just as I had expected, her math and writing were about the same (writing actually went down), but her CR went up 70 points because she was able to finish when she took the test with extra time. My point is, if a kid is able to finish the test in the normal time, I'm not sure how much extra time will help. They might gain a point or two, but I don't think it would make the huge difference it can make for kids who really need it.</p>

12

<p>A neighbor's D, top student (15/600) who is very driven, suffered a brain injury this past winter, a random virus settled in her brain causing her brain to swell. They called it malignant catatonia. She was hospitalized for 8 weeks, part of that time in a drug induced coma and on a ventilator. She had multiple rounds of electro-convulsive therapy. Miraculously, she is recovering well but is having a lot of short term memory problems. Her brain is still swollen.</p>

<p>She returned to school in late March and took the June SAT and ACT with accomadations. She had previously taken it in Nov. (before brain injury) scoring 1200/1600.
She has never had an LD problems before in her life but her parents were able to get the accomadations based on this one severe incident.</p>

13

<p>"Lots of people cheat on their taxes, too, but the IRS had damn well better not punish me on account of others."</p>

<p>Unfortunately, the IRS does punish the rest of us on account of those who cheat. If there were no cheating, either our tax rates would be lower or government could provide more and better services.</p>

14

<p>Test prep at this house consists of buying a study guide. Oldest wasn't able to fit the h.s. SAT prep into his schedule and it doesn't look like younger one will, either. I'm of the camp that if they have to prepare extensively (I'm not talking about familiarizing yourself with the format of the test and looking at CB's free online info) to do well, you don't belong at the school that's looking for that kind of score. </p>

<p>I've often wondered what happens to kids who do have accomodations in testing, and perhaps with coursework (note takers, etc.). What kinds of jobs do these students land when they do graduate? Are employers aware of any accomodations student used to earn the degree? How do the underlying learning differences affect job performance?</p>

15

<p>No test prep here either, not a study guide, no sample questions,nada. </p>

<p>S just showed up and took the test. </p>

<p>He made 1400/1600(old SAT), said "that's good enough for me" and was done with it. </p>

<p>A friend of his took the SAT 3 times. Between #2 and #3, he took an extensive prep course ( 6 weeks@ $500). His score only went up 40 points bringing him to 1200. Different strokes.
They attend the same university now.</p>

16

<p>I certainly understand the arguments about the utility of the SATs and ACTs. I understand the correlation between the test scores and achievement in college is very weak. It does make sense that some colleges have stopped using these measures.</p>

<p>In spite of the arguments about standardized testing, I cannot understand why anyone would qualify for accommodations in taking the test. I would expect kids to score poorly if they don't understand, cannot concentrate, or if they cannot read well. Ideally, everyone has equal abilities and and equal chance to succeed. That is not the case. Some kids just are below average and some are above. The point of the exams is to rank individuals, not to give handicap points so everyone comes out the same.</p>

17

<p>Be thankful you can't understand, edad, because if you had a child that consistently underperformed due to LD or ADD related slowness, you'd likely understand.</p>

<p>The last ACT product (PLAN) my kid took showed the results on the back side - questions answered correctly, incorrectly and not answered. On each subtest the last 1/3 to 1/2 of the questions were unanswered due to her slowness. Those answered were overwhelmingly correct. Are the resulting middling scores a fair representation of her ability? (Tho she's had an IEP forever, the school didn't acquire extra time for last year's test, but she got 1.5 time for this year's test, which won't be scored for months).</p>

<p>Maybe these kids don't party from Thursday to Tuesday in college, maybe they work harder. Which is the better hire?</p>

18

<p>Isn't the SAT designed with speed in mind and doesn't it attempt to measure "slowness"?</p>

<p>Maybe the problem is that the SAT does a poor job of predicting success in college. What is the connection between being slow and going to parties? Can't kids who have low SAT scores also party?</p>

19

<p>This LD stuff greatly troubles me. It troubles me because the profession doing the defining, developing the diagnoses, treatment and ed plans, is one noted for its lack of rigor.</p>

<p>Just last week I read an interesting article that basically stated that many patients are actually harmed by some kinds of psych therapy rather than helped. There are few standards and little research regarding outcomes. And keep in mind that behaviours we now consider normal were classed by the same group as deviant a few years ago. </p>

<p>I can understand wanting the best for our kids. I certainly do for mine. But consider that "normal" behaviour spans a broad range. I wonder how the profession distinguishes between "normal" and LD or EDD? This is not a bright line. Underperforms, treetop leaf? Based on what standard?</p>

<p>At any rate, this is a complex issue, and a very subjective one, especially the diagnosis. And any such diagnosis where there are real benefits accruing to those diagnosed literally begs for abuse. And, as others have said, these diagnoses ARE abused. Maybe not among any posters here, but widespread among middle class and private school parents - those that can afford private diagnoses and advocacy for what the parents want.</p>

20

<p>epiphany wrote: "Ya know, it's either a valid test or it isn't. It either tests ability or it doesn't."</p>

<p>It is valid and it does test ability - one of the abilities it is designed to test is "processing speed". </p>

<p>Now, we can all question whether the abilities that it "tests" are the best ones for judging who should be admitted to college - and I'm sure we'll have a very robust discussion. </p>

<p>However, if the test results do not include a "flag" explaining the accommodation the tester received - the test results have been compromised. The student receiving the accommodation does not have the same "ability" that those taking the test without the accommodation. In the absence of a "flag" the college is comparing apples and oranges.</p>

<p>I like the way edad put it - it's like the handicap system in golf. When you play in a tournament that uses handicaps - you <em>could</em> win the tournament and be the worst golfer in the field. All it means is that you played closest to your abilities - it means nothing in comparision to the other golfers. And, the one of the uses of the SAT/ACT is to offer schools a way to compare. students from different schools/courseloads/etc.</p>