The solution to this issue seems rather obvious and should be applicable to all of these situations - give every student the maximum amount of time that could be allotted. Not only are there possibilities of those abusing the system but there are also students who have no idea that there are accommodations or how to seek them out and often these are the students who likely need them most as they often are from poorly resourced schools. Also there are some adults that are only diagnosed with an LD well into their twenties or later which indicates that there are students who probably have never sought any accommodation but who would qualify. There are possible misdiagnoses as well. It seems that schools should just allow for maximum accommodation for all students in the event that a student does indeed have an LD that was either undetected or was detected but perhaps the severity was not recognized and would have been given the maximum allowable time. Same with class tests/exams etc for the same reason.
I 100% believe this, unfortunately, and it is really shameful. And the reason I believe it is because Iâve seen it from the other side: I attended a gifted which you had to test into. So many test. And a psychological assessment of some sort, as I recall. All done by professionals hired and paid for by the school district. Sometimes, however, wealthy/influential parents did not âagreeâ with the results of these assessments and hired their own psychologist to carry out the testing. There was one in our county well known for identifying many âgifted students.â It is not only a breach of professional ethics, imo, but it was a disservice to the kids who struggled in an environment they werenât well-suited to. So, yes, I absolutely believe these same parents - and many just like them - know very well who will give them the documentation they pay for for their kids.
Would this possibly violate HIPAA? Does that apply to learning disabilities?
My initial reaction to this was, yes, agree. But would a high percentage necessarily indicate abusers of the system? What if its rather more indicative of a school willing to accommodate a high rate of learning differentiation need? In some districts, there are schools well-known to offer proper support to students with various IEPs, and schools that are well-known to be terrible in accommodations. Would it not be expected that families would flock to the accommodating schools as much as possible, creating a higher concentration of those in need of accommodation? And can or should an AO make an assumption that a particular school is full of abusers, rather than a certain school is known locally for being accommodating of students with learning differentiation needs?
Wouldnât a school that accommodates a high number of students with LDâs note doing so as part of the school profile?
Even if they do not, I imagine such a school would have a different school profile than a private school that serves an affluent student body but which also shows a similar rate of accommodations. I could be wrong about this but I donât think the two schools would look the same on paper, indicating the private school may be offering more accommodations than warranted. Still I do think the solution to this situation is to allow everyone the maximum time that would be allowed in case a student may in fact have an undiagnosed or misdiagnosed LD.
Do they? I am not sure.
I donât know. It is often private schools that do offer more robust accommodations, making them attractive options for parents of students with learning disabilities. This might include wealthy families who can afford to pay for an appropriate education for their child with LD, rather than leaving them at the mercy of an underfunded and overcrowded public school. Or this might include a less wealthy family who gets a scholarship/financial aid to attend a private school with the appropriate accommodations. Yes, it might look potentially âsuspiciousâ if a wealthy private school has a lot of accommodations. But is it fair for an AO to make assumptions like that when there are alternative possible explanations?
I also think this may be the most fair option. But I am sure there are many who would disagree and defend the skill of quick thinking and problem-solving being an important part of what is being tested.
They would be wrong, since speed-thinking is not part of the vast majority of careers that require serious intellectual effort. This is especially true now that calculations are done by computers, so the need for people who can perform arithmetic really quickly no longer exists.
âOK, Carla, we need you to figure out how to best increase the weight-bearing capacity of this bridge. You have two hours starting⊠NOW!â
I donât think the AO should be making that assumption but a school in such a situation could offer those alternative explanations as part of the school profile. Still though, I do not think flagging a school for having higher than expected accommodations would really address this issue as it seems the only outcome in doing so would be to penalize the students from the school during the admissions process though some of these students may not have even been given an accommodation and/or may be one of the students with a legitimate LD. I also think that flagging students for having an accommodations would likely be a HIPAA violation plus some schools might be less likely to accept the student that required accommodations - not sure that would be the case but itâs a possibility.
Yes, and I wonder to what degree they do. It is possible that they do this already. I am just not very familiar with school profiles (other than the one my daughterâs school produces).
I agree with you. I am, in general, skeptical of standardized tests, in part because of this very issue.
I canât speak for all school profiles but our kidâs private did not provide any data on this on the College Profile. I have no idea how many kids had accommodations, but I know from other parentsâboth at our private school and other area privatesâthat kids and parents took advantage of the loop hole. I donât think a college would know because in fact, these kids are strong and highly-capable students. I donât think the extra time is the difference between an 1100 and a 1500, but it might be the difference between a 1450 and 1500. So basically, they likely would have done well in any case, just not as well. And kids and parents want those extra 20-50 points, so they pay the $5K for testing and get the accommodation.
In the type of school you describe, I do not think the school profile would be explanatory for a high accommodation rate ie. it would not for example state something like the schoolâs mission is to serve the needs of the local neuro-divergent student population. If schools were expected to report the percent of students with an accommodation and a school with a mission like the above has a slightly higher rate of accommodations than a suburban affluent private school, the latter would probably appear as the âabusers of the systemâ while the former would not. However, I do not think it would be fair for all students at the school to be penalized for the actions of some as there will be students at the school who donât have an accommodation and others who have a legitimate LD even if there are some students who are gaming the system. This is why it seems most fair to just have every student have the maximum time allowed since there would be no more gaming the system but this solution would also accommodate those students with undiagnosed or misdiagnosed LDâs.
âSpeed thinkingâ doesnât have to mean doing complex calculations in your head (and standardized tests are not complex calculations comparable to designing a bridge). It means assimilating information quickly and being able to make a logical and thoughtful response. If you can look at A, B, C and X and immediately see that X doesnât seem right, and can speak up in a meeting, then your career is likely to be more successful than if whenever you are asked âwhat-ifâ questions by your bosses you say âIâll come back to you on thatâ.
Thatâs why we have a negative reaction when we see a CEO or a politician crumble in an interview and we like politicians, executives or even comedians who can come up with a quick, thoughtful or witty response.
âSpeed thinkingâ is in many ways similar to FSIQ: a combination of Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Reasoning, Working Memory, and Processing Speed.
The English/reading section of standardized tests can be a better measure of this than the math section (especially ACT which is more about speed than the SAT), although its always better if you get your numbers right in these sorts of exchanges.
Itâs difficult for me to think of an intellectual profession that does not require and reward thinking at speed.
Surgeon - physician - Quick, on-the-spot planning and problem-solving decisions are intrinsic to performance of the job. There are good and bad surgeons who are fast. There are few good surgeons who are slow - or so the saying goes.
Non-surgeon physician - Evaluating, treating and deciding on the correct clinical course for 30 or more patients in a day where the actual decision points are measured in seconds and not minutes during highly fact-driven and intellectual discussion with patients and families requiring synthesis with a fund of knowledge.
Trial attorney - quick processing of opponentâs arguments and claims, formulating objections and counterarguments that are germane to the Court or opposing counselâs points.
Non-Trial attorney - charges by the billable hour. Speed of work directly impacts client billing and relationships, firm profitability. Ability to issue spot, proof documents, make changes, assess the liability consequences of wording changes require legal expertise applied under strict deal deadlines.
Investment banker - success requires absorption and synthesis of massive amounts of data. Hours already stretch to 80+ hours per week even with efficiency of effort.
Research scientist - Plenty of time to think in between projects, needs to be able to process, participate and lead lab meetings, presentations and collaborations that require on-the-spot processing of new results and information and the ability to incorporate those data into existing knowledge.
Musical performance - months of practice and study culminate in performances where split-second decisions regarding phrasing, interpretation and how to handle the occasional âoopsâ is implicit in the joy and interactive aspect of what makes every performance unique.
I think a more accurate statement would be that most highly intellectual jobs require thought that doesnât need calculations of the type computers can at this point readily do - pending the rise of AI.
Thatâs a pretty narrow field of professions, but even if we accept that list, are we really testing high school juniors on whether they would be quick-thinking enough to perform surgery 15 years (and a ton of addition training) hence? I donât personally buy that argument at all.
Interesting, I donât think of most of the professions that you listed (besides research scientists) as particularly intellectual --I mean sure, I think that people need to be intelligent to succeed at all of those professions, but they are not what comes to mind when I think of intellectual work. Instead, I tend to think of writers, professors, researchers/scholars of any sort not just scientists, curators, psychologists or psychotherapists, designers (of any sort), pundits, public and foreign policy experts and so forth.
Anyway, regardless of whether a career is intellectual or not, I think the bigger question is whether quick-thinking is needed for most careers. In general, I think being a quick thinker is helpful in many settings though some of the smartest people whom I know are deep but quite slow thinkers, and they have found professions that suit them.
And I know some quick-thinking and seemingly smart individuals that are so enamored with their first thought or opinion on any matter that they donât seem to slow down to consider other alternatives. There may even be certain careers for which slow precision is more valuable than speed. Can speed be a detriment in some âintellectualâ careers? Maybe those in which you have to be able to build trust with others? Or some careers in the visual and performing arts?
Maybe more to the point, most high school juniors and seniors donât score 1500+ or 1400 or even 1200 on the SAT. I just donât think that all of those people with âlowerâ SAT scores are unable succeed in any of the careers that I listed or most of the ones that you listed. In fact, I know several doctors whom I am sure did not have top scores in high school --they just had more grit and willingness to grind than most people.
But in general I have not observed that folks with low SAT scores ended up in âslowâ professions whatever that means or failing at their profession of choice.
So we should readminister the SAT when everyone is 30? Itâs a snapshot of where students are at the moment - college application.
I was replying to the idea that the SATâs time component is not a relevant life skill. To the extent that the vast vast vast majority of students especially at schools where top SAT scores are expected are aiming for the listed professions, I donât see how the testâs time factor is so irrelevant.
Whether a romance novelist or a neurosurgeon or judge is more intellectual is not really a conversation leading very far.
No, we should provide adequate time for every student to do their best and test for knowledge rather than speed, which is less relevant and less predictive of college preparation
Yeah, I think we are all shaped by our own ambitions and the people who surround us. So what one person considers obvious and common sense (the idea that most high scoring students are interested in those professions), another might find a completely foreign notion. It certainly is not a connection that I ever considered before reading threads on CC. I went to a college filled with high scoring students, and I actually did not know a single person who was remotely interested in being an attorney or investment banker (or a professional musician for that matter). At least no one had those ambitions when they entered as freshmen though some ended up in those careers later. I did know some people who were set on medical school from the very beginning.
My two oldest daughters are currently at similar schools that are filled with folks who aced the SAT. One does report being surrounded by wanna-be investment bankers, lawyers, and management consultants. She is a little disappointed with the narrowness of her classmatesâ ambitions. The other daughter reports being surrounded by friends planning careers in engineering and hard science research, but it does not seem like she has friends interested in banking or law at least not yet. She says no one is interested in the humanities at all. Maybe it is a generational change, and todayâs young people are more focused on career goals at an earlier age than when I was a college student. Or maybe it is just the difference in our friendship circles/social lives.
Whether a romance novelist or a neurosurgeon or judge is more intellectual is not really a conversation leading very far.
I find the above question fascinating as well as the question of the relationship between SAT scores and career choices, but Iâm weird that way. Iâd like to pretend my interest in these questions is intellectual, but alas it is probably just weirdness. Iâm also interested in the connection between speed and careers. But I do realize that my interest is probably off topic to this thread so Iâll let it go.
In the same light, I guess we should rate restaurants as to ambiance only and not as to service or promptness. In the real world that I see, most tasks need to be done on point, on time.
SAT testmakers are deliberately making time an issue, and for all those students with the same amount of time provided, time will distinguish one student from another. And it is appropriate to nudge students with time pressure. Life involves time pressure, and even novelists have deadlines.
A student who can work quickly and accurately will get one score. A student who works more slowly for any of a number of reasons including weaker knowledge of the subject will get a lower score. IQ tests are timed, and time to completion is also sometimes a factor in IQ testing because speed is in fact relevant to cognitive testing. Or so generations of psychologists and cognitive psychiatrists believe.
Time is an independent factor for success in most professions. Slow surgeons have patients with more infections, Slow plumbers can accomodate fewer jobs, Slow academics can read and write less. In the context of deadlines, âgetting itâ early gives a scholar more not less time do the kind of deep reflection that some here point out as the opposite of speed. Sure, anyone can introduce additional factors, but how does that change the fact that the ability to accurately absorb and synthesize knowledge quickly is an important skill? And how does that question get us to comparing poets with judges? In a recent poll, more than 50% of students at one of the top 3 most selective colleges in the country were interested in a career in investment banking. Anecdote aside, thatâs one number.
For someone with a legitimate learning disability, it can be the difference between 1100 and 1500. For someone who doesnât have a legitimate learning disability, but scammed their way to extra time, that it is likely the difference between 1450 and 1500.
Moreâs the pity. Seems to me that is a very good reason for weeding out students who get high scores on the SAT.
Quick thinking (particularly in terms of being able to rapidly assimilate and process information) can be very important in the performing arts. Watch shows like âSo you think you can dance?â. D has seen plenty of talented ballet dancers fail out because they arenât smart enough to quickly pick up choreography.