That's extremely short sighted and it's unfortunate that you feel that way. Some of the smartest and most accomplished people in human history were/are ND(neurodivergent) and needed help along the way.This is what buying a test score looks like.D.C. students with “special accommodations” were outscoring standard test takers by 50+ points on the SAT verbal. Not keeping up. Outscoring.This isn’t a coincidence. Students at wealthy high schools are more than twice as likely to qualify for extra time as students at poor schools. And since Varsity Blues, there’s been a boom in parents turning to compliant doctors to diagnose their kids with conditions they don’t actually have, purely to get extra time on the SAT.The students who genuinely need accommodations deserve every minute. But when wealth is the primary predictor of who gets flagged, we’re not talking about disability access anymore. We’re talking about a $300/hr psychologist and knowing the right people at the right cocktail party.And the lying is only getting worse. 38% of Stanford undergrads are now registered as having a disability. Stanford admits students in the 99th percentile. The idea that more than a third of them have a legitimate learning disability is absurd on its face. A Stanford professor on the university’s own disability task force has already started asking what happens when it hits 50 or 60%.Here’s the thing nobody wants to say out loud: getting into Harvard means nothing if you cheated to get there. You didn’t beat the process. You bought your way around it. And somewhere deep down, you’ll always know that.The Ivy League acceptance letter on your wall won’t change that feeling, and neither will the degree.I'm for accessibility as much as the next guy, but what's the point of an entrance exam if some kids get extra time? If you have a disability, that's tragic, but if it means you don't qualify for Harvard, well then, them's the breaks.
Then give them help. But don't disadvantage others to do it. Especially if, as seems likely here, most of the diagnoses are bullshit.
I miss the good old days when the only cheating someone diagnosed with a neuro-divergent condition did was at cards in a movie...
A good friend will bail you out of jail, but your best friend will be sitting next to you in the cell saying "that was f***ing awesome"
For sure but it's such a fine line. You'd hate to deny someone help who truly needs because of some stringent and arbitrary guideline.It may be because the autism and ADHD spectrums are much wider these days.
I have some very unpopular opinions about this. I'm probably just getting old. And crusty.
I think the lines on the edges of the spectrums (there are so many) are getting really blurry and undefined. Which benefits those with more serious problems not a whit.
Maybe we should get back to saying NO more often in society.
The widening of the spectrum was needed and the blurred edges are valid. No one fits into a perfect box for anything. But figuring out proper care and help for individuals needs to be a priority. We are smart enough and know enough about ND issues now to figure out proper treatment plans. And do it efficiently.
90% of the people on stimulants don’t Need them…they or their parents Want them.
Same numbers qualify for people with “Medicare Disability”…only about 10% are truly disabled
where are you getting those numbers? Also that's not really what we are talking about but ok.For sure but it's such a fine line. You'd hate to deny someone help who truly needs because of some stringent and arbitrary guideline.It may be because the autism and ADHD spectrums are much wider these days.
I have some very unpopular opinions about this. I'm probably just getting old. And crusty.
I think the lines on the edges of the spectrums (there are so many) are getting really blurry and undefined. Which benefits those with more serious problems not a whit.
Maybe we should get back to saying NO more often in society.
The widening of the spectrum was needed and the blurred edges are valid. No one fits into a perfect box for anything. But figuring out proper care and help for individuals needs to be a priority. We are smart enough and know enough about ND issues now to figure out proper treatment plans. And do it efficiently.
90% of the people on stimulants don’t Need them…they or their parents Want them.
Same numbers qualify for people with “Medicare Disability”…only about 10% are truly disabled
how is helping a dyslexic kid read the questions to a test putting anyone else at a disadvantage?That's extremely short sighted and it's unfortunate that you feel that way. Some of the smartest and most accomplished people in human history were/are ND(neurodivergent) and needed help along the way.This is what buying a test score looks like.D.C. students with “special accommodations” were outscoring standard test takers by 50+ points on the SAT verbal. Not keeping up. Outscoring.This isn’t a coincidence. Students at wealthy high schools are more than twice as likely to qualify for extra time as students at poor schools. And since Varsity Blues, there’s been a boom in parents turning to compliant doctors to diagnose their kids with conditions they don’t actually have, purely to get extra time on the SAT.The students who genuinely need accommodations deserve every minute. But when wealth is the primary predictor of who gets flagged, we’re not talking about disability access anymore. We’re talking about a $300/hr psychologist and knowing the right people at the right cocktail party.And the lying is only getting worse. 38% of Stanford undergrads are now registered as having a disability. Stanford admits students in the 99th percentile. The idea that more than a third of them have a legitimate learning disability is absurd on its face. A Stanford professor on the university’s own disability task force has already started asking what happens when it hits 50 or 60%.Here’s the thing nobody wants to say out loud: getting into Harvard means nothing if you cheated to get there. You didn’t beat the process. You bought your way around it. And somewhere deep down, you’ll always know that.The Ivy League acceptance letter on your wall won’t change that feeling, and neither will the degree.I'm for accessibility as much as the next guy, but what's the point of an entrance exam if some kids get extra time? If you have a disability, that's tragic, but if it means you don't qualify for Harvard, well then, them's the breaks.
Then give them help. But don't disadvantage others to do it. Especially if, as seems likely here, most of the diagnoses are bullshit.
Also "most". A lot for sure. Too many for certain. But "most"? Not so sure. The IEP process alone would weed out a lot of bad faith actors. Not all but most.
how is helping a dyslexic kid read the questions to a test putting anyone else at a disadvantage?
We're talking about standardized tests. They are only standardized if everyone takes them under the same conditions. If you give me three hours to take it, but give someone else five hours to take it, comparing our scores becomes meaningless. It doesn't matter why you want to give them two extra hours. Maybe it's a good reason. But by doing so, it's no longer standardized. We are effectively taking two different tests.
Dyslexia is a neurodivergent condition. Do you think kids who are dyslexic should get extra time and help at reading questions for a test? I certainly do. The autistic kid who excels at math?... Certainly not less time. But what help they receive is entirely dependent on the kid. They could be genius level at the numbers and equations portions of math but again dyslexic. So they would need help with things like story problems. They could be completely fine doing any math and receive no help. They are struggling somewhere else. Their individual IEP evaluations are supposed to root out the issues and create an education/therapy plan to tackle them.Why do “ND issues” mean extra time on a STANDARDized test? Should we provide less time to autistic kids to do math sections if their autism provides a higher math ability?For sure but it's such a fine line. You'd hate to deny someone help who truly needs because of some stringent and arbitrary guideline.It may be because the autism and ADHD spectrums are much wider these days.
I have some very unpopular opinions about this. I'm probably just getting old. And crusty.
I think the lines on the edges of the spectrums (there are so many) are getting really blurry and undefined. Which benefits those with more serious problems not a whit.
Maybe we should get back to saying NO more often in society.
The widening of the spectrum was needed and the blurred edges are valid. No one fits into a perfect box for anything. But figuring out proper care and help for individuals needs to be a priority. We are smart enough and know enough about ND issues now to figure out proper treatment plans. And do it efficiently.
Also the % of college kids today that have been diagnosed with a ND condition is around 21%. The US as a whole it's also around 20%.
Also the % of college kids today that have been diagnosed with a ND condition is around 21%. The US as a whole it's also around 20%.
I dunno, seems to me if 20% of Americans are neurodivergent, what we really need is to firm up the definition of neurodivergent. Because that's an awfully big number of people to be classifying as some kind of outlier.
who cares? The time is arbitrary. Standardized also doesn't mean set in stone.how is helping a dyslexic kid read the questions to a test putting anyone else at a disadvantage?
We're talking about standardized tests. They are only standardized if everyone takes them under the same conditions. If you give me three hours to take it, but give someone else five hours to take it, comparing our scores becomes meaningless. It doesn't matter why you want to give them two extra hours. Maybe it's a good reason. But by doing so, it's no longer standardized. We are effectively taking two different tests.
Look up countries with the the best education rates in the world. Then look up countries with the best education and care for neurodivergent children.
who cares? The time is arbitrary. Standardized also doesn't mean set in stone.how is helping a dyslexic kid read the questions to a test putting anyone else at a disadvantage?
We're talking about standardized tests. They are only standardized if everyone takes them under the same conditions. If you give me three hours to take it, but give someone else five hours to take it, comparing our scores becomes meaningless. It doesn't matter why you want to give them two extra hours. Maybe it's a good reason. But by doing so, it's no longer standardized. We are effectively taking two different tests.
Look up countries with the the best education rates in the world. Then look up countries with the best education and care for neurodivergent children.
Standardized means everyone takes the same test. Time is, in fact, arbitrary. You're right there. But if it's not the same time for everyone, then it's no longer standardized.
you can't have too rigid definitions when talking about the brain. But I think the definitions grossly out dated. The processes and evaluations need to be updated. And I do think stimulants should be avoided unless necessary. They are abused by a lot of people. To the people that do need them they are a godsend. Parental education on what to advocate for severely lacking. Id say most misdiagnosis are not something nefarious but more ignorance. The parents don't know how explain what's happening because it's so uniquely different for everyone. So they don't get the proper plan.Also the % of college kids today that have been diagnosed with a ND condition is around 21%. The US as a whole it's also around 20%.
I dunno, seems to me if 20% of Americans are neurodivergent, what we really need is to firm up the definition of neurodivergent. Because that's an awfully big number of people to be classifying as some kind of outlier.
again, who cares? The answers are the answers. No one is given the answers.who cares? The time is arbitrary. Standardized also doesn't mean set in stone.how is helping a dyslexic kid read the questions to a test putting anyone else at a disadvantage?
We're talking about standardized tests. They are only standardized if everyone takes them under the same conditions. If you give me three hours to take it, but give someone else five hours to take it, comparing our scores becomes meaningless. It doesn't matter why you want to give them two extra hours. Maybe it's a good reason. But by doing so, it's no longer standardized. We are effectively taking two different tests.
Look up countries with the the best education rates in the world. Then look up countries with the best education and care for neurodivergent children.
Standardized means everyone takes the same test. Time is, in fact, arbitrary. You're right there. But if it's not the same time for everyone, then it's no longer standardized.
again, who cares? The answers are the answers. No one is given the answers.
"Hey, boss, I finished that project you assigned me. Why do you care how long it took?"
where are you getting those numbers? Also that's not really what we are talking about but ok.For sure but it's such a fine line. You'd hate to deny someone help who truly needs because of some stringent and arbitrary guideline.It may be because the autism and ADHD spectrums are much wider these days.
I have some very unpopular opinions about this. I'm probably just getting old. And crusty.
I think the lines on the edges of the spectrums (there are so many) are getting really blurry and undefined. Which benefits those with more serious problems not a whit.
Maybe we should get back to saying NO more often in society.
The widening of the spectrum was needed and the blurred edges are valid. No one fits into a perfect box for anything. But figuring out proper care and help for individuals needs to be a priority. We are smart enough and know enough about ND issues now to figure out proper treatment plans. And do it efficiently.
90% of the people on stimulants don’t Need them…they or their parents Want them.
Same numbers qualify for people with “Medicare Disability”…only about 10% are truly disabled
Hands on experience from selling meds to the parents and individuals for the last 30 years. The change over that time period has been drastic to say the least…and for most…not in a positive way
The reason for the post is that rich (or super "driven") parents are cheating the system. You seem to be disputing this and I'm not sure why. The Varsity Blues scandal was just the tip of the iceberg.Dyslexia is a neurodivergent condition. Do you think kids who are dyslexic should get extra time and help at reading questions for a test? I certainly do. The autistic kid who excels at math?... Certainly not less time. But what help they receive is entirely dependent on the kid. They could be genius level at the numbers and equations portions of math but again dyslexic. So they would need help with things like story problems. They could be completely fine doing any math and receive no help. They are struggling somewhere else. Their individual IEP evaluations are supposed to root out the issues and create an education/therapy plan to tackle them.Why do “ND issues” mean extra time on a STANDARDized test? Should we provide less time to autistic kids to do math sections if their autism provides a higher math ability?For sure but it's such a fine line. You'd hate to deny someone help who truly needs because of some stringent and arbitrary guideline.It may be because the autism and ADHD spectrums are much wider these days.
I have some very unpopular opinions about this. I'm probably just getting old. And crusty.
I think the lines on the edges of the spectrums (there are so many) are getting really blurry and undefined. Which benefits those with more serious problems not a whit.
Maybe we should get back to saying NO more often in society.
The widening of the spectrum was needed and the blurred edges are valid. No one fits into a perfect box for anything. But figuring out proper care and help for individuals needs to be a priority. We are smart enough and know enough about ND issues now to figure out proper treatment plans. And do it efficiently.
Also the % of college kids today that have been diagnosed with a ND condition is around 21%. The US as a whole it's also around 20%.
For people that we'd all agree meet the term "neurodivergent," your main focus, I think it's a bit of a different discussion. But I think you're glossing over the word "standardized" in standardized test, not to mention creating what seems to be an unfair advantage in the college admissions process if only the limitations of the condition are addressed, and not the benefits. And that's not just on the test. The essay will allow these kids to describe their conditions, their struggles, etc. and will probably give them a leg up there, too.
I think you also might be making a value judgment about which NDs get help, are deserving of admits to elite colleges or who can afford to go to certain other colleges (stand. test scores drive a lot of scholarship money). Schizophrenia, psychopathy, and increasing pedophilia are also considered "neurodivergent." Schizophrenics and psychotics usually take strong meds that slow down their thinking, affect memory, and cause sedation.