I have raised two kids who were diagnosed with issues that would be considered "neurodivergent", a term that arose from advocacy in the 90's but wasn't in the mainstream until well into their adulthood. That umbrella term was fairly large and encompassing then and is even more so today. There's even been a push to add personality disorders like BPD and psychopathy as "aquired neurodivergence" and even recognition of an intersection of gender dysphoria and neurodivergence. I sought help for my children from their doctors, the school systems and counselors and by and large appreciated the help we received.
I reckon much like any other programs designed to assist those with a need, that while most folks getting the help actually need it, there is always going to be those who don't but would abuse such programs.
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"
Seems to me this is school admission problem if a school wants the most qualified students. Last I heard test scores aren’t the be-all and end-all.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.
Other schools have the opportunity to admit higher quality students, especially in terms of ethical standards and honesty.
IU Bton benefited greatly in the 50s and 60s by hiring Harvard-quality professors the Ivy League discriminated against hiring.
Looking at that video and his ability to hold a gun and shoot it, the guy he shot must’ve really been out of it because I’d have been all over him before he put two bullets in my head.
It is. And I'm not even arguing that a school shouldn't take autism, etc. into account (on the plus side) or that such neurological issues make one a worse student, candidate, etc. I'm just saying that one portion of the consideration is the standardized test. That test included a timed component that is designed that way. Giving kids extra time (especially for what appears to be sketchy diagnoses) defeats the purpose of that one portion that schools do (and should) consider. Now, if NDs want to argue that for them, standardized tests don't show the whole picture, go for it. That's what the essays are for.Seems to me this is school admission problem if a school wants the most qualified students. Last I heard test scores aren’t the be-all and end-all.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.Other schools have the opportunity to admit higher quality students, especially in terms of ethical standards and honesty.
IU Bton benefited greatly in the 50s and 60s by hiring Harvard-quality professors the Ivy League discriminated against hiring.
Test scores have made a big come back, by the way. They are very important to both admissions and scholarship money.
Last I heard test scores aren’t the be-all and end-all.
That's correct. In fact the trend for decades was to deemphasize test scores, making them optional or even not considered at all (which is still true for the California state schools). Almost all Ivys at one point made test scores optional, but in recent years one by one they again became a required part of the admissions package. But they still aren't everything. You get perfect SAT scores and you still might not get into Harvard, Stanford, Caltech, MIT, etc. because they look at GPA, activities, community service, essays, past success of students from that high school, etc. Meanwhile, schools have been largely forced to drop any analysis or impact of racial or cultural diversity.
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
I firmly agree with you and goat on this. Standards are standards. Period. Giving anyone extra time basically defeats the purpose of the test, which is a tool that is designed to help admissions personnel.It is. And I'm not even arguing that a school shouldn't take autism, etc. into account (on the plus side) or that such neurological issues make one a worse student, candidate, etc. I'm just saying that one portion of the consideration is the standardized test. That test included a timed component that is designed that way. Giving kids extra time (especially for what appears to be sketchy diagnoses) defeats the purpose of that one portion that schools do (and should) consider. Now, if NDs want to argue that for them, standardized tests don't show the whole picture, go for it. That's what the essays are for.Seems to me this is school admission problem if a school wants the most qualified students. Last I heard test scores aren’t the be-all and end-all.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.Other schools have the opportunity to admit higher quality students, especially in terms of ethical standards and honesty.
IU Bton benefited greatly in the 50s and 60s by hiring Harvard-quality professors the Ivy League discriminated against hiring.
Test scores have made a big come back, by the way. They are very important to both admissions and scholarship money.
If schools really care about attracting so-called NDs, then they simply need to develop procedures to qualify them.
As things stand now, and probably will into the future, the schools have a tool for investigating the honesty of being incoming students. Some schools, like Kelly’s, like dishonest students, judging from my experience. (Sue me.)
The varsity blues scandal didn't involve neurodivergent children. It was a pay to play scheme to put it simply. One that is still happening. Having a child fake a mental disorder would be a whole new low. I'm sure it happens, I'm not disputing that. I'm pushing back on how prevalent you think it's happening in that way. The overwhelming majority of misdiagnosis are due to parental ignorance and lazy doctors. Both not knowing what to do because literally every case is different and unique. We're talking about the brain.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.
Every kid gets an individual IEP plan based on what other people think is best and would work for them. They don't get blanket help with everything just because they are diagnosed ADHD or Autistic. They get help only in the areas they are deemed behind or disabled. I don't believe that creates an unfair advantage and I don't think you really believe that either. If you do, it only means you have no or very little experience with ADHD or Autistic children. Those kids don't want to have to get extra help. To have to go the the special Ed room every day. Answer those questions from their peers. They would give anything and everything to be "normal".
Again, are some parents really that demented to pull a scam like this? Absolutely. But I think the bigger cause of the numbers you posted are because antiquated systems. They are better than ever but still antiquated...
standards change. Every school system in the country has now adopted measures to help ND children. That makes it...the standard.I firmly agree with you and goat on this. Standards are standards. Period. Giving anyone extra time basically defeats the purpose of the test, which is a tool that is designed to help admissions personnel.It is. And I'm not even arguing that a school shouldn't take autism, etc. into account (on the plus side) or that such neurological issues make one a worse student, candidate, etc. I'm just saying that one portion of the consideration is the standardized test. That test included a timed component that is designed that way. Giving kids extra time (especially for what appears to be sketchy diagnoses) defeats the purpose of that one portion that schools do (and should) consider. Now, if NDs want to argue that for them, standardized tests don't show the whole picture, go for it. That's what the essays are for.Seems to me this is school admission problem if a school wants the most qualified students. Last I heard test scores aren’t the be-all and end-all.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.Other schools have the opportunity to admit higher quality students, especially in terms of ethical standards and honesty.
IU Bton benefited greatly in the 50s and 60s by hiring Harvard-quality professors the Ivy League discriminated against hiring.
Test scores have made a big come back, by the way. They are very important to both admissions and scholarship money.
If schools really care about attracting so-called NDs, then they simply need to develop procedures to qualify them.
As things stand now, and probably will into the future, the schools have a tool for investigating the honesty of being incoming students. Some schools, like Kelly’s, like dishonest students, judging from my experience. (Sue me.)
Over prescribing drugs to children(really to everyone) is one of the biggest problems in our society. I agree wholeheartedly that is a problem. Its ignorant parents just searching for answers and lazy doctors. We need better tools to help parents advocate properly for there kids and more specialized doctors/psychiatrist.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
A lot of doctors and pharma companies got in trouble because of the opioid epidemic. Same thing needs to be investigated for stimulants.
I have raised two kids who were diagnosed with issues that would be considered "neurodivergent", a term that arose from advocacy in the 90's but wasn't in the mainstream until well into their adulthood. That umbrella term was fairly large and encompassing then and is even more so today. There's even been a push to add personality disorders like BPD and psychopathy as "aquired neurodivergence" and even recognition of an intersection of gender dysphoria and neurodivergence. I sought help for my children from their doctors, the school systems and counselors and by and large appreciated the help we received.
I reckon much like any other programs designed to assist those with a need, that while most folks getting the help actually need it, there is always going to be those who don't but would abuse such programs.
My youngest is on the learning spectrum and has been getting help since 1st grade. Our school system has been nothing but great with her... we just had a conference with her advisor last week.
What takes normal kids 30 minutes (a reading and writing assignment), it takes her close to 2 hours by herself. If she has someone that can explain the question to her, she's much faster. Math, no problem for her, she's doing just fine. But reading and understanding what she reads, it's been a real struggle.
Bad apples ruin it for the kids that actually need the help. Five more years of grads school after this one. Can't come soon enough.
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.
The varsity blues scandal was a pay to play thing... how is that the same as kids needing extra time for tests?
This. I get very defensive about this subject because I feel the rhetoric can get very dangerous. Like blowing up food stamp programs because a few people take advantage of the system. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Blowing up the entire system rarely is the answer. Targeting and possibly prosecuting the bad actors while improving the systems for those who need them is the answer.I have raised two kids who were diagnosed with issues that would be considered "neurodivergent", a term that arose from advocacy in the 90's but wasn't in the mainstream until well into their adulthood. That umbrella term was fairly large and encompassing then and is even more so today. There's even been a push to add personality disorders like BPD and psychopathy as "aquired neurodivergence" and even recognition of an intersection of gender dysphoria and neurodivergence. I sought help for my children from their doctors, the school systems and counselors and by and large appreciated the help we received.
I reckon much like any other programs designed to assist those with a need, that while most folks getting the help actually need it, there is always going to be those who don't but would abuse such programs.
I know Brad wasn't saying to blow up the system. But some less empathetic types may read his data a say that.
Read the article and posts. Both are examples of parents spending money to get their kids an unfair advantage to get into elite schools or qualify for scholarship money.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.
The varsity blues scandal was a pay to play thing... how is that the same as kids needing extra time for tests?
ADHD diagnoses and 504 plans to obtain extra time on the SAT and ACT, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis. Affluent districts report much higher accommodation rates, as wealthy families leverage private doctors to document learning disabilities, offering an advantage in high-stakes testing.
- Growing Disparity: The rate of extra time granted to students in wealthy school districts is significantly higher than that in low-income districts.
- Easy Approval: Since 2017, the College Board automatically approves accommodations if they are already in place at school (e.g., an IEP or 504 plan).
- The Process: Families with resources can pay for private psychologists to conduct evaluations that yield specific diagnoses.
- Beyond ADHD: The rise also covers anxiety and depression diagnoses, which are used to justify extra time.
https://nypost.com/2024/03/27/us-news/private-school-students-get-fake-adhd-diagnoses-boost-sat/
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-university-student-accommodation/684946/
1. Educational standards are one thing. You say they’ve changed. Great!
Entrance exam standards have nothing to do with teaching standards. Their purpose is to assist college admissions personnel.
2. The SAT test is a SPEED TEST. Take time out of the equation and it’s providing admissions personnel with qualitatively different information.
3. For years highly motivated students have been acquiring by whatever means Adderall and other types of “speed” to increase their ability to study intensely and for long periods of time. The OP highlights an additional factor being used by highly competitive families. This is no indictment on medical diagnosis of ND. It’s unrelated.