According to the Wall Street Journal*, one in three students at Newton North is eligible for extra time to take the SATs. The WSJ looked at the percentage of students who are eligible for extra time allowance because of their IEP (Individualized Education Plan) or 504 designations. This is a much higher percentage than at lower-income high schools. You can read a summary of the story in this report from Commonwealth Magazine.
The Journal quotes School Superintendent David Fleishman saying,
“Do I think that more than 30% of our students have a disability? No. We have a history of over-identification [as learning-challenged] that is certainly an issue in the district.”
It goes on to say:
In Newton North, the school near Boston where about a third of students are eligible for extra time on college entrance exams, Dr. Fleishman, the superintendent, said virtually every time a student sees a private counselor for evaluation, he or she leaves with a recommendation for a special accommodation. Dr. Fleishman said Newton is working to reduce the number of students who get these.
The article doesn’t break down the percentage of students in Newton on 504 plans specifically but nationally, the average among wealthy school districts is 4.2 percent, compared to 1.6 percent at low-income schools.
Many of us were disturbed by the stories about rich parents buying college acceptance for their children. The WSJ article and Superintendent Fleishman’s statements insinuate that, here in Newton, we are allowing parents to buy special accommodations to give their children an edge. Is this an accurate depiction? I’d love to see comments from School Committee members here.
*You need a subscription to get behind the Wall Street Journal’s paywall.
Does it say what the percentage is at South? I expect there’s a differential between the schools, having known people who transferred their kids with special needs to North for the less high-pressure and more accepting environment there.
@Meredith: The article didn’t mention South.
Some students use extra time to function from elementary school through high school. Getting an IEP is NOT easy in Newton and advocating to NPS that your child needs services because he or she is not accessing the curriculum due to a diagnosed disability is difficult and time consuming. A child that has dyslexia needs that extra processing time. That child spends more time on homework and reports and tests than a typical student. Have you witnessed the pain and agony of a dyslexic child trying to slug through daily homework? Have you seen a child with tracking issues suffer through daily math homework? These struggles are real and happen in every classroom every day.
IMHO there is a small percentage of parents who rig the system but the majority of kids who have IEPs need them for documented needs. It takes months and months of parents asking for testing to get NPS to test. Meanwhile kids are not accessing the curriculum.
Please be respectful and not label every IEP student privileged. They are not and many times it takes them 50-75% more time on any assignment, report or test than you think. These students struggle every day and are learning to live with this disability for life! Hard for teens to imagine that they are going to take 50% more time to complete an assignment which means less time for something else. SPED parents are trying to have their children succeed when there is already a roadblock. Please show compassion.
The time and energy that parents spend getting an IEP and then enforcing an IEP is time consuming. I’ll give you a small example. . . . my then first grader was eligible for OT. Would you believe the OT was out on medical leave for three months and there was NO communication from the school (SPED or regular ed). The teacher told me it wasn’t her responsibility since the OT was a SPED department. My kid didn’t receive his weekly OT services for THREE MONTHS. I was told they would make it up when I finally emailed the SPED HEAD at the time. Sure, he could make it up in July and August on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 11 AM. When I said I worked full time and he was in camp, I was told it wasn’t their problem. I didn’t have the funds to pay for a private OT. I fought for as long as I could. But SPED parents spend hours helping their students and advocating. My kid NEEDED OT for fine motor skill building.
Sure, there are some bad apples, but not all IEP kids are rich.
The Superintendant’s words, as well as common sense, tell us that there has been systematic foul play at Newton North. Are we to believe that the school did not notice this sooner? It is an affront to students who are truly disabled, and to all the others who play by the rules. For that reason, this is no less appalling to me than the college admissions scandal currently before the Federal court in Boston. There ought to be an investigation.
We pay such high taxes to ensure Newton schools are among the best in the state… come to find out nearly one-third of our student body has learning disabilities? If that’s to be believed at face value, it would be mind boggling…
Per Fleischman: “virtually every time a student sees a **private counselor** for evaluation, he or she leaves with a recommendation for a special accommodation”
As a parent of a NPS middle schooler who has been on a 504 plan (which, yes, gives him extra time on standardized tests) since second grade, I find this particular comment interesting. My son was placed on his 504 after an evaluation performed *by the district,* at the recommendation of his teacher, not by a “private” evaluator (which, by the way, we could not have afforded at the time).
My understanding is that, if the district does not think that a private evaluation is accurate, they are entitled to have their own evaluation performed before rubber-stamping accommodations that are suggested by a “private” evaluator. It seems perhaps that the district is not doing this as often as they should — especially as recent news events have made it obvious that a “private” evaluation system is vulnerable to abuse.
Timed tests are a poor way to assess a student’s ability. We were told that one of my sons did not qualify for an honors level math course because he couldn’t complete the tests fast enough. He could do the higher level thinking and work, mind you, but couldn’t complete the test in 55 minutes. The school’s solution was for him to move to a less challenging math class.
If the school had been reasonable in its approach to students with minor learning differences, we wouldn’t have considered having him tested.
We had him tested, he continued in higher level math classes throughout high school, and minored in math in college.
The problem was a result of trying to fit perfectly bright and capable square peg into a rigid round hole. Don’t blame the student or the parent for that – take a hard look at what we value in students and how we assess ability. Frankly, there’s been no other part of his life since high school where he has either not been allowed to use extra time or put in extra time on his own initiative to complete his responsibilities.
Guess who he inherited the slower processing speed from? He got a double whammy from both parents who’ve had successful careers in two very different fields.
The differences in percentages between Newton North and South, and for that matter between North and schools in affluent suburbs, tells me that story goes beyond the Superintendent’s “private counselor” explanation. It is mind-boggling that we are learning about this is the WSJ. Would someone on the school committee point to meeting documents where these statistics were provided to the community?
@Jeffrey –
North has Newton’s vocational program, and voc ed programs usually have a higher proportion of special needs students.
Also, there is research showing that extended time only helps students who really need it. What happened in the recent scandal had nothing to do with having longer time per SE – they were using it to be alone in a room and have someone else take the test for them.
Meredith. To be clear, I don’t think this has anything to do with the recent scandal. I also don’t think the whole story is that North parents run to counselors. I agree that a higher proportion of voc ed students may explain some of this, but again, I don’t think this is whole story.
What I am saying is that we should know the whole story. Rather than speculating on V14, there should be something in the School Committee public record that provides clear information about why the statistics for Newton North attract national media attention.
BTW, one of my children is dyslexic and genuinely needs extra time.
Maybe, just maybe, Newton’s public school attending households are ready to demand what many have been able to accomplish by other means.
The School Committee has yet to internalize that the current public school system is serving squeaky wheels better than quaintly-idealized average American households. The 25% of enrolled students being SPED + IEP are enough to justify a system-wide redesign. (Think “mass customization” and “made to order” as educational system production strategies instead of attempting to produce semi uniform widgets called “Americans”.)
The objective ought to be to serve each and every student individually rather than trying to serve all students on average with exceptions as special cases. Though claiming that flexibility, operationally NPS does no such thing .. except for squeak wheel households. The number of Newton’s special lays bare that the core assumption in the design of public school is no longer true. So make NPS better able to serve each student rather than continuing to believe we can well serve all students by understanding them as cohorts, classes, or other groupings no longer useful in bringing the right learning opportunities and methods to students. Colloquially, the behavior of squeaky wheel households means “the dog won’t eat the regular dog food”; so we need to be serving a better meal instead of harshly judging parents working hard to do best by their kids within their available means.
The 2010s aren’t and 2020s won’t be anything like 1950s. So why should students from non-squeaky wheel households be less well served by a system showing signs of not fitting the community’s express needs, wants, and aspirations for its next generation?
Maybe Newton is better at identifying kids who have different learning disabilities whereas in other districts these kids might just struggle and do poorly because the district doesn’t have to resources to diagnose or support them. I barely skated by at school due to poor executive functioning skills but maybe if I went to NPS I would have done much better. I’m also grateful for the services my child receives.
@Mary P.
Superb post! Newton is uniquely positioned to have the best public school system in the country. But it would take a “system-wide redesign” as you suggest, with individually customized educational plans as the goal.
Unfortunately, we just don’t have the kind of visionary Mayor it would take to lead that charge. And the School Committee has struggled for nearly two decades just to change high school start times. For the foreseeable future we’re stuck with a system that shortchanges both students and taxpayers.
Missing from this outrage is the fact that urban districts, and low-income districts, are notorious for not giving students the IEPs or accommodations they need. A student who needs services in BPS maybe just might get them, whereas Newton, rightfully so, has a excellent process in place. Our attention should primarily focus on how we can ensure equitable access to disability and learning accommodations.
Mary – What ward do you live in? Would you consider running for SC?
Can the SAT just go away already? It’s an incredibly flawed measure of a student’s capabilities. Extra time is meant to help level the playing field, as is the College Board’s new adversity score. Both are just imperfect.
When going through the college process with my senior this year, I was happy to find that more and more colleges are becoming ‘test optional’. I hope this trend continues.
Did it ever occur to anyone that when a third of the students need more time to complete a particular test that there might be something very wrong with the test itself, not the test takers?
@ Allison Sharma said.
The SAT thing is sort of interesting to me philosophically. The stated goal of the test is to provide a data point that, when combined with high school performance, correlates with expected college performance better than HS alone. There is a cold, data-based sense in which a perfect score in the standard time limit is statistically different than a perfect score in twice the allotted time. If IEP-type accommodations are rarer and less flexible at the college level, the test filtering out that difference is probably correct with regard to the stated goal of the SAT.
Now, in a practical sense, you can throw a lot of that out the window, of course. Things, including the SAT, are what they are used for, rather than what the creators intended them to be used for. As soon as you get to a place where well-off households across the country are investing thousands of dollars in SAT prep courses, you’ve compromised the original intent of the test anyways. The real scandal always should have been the big systemic issues (and it’s not like it’s a secret – all of the research and articles on this have been out for a long time); abusing extra time or even the recent admissions scandal is an (infuriating) footnote.
I’m fifteen years away from having to care about this for my children, but my inclination is that this is one of those things that should be burned down and rebuilt from the ground up, and when that fails because of entrenched interests, the influence of the test should be minimized as much as possible.
I give our school system immense credit for introducing the “Understanding our Differences” program that seeks to give students a degree of empathy and understanding for classmates who might come off as “different” in a number of apparent and not so apparent ways. Since elementary school, I’ve dealt with various learning disabilities and it’s been a distinct pleasure to talk about these with kids in most of the City’s elementary schools. These caused me considerable grief and frustration when I was going through them as a kid, but I just see how totally tuned in kids are to these challenges and how they are able to identify and nod in agreement when I describe what I went through. But they also perk up when I tell them about what I was able to work through and accomplish despite these liabilities. In fact, some of the ways these disabilities allowed me to see and feel some positive things most kids do not. And there is no guilt or shame when they describe their own learning disabilities. We can even laugh at them together. I had great and wonderful teachers at Hyde and Weeks who tried patiently to help me, but they were clueless and as frustrated as I was. Thank goodness, this is no longer the case in Newton, but I wonder how many kids throughout the country still suffer the stigma that their learning disabilities are some kind of moral or disciplinary. failure.
Amy-
The depth of constituent complacency still requires one to sing thusly:
” Christ, Marx, Wood and Wei,
Led us to this perfect day.
Marx, Wood, Wei and Christ ….”
And I sense that you already knew that.
Best,
Mary
I’m in no position to judge the benefits or drawbacks of these various tests. But one way you might help level the testing field for kids with learning disabilities would be just to double the amount of time allotted for each test. I can tell you from personal experience that it’s not so much we don’t know something or can’t figure it out–it’s just that it takes us longer and we don’t like to be rushed. And in an era when social media and smartphones produce quick and uninformed kneed jerk responses, time to ponder things more carefully might benefit all. What’s a few extra hours when someone’s future is hanging in the balance from what most admit is a very flawed testing system?
The percentage of high school kids’ needing extra time on any standardized, timed test, including the SAT, is high for a lot of reasons. The least of which is outside testing. Our Superintendent passing the buck and refusing to accept responsibility for why 1 in 3 receive the extra time is insulting to the students and parents who struggle to get schools to meet their students’ needs.
As has been said above, extra time doesn’t benefit those who either don’t need it or those who don’t know the answers. It only benefits students who will have trouble taking the test, because of either learning disabilities (on an IEP) or a medical condition (on a 504 plan.) These conditions are relatively easy to prove either by specific testing (to have the student placed on an IEP) or by an MD or PhD specializing in the medical condition who gives the student a diagnosis (to be placed on a 504 plan.)
Most times it is quite difficult to have your child tested within the school system – particularly if they are young (when it helps the most) – or if the student is not 2 years behind in their subjects – particularly reading and math.
Parents who are new to this process generally go into these preliminary meetings with the school, teachers, special ed teachers and sometimes the principal or others, assuming everyone there wants the best for their student – which in most ways they do – but quickly find out that they have to learn to advocate for their child in order to get them the accommodations they need. That means studying everything they can find on the laws pertaining to these subjects and more than likely hiring an advocate. This Avenue is the one I took when my children were in school and one of them had both a medical diagnosis and a learning disability.
Another way to proceed if the school says the student doesn’t fit the qualifications for testing is to have your child tested at an outside specialty group. Parents generally only take this route as a last resort. Because one of my grandchildren needed testing at a young age, the school said “maybe next year.” If his parents had accepted this route, he would have just continued on not being able to read or write with any success. This route is one that leads to failure and a botched self image.
They chose to pay for testing. He was dx with dyslexia which can affect all learning from the start. After that was given to the school, they tested him there and came up with the same dx. But as someone said above, I don’t believe outside testing can just not be accepted.
I’m not saying that these are the only reasons that 1 in 3 NNHS students receive extra time because I don’t know the whole story as has been mentioned above. I do know that some Newton parents attempt to bully principals to put their children on IEPs, mostly in elementary school and end up getting their way. – to the consternation of the special ed department.
Linking this situation to the pay-for-play college admissions scandal is wrong. Yes, affluent parents have more resources to hire advocates and pay for testing, but their students rarely benefit from such measures unless they actually need them.
In addition, since we don’t really know anything about why NNHS has a higher percentage of test takers receiving extra time, speculating about why is a waste of energy that could be used to investigate the situation.
A good solution is to eliminate the timing of the SAT test or give everyone additional time. Those who need it will benefit – those who don’t will not use it.
I learned this year with my oldest grandson taking the SATs this year, many prestige and other colleges, recommend that the applicants not do the essay part of the test. They are not interested in a timed essay but in the essay that is part of the application. They also recommend that the applicant take their time and get help about what they include.
@Dulles – I agree that the 30% figure is mind boggling, but for the record Newton actually has one of the lowest residential tax rates in the state. Ranked 40 out of 351 in 2019. In the lowest quintile and nearly the lowest decile. https://patch.com/massachusetts/boston/ma-residential-property-tax-rates-each-community
Jon C – thanks for that, it is good to know and enlightening … our property taxes are low relative to cost-per-thousands, but we feel a pinch because of Newton’s high housing valuations.
Maybe I’m looking at things the wrong way. At one-third of the student body, Newton North has an extraordinary rate of students with learning disabilities. But a high proportion of these students would appear to triumph against these adversities and go on to enroll in the nation’s top universities.
I appreciate all of the commentary above about shortcomings of standardized tests and about the need to change the way we approach learning differences, but I am still troubled that Newton’s numbers are so high as compared to other affluent districts.
According to the WSJ analysis, an average of 4.2% of students have 504 designations in affluent public school districts (where no more than 10% of students are eligible for free or reduced-cost lunch).
One of the WSJ reporters kindly directed me to their data source, the DOE Civil Rights Division. According to the most recent numbers, in 2015-2016:
Newton North had a total enrollment 2089. 25.2% were students with IEPs, and 7.9% were students with a 504 plan, yielding a total of 33.1%.
Newton South had a total enrollment 1798. 18.5% were students with IEPs, and 7.1% were students with a 504 plan, yielding a total of 25.6%.
If we combine the two Newton high schools, 22.1% were students with IEPs, 7.5% were students with a 504, yielding a total of 29.6%.
What do some of our peer districts look like when it comes to IEP/504 designations?
Weston: 17% IEP, 6.2% 504
Wellesley: 15% IEP, 4% 504
Needham: 15.2% IEP, 5.8% 504
Dedham: 15.5% IEP, 5.1% 504
Brookline: 15.7% IEP, 3.9% 504
I hope the school district can examine why our numbers are higher. There may be good explanations, but the 504 number is concerning.
Sorry, my link above is not working. Go here for the DOE Civil Rights Division data:
https://ocrdata.ed.gov/DistrictSchoolSearch#schoolSearch
This is purely anecdotal, but two of my friends who teach in NPS have told me that they have spoken with parents who moved to Newton specifically because of it has a reputation for excellence with respect to the services provided to kids who need special education services or who are on IEPs and 504 plans.
We did not move here for this reason (I grew up in Newton), but have considered moving away (due to housing costs) and ultimately decided to stay almost entirely because of the excellent services our son receives here, and I have at least one friend in the exact same situation. So this rings true to me personally.
Also anecdotal, but I know several people from neighboring communities who moved here for the special ed services. And like AD, we considered moving somewhere cheaper because we have long outgrown our home but with a child on an IEP it just seemed like a risk.
May I just add, as a Newton parent of a child with learning challenges, reading the thoughtful and compassionate posts on this thread has really made my day. I was a little worried about what I might read when I clicked the “notify me of followup comments” box 😉 — but it’s clear that the people in this city (or at least those commenting here), whatever their disagreements may be, truly and deeply care about our schools and the success of our kids. So thanks to everyone for engaging with such passion and respect and thoughtfulness.
I wonder what percentage of students wouldn’t be on a 504 if class tests weren’t timed. The point is to see if a student has mastered the material. Why not maintain the focus on the reason for giving the test in the first place?
@AD and @MMQC, I can echo your comments. Newton has an excellent reputation for special ed services, of which we can all be proud. There are certainly families who move here because of it, and that may be the reason we have higher IEP percentage than our neighbors. Also, as @Meredith pointed out, there’s likely a good explanation for why North has more students with IEPs than South. It’s better to examine the combined numbers; given the differences in programming between the two schools, it’s a little unfair that North was singled out in an article about parents “seeking an edge.”
Is anyone else offended by our superintendent of schools telling a national newspaper that our schools have a history of “over identifying” children who need learning help? This comment doesn’t support the children, doesn’t support the educators and is clearly pointing fingers at….who? Perhaps the article should have mentioned his little plagiarism problem to identify him as someone who may not have a firm moral compass. Just so the readers had all the facts. This isn’t a fiercely dedicated educator and his words need to be taken with a grain (a pound?) of salt.
I have analyzed reports (not in Newton) from outside neuropsychologists and have read blatant lies with respect to a child’s abilities vis a vis request for services. I have seen statistical data interpreted wrongly to say the numbers reflect a disability when they do not. NPs can be hired guns who write what parents want because that is who pays them.
A 504 requires a Substantial Disability. The difference between a disability and a weakness is often not understood. A substantial disability limits a life function significantly and substantially. Shame on doctors who diagnose ADD, anxiety, and LD unethically. That is who should be investigated, along with lawyers threatening lawsuits that would be quite costly for schools to fight. As a SPED service provider,a portion of my caseload is unwarranted and this is due to fear of litigation. Most people in SPED know this.
So when the superintendent talks about overdiagnosing, this is most likely due to parental pressure. And of course like in any system, there are also those who fit the assigned diagnosis. This problem is a smear on the parental-doctor-legal complex. The schools can not afford to fight and assume the costs of private school that parents request. So they give them an IEP or 504 and/or extra services even if there is technically no disability. It pains me that I, as a public resource, is a victim of this situation.
We are sometimes treated like the hired help for well-to-do parents.
Does the childs diagnosis affect college applications? I knew a relative who wanted her child college application to mention they were autistic (child was not, I knew the child since birth)
Late to the discussion, but a question for anyone who has access to the article: While it says what percentage of students qualify for extended time, does it answer what percentage of NPS students actually take that accommodation? It seems to me that is a data point that is missing. One cannot assume that every student with an extended time accommodation either (a) takes the SAT or ACT or (b) applies for extended time.
Also late to the discussion. I’m going to start being blunt and upfront: Newton is an abnormally rich town with an above average amount of parents with J.D.’s or money, they are able to buy influence in the school system directly. This is extremely unacceptable and shameful. As a student at North, I have recognized the strangely high number of IEPs surrounding me. Now it’s easy to say that whether someone has an IEP / what their deal is should not be my worry — but I beg to differ. Now, I’m not going to say that IEP’s are total B.S. because they’re not. I have a family member that does need one and it’s obvious (not going to get into details.) The reason that I have an issue with 30% of my fellow students having an IEP is that on the common app (or most apps that I know of,) it does not specify whether the applicant has an IEP. Furthermore, in the college application process, the admissions officers are assigned certain regions or school districts (based on college size.) This means that I am somewhat so competing with these other students. Thus, making it my problem now. I just want people to recognize that this system is corrupt. I’m glad this article came out about North, bringing a spotlight to a greater issue (as well as bringing it to light in our community. The issue with Newton is that yes, we have a lot of money and many parents are intense about having their kids do the best.
John,
I assume you need some kind of Dr’s note? The school has no choice if the parent can product a verified Dr’s note. Perhaps the procedures should be changed to require 3 separate Dr notes with the same diagnosis?
I’m going to assume most kids have notes that put them on the “spectrum”. 30% sounds very high, but it is also very plausible if the spectrum is considered wide… If you are student, would you say 30 people in a room of 100 are socially akward? (with so many kids raised on smart phones/ipads.. maybe?)
BUGEK – getting an IEP is way more complicated than a note from the doctor. This is from the SPED Advocate website:
When a student is referred for an evaluation to determine eligibility for special education, the school district shall send written notice to the student’s parent(s) within five school days of receipt of the referral. (603 CMR §28.04(1)(a))
If consent is received within 30 to 45 school working days before the end of the school year, the school district shall ensure that a Team meeting is scheduled so as to allow for the provision of a proposed IEP or written notice of the finding that the student is not eligible no later than 14 days after the end of the school year. (603 CMR §28.05(1))
(See the section on Evaluations for further timelines)
(If the student is found eligible) Within 45 school working days after receipt of the parent’s written consent to an initial evaluation or reevaluation, the district shall provide the parents with two copies of the proposed IEP and proposed placement along with the required notice (603 CMR §28.05(7))
If the Team determines that the student is not eligible, the Team chairperson shall record the reason for such finding, list the meeting participants, and provide written notice to the parent of their rights in accordance with federal requirements within ten [calendar] days of the Team meeting. (603 CMR §28.05(2)(a)(2))
Just to clarify the team can consist of the parents, the teacher, the principal, the special education teacher, a physical therapist, an occupational therapist, a school psychologist, a behaviorist, a speech therapist, etc. Anyone on the team MUST attend the meeting. It is more than a doctor’s notes.
John Doe, it seems a waste of energy to be so angry at students who receive extra time on tests when you seem to know so little about how to receive these accommodations on standardized tests.
First I want to point out that multiple studies show that the few students who receive extended time on tests, that they don’t actually need – if indeed there are any – score no higher than they would have without the extended time.
Next, how do you recognize the “strangely high numbers of students on IEP’s that surround you in school?” Because you are right about it not being your concern or “worry,” or “problem.”
The system may be corrupt in some ways but not by students who need it to receive extra time. I, of course, don’t know if residents are bribing anyone, nor do you.
To receive extra time there is a long drawn out process.
From one google I got to the college board accommodations page which says:
Some students with documented disabilities are eligible for accommodations on College Board exams. Students cannot take the SAT, SAT Subject Tests, PSAT/NMSQT, PSAT 10, or AP Exams with accommodations – such as extended time or the use of a computer – unless their request for those specific accommodations has been approved by Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) – a part of the College Board.
Most students work with their schools to submit requests. Schools submit the request online through the SSD Online Disability Accommodation Mangament system (SSD Onine). “Documentation is always required and must be submitted for College Board review. Because the College Board process includes a thorough review of all information provided, it can take approximately seven weeks.
Families can also submit requests without the involvement of their school by requesting a paper Student Eligibility Form from their school or SSD. However, when families work with their schools to apply online, they usually save time and get a faster response.
In general, students approved by SSD for College Board testing accommodations meet the criteria discussed below:
1. Students must have documentation of their disability, such as a current psychoeducational evaluation or a report from a doctor. The type of documentation needed depends on the student’s disability and the accommodations being requested. That documentation must be submitted to the College Board.
2. The disability must result in a relevant functional limitation. In other words, it must impact the student’s ability to participate in College Board exams. Students whose disabilities result in functional limitations in the following areas may need accommodations:
* Reading
* Writing
* Sitting for extended periods
3. The student must demonstrate the need for the specific accommodation requested. For example, students requesting extended time should have documentation showing that they have difficulty performing timed tasks, such as testing under timed conditions.
4. With few exceptions, students who request an accommodation on College Board exams receive that accommodation on tests that they take in school. However, students who receive an accommodation in school or have an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or 504 Plan that includes the accommodation do not automatically qualify for the accommodation on College Board exams — they must still be approved by the College Board’s Services for Students with Disabilities, and the documentation will be requested for the College Board’s review.
5. The student’s history of receiving accommodations in school and information provided by the school are important in the College Board’s review of requests for accommodations. Yet College Board exams can differ from classroom tests. When requesting accommodations, schools and students should consider whether the accommodations that are used for classroom tests are needed for the specific College Board tests that they are taking.
What to Include
Include a detailed description of the disability and an explanation of how it affects test taking under timed conditions, including the frequency, duration, and intensity of the student’s symptoms. For example, requests for students with Tourette’s should provide a detailed description of their tics. For students with seizure disorders, a detailed description of their seizures and medication is appropriate.
Also include these forms of documentation as appropriate:
* Educational history, including use of extended time
* Scores from timed and untimed academic tests (examples listed below)
* Comparisons of student’s performance under timed and untimed conditions
* Occupational therapy evaluation
* Teacher Survey Form (.pdf/240KB)
Seven Documentation Criteria
For the documentation you submit to be useful to us in making accommodations decisions, it should meet these criteria:
1. The diagnosis is clearly stated.
2. Information is current.
3. Educational, developmental, and medical history is presented.
4. The diagnosis is supported.
5. The functional limitation is described.
6. Recommended accommodations are justified.
7. Evaluators’ professional credentials are established.
@Marti, I would question any study that says that people who get extended time on a test when they don’t need it don’t score any better on the test than they would have done without the extra time. That flies in the face of common sense. If you have more time to take a timed test so that you can finish and check your work and correct mistakes, how could that not give you a better score?
@Sarah, it actually makes perfect sense, because the timing/length of the test is designed to permit test-takers to complete the test and to go back and check their work. Additional time to go back and check a second or third or fourth time is not going to provide a significant additional benefit.
Students with documented disabilities that prevent them from finishing in the allotted time don’t have this benefit, and either fail to complete the test at all or do not have enough time to go back and review their answers even once.
I favor eliminating the timing requirement for ALL takers, but as long as the test is timed, extra time is a reasonable accommodation for those with documented disabilities.
Okay Marti,
Maybe it is harder to get an IEP, as your google search showed it’s not as easy as getting a doctors note. But it would be wild to say that 1/3 of NPS’s students have disabilities that require extra time etc. obviously something is up here. And yes, it is my business. I’m inferring and looking at your profile picture you have graduated from college and are done with the process. I am not. This effects me directly, as for you I cannot say but it appears not. So please don’t tell me what is and what isn’t my business.
@Bugek, I wouldn’t say that 30 of 100 kids are socially awkward. Most people don’t get ipad’s/computers unless their 504 specifically says that they can.