Education >
Standardized Tests
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedIs allowing students with disabilities extra time on the SAT's fair to others?
Results so far:
| Yes | 73% | 47 votes | Total: 64 votes | |
| No | 27% | 17 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesWhen it comes to tests of great importance and impact, the SAT Reasoning Test is unquestionably at the top of the list. After all, this is the test that not only proves what you have learned in your twelve years of mandatory schooling, but the score itself is instrumental in your being accepted to the college of your choice (or any college at all, for that matter.)
Due to the gravity of the situation, one would think that it would be not only necessary that students with learning disabilities should be granted extra time to take the SATs, but understandable as well. However, there are those out there who feel that the practice is unfair, on the grounds that it is similar to cheating; since the learning disabled students have more time to complete the test, their test scores will theoretically be higher than those students who didn't qualify for extended test-taking time, thereby robbing the latter of the chance to be accepted at the college or university of their choice.
Speaking as a person with a learning disability, I would like to tell those people where they can put that argument, and it's not in a place that Helium will allow me to state in great detail, so let me just say that people who argue that it's unfair don't know the meaning of the word "unfair".
Seriously, if that's considered unfair or cheating, is it unfair or cheating for an amputee to be allowed the use of their prosthetic leg to take part in a marathon? If we apply the that logic to this situation, the amputee is being given the advantage of a false leg in order to run, thereby creating the possibility that they may cross the finish line well ahead of someone who has both legs. And that just wouldn't be fair, would it?
Oh, wait: It actually would be fair, because the point of the marathon is based on proving each runner's physical endurance, not on whether or not they possess a matching set of human legs. Kind of like how the SATs are meant to assess how much a student has actually learned and retained as opposed to how quickly they can spit out the right answers. For students with learning disabilities, they have a harder time proving what they know in what is considered the average time frame due to their disability; hence, the need for extra time, as granted by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Also, just because a learning disabled student receives extra time in order to take their SATs doesn't automatically mean that they are guaranteed a high score. When I took my SATs, I received a total score of 960, and yes, that was with extra time. I didn't even make it into the quadruple digits, and I completed the entire test from cover to cover. Meanwhile, the average students who were not given extra time outperformed me on that test by leaps and bounds, so getting extra time does not mean that a student will get a perfect score.
In all honesty, I fail to see how this is unfair to students without learning disabilities. The test itself is in no way dumbed down for those who are learning disabled, and it's not like the teacher administering the test is allowed to help the student find the correct answer. The test is still geared towards the average student, so where's the harm in giving those who are considered below average a little more time to work their way through?
To argue that such a thing is unfair is say that disabled people are less deserving of the right to a higher education than those who aren't disabled, which is to say that they are second-class citizens. If anything is unfair, I would have to say that belief right there takes the cake.
Learn more about this author, Rose Calder.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
The SAT Reasoning Test is a standardized test used for college admissions in the United States and is one of the best predictors of how well students will do in college, according to the College Board. The term "standardized" indicates that something is on the same level or equal for everyone. Not only is allowing students with learning disabilities extra time on the SATs unfair to the other students, it is unfair to the students with disabilities too.
In a society obsessed with equal opportunities and political correctness, the fact is that giving learning disabled students more time to complete the SATs is doing them a disservice. It teaches them that they are different from all the other students and that those differences will give them an advantage in life. That is simply not the case and is a dangerous belief for those students to have.
Not everything in life is ideal, which is unfortunate, but also reality. Setting a precedent like this creates a jaded self-image of the abilities of that student. That student is taught there are a different set of rules for him or her. Maybe that person won't work as hard as he or she can, knowing they can use their disability as a crutch when deadlines aren't met or when failing to produce at work. Allowing disabled students extra time to complete the SATs could have long-lasting ramifications.
Students with learning disabilities may have to work harder than most or put in more hours studying or working on a project than others would. These are important values for learning disabled students to have, especially when entering the work environment. Nothing in life is easy, and for some, it is more difficult than others. That does not mean they should receive special treatment. It should be motivation to work harder and prove to themselves, and everyone else, they can accomplish just as much as anybody else can on their own.
Not all students test well and is a good reason why allowing extra time for disabled students is unfair to the rest. The argument can be made that anxiety and fear over taking tests is a disability. Those students are not allowed to write essays instead of taking the test. The test is not doctored to meet their specific needs. It's standardized, the same for everyone.
All students are taught that hard work and perseverance pay off in the end and are the only way to reach their goals. Allowing disabled students extra time to complete the SATs debunks this notion for those who don't get extra time. It shows them that working hard does not always pay off. Where is the motivation for a student to work hard and study for the SATs when the last spot in their dream school is taken by someone who may not be as qualified but was given more time to complete the test?
Although life is not fair, it should not be so out of design. There is no shame in giving something your all and failing. It is not fair, but at least there is solace in knowing that you did everything within your power to achieve your goal and simply came up short. You don't have to live with the knowledge that you were slighted because someone else was given an unfair advantage. Losing on an even playing field is one thing, but losing when the odds are unfairly stacked against you is something different.
In a world where people protest, suffer persecution and start wars to achieve equality, practices like this teach our youth early on that equality is only for those without the advantages in life.
Learn more about this author, Kevin Jeannette.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Standardized Tests
- Should the SAT be abolished for college admissions decisions?
