Why Are Some Wealthy Kids Getting Extra Time To Finish Their SAT Tests? (cbsnews.com) 210
Students from wealthy high schools are more than twice as likely to qualify for extra time to finish their SAT or ACT college entrance tests than students from poor schools -- and in some cases, they're getting 50% more time.
An anonymous reader quotes CBS News: About 4.2 percent of students at wealthy high schools qualified for a 504 designation, a plan that enables the students to qualify for accommodations such as extra test-taking time, according to an analysis of federal data for 9,000 by public schools by The Wall Street Journal. By comparison, only 1.6 percent of students in poor high schools qualified for the same designation.... These plans, named after a federal statute prohibiting discrimination against students with disabilities, can cover a wide range of issues, ranging from anxiety to deafness and other impairments. But critics of 504 plans say some families may be abusing the system in order to secure much-needed extra time for their children on the high-stakes exams...
About one-sixth of ACT test-takers don't complete the exam within its normal time limit, the Journal noted. And a redesign of the SAT in 2014 signaled how many students struggle with finishing on time, as fewer than half of students completed the math section in a prototype of the new test. Naturally, gaining an extra 50 percent of the allotted time can alleviate some of the stress of time management. And the SATs and ACTs don't alert colleges about whether a student received extra time to complete the tests, eliminating a disincentive for students to request the accommodation.
It's apparently been going on for years, according to CBS. In 2000 a California state report found that students getting extra time for their tests "were predominately white, wealthy, and from private schools."
And now in Boston's "well-heeled" Newton suburb, about one-third of students qualified for extra time.
An anonymous reader quotes CBS News: About 4.2 percent of students at wealthy high schools qualified for a 504 designation, a plan that enables the students to qualify for accommodations such as extra test-taking time, according to an analysis of federal data for 9,000 by public schools by The Wall Street Journal. By comparison, only 1.6 percent of students in poor high schools qualified for the same designation.... These plans, named after a federal statute prohibiting discrimination against students with disabilities, can cover a wide range of issues, ranging from anxiety to deafness and other impairments. But critics of 504 plans say some families may be abusing the system in order to secure much-needed extra time for their children on the high-stakes exams...
About one-sixth of ACT test-takers don't complete the exam within its normal time limit, the Journal noted. And a redesign of the SAT in 2014 signaled how many students struggle with finishing on time, as fewer than half of students completed the math section in a prototype of the new test. Naturally, gaining an extra 50 percent of the allotted time can alleviate some of the stress of time management. And the SATs and ACTs don't alert colleges about whether a student received extra time to complete the tests, eliminating a disincentive for students to request the accommodation.
It's apparently been going on for years, according to CBS. In 2000 a California state report found that students getting extra time for their tests "were predominately white, wealthy, and from private schools."
And now in Boston's "well-heeled" Newton suburb, about one-third of students qualified for extra time.
what about dumping college for all?? germany dual (Score:2)
Germany has an good dual education system
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed - the world will always need good technicians (maybe even human ones) - from plumbers, to secretaries, to nuclear power maintenance. Sometimes you want engineers or other broader theoretical experts guiding or overseeing things, but they're almost always well outnumbered by the technicians getting their hands dirty.
Re: what about dumping college for all?? germany d (Score:2)
Yup. Educating the deplorables just makes them uppity.
Hmm... (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe it's because they have money? Seems things are much easier if you have money.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? What a non-issue.
This accommodation is for students with challenges that intend to go to college - perhaps wealthy schools have more students that intend to go to college than poor schools? That is likely the entire basis for this "disparity".
Or, are we pretending that students in poor schools are just as likely to attend college, and hence just as likely to take the SAT and apply for extra time?
Perhaps wealthy school can afford better intervention programs, which would point out the need for the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If the poor students aren't planning on going to college/university would they even take the SATs? If they aren't taking the SATs they aren't factored into the averages.
Ok, I got curious and actually looked it up. It looks like currently in some states it is mandatory to take the SATs but not in most.
Re: (Score:2)
1 in 20 is a bit high considering this is only the people who took the test.
I call Bullshit on this! (Score:5, Insightful)
I know of an attorney who got 2X time to take the bar exam in California as an ADA accommodation for "testing anxiety."
The article makes it an issue of race. Bullshit. It is an issue of being smart enough to game the system. Either they knew this on their own or paid one of those college consultants. Its like saying that Mercedes dealerships are racist because more white guys drive Mercedes than black guys. I am pretty sure, the only color that the dealerships see is green (or at least in the USA).
Re: (Score:2)
I know of an attorney who got 2X time to take the bar exam in California as an ADA accommodation for "testing anxiety."
For a lawyer that seems like legit extra credit!
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The article makes it an issue of race.
Not really, no. There were two articles there, one talks almost exclusively about wealth and the other is much longer and mentions many factors, though race is one of those. I don't know why you focused on the race thing.
Re: (Score:2)
The article makes it an issue of race. Bullshit. It is an issue of being smart enough to game the system.
The article makes it an issue primarily of wealth, which happens to be correlated with race and private school attendance.
If these people are "smart" enough to game the system, then "honest" people are "stupid" enough to not game the system.
Some of these "smart" people have kids with the disabilities specified by the college exam organizations, and some of these "smart" people are "smart" enough to find doctors that are willing to write the requisite diagnosis for an appropriate business transaction cost.
I call it dishonest cheating (Score:2)
It is an issue of being smart enough to game the system.
This is not smart, it is dishonest and it is not "gaming the system" it is cheating. Accommodations in exams exist for those whose ability to display their mastery of the material under exam conditions is affected by a disability. The problem is that more and more students are abusing the system to get extra time that they are not due (or we have a major medical crisis that is suddenly started to severely impact younger generations about 5 years ago).
The situation got so bad here in Alberta with so many
Re: (Score:2)
Nepotism is alway bad. Just look at Kiefer Sutherland.
Could it be... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
These rich kids are more slower (as in Forrest Gump slow) than their non-rich peers?
It’s all the inbreeding.
Re: (Score:2)
These rich kids are more slower (as in Forrest Gump slow) than their non-rich peers? Maybe having all that wealth has lead to rich kids being slow learners and simpler thinkers? Growing up pampered and can probably lead to stunted neurological development, so these kids need an assist..
No, it really couldn't be that, because another well-known correlation is that wealthier kids get better SAT scores, and go on to do better in college.
The answer -- and I say this as a father of multiple children who've had 504s and been permitted more test time -- is that wealthier parents are better-equipped to get the professional help needed to identify and document the learning disabilities which qualify for 504 assistance. You have to get testing by doctors who specialize in the right fields and wi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe parents of kids with learning challenges (learning disabilities) sacrifice and move to a "wealthy" school district, buying a smaller house in a better neighborhood and paying higher taxes to ensure their kids get the best education possible?
Maybe wealthy school districts are better at identifying learning challenges than poor schools?
Maybe kids in wealthy school districts are more motivated to attend college, and kids with challenges are directed to take the SAT while kids in poor districts with learn
Can't Get a 504 Without Parent Involvement (Score:3, Insightful)
Parents have to actually go through a process to get 504 designation for their kids. Wealthy parents are generally more involved in their kids education than poor parents. This probably accounts for the vast majority of the disparity, and anyone gaming the system--if they exist--is a infinitesimally small minority.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that parents who are more actively involved in their children's education and overall well-being are more likely to learn about the need for a 504 process to be completed when necessary. I'm not wealthy, but I did have to do it for my daughter after she had surgery. She doesn't get extra time for tests, but they are aware that she sometimes needs a short break when she is in pain.
I'm not sure why so many people are getting so indignant about it. Most of the negative responses seem to be on the immat
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure why so many people are getting so indignant about it. Most of the negative responses seem to be on the immature side, so I am assuming they are not parents. The ones who are parents should educate themselves on various school programs and how to help their kids succeed.
Wait until they find out that there is a disparity in the applications for handicap parking spaces based on who odes or does not have medical insurance (and thus more likely to see a doctor to request a parking tag)!
why a time limit (Score:2)
If people are not finishing then perhaps the test is not doing what it should to measure their aptitude. Or is it somehow important to measure speed of responses ?
Why not make the test an all-day thing, I understand that at some point the test supervisors want to go home, but I don't see any academic need to impose a great deal of time pressure. I see few parallels in the real world where speed of response to a complex question is important.
Re: why a time limit (Score:2)
This x10.
The time limit should be removed, if not absolutely then at least practically eg by giving 5 hours for a 3 hour exam
Re: (Score:2)
The rest of the really smart people who can study did just fine in the test with the time given.
Testing is used in the USA to sort the best of the best so they can get ready for "working" on really complex things for decades.
Re "Why not make the test an all-day thing"
Then everyone would get a better grade and the results to find who can work quickly would be useless.
The ability to learn.
To u
Re: (Score:2)
Why time it? (Score:3)
The number of times I had to finish a math problem in limited time*, outside of a school setting, is exactly zero. So how is a timed math test useful? If anything, it's weeding out people who would be good mathematicians, because that requires thinking for a very long time about a very deep problem rather than reflective applications of well-studied rules. In fact, people I know who majored in math in college weren't very quick doing algebra and arithmetic.
*Yes, there's taxes and such, but the time limit is on the order of months rather than minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
finish a math problem in limited time
So what are you suggesting? Unlimited time is not available.
Re: (Score:2)
So what are you suggesting? Unlimited time is not available.
50% don't finish in time. The time doesn't need to be unlimited, but it should be less constrained that it is now. We should be mainly testing ability, not speed.
When my daughter was practicing for the SAT, she did not finish the math section. So I drilled with her every weekend for a month, not to learn new math, but to work FASTER. She was successful, and increased her score enough to get into her target college.
But was that really the best use of her time? What about the kids who don't have a nerd d
Re: (Score:2)
Why? The really smart people can do just fine and pass in the given time.
They know how to study.
Understand the work expected.
Got ready for the test.
Did great in the test due to skill and study.
Did much better that a large % of the average population.
Due the the ability to be educated. To understand what was been taught.
They had the skill to show they could take the test in a given time and get great results in the time allowed.
Re: (Score:2)
50% don't finish in time.
Not every unanswered question is because a student ran out of time, I seem to recall there was a penalty for wrong answers, so I suspect many students are reluctant to "guess" and lose a 1/4 point for each "guessed" wrong answer.
The time doesn't need to be unlimited, but it should be less constrained that it is now. We should be mainly testing ability, not speed.
It's not a speed test - no one records how fast you completed the test. Putting an upper limit on the time allowed is necessary for simple test management issues if nothing else.
Re: (Score:2)
You have to understand the statistic in context. 50% don't finish in time probably does not mean that their was 1, 2, or maybe more questions at the end that the students did not even get to see. It means that 50% of students had at least 1 question without an answer. Meaning they lacked enough understanding to even attempt to complete at least 1 question.
Re: (Score:2)
My Solid State Electronics course in college gave unlimited time for the final exam and also allowed as many books as you could fit in a wheelbarrow to be brought into the exam. There were six questions. I finished 2 in 6 hours and received a 29 on the exam which turned out to be the highest grade and gave me a solid A. As I heard it, nobody stayed for more than 7 hours.
People have natural limits.
Re: (Score:2)
If anything, it's weeding out people who would be good mathematicians
That's very unlikely. Math has a memorization component, and you will struggle if you can't do it, no matter how good your understanding is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People who can't remember everything with ease tend to be the ones finding the out of the box solutions and most capable of applying their capabilities to the real world.
Yeah but they didn't become great mathematicians.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but they didn't become great mathematicians.
I would think that neither did the ones who relied on memory. Perhaps the best of both worlds is what's needed to become a mathematician.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Out of my very limited sample of 2 people with masters degrees in math, 100% are slower than me at arithmetic. They're also both very forgetful. Some mathematical topic would come up, and they would tell me there's a theorem that proves that, except they have no idea what it's called. They can explain how to prove it though.
Re: (Score:2)
Not useful: practical concerns (Score:2)
The number of times I had to finish a math problem in limited time*, outside of a school setting, is exactly zero. So how is a timed math test useful?
It is not useful: exams have time limits for practical reasons. At school and lower undergrad levels, they have to be conducted in a controlled environment where external material cannot be accessed and for a large variety of practical reasons, such an environment cannot be maintained for extremely long periods of time.
While this may impose a slight disadvantage on some people this is always true for any system of assessment. So we implement the best system we can with the resources available which gene
Re: (Score:2)
At least in my experience, exams in school are 1 hour long. I see no reason it cannot be doubled other than because that's how the teachers wanted it. There's also no reason it cannot be split into two parts and taken on different days.
As for the disadvantage, it's quite significant. This format excludes an entire class of people who work slowly but can tackle very complex problems. Yet those are the kind of people you need. In real life, very few hard problems can be solved with a few minutes of concentrat
Re: (Score:2)
At least in my experience, exams in school are 1 hour long. I see no reason it cannot be doubled other than because that's how the teachers wanted it.
You clearly have very short exams. The shortest exam I ever took at school was 1.5 hours and most were 2-3 hours. Short exams have a different problem: because the number of questions are very limited you cannot test all the material and so the noise-to-signal ratio of the results is a lot higher. Adding more exams also poses more logistic problems with times that do not clash with other lectures/exams, more rooms and generally more time taken away from teaching for exams. This is not a good solution.
As for the disadvantage, it's quite significant. This format excludes an entire class of people who work slowly but can tackle very complex problems.
Rubb
I remember back in the day (Score:2)
Taking the SAT at a "disadvantaged" school added bonus points to your score, if you scored high enough at specific testing sites, there were even some additional grants and financial aid handed out.
Wow. Just.... wow. (Score:2)
It would be one thing if they were getting benefits they did not rightly deserve, but my understanding is that this extra time is only given to students with qualifying medical conditions.
Suggesting that it somehow unfair that a person who might have a qualifying medical condition should not be entitled to some special treatment that people without that medical condition would not receive simply because they might happen to be wealthy enough to have had access to the medical professionals that enabled th
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Given its a "medical condition" the extra time should not really change the result in any way.
Massive new pass and at unexpected rates are quickly detected by peer review od test results all over the USA.
Decades of average data sets quickly detects any one year, one location changes.
The person with a "medical condition" would have that reviewed and the extra time allowed would not advantage/disadvanta
Where is the medical crisis? (Score:2)
It would be one thing if they were getting benefits they did not rightly deserve, but my understanding is that this extra time is only given to students with qualifying medical conditions.
Well given the huge increase in the number of such accommodations granted over the past ~5 years either some students are getting benefits that they do not rightly deserve or we have a major medical crisis due to massively increasing rates of disability in the younger generations. Given that I have not seen any signs of such a major medical crisis in the news I suspect the former.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You misunderstand my point. It may be the case that wealth can offer increased access to medical professionals which might offer a person more opportunities for a correct medical diagnosis of a disability, but that is not an indication that the wealthy, or even the schools, are doing anything wrong.
In related news, rich people
Resources go a long way. (Score:2)
Resources remove *so* *many* obstacles. Need a ride? Dad will call in and come late and take you with his car. This won't happen with the poor single mom.
Student Ticket costs money? No, problem, we always have money for that. This is very tough for the poor single mom.
It's also about focus. I made it a point in our household, even when money was tight, that there *always* was money for a book. My mom did that too, but it was tough. I saw the rich kids at my school getting pampered and sleazing their way thr
Looks like the problem is primarily on the low end (Score:2)
So the problem would seem to be California schools not knowing about / not doing a good enough job helping get extra time accommodations for students who should qualify for it. With the problem being substantially worse at schools in low-income districts. Los Ang
This is not news to university faculty (Score:5, Interesting)
Any college professor will tell you that the system is abused often and systematically. Every semester, I have students with no previously declared disabilities who suddenly discover that they have a learning disability after taking my first exam. All they need is a doctor's evaluation (which is easily obtained), and they receive accommodations. It's the perfect system, since the "disability" does not show up on the student's transcript, and essentially disappears from their record the moment they graduate.
What is interesting is that rarely does the extra test time result in any improvement in the student's test performance. If I had my choice, I'd give all of my students two or three hours to work a one-hour exam. Doing so would force many students to confront the truth that lack of time isn't their problem; it's lack of understanding of the material. Unfortunately, the system doesn't work that way. You have to work within the time constraints of the one-hour lecture format.
But the SATs don't need to work that way. This issue can be solved by making the SAT an 8-hour exam for everyone. Give all the students enough time to double-check every answer. Most students will leave after 5 or 6 hours. As for the rest, I expect (from years of teaching experience) that the point of diminishing returns will kick in long before 8 hours is up.
Do that, and the problem of bogus disabilities will largely disappear once the extra time confers no real advantage.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yes of course. Gaussian distribution....
Endless cycle (Score:2)
However, because there is no way to say how long it takes to do an exam when you write it, the exams will gradually expand in length until students
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary, any experienced professor knows exactly how difficult to make a one-hour exam. I could easily take one of my standard four problem midterm exams, pull out two problems, and give that instead. I know exactly what would happen: most of the class would be finished within 30 to 45 minutes, while the bottom third would sit staring at the exam for the last 15 or 30 minutes.
I know this because that's exact
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary, any experienced professor knows exactly how difficult to make a one-hour exam.
I can certainly make an educated guess about how long it takes to complete my exams but, at least in physics, it is far to easy to come up with a problem that takes the students a lot longer to figure out than you expected or, turns out to be a lot easier. My colleagues have the same issue so this is something that is very much subject dependent. I could certainly imagine in the arts or in the more descriptive sciences that you can more easily predict the length of an exam but in the hard sciences where yo
Re: (Score:2)
Each subtest was allotted 3-4 hours but it really took an hour or more less than the allotted time (this is coming from someone who really took his time and double checked everything)
As the rare accountant who actually understands the principles well, the test was simple but sadly most accountants struggle with it...
Easy (Score:2)
"Why Are Some Wealthy Kids Getting Extra Time To Finish Their SAT Tests?"
Because they are stupid. Their parents didn't love them, didn't talk to them and their nanny only spoke Spanish so their vocabulary is very much reduced, compared to the general population.
It doesn't matter anyway, there is a job as dotard in chief waiting for each of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps the kids aren't wealthy, parents of students with learning disabilities frequently bite the bullet and move into a wealthy school district, buying a smaller house and paying higher property taxes to ensure their kids get the best education possible from the public school system.
Reports should include indication of accommodation (Score:2)
The score reports should include an indication of accommodations that were made in administrating the test and specify the nature and extent of those accommodations.
Obviously those students receiving accommodations will usually need ongoing accommodations in college (perhaps personal tutors, more time on tests, etc.) and some schools may find that they can't reasonably provide the necessary accommodations for any of a variety of reasons. Therefore, students taking the SAT and given accommodations during the
Why does anyone get extra time? (Score:2)
If one person gets extra time, everyone should get extra time.
This is only half the information (Score:2)
Deafness??? (Score:2)
Of course (Score:2)
None of this is remotely surprising if you work in mental health. Here are some basic facts of life:
* Minorities are less likely to seek out psychiatric care (they tend to distrust the system-- for which I can hardly blame them), and they are MUCH less likely to seek out or request an ADHD diagnosis. (They're also less likely to have access if they do seek out psychiatric care). That's why if you look at reported prevalence rates for ADHD, they're all over the map. The "prevalence rate" in a rich white
Not everyone is equal (Score:2)
I don't understand the rationale for trying to make a "leveled playing field" for everyone taking tests. I work at a medical school and students routinely get extra time on exams or get their bad grades remediated. I don't understand why. I would like to see a surgeon who takes twice as long to do a surgery, taking resources such as the surgical suite and a cadre of aides, nurses, and residents along with him/her. Or one that takes twice as long to diagnose an XRay. The hospital has productivity standa
Too much emphasis on SATs (Score:2)
The score from SATs is seen as a de-facto measurement of a students' worth, and not as a tool of evaluation.
Needless to say, the rich are using their privilege to get more time, so that the scores of the rich are better than their comparable lower income "peers".
It's another way of getting more of their rich friends to qualify for "better" schools, while leaving out others.
After all, the "buy your kids' ways through school" thing has become more well known, so they have to have some other system put into pl
If you're not cheating..... (Score:2)
Sure, there are no doubt those who truly have documented learning disabilities. But when 1/3rd of a given area suddenly asks for accommodations, that says they're part of the test prep coaching.
But why would people willingly make this request?
Answer: Because they have been incentivized to do so. The results as reported to the universities do not differentiate between who had more time and who didn't.
Wealthy and sick (Score:2)
Librals (Score:2)
Is it just me, or has the news been absolutely full of stories about Liberals gaming the system to get their children into the right post secondary institution. This is at least the third unique story of this kind I have read this month alone.
Re:Sigh, more "rich people bad" narrative (Score:4, Insightful)
The point is that extra time is supposed to be available to mitigate specific issues that unfairly disadvantage the child. If the take up of extra time is skewed towards the wealthy then either the wealthy are simply less fortunate and suffer from more adverse conditions, or more likely the rules are not being applied properly and fairly to all.
Take-up rates should not be related to how much time and money the parents have to spend on applying for them, they should be related to the adverse conditions in each child's life.
Re:Sigh, more "rich people bad" narrative (Score:5, Insightful)
If the take up of extra time is skewed towards the wealthy then either the wealthy are simply less fortunate and suffer from more adverse conditions, or more likely the rules are not being applied properly and fairly to all.
You miss the explanation that because their parents are wealthy they have the resources to identify those conditions in their children and have them appropriately certified so that their children can take advantage of these policies. There are probably children less well off who should have additional time, but their parents never thought to have their child examined or were completely unaware that these policies exist at all.
The general rule is that in any system, the people with the most resources are best able to take advantage of it. For example, subsidy programs designed to help independent farmers have a majority of the funding devoted to a small minority of farmers who are already doing well economically. They found similar results when examining a program designed to help African American business owners and in one case found that one of the people who received a grant was just a figurehead for a company that was really being run by her white husband who was already wealthy from other business ventures.
Take-up rates should not be related to how much time and money the parents have to spend on applying for them, they should be related to the adverse conditions in each child's life.
Sure in an ideal world yes. Unfortunately we don't have the time or money to assess this or even a good way of doing the assessment. Maybe 30 years from now when we've automated more of our economy we'll be able to devote the necessary labor towards individual and personalize education, but it isn't going to happen now.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't miss anything, that was my point. The idea that the wealthy are just unlucky is clearly ridiculous. As you say, they have more time to put in to getting the extensions, which means that they are not being distributed fairly.
Fairly would mean that it doesn't matter what the child's parents do or don't do. So applications are out, there has to be an investigation of each child's circumstances. It's the only fair way.
Since that's not very practical, I'd suggest that the whole notion of assigning a chi
Re: (Score:2)
I said it was unfair. I didn't speculate as to why it was unfair. I left that for the reader.
Come on, basic reading comprehension, do you need more time?
Re: (Score:2)
The general rule is that in any system, the people with the most resources are best able to take advantage of it.
It's called positive feedback loop. A system that is big tends to get bigger more easily - eg power, wealth, forest-fire, compound-interest, may be ignorance/rage/stupidity
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, and it's the wrong point, and it simply reinforces people ignoring the more relevant problem. Performing well, indeed very well, on the SAT will minutely affect a student's likelihood of acceptance to an elite institution. Shifting that chance from, say, 1/20 to 1/10. But every time we come out to advocate for the fairness of a test like this, we're implicitly leaving in place the idea that we somehow have a functioning meritocracy when it comes to college admissions.
The issue in the bribery scandal
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because 'No child left behind' helped our country out so well... /s(do I need this?)
Re: (Score:2)
Its a timed test, you don't get extra time in timed tests. Why the fuck have a time if you give extra?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So, "rich" people, who take an active interest in their children's educations, have children who do better on test, etc. Did the study adjust for parenting skills?
Oh. Like hiring admissions consultants and doctor shopping for a diagnosis and letter stating that their kid has some sort of "disability" and therefore needs more time?
Or out and out bribery and fraud to get their kids into good schools?
This is just another example how the system is rigged. A hard working kid from say a West Virginia coal mining town gets some scholarships and the best he can do is state is already behind. There's a lot of snobbery with educational backgrounds and it's just getting wors
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry no mod points - a great post. Balanced and covers all the bases.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. The incompetent children of rich people generally end up wasting their inheritance.
And that's where Russia enters the picture.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Sigh, more "rich people bad" narrative (Score:2)
Sorry brohamley - everyone who has worked for a while knows that's not true.
80% of rich people are the dimwitted children of rich parents.
10% are evil bastards who robbed, cheated, lied, stole, and defrauded their way to wealth.
7% were just lucky. Right place at the right time. Sometimes these folks are even genuinely nice people.
3% worked smarter than everyone else. I'm being generous with the percentage here. But these do exist, I've met one or two in my life.
0% workeds harder than everyone else. Rich pri
Re: (Score:2)
Not if you sell drugs.. Might have some experience..
Re: (Score:2)
More like rich people who should, in theory already have plenty of advantage at test time ALSO get an easier test so they can begin their career based on fictional 'merit'. This will lead to greater success which they will falsely attribute to hard work (mostly other people's) and 'merit'.
That way they can go on to buy (other people's) hard work and 'merit' for their children.
Re: (Score:2)
All that does is prove that rich business owners are unaffected by the economic downtowns that hit the poor very hard. Most because they keep so much of their money. You can't use the "economy" to price the state of the nation as a whole.
Re: (Score:2)
So we should have no rules. Got it!
Re: (Score:2)
While it is an abuse of the system, remember nearly half the population is below average.
There are plenty of other things that wealthy kids have that also pad their applications— volunteering, extracurriculars, networking, etc., that people with lower means will struggle with. Another gem is schools discriminating against students that need to work because their success rates are significantly lower in upper-level classes.
“Fair” is hard, and sometimes isn’t the best solution
Re: (Score:2)
His point is that without 504 status there would be no rules to game, so it wouldn't favour the more intelligent parents, who can shop around for doctors more and pay higher priced lawyers.
Go ahead, introduce more rules and see if he isn't right.
Re: (Score:2)
Without "504 status" students with learning challenges would have a harder time getting into college, since their scores would be lower.
Examples of 504 accommodations include having the questions read to a blind student, extra time for those with cognitive challenges, etc. The application is non-trivial, and an honest assessment would include the observation that it is perfectly reasonable to assume that "wealthy" schools have staff that are encouraged to identify learning challenges and address them, while
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn't he in the Air National Guard, not the Air Force?
I remember that much from 2000!
Re: (Score:3)
I also remember reading multiple stories about it - prior to the election. But if you ignore minor details like getting the facts totally wrong, the GP is exactly right.
Although he did spark a memory of this: https://politics.theonion.com/... [theonion.com]
Re: Because . . . (Score:2)
Have you met many Ivy Leaguers? They have only one characteristic in common. Not intelligence. Not "race". Not "work ethic". What they share in common is that they come from rich, socially well-connected families.
Don't believe anything they say about their black box admissions process. Instead, go to an Ivy campus and observe the what the black box actually selected. Hint: you are WAY more likely to meet the son of a warlord from Rwanda, than the son of a worker from the flyover.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone with a learning disability "bona fide" should be allowed to retake with the full time limit, to make it even.
I don't understand "retake with the full time limit"?
Anyone with a "bona fide" disability that applies gets extra time (or other appropriate accommodation.
Perhaps poor schools are worse at identifying "bona fide" learning disabilities than wealthy schools?
Giving only rich schools 504 status is bullshit oversight. But this is just ONE way the rich get a leg up on the rest.
ONLY? You literally made that up - the summary above says 4.2% of students from "wealthy" schools (whatever that means) qualify for 504 accommodations, while 1.6% of students from "poor" schools (whatever that means) qualify.
Re: (Score:2)
Wealthy districts are better able to provide for students with special needs, so they are motivated to identify them... Poor districts that can not afford accommodations are less motivated to even make the effort to identify students with special needs (since they can't afford to provide for them)?
Re: (Score:2)
It means that students with learning disabilities in wealthy districts are more likely to go to a college or university that requires SAT scores while students in poorer districts are more likely to go to community college (which doesn't require SAT scores) or forgo college altogether.