Number of kids getting extra time in exams MASSIVELY overstated

If time isn't important, for example a child needs extra time to read the maths questions, then why do we stress kids out trying to get them to race against the clock to get the exam questions answered at all.

In my job, the time it takes to do the maths calculations is relatively flexible so it doesn't matter how long it takes to do it, as long as you know how to complete it.

Therefore, is it fair that some know how to work the system to gain extra time? Should we just let all children spend as long as they want on the paper, within reasonable limits (minimum and maximum), but obviously let leave them exam hall when they have finished. I'm fairly sure that most wouldn't take advantage of the extra time because they would finish anyway. I know I would have left a the minimum time allowed in 90% of my exams.

I think the concern is not that all children need the extra time but that some who do need it aren’t getting it and are therefore disadvantaged. I can’t understand why it isn’t feasible to have 3 hours for all GCSEs and just to allow children to leave and sign out once they are done after say 1.5 hours. That would seem to be the most inclusive way and would avoid accusations of sharp elbowed parents pushing for an advantage.

It's fairly standard not to be allowed back in the exam room
.

So what if they need extra time to regulate? How does that affect you or your GCSE exam?

How lucky you are that you don't have crippling anxiety because you are so petrified of what your parents will do if you fail this exam.

Yea, even being allowed back in the hall after my attack so I could complete my paper. Not extra time, I don’t care for the extra time. I was predicted a distinction. That’s all I wanted. But at 21 when your best friend does such a thing it’s not easy to brush aside.

Nowadays people are getting extra time because they need to regulate, or get their head around facing the exam. Come on!!!

If you got rid of time limits, you would have people never finishing the exam.

What if a candidate decides to stay for 7 hours?

Because it is given to students who need it (based on assessment by the school of their usual way of working) in order to be able to sit a compulsory exam. It isn’t for students who “want” it because it would be nice to have a bit more time to get some extra information down on the paper.

No-one is having anything “both ways”. As lots of PP have pointed out, it is to create as level a playing field as possible for all students to be able to sit a compulsory exam and demonstrate their knowledge and be given a grade for the level of learning they have demonstrated to the examiner.

The glasses are the perfect analogy. It's about providing each candidate with the ability to do their best.

GCSEs aren't a competition.

If you got a job as a Cheese Consultant ... would it matter if you had 25% extra time to complete a Cheese Lovers GCSE? Would it matter if you needed a laptop to type your answers? And another candidate didn't have extra time in theirs? You both get a 9.

Would it maybe make a difference that you might need a bit more time to produce the report for which cheese your client should buy? Perhaps, but, that doesn't detract from your ability to recommend cheese, not does it diminish your expertise in the area. You could be the world's best Cheese Consultant! But we'd never know had you not been given the access arrangements, because it turns out you're dyslexic and dyspraxic with slower processing. You would perhaps achieve a 6 instead. Because you literally ran out of time on question 6 out 10. Whilst the other candidate had ample time to answer all 10 questions without difficulty..

Because there's absolutely no need. 95% of candidates will be twiddling their thumbs, and then there are candidates that get 50% or 100% extra time... Should we just double the length of all exams?

Oh and on the "extra time doesn't mean a separate room" - in the school I invigilate it does. Because it's unfair to the children with extra time to have 200 odd other kids leaving the hall while they're still working. This school has a policy of not allowing anyone to leave until the scheduled end of the exam - they must all sit there until the end. This means that kids are not distracted by others leaving, worrying about why they are still writing when a friend has finished. We do accommodate children in groups - so the kids with 10% extra time are in one room, the children with 25% or whatever are tofgether too.

Quite clearly those with a reader/scribe need separate accommodation, as did the boy who had to get up every 20 minutes and hobble around.

Yes I realise that.

But in the 'real world' people can at least to some degree pick a job that fits their nature / individual needs. So (generalising massively here) someone with dyspraxia won't aim for a job requiring fine motor skills, someone with dyslexia won't aim for a job as a proof reader. Mini adjustments on the peripheral of a job should often be possible.

My eldest had 'adjustments' (if you can call them that) of writing down procedures so she didn't forget them, and asking colleagues to be very direct as she didn't notice hints.

As for the “middle class parents getting an unfair advantage for their kids by getting them adjustments. The issue isn’t that these parents are getting their children what they are entitled to. The unfairness is that there are some families who don’t have the awareness of the system to know that you have to keep fighting the system to get these things agreed and in place. I feel extremely sorry for children whose parents don’t understand the system or how to talk to the school - it isn’t fair. But this doesn’t mean that “middle class parents” are somehow getting a great deal for their children.

From my experience, there is no way a SEN team would be going along with exam adjustment requests based only on how pushy a middle class parent is.

I was an exam invigilator in Scotland for the main exams this year and last year.

For some exams, a third of children had alternative arrangements. Not all of these had extra time.

Some required a reader or a scribe, or both. They generally got extra time because that process takes longer. Others did their exams on computers, typing rather than handwriting. Not all of them got extra time. I invilgated for one lad with a knee injury, he had to sit with his leg straight out in front of him and was allowed breaks every 20 minutes to get up and hobble round the room. He didn't get any extra time - he got the same time as everyone else but the clock was stopped every time he needed to move his exam took longer.

Other alternative arrangements included large print papers for children who were visually impaired, coloured papers for children with dyslexia.

Additional arrangements does not always equal "extra time".

This thread has gone very strange.

My understanding is @noblegiraffe isn't saying a small room is never needed - just that it isn’t always needed for all students with an agreed adjustment? However, some schools do apparently choose to put all their students who have an adjustment (such as extra time) together in a separate room from the main exam hall.

There’s lots of sad and worrying posts that are coming across as “why should your kid get an advantage - mine should have some extra time too”. When talking about young people with a mental or physical need for a reasonable adjustment to be able to sit a compulsory exam.

And no acknowledgment from these posters that, as many PP have said, the workplace and life as an adult is very, very different from being in the school (and exam) system where everyone has to do the same thing and you have no autonomy as a child. Employers can use the interview process (including tests if relevant) to work out if the candidate is suitable for the job. The candidate can choose which jobs to apply for and can ask for reasonable adjustments when in post.

@catbathat must be on the wind up. No-one can actually be this obtuse.

Are you suggesting professionals - educational psychologist would assess a child with a problem because a parent is paying them to do so? Perhaps you ought to write to the British Psychological Society and suggest that they're not regulating their members and that do something about it... seriously get a grip you can't get willy nilly get any old diagnosis.

Late - No, when did I say that? I know that some parents see multiple people to get a diagnosis because they they talk about it quite openly!!

Late - she didn’t say ALL middle class parents are gaming the system - but some undoubtedly are, I’ve seen it myself. Some are also doing it subconsciously- trying to find an answer for why their dc doesn’t live up to their high academic expectations- I feel very sorry for these children, whose parents are trying to ‘fix’ them rather than being proud of them for who they are and recognising their other strengths.

Of course your an educational psychologist and know everything....🙄

Yes. I know of parents who have taken their child for multiple screenings until they get the diagnosis they want, the concept that some children are less able and don’t have a particular SEN seems to have disappeared.

What sad response - just because someone is from a middle class background doesn't mean they can't have a child that needs support in school. This is stereotypical of some people on mumsnets sadly and to see it from another teacher is depressing. I just glad the teachers I know are like this.

This.
I was until recently teaching in a school where sharp elbowed parents absolutely were and are gaming the system.
Unfortunately they are also imbuing a victim mentality in their DC too.

Teento - Reasonable adjustments in the work place is very job dependent. I know lots of people in the medical world and lots of teachers. Not much in the way of reasonable adjustments possible! Other people I know tend to be in business or professional jobs, I don’t think I know anyone who has adjustments in their job. I know plenty of people with dyslexia/ ADHD but they just get on with their jobs.

So if extra time isn't an advantage, why not just give it to everyone who wants it? You can't have it both ways!