Extra time

I'm a teacher and it really isn't that rigorous. I'm not saying your evidence wasn't but in general it just needs to be shown as the normal way of working and they can compare it to an non extra time piece. There are definitely kids that need extra time to level the playing field but the system seems totally nuts at the moment without any really stringent guidance for who can't and can have it

There are different amounts of extra time depending on need. Dd is dyslexic and gets extra time, her friend gets extra, extra times It’s all relative, there will be a huge mundane of reasons.

No I'm well aware of that.

But the OP is a bit vague too - she seems to think all alternative arrangements mean extra time.

I think you are confusing extra-time with rest breaks here. Extra-time does alone does not mean you can leave the room. At all. Extra time should be evidenced and only given if used as a normal way of working. The fact that you state that ‘many’ students you supervise are not using it is a problem. Extra-time is not a ‘safety net’ or a back-up option in reserve.

I work in a state school. We don't use private diagnoses and the vast majority of our parents don't have the means anyway

Your dd may not know who gets extra time and who doesn't but has other access arrangements. That's because DC who have rest breaks can look as if they have extra time when they don't. DD had a spinal fracture when she took her A levels and got rest breaks to manage pain etc and to walk around. DD1 had a wrist injury and had similar accomodations - both therefore ended up finishing some time after most of the rest of the cohort so it might have looked as if they had extra time but it was just a stop the clock.

Definitely not an English teacher!!

Part of PE is possibly reaction times as that is pretty key to many sports. Though not eg high jump, shotputt etc.

But every GCSE is not meant to be a processing speed test.

What you also have to realise is many kids who get extra time are already disadvantaged in their revision. Slow processing doesn't only impact exams, it impacts learning, writing revision cards, even self testing. So even with extra time in the exam they have had to put in more effort than a similar ability faster processor.

Extra time slightly redresses the disadvantages, it doesn't wipe them away.

Have you never seen extra-time abused though? I have worked in both the state and private sectors and have never known a student whose parents have paid for private assessment to come back empty handed. Not once. Regardless of the ability of the child. I realise not everyone has the means to do this, but believe you me, some of those who can most certainly will. It’s a massive problem and I hope the exam boards tackle it.

No, it's there if they need it. If they are prone to feeling overwhelmed, they have the safety net of knowing they can stop the clock and leave the room. That knowledge may be enough.

I also teach a kid who gets rest breaks. She's hyper mobile and pain is a problem. That's not mollycoddling.

A "normal amount" of extra time is 10%. Bob gets it because he's dyslexic and it takes him a while to read the materials. Those extra 9 minutes in his literature paper help him to achieve what he can do in class when I read them to him.

A teen I know in a not hugely academic but small / mollycoddling private school already gets rest breaks and now school is applying for extra time for them also. No learning difficulty or neurodivergence - just “stress” in their own words. Got a private therapist to write in support. Like anyone doesn’t find exams stressful?! having worked in the state sector I’m sure they wouldn’t do this in a state school…

So, it’s simultaneously completely necessary but ‘many don’t use it’…. 🤔

Also - in Scotland at least - the kids don't need to use the extra time if they don't want it. I always tell a child when they are into their extra time and how many more minutes they have. Many don't use the extra time, and not every child with an agreement to take a break uses that either. But it's there if they need it.

Are you an English teacher?

A thought experiment: I am a very average netball player as I move too slowly round the court. My other skills are excellent (throwing, catching etc) but my speed slows me down reducing my overall abilities to average or below. If I was doing PE GCSE, would all sorts of special allowances be made for me in order to pass at a higher level along with my more physically talented and quicker friends? Or alternatively, do we accept that some people move faster than others, and, that those people are therefore fundamentally better at sport / working at a higher level?

I am invigilating in the exams up here in Scotland and I quite often work with kids who have extra time. There are so many reasons why children get extra time and it is not my place to ask why they get 25% or 50% more time than the children sitting the exam in the hall.

Alternative arrangements though don't just mean extra time. I was with a student last week who had broken his leg and needed to get up and hobble around every 30 minutes to keep mobile. He didn't get any extra time - but the clock stopped when he started hobbling around and started again when he picked up his pen. Other children are allowed to take a break away from the exam room so we stop the clock, go for a walk outside for 10 minutes if it's nice, then start again. No extra time - but it takes them longer overall to complete the exam because of the breaks. Others get extra time because they work with a scribe, a reader, or both.

Hmmm, I’m struggling with your reasoning here which appears to be that your students show progress / higher achievement with the addition of extra-time. Well frankly, wouldn’t we all? I could certainly write and edit a better essay with an hour-and-half to play with rather than just one hour. The time limit is clearly part of the test, otherwise why have it at all?

As with all these things, there may be a tiny minority of cases for which special adjustments should apply, but the pushy and sharp elbowed (among both parents and increasingly results pressured teachers) have milked this system for all it’s worth.

If you give extra time to all in eg English Language then kids will just write unnecessary reams which then has to be marked.

If you give extra time to all in Maths/Science then generally kids will be twiddling their thumbs.

Extra time is to make up for slow processing / slow handwriting or similar. It doesn't miraculously make kids better at analysing Shakespeare or doing harder maths. Generally if you can do it, you can do it in the time. Extra time is for the kids who can do it but clearly slower than others, and for whom extra time time makes a significant difference.

Making all exams longer means more time in exams for all, more costs for invigilation, more stress, more unnecessary stuff to mark in English & History.

(NB I will accept there may appear to be an issue with length of English Lang exam as this seems to be consistently one that seems very tight on time for all.)

I’m sorry, but as an English teacher I must disagree with you. Extra time is a huge advantage in time pressured essay subjects which are about expressing ideas rather than showing ‘knowledge’ in the way maths and science are. The amount of students qualifying for it at the moment is shocking and I hope JCQ clamps down on it.

There is some flawed logic in this thread.

If the exam is “designed to be do-able in the time given for children who don’t have additional needs” and there is “no advantage to giving extra time to kids that don’t need it”, why don’t we just let all the kids have the extra time?

There must be an advantage to having more time - otherwise they’d let everyone take as long as they wanted!

Hmm I agree that being able to pay for assessment is a huge factor in the numbers but I doubt state school teachers don't notice. They are far more likely to be qualified and also contractually attend training on Sen so I would suggest more likely to be aware of current research and procedures.

Private schools usually have smaller class sizes and tend to be smaller, with better student to staff ratios. It makes sense that they would be more likely to notice that a student isn't quite meeting their potential, and investigate further. The parents are also more likely to have the means to pay for private assessments if recommended by the school.

That might not seem 'fair' because there may be students in state schools that would qualify for extra time if someone had noticed them struggling and if parents were able to pay for further investigation. But that's not really the fault of private schools.

@TheAmberStork is correct. For a number of reasons private schools have higher % of extra time. A lot of SEN parents use private schools. A good friend of mine involved in education told me that private schools use the system to get it way more than state schools. They can help ensure the highest results. A lot of kids in state are either not diagnosed formally and / or don’t know how to get it

My DD has dyslexia she has a fornal
diagnosis stating age should get 25% extra time. I was quite surprised she needed to be assessed by the school too tbh

Yep there is a disproportionate amount of students from private school with extra time. And before all the parents come on from these schools they don't all have undiagnosed sen. I suspect it is more pressure on these schools to perform and attract paying customers. The whole exam system needs an overhaul...