Special needs and extra time

[mummy68]

DD1 has just done her S grade exams (equivalent of GCSE I think) and for the majority of exams felt 'pushed for time'. As a result she feels it is quite unfair that several classmates were given extra time simply because (like her) they are a bit slow with reading and writing and concentrating. They claim thngs like dyslexia when they can read and spell perfectly well but are just slow. But the reason she has no problem spelling etc. is she LEARNED to at a young age. Even more laughable is ADHD, which translates (on evidence of said people) as a bit cheeky and bored of certain tasks, or maybe with difficult family environments. (DD got the odd detention a few years back for being rude and carried away with herself, maybe she had ADHD)

So is it fair that some people get special treatment with extra time, scribes, money for a laptop etc. just because they haven't learned to read and write or been brought up to concentrate on things that matter to them? Are we doing more harm than good giving in to incompetent teachers and parents. Or should we pretend DD has a 'learning disability' to get her on a level field for her Highers?

The OP is in Scotland, which is a massively different system and a different awarding body.

To have modified exam arrangements you need to have a cause, with evidence (usually medical) and a reason, also with evidence.

So no condition automatically qualifies you to extra time, schools need to show that the pupil actually needs it on top of dyslexia/dyspraxia/ whatever the ASN is, which will involve sitting practice exams with and without extra time and only if that extra time makes a significant difference to the result will it be allowed.

With most candidates, extra time does not improve results, they just finish earlier or write more waffle.

To be able to use a scribe or computer, again there needs to be evidence and it needs to be their usual way of working - if they don't use it in class, they've got no chance of getting it in an exam, the same with readers and prompters

Also exam arrangements need to be applied for well in advance, you can't just ask for them a month beforehand - in fact a lot of pupils miss out on them because a lot of teachers don't realize this, try to do it too late and without evidence.

ADHD is not laughable.

What is laughable is people being jealous of someone for having SN and whining about it on the SN board..

Isn't it a shame that these poor people with SN envy do not have the opportunity to acquire some SN of their own to enjoy the benefits?

At least people who whine about benefit scroungers do have the option of leaving their jobs and going off to enjoy the high life in a council flat in the slums. Though you don't often seem to see them doing it.

You cannot say what a dyslexic can and cannot do. That is for a professional to determine.

My son - like another on here - has a processing speed on the third centile. His intelligence is circa 75th centile.

He has a music exam coming up where he is given 'extra' time for sight reading. However, in reality, his processing speed is so low and the time given for sight reading so short, even that won't make him equal. He has to work harder to nail the rest of the test because, basically, 10% of the test is close to out of his reach. Problem? No, he gets on with it and realises that a bit of extra time is all he can expect (after all, if you are musician in real life you can expect nothing more). To argue someone with a proven condition ought not get this, just shows your ignorance.

One other thing.

My son, when in class, has a head full of ideas. Give him a lesson where interaction is the activity and he thrives. Give him writing as the form of expression and his brain is flooded with processing requirements. He can no longer think of his ideas as his mind is taken with processing data. His body stresses and panic starts to setin. He has to grab the side of his chair and undertake stress relief techniques to disperse the pressure. Then he can try writing more.

Can you even come close to imagining what life is like in an academic environment when exams are involved. 100% writing for hours?

There is unfairness in the extra time allowed. There is no allowance for the severity of the disability - all students get an extra 25%.

DS1 was diagnosed at 15 with dyslexia, by the school. We had no idea - he can read and write fine. Without looking out his assessment, I couldn't tell you which of the functions tested are deficient.

He gets the same amount of extra time as someone who is really struggling.

That unfairness comes from the assessment process. Despite severe dyslexia and mild dyspraxia, where it was obvious there was a problem from year 2 and with me asking for help and assessment from that time, nothing was actually done (apart from scribes etc at KS2).

We ended up paying privately £400 for an Ed Psyc over the summer of year 6/7 so that on entry to secondary they had a detailed report. We could only just afford that. No way could we afford to have that done - nor could the school - to assess the level at every exam sat.

I absolutely dread my sons GCSEs.

When I was at school you got different amounts of extra time for different issues. I got 1/3 extra time, which makes your exams really, really long. Other people got 10% extra time. It seems odd to have changed it to a standard 25%.

students can be awarded more than 25% extra time if the need is severe enough - look at the JCQ website. Not all students get 25% anyway - some get 10%

im sure my son would happly trade you his extra time, if you promised to take away his diability at the same time.

cornsilks - everything you say is so true, although it should not be like this. Why aren't all SENCos properly trained even now?

LIZS - it really should not have taken two EP reports and lots of dosh to size up a handwriting difficulty. Class and subject teachers should notice. It really is the simplest thing for a specialist teacher to assess: a whole class can be assessed in one sitting, taking less than half an hour. If your son is very slow he should be allowed sufficient extra time to bring his handwriting speed within the normal range.

Those saying that you need an actual disability to get extra time are sorely mistaken.

One of my friends is very clever - 11A*s at GCSE, extra GCSEs in Latin and such subjects, wins prizes for writing etc etc. She used to be in all my classes when we were doing GCSEs, and would invariably finish copying from the board or answering questions before me.

YET, she gets extra time(even in MATHS) because "she's slow at writing". All she had to do was do an in-school test where they times her writing sentences, and now she has extra time. She has no disabilities, and no problems writing. I don't blame her for it, but it's irritating.

I don't begrudge anyone with actual problems like dyslexia/dyspraxia/a broken arm/eyesight problems, but it's just ridiculous to give extra time because someone never bothers to write at the same speed as everyone else in exams.

This girl was the best example, but it's the same case with many of my peers. In a chemistry A-Level exam I had last week, more people had extra time than didn't!

I hope it's not just my school, anyway. :S

Wow, that's shocking, MK. How weird of your 'friend'.

When I was at school, these allowances and extra time didn’t exist. I don’t think that they should. An exam result is meant to be an utterly objective measure for an employer, of how good that pupil was at the reading, comprehension, and writing exercise that that exam comprises. So that if he takes them on and they face some very broadly and very loosely comparable task in an office, he knows how they will perform. If one pupil was given more time than another for the same exam, the comparison is no longer objective. The deadline in a workplace won’t be any different for the two pupils.

Today’s newspapers (10th Feb 2017) report that ONE IN FIVE pupils in private schools, and one in 8 in state schools, now get the extra time. Sorry, and I know some people who are parents of special needs children will not agree with this (but you are hopefully as politely tolerant of others’ different opinions, as I try to be), but IMHO no-one should.

Paolo It would be more helpful to start a new thread to comment on today's news article rather than resurrecting a zombie thread that is almost 6 years old.

OP you are talking rubbish!

No-one is just 'given'anything, access arrangements ( if a pupil does not have a statement or EHCP) have to be assessed and approved.

It makes me very sad that people like Paolo still have these attitudes to the extent they S resurrect zombie threads.

Paolo is of course very wrong. Exams are not meant to be representative of the workplace. They are meant to test knowledge of a particular subject. If children with certain conditions are not able to perform to their potential in an exam it is to the huge detriment of society. We might even lose another genius like Stephen Hawkins.

I am grateful that the replies were polite, given the sensitive nature of the subject. There is a far more recent thread on this area, but contributions to that are ALL in favour of educational allowances, with not one opinion the other way - my judgement was that if I posted there, replies might be abusive given the strength of feeling (although, they might not). It is not nice being flamed/abused, so I didn't risk it ! THIS thread however, is on the same topic but with much more mixed contributions/more open debate, including the opening post which is open minded, so it seemed a better place to post my own opinion now that this is topical in today's press. I think mine is an opinion that some others would hold, yet hold back from posting. I can see that the purpose of an exam is open to debate - is it to test knowledge, or is it something more, something that might be of interest to an employer ? Perhaps it depends a little on the subject and level. I would contest that GCSE Maths and English, for instance, are in practice quite vocational in the way they are often applied. There are jobs where reading fast and writing, are not at all important/useful/relevant to productivity; but in many professional jobs, they are, and the English Language GCSE might be taken, at least in part, as a test of that. For an apprentice technician or engineer, again they are important. In truth many employers no longer trust exam results as much as in the past, and for professional positions will ask candidates to take a numerical and verbal reasoning test. This is still less common for other positions, but I know of one apprenticeship programme for technicians (friend's son just got through it) that does make them take its own assessment test (including reading some material very quick, then they are asked to rapidly write an essay on what they can recall of it, summarising it - not given much time - a good replication of real work) as part of the recruitment day. Other things were assessed too, including technical ingenuity, maths, and teamwork.

OP you're talking crap. The standard grades haven't even been in existence for 4/5 years now...

Get back under your bridge.

Doh. Zombie thread... ooops.