Extra time

[UltimateLuxury]

This isn’t meant to be provocative but…

my daughter is sitting GCSEs at the moment and told me last night that 43 kids of 120 are getting extra time

This seems really high to me. The school, although fee paying, is very academically strong and doesn’t have large SEN numbers.

To be clear, my point is not that my daughter isn’t getting this extra time. However, it feels that maybe the pendulum has perhaps swung to the point that those that really do need the additional time may be being disadvantaged by those with softer requirements?

How is the decision made? Would be interested in views.

It’s not just SEN children that need extra time. Those suffering with mental health may have extra requirements. There are also those with disabilities or chronic and debilitating illnesses. Those with unstable living situations. Etc. I’m not saying the number isn’t high as I don’t really have a comparison, just that there are many other legitimate reasons extra time may be required.

It will be less next year, JCQ are clamping down and using SRB instead (supervised rest breaks).

Extra time is based on teacher evidence of normal way of working plus either a qualifying medical condition or qualifying scores on assessments of cognitive processing/speed of working.

What are "softer requirements"?

We had a student once with 200% ET.

It’s becoming much more difficult to get extra time and schools must now try rest breaks before extracting time.

Thanks- I get there are lots of reasons. But is it “fair” that a student with eg stable treated MH issues gets the same extra time and one with severe dyslexia?

Sorry- what does that mean?

They are requiring evidence that the student has used the extra time in exams eg copies of a range of papers showing change of colour pen in extra time, but very little else has changed. JCQ don't required supervised rest breaks to be "trialled and exhausted" any more.

Ime the process is quite rigorous. My Dd had a letter from her consultant stating diagnosis and how this affected her and school provided evidence of how her illness had affected her grades. She sat one set of mocks prior to becoming ill and one after and was awarded extra time only in those subjects where there was a clear deterioration between mock exams.

200% extra time

Extra time can be awarded either for low scores in tests due things like processing speed, writing speed and accuracy, working memory, word retrieval etc. In most schools, these test are overseen by the SEN department and then application made to the jcq (who oversee most exams). Alternatively, if students have a medical diagnosis eg visual impairment that will impact on academic issues then there is a different way to apply for extra time.

Other access arrangements such as rest breaks, use of a laptop are decided by the school.

In either case it has to be the students normal way of working and there has to be evidence of need provided by the school on application or submission.

My children were academically very bright, straight A students - but needed extra time to demonstrate that. The complexities of their medical issues were not known outside of those who needed to know.

For those students who do not need extra time, then giving extra time really doesn't make much difference - most students are able to answer the paper without. For those students who brain works slower, or hand works slower, or who struggle to read, then extra time is designed to remove those barriers to demonstrating their knowledge, understanding and skill. GCSEs and A levels should not be a test of speed, but that is exactly what they become sometimes.

I never understand why this is an issue for some?

With regard to private schools having higher numbers, that is often because they have more capacity to assess students, particularly those who are borderline. State schools do not have the same resources.

Are you sure it is extra time and not just access arrangements?

Unless you have an actual need for extra time having extra time isn't much benefit. The exams are designed to be perfectly doable in the time provided. Having extra time doesn't mean you suddenly know something you didn't know before or the questions are easier.

My youngest son is autistic and it has been decided on a case by case basis for each exam. Over his 12 exams sat over the exam years, he’s had extra time (25%) in all but 2 of them and been able to use a laptop in ones that require a lot of writing. It was assessed and based on how he performed in assessments in class and how much he was able to get done in regular time. Over 1/3 of the cohort does seem a lot.

Totally fair. I work in a College with adult learners and we have to summit two types of evidence to the exam board to get extra time, be that 25% or 50% or 100%.

1. A written statement by myself or the teacher that explains the types of tasks that the student gets extra time on and what difference this extra time makes to their work.
2. At least two pieces of written work where we have given them the "normal" exam time to complete the task, then made a obvious mark to show what they have done at that point. Then given them 25% extra time, marking again what they have added. Then, if they may qualify for 50%, given them another 25% and marked the sections in the same way.
3. Depending on the student's needs, extra evidence of their difficulties and how these affect them, with particular consideration of any other support they might need and how this would be helpful for their condition. For example rest breaks with an explanation that their medical condition causes extreme tiredness or the need for frequent, urgent urination.

In your example, those students will have individually shown that they meet the criteria for extra time and so it is fair they both get it. If the one with mental health problems had NOT met the criteria and the one with dyslexia had, then the one with mental health problems would not have got extra time and the one with dyslexia would have done and that would have been fair. If the one with mental health problems had met the criteria and the one with dyslexia had NOT, then the one with mental health problems would have got extra time and the one with dyslexia would not have, and that too, would have been fair.

The school has to provide evidence to demonstrate that it is needed, even if there is a diagnosis eg of dyslexia, dyspraxia, mental health etc. Despite a diagnosis that recommended additional time in exams, DC still needed to complete an assessment on writing speed. Teachers were also able to demonstrate that in previous tests/exams additional time had been utilised and consider whether rest breaks were suitable support before extra time was granted. The diagnosis was a private one ( no other option in most cases) but was provided by the person suggested by the primary school, that used to work for the council when they offered a diagnosis themselves.

Others that are getting it could have a variety of needs that you have referred to as softer, but it doesn't mean that they are not still needs and the child would be disadvantaged without the additional time.
Having said that the figure you have given seems quite high - but who knows if there are children without what would be considered by most as SEN, but whose parents chose to send them to a fee paying school because they had a need of some kind that they thought the school could meet, and that is reflected in the percentage you have quoted.

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...

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

@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

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.)

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.