Bostonian is absolutely correct-- and even disability advocates have expressed some concern over the time issue-- because that DOES fundamentally alter the assessment, and it does so even for those students who are non-disabled, making it very much unlike other accommodations. That is, this particular accommodation is one that MOST non-disabled students would be quite happy to have, and it would improve their scores in at least some subsections. The "timed" aspect of the test IS part of the test. I have no problem with offering the necessary time accommodation to students who really need it, of course-- slow processing speeds, dysgraphia, etc. all make that necessary to level the playing field. But it does open the door for fraudulent application for accommodations, too, and it probably DOES mean that some kids are getting mommy and daddy to purchase them accommodations.
The thing is, though... the crazy-making thing, I mean, is that they make the process of getting approval so unbelievably hard for everyone ELSE. That one makes no sense whatsoever.
There is NO WAY that "_______-- control of the environment to avoid triggering _______ (medical condition)" is any kind of advantage to non-disabled test-takers. Reducing distractions for an ADD student hardly seems like something every test-taker would even CARE about.
Seriously. That's like arguing that braille is an "unfair advantage" and that those kids wanting it are probably faking it to gain unfair advantage.
I understand the additional scrutiny re: extra time, particularly in people who have a very recent diagnosis. That's just plain suspicious, and I think everyone can see why.
But to say that a kid with dysgraphia since school entry wanting a computer for the essay is "unfair" or "suspect" is just insane.
And for people with medically-based disabling conditions, the entire system is convoluted and nonsensical in the extreme. MOST of those applications could be rubber-stamped, the provisions asked make so much sense and offer no possible, conceivable advantage to a non-disabled student.
So much of the documentation requested is plainly "does not apply" to anyone without a LD diagnosis. What, pray tell, is a neuropsych evaluation supposed to offer in determining which accommodations a student with cerebral palsy, severe RA, or active lupus "really needs" in order to take an AP test, anyway?
Oh, right-- they don't.
The most aggravating thing of all is that you ask for what YOU NEED at your peril if you are not applying because of LD (or something related) and asking for extra time.
You'd better make sure that you use the phrases that they recognize, because the default answer is "NO." Anything off the 'menu?' No again.
And really, again, this makes NO sense. A child with debilitating migraines triggered by fluorescent lighting SHOULD be able to specify "test environment must use natural or incandescent lighting sources only" right?
Not so. That child needs to request the same thing that mine does. "Breaks as needed." You know, to manage the condition.
It has NOTHING to do with the provisions written into a child's IEP or 504 plan. College Board states openly that they feel that they are under ZERO obligation to honor those provisions, and completely free to determine which of them are "really" necessary. Without any real appeal process to speak of, I might add.
You can always reapply with new data and supporting documentation, of course.
We dotted every i and scrupulously followed their instructions to the letter in every way that we possibly could-- and were STILL denied "one on one testing" as an accommodation. Even though we made it clear that ANY person in that testing room may pose a risk of fatality-- within a few minutes-- to my daughter, and documented her sensitivity and medical history to support that assertion. The school backed us (what about homeschooled students like my dd?? Good lord.) our specialist physician backed us (and he's nationally known). And we still were told that we were asking for what she didn't really need.
It's mind boggling.
