extra time on exams for disabilities

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby A'nold » Fri May 14, 2010 2:09 am

How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.

Baylan
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby Baylan » Fri May 14, 2010 3:21 am

mikeytwoshoes wrote:
Baylan wrote:
rbgrocio wrote:I do not agree with it. We are going to law school to become lawyers, to become professionals. What are you going to do when a client comes in 5 days before the Statute of Limitations runs out? Ask another associate to do the job for you? We live in a world of time constraints, and this is a profession with such constraints. If one can't deal with it, then one should not sign up for it. I know lots of you are going to disagree, but if I'm fat I can't be a model; if I can't speak English, I should not go to college in the U.S. I understand that you can change your weight and that you can learn the language, but the case with ADD just pisses me off. You can take the appropriate medicine for it, and that should allow you to work just fine.

I would like to clarify that this rant refers ONLY to the case of ADD. And I know a 0L here mentioned that what is 1.5 hours more going to do to you? that actually made me laugh. Yes, in law school you need to know your stuff, but when someone makes you write five essays (very long ones) and you also have to do multiple choice and raise about 15 issues (joinder, SMJ, PJ, Erie, venue....) 1.5 hours can go a long way for you.


I'm going to jump on this wagon here. There are many disabilities where you might be able to quantifiably adjust the amount of time one has, or create accommodations which will level the playing field, but I believe that it is doing a disservice to those that are given the accommodations. How can they be expected to perform on the same level as any other student if they have a different set of rules? The real world is far from fair, and in all honesty, how is it perfectly equitable for two separate sets of rules to exist?

I am honestly sick and tired of government attempting to create equality for people with different talents, abilities, and work ethic. One must perform to the best of their abilities and find their own way in the world.

I am also in favor of equal benchmarks between men and women in professions that have physical components. I don't understand why firefighters, police officers, and other professions which have a physical component would hire and allow for what would be a "substandard" employee, because of being a different gender.

I know this sounds harsh to those with disabilities, but in the same vein, if you don't have legs, you can't be a fireman. Why go into a profession that involves lots of high level reading, quickly, and writing, quickly, if you can't do the work at the same level as everyone else?

And so you don't all hate me, some of the inspiration from this is coming from a man much greater than I, Martin Luther King Jr.

"If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.”

No one is saying that you should be able to be a lawyer if you don't have a brain. We're not asking for the government to be the Wizard of Oz. There is a reason that it's called reasonable accommodations. It isn't that there are two standards, but that the standard is inaccurate. Grades from race horse examinations don't measure our ability to be lawyers. Exams are only a rough proxy for ability. Having a disability doesn't mean we were called to be street sweepers. Calling is about personality not ability, jack ass.


Grades from any examination don't accurately reflect or measure ability in many cases. That doesn't stop everyone using grades as a reflection of ability. Literally, at every point in your life, your grades are used as a reflection of your ability (until you get your first job).

And I never said that having a disability meant that you were called upon to be a street sweeper, I simply said that I feel that everyone should have the same standard - no matter what. I believe that in pretty much every testing scenario. I feel that the accuracy of one's ability, relative to others, which is all that grades and standardized testing is really about, cannot really be accurate if some (or any) students are given a different set of standards/rules to abide by.

The meaning of the quote was simple, from my interpretation, and it wasn't "go sweep streets." I believe it means this: No matter what you're doing, do it the best you can. Even if it isn't your first love or first option.

Baylan
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby Baylan » Fri May 14, 2010 3:30 am

A'nold wrote:How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.


Like a previous poster said - heart surgeon with tremors? Why does the government force a "level playing field" in some areas, and not in others?

I have an old teacher who has a degenerative neural condition that causes him to have tremors. He can no longer write on the chalkboard, but he loves teaching. He has found a way to be successful despite his disability. No one is saying that people shouldn't be able to practice law, or be removed from the possibility of success. I am simply saying that I feel that equal standards should exist. Across the board. For everyone. No exceptions for any reason.

I also have a friend who cannot walk for various reasons. He wanted to be a teacher. He completed his undergrad in secondary ed and rolled into his first day of student teaching and was told that he could not teach because he could not command a classroom because he couldn't stand. This is wrong, and this is why the ADA exists. Thing is - he has completed his education with the same standards as everyone else. Took his exams the same as everyone, with the same time limits and was simply told off by the admin at the school. He can do the job - there is just an inherent bias against him because of his disability by other people.

User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby A'nold » Fri May 14, 2010 5:14 am

Baylan wrote:
mikeytwoshoes wrote:
Baylan wrote:
rbgrocio wrote:I do not agree with it. We are going to law school to become lawyers, to become professionals. What are you going to do when a client comes in 5 days before the Statute of Limitations runs out? Ask another associate to do the job for you? We live in a world of time constraints, and this is a profession with such constraints. If one can't deal with it, then one should not sign up for it. I know lots of you are going to disagree, but if I'm fat I can't be a model; if I can't speak English, I should not go to college in the U.S. I understand that you can change your weight and that you can learn the language, but the case with ADD just pisses me off. You can take the appropriate medicine for it, and that should allow you to work just fine.

I would like to clarify that this rant refers ONLY to the case of ADD. And I know a 0L here mentioned that what is 1.5 hours more going to do to you? that actually made me laugh. Yes, in law school you need to know your stuff, but when someone makes you write five essays (very long ones) and you also have to do multiple choice and raise about 15 issues (joinder, SMJ, PJ, Erie, venue....) 1.5 hours can go a long way for you.


I'm going to jump on this wagon here. There are many disabilities where you might be able to quantifiably adjust the amount of time one has, or create accommodations which will level the playing field, but I believe that it is doing a disservice to those that are given the accommodations. How can they be expected to perform on the same level as any other student if they have a different set of rules? The real world is far from fair, and in all honesty, how is it perfectly equitable for two separate sets of rules to exist?

I am honestly sick and tired of government attempting to create equality for people with different talents, abilities, and work ethic. One must perform to the best of their abilities and find their own way in the world.

I am also in favor of equal benchmarks between men and women in professions that have physical components. I don't understand why firefighters, police officers, and other professions which have a physical component would hire and allow for what would be a "substandard" employee, because of being a different gender.

I know this sounds harsh to those with disabilities, but in the same vein, if you don't have legs, you can't be a fireman. Why go into a profession that involves lots of high level reading, quickly, and writing, quickly, if you can't do the work at the same level as everyone else?

And so you don't all hate me, some of the inspiration from this is coming from a man much greater than I, Martin Luther King Jr.

"If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.”

No one is saying that you should be able to be a lawyer if you don't have a brain. We're not asking for the government to be the Wizard of Oz. There is a reason that it's called reasonable accommodations. It isn't that there are two standards, but that the standard is inaccurate. Grades from race horse examinations don't measure our ability to be lawyers. Exams are only a rough proxy for ability. Having a disability doesn't mean we were called to be street sweepers. Calling is about personality not ability, jack ass.


Grades from any examination don't accurately reflect or measure ability in many cases. That doesn't stop everyone using grades as a reflection of ability. Literally, at every point in your life, your grades are used as a reflection of your ability (until you get your first job).

And I never said that having a disability meant that you were called upon to be a street sweeper, I simply said that I feel that everyone should have the same standard - no matter what. I believe that in pretty much every testing scenario. I feel that the accuracy of one's ability, relative to others, which is all that grades and standardized testing is really about, cannot really be accurate if some (or any) students are given a different set of standards/rules to abide by.

The meaning of the quote was simple, from my interpretation, and it wasn't "go sweep streets." I believe it means this: No matter what you're doing, do it the best you can. Even if it isn't your first love or first option.


Sorry, but this is just stupid. The bolded shows how backwards your view is. Do you honestly think that one's ability to to be a top student or a lawyer is predicated on his ability to read 1/2 a line faster or type just that much more quickly? Sure, if one's ability to THINK or APPLY the law is less than another, then we are comparing apples to apples, but the speed at which he does it should not matter (to a REASONABLE extent). Think about it: If you can process and type crap 3 times faster than Mikey, but are dumber, you could still smoke him in an exam. If Mikey had the equivalent of what you had, say 4 hours instead of 3, his exam would be lightyears ahead of yours. Law school is not basketball. Someone's physical ability to process a tad quicker does not mean they should be at the top and the other below them. This would defeat your purpose of the "best man wins" darwinian type scenario.

User avatar
rbgrocio
Posts: 560
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:58 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby rbgrocio » Fri May 14, 2010 7:03 am

mikeytwoshoes wrote:
Baylan wrote:
rbgrocio wrote:I do not agree with it. We are going to law school to become lawyers, to become professionals. What are you going to do when a client comes in 5 days before the Statute of Limitations runs out? Ask another associate to do the job for you? We live in a world of time constraints, and this is a profession with such constraints. If one can't deal with it, then one should not sign up for it. I know lots of you are going to disagree, but if I'm fat I can't be a model; if I can't speak English, I should not go to college in the U.S. I understand that you can change your weight and that you can learn the language, but the case with ADD just pisses me off. You can take the appropriate medicine for it, and that should allow you to work just fine.

I would like to clarify that this rant refers ONLY to the case of ADD. And I know a 0L here mentioned that what is 1.5 hours more going to do to you? that actually made me laugh. Yes, in law school you need to know your stuff, but when someone makes you write five essays (very long ones) and you also have to do multiple choice and raise about 15 issues (joinder, SMJ, PJ, Erie, venue....) 1.5 hours can go a long way for you.


I'm going to jump on this wagon here. There are many disabilities where you might be able to quantifiably adjust the amount of time one has, or create accommodations which will level the playing field, but I believe that it is doing a disservice to those that are given the accommodations. How can they be expected to perform on the same level as any other student if they have a different set of rules? The real world is far from fair, and in all honesty, how is it perfectly equitable for two separate sets of rules to exist?

I am honestly sick and tired of government attempting to create equality for people with different talents, abilities, and work ethic. One must perform to the best of their abilities and find their own way in the world.

I am also in favor of equal benchmarks between men and women in professions that have physical components. I don't understand why firefighters, police officers, and other professions which have a physical component would hire and allow for what would be a "substandard" employee, because of being a different gender.

I know this sounds harsh to those with disabilities, but in the same vein, if you don't have legs, you can't be a fireman. Why go into a profession that involves lots of high level reading, quickly, and writing, quickly, if you can't do the work at the same level as everyone else?

And so you don't all hate me, some of the inspiration from this is coming from a man much greater than I, Martin Luther King Jr.

"If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.”

No one is saying that you should be able to be a lawyer if you don't have a brain. We're not asking for the government to be the Wizard of Oz. There is a reason that it's called reasonable accommodations. It isn't that there are two standards, but that the standard is inaccurate. Grades from race horse examinations don't measure our ability to be lawyers. Exams are only a rough proxy for ability. Having a disability doesn't mean we were called to be street sweepers. Calling is about personality not ability, jack ass.
Last edited by rbgrocio on Fri May 14, 2010 7:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

hubtubrub
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:02 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby hubtubrub » Fri May 14, 2010 7:04 am

do you think there are a lot of people with disabilities at t14s?

User avatar
rbgrocio
Posts: 560
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:58 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby rbgrocio » Fri May 14, 2010 7:15 am

A'nold wrote:How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.



I dismissed my own analogy by saying that you can change your weight and learn the language. I mean, I arrived to this country four years ago, when I was a senior in high school. I didn't speak English and had to take my SAT without knowing the language. Still, I was able to get a scholarship to college (the standards in Florida are not so high) but still, I made it. I then did college in less than two years. I took a year off and now I'm in law school... thus, I know that you can change your language and that you cannot change a disability. I think many people try to set excuses to get away with things. As some people said, ADD is over diagnosed. People say: "oh.... I can't concentrate, let's see what the doctor says." This weak standards of letting people with ADD get extra time when they can take medicine for it, is a disservice to them and to everyone in a curve. In real life there is no extra time, and unfortunately a firm is going to hire the one person who can work fast and efficient than someone who is going to need extra time.

But it is OK... we can agree to disagree!

User avatar
A'nold
Posts: 3622
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby A'nold » Fri May 14, 2010 9:45 am

rbgrocio wrote:
A'nold wrote:How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.



I dismissed my own analogy by saying that you can change your weight and learn the language. I mean, I arrived to this country four years ago, when I was a senior in high school. I didn't speak English and had to take my SAT without knowing the language. Still, I was able to get a scholarship to college (the standards in Florida are not so high) but still, I made it. I then did college in less than two years. I took a year off and now I'm in law school... thus, I know that you can change your language and that you cannot change a disability. I think many people try to set excuses to get away with things. As some people said, ADD is over diagnosed. People say: "oh.... I can't concentrate, let's see what the doctor says." This weak standards of letting people with ADD get extra time when they can take medicine for it, is a disservice to them and to everyone in a curve. In real life there is no extra time, and unfortunately a firm is going to hire the one person who can work fast and efficient than someone who is going to need extra time.

But it is OK... we can agree to disagree!


It seems like people in this thread have a fundamental misunderstanding (i.e., what they see on t.v. and what they've seen in those they knew) about ADD, such as how you said earlier that they "can just take a pill." True ADD is pretty debilitating. That said, let's get off of the ADD idea and think of every other mental diagnosis which might impair somebody to where they need a little extra time and stop focusing on the red herring of ADD. I mean, you know I love you rbgrocio and your story is impressive, but I think our fear of the curve is guiding a lot of our feelings in this regard.

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby seespotrun » Fri May 14, 2010 10:27 am

A'nold wrote:
rbgrocio wrote:
A'nold wrote:How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.



I dismissed my own analogy by saying that you can change your weight and learn the language. I mean, I arrived to this country four years ago, when I was a senior in high school. I didn't speak English and had to take my SAT without knowing the language. Still, I was able to get a scholarship to college (the standards in Florida are not so high) but still, I made it. I then did college in less than two years. I took a year off and now I'm in law school... thus, I know that you can change your language and that you cannot change a disability. I think many people try to set excuses to get away with things. As some people said, ADD is over diagnosed. People say: "oh.... I can't concentrate, let's see what the doctor says." This weak standards of letting people with ADD get extra time when they can take medicine for it, is a disservice to them and to everyone in a curve. In real life there is no extra time, and unfortunately a firm is going to hire the one person who can work fast and efficient than someone who is going to need extra time.

But it is OK... we can agree to disagree!


It seems like people in this thread have a fundamental misunderstanding (i.e., what they see on t.v. and what they've seen in those they knew) about ADD, such as how you said earlier that they "can just take a pill." True ADD is pretty debilitating. That said, let's get off of the ADD idea and think of every other mental diagnosis which might impair somebody to where they need a little extra time and stop focusing on the red herring of ADD. I mean, you know I love you rbgrocio and your story is impressive, but I think our fear of the curve is guiding a lot of our feelings in this regard.


I have terrible ADHD.

*Oh, look a squirrel*

But anyway, the meds work perfectly. If you have ADHD and you take meds, there is absolutely no reason for extra time. I can't speak for other learning disabilities.

Baylan
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby Baylan » Fri May 14, 2010 11:00 am

A'nold wrote:Sorry, but this is just stupid. The bolded shows how backwards your view is. Do you honestly think that one's ability to to be a top student or a lawyer is predicated on his ability to read 1/2 a line faster or type just that much more quickly? Sure, if one's ability to THINK or APPLY the law is less than another, then we are comparing apples to apples, but the speed at which he does it should not matter (to a REASONABLE extent). Think about it: If you can process and type crap 3 times faster than Mikey, but are dumber, you could still smoke him in an exam. If Mikey had the equivalent of what you had, say 4 hours instead of 3, his exam would be lightyears ahead of yours. Law school is not basketball. Someone's physical ability to process a tad quicker does not mean they should be at the top and the other below them. This would defeat your purpose of the "best man wins" darwinian type scenario.


Why shouldn't one's ability to process a tad quicker be a differentiation? Take two people who do not have a learning disability. How are we able to differentiate these two? Based on the ability for one to do higher quality work during a specific time period in an examination environment. The ability to do work in a time sensitive manner is an important skill at all levels of employment, from McDonald's to POTUS. One's inability to do the same quality work as another in the same time-frame is, in my opinion, something that should be taken into account.

Now, if extra time and accommodations are made note of on a transcript, you at least allow employers to make that judgement.

And yeah, I'm sure the fear of the curve is partially fueling my thought process on this, but I really do believe it. I am all for removing all human bias from admissions and employment, but one's ability to do better on the exams in the same environment and the same time constraints is important.

Another anecdotal, but personal example. I have been coaching forensic speaking at my old high school this past spring. A competitor at the state competition was blind in extemporaneous speaking... He had one man guide him to his rooms and to read him his question options. Then the kid had the same 30 minutes as every other competitor to prepare a speech. Yes, this was a competitive event... but the kid clearly could not research as well as the other students. Yet he competed with the same rules and was a semifinalist in the state competition. Law school is pretty much a competitive event too, in my estimation.

User avatar
SamSeaborn2016
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:07 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby SamSeaborn2016 » Fri May 14, 2010 12:10 pm

hubtubrub wrote:do you think there are a lot of people with disabilities at t14s?


Probably more than you think but still not enough to qualify as "a lot." I can only speak anecdotally but a significiant number of the disabled law students I know are within the t14. Also keep in mind that many disabilities aren't obvious to others and many students don't report their disability for various reasons.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby 09042014 » Fri May 14, 2010 12:15 pm

Obviously ADD is real, but how is it any different than just not being intelligent? Both are likely a bad roll of the genetic dice. Why is having a hard time concentrate a disability but having a hard time grasping logic not? ADD is treatable, they should be held to the same standard.

jnorsky
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:26 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby jnorsky » Fri May 14, 2010 12:19 pm

I had a friend how had "severe ADD" took 50 mg's of concerta a day plus had double time on exams that were curved. Then bragged about how he got all A+'s....I think this is utter bullshit, especially when my grade depends on how these people do.

Kid now works at one of the most prestigious Ibanks in NYC

User avatar
Matthies
Posts: 1253
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 6:18 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby Matthies » Fri May 14, 2010 12:31 pm

Just to add to the conversation I have really, really bad dyslexia, to the point that I did not learn to read or write my own first name until I was 10. Was first labed as austic then sent to a special school for dyslexics, then to HS then to college where I failed out with Fs. There were few computers then, and the ones the school had did not have robust enough spell-checking software to deal with someone like me who writes and reads backwards.

Six years later I went back to school with a good computer and speech to text software. Ended up getting a 3.92 GPA. In law school I was given extra time on in class exams and the ability to use MS Word as a spell checker. On every exam, even with the extra time, I actually had to stop writing before the end of the regular allotted time to give me enough time to run the spell checker. When you have dyslexia as bad as mine its takes 3-4 times the amount of time to spell check than write, and because I spell things the way my mind "sees" them it won't appear to me to be misspelled w/o the software (additionally 3 out of 4 times it so backwards MS Word has no suggestions so I must keep putting in various combinations of letters until it recognizes them).

Text to speech was not an option unfortunately because of the disruption to other test takers and the fact that text to speech must be trained to your voice to work well, meaning I would need to have my computer not locked down on exams. I took maybe five exams with extra time in law school. All the rest of my classes I would always take take-home or paper courses with no extra time over a class with an in class exam with extra time. Because when I can use my speech to text and read please software I am much, much better than when I can't. Extra time, given my disability, was a hindrance not a help. As for work every firm has been very good with me bring in my own laptop and software, and I've had no issues there.

Also I would trade my desylixa for being non dysleixc in a heart beat even if it meant i had to do everything in half the time as everyone else from now on. I would not wish this on anyone.

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby seespotrun » Fri May 14, 2010 1:00 pm

Matthies wrote:Just to add to the conversation I have really, really bad dyslexia, to the point that I did not learn to read or write my own first name until I was 10. Was first labed as austic then sent to a special school for dyslexics, then to HS then to college where I failed out with Fs. There were few computers then, and the ones the school had did not have robust enough spell-checking software to deal with someone like me who writes and reads backwards.

Six years later I went back to school with a good computer and speech to text software. Ended up getting a 3.92 GPA. In law school I was given extra time on in class exams and the ability to use MS Word as a spell checker. On every exam, even with the extra time, I actually had to stop writing before the end of the regular allotted time to give me enough time to run the spell checker. When you have dyslexia as bad as mine its takes 3-4 times the amount of time to spell check than write, and because I spell things the way my mind "sees" them it won't appear to me to be misspelled w/o the software (additionally 3 out of 4 times it so backwards MS Word has no suggestions so I must keep putting in various combinations of letters until it recognizes them).

Text to speech was not an option unfortunately because of the disruption to other test takers and the fact that text to speech must be trained to your voice to work well, meaning I would need to have my computer not locked down on exams. I took maybe five exams with extra time in law school. All the rest of my classes I would always take take-home or paper courses with no extra time over a class with an in class exam with extra time. Because when I can use my speech to text and read please software I am much, much better than when I can't. Extra time, given my disability, was a hindrance not a help. As for work every firm has been very good with me bring in my own laptop and software, and I've had no issues there.

Also I would trade my desylixa for being non dysleixc in a heart beat even if it meant i had to do everything in half the time as everyone else from now on. I would not wish this on anyone.


Good for you, Matthies. I would have quit school and started hooking at age 12.

User avatar
SamSeaborn2016
Posts: 412
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:07 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby SamSeaborn2016 » Fri May 14, 2010 1:17 pm

I can understand the concern everone has regarding extra time on exams and the curve. Again, though, I think it comes down to what constitutes a "reasonable" accomodation. An extra hour and a half may not be reasonable for someone with treatable ADD. But for someone with a more severe case or other difficulties such as described by Matthies it could be perfectly reasonable.

Something else worth noting is that professors do have the ability to grade outside the curve. At the school I will be attending I was told by a professor that there is a curve but it is regularly adjusted by each professor (within reason) to account for circumstances such as students with disabilites, or in cases where the professor believes more students deserve high grades than the curve would normally allow. I don't know how each and every school does it but in any case I suspect there aren't typically enough students getting extra time on exams to really throw a curve anyway.

umichgrad
Posts: 381
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:53 am

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby umichgrad » Fri May 14, 2010 1:54 pm

I think the case of the person gaming the system to receive extra time and then setting the curve for the class is relatively rare (and when it happens it really sets a bad example and is embarrasing for people with legitimate disabilities). I would wager that most of the people receiving extra time fall somewhere around a normal distribution of class rank. If this si so, then it shows that extra time for the majority of users does in fact level the playing field.

It's also worth noting that extra time is extremely difficult to get at most law schools. Usually it requries extensive evaluation and a LOT of red tape, which for people without disabilities is time probably better spent studying.

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Fri May 14, 2010 2:50 pm

Baylan wrote:
A'nold wrote:How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.


Like a previous poster said - heart surgeon with tremors? Why does the government force a "level playing field" in some areas, and not in others?

I have an old teacher who has a degenerative neural condition that causes him to have tremors. He can no longer write on the chalkboard, but he loves teaching. He has found a way to be successful despite his disability. No one is saying that people shouldn't be able to practice law, or be removed from the possibility of success. I am simply saying that I feel that equal standards should exist. Across the board. For everyone. No exceptions for any reason.

I also have a friend who cannot walk for various reasons. He wanted to be a teacher. He completed his undergrad in secondary ed and rolled into his first day of student teaching and was told that he could not teach because he could not command a classroom because he couldn't stand. This is wrong, and this is why the ADA exists. Thing is - he has completed his education with the same standards as everyone else. Took his exams the same as everyone, with the same time limits and was simply told off by the admin at the school. He can do the job - there is just an inherent bias against him because of his disability by other people.

I agree with most of the things you said, but your opinon on time limits doesn't mesh with your opinion Law students and lawyers with disabilities that require extra time on exams are like your friend. They can perform the job's essential tasks. The exams are graded on the same standard - whatever it is. I agree that time limits are important and accommodations should only be given to those who truly need them.

In undergrad, I had a classmate who couldn't move her fingers. She was brilliant. She wrote the best papers I have ever read. The only difference between her and students of normal ability was typing, writing, etc.. As I understand it, she had a scribe for her exams. I did not know her well, so I do not know if she wanted to be a lawyer. I have no doubt she could be a lawyer if she wanted to be. Someone like this would be exactly like your friend. She would be able to the essential tasks, but she would need reasonable accommodations to thrive in the profession.

The heart surgeon with tremors can't perform the jobs essential tasks even with reasonable accommodations. He could be a radiologist instead or even a cardiologist. As I posted earlier regarding Alzheimer's, there are important abilities that a lawyer cannot lack. The ability to spot issues in 3 hours versus 4.5 or even 6 is not one those abilities. In practice, we will become more efficient. I seriously doubt that the need for accommodations on law school exams says anything about a person's ability to be a lawyer.

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Fri May 14, 2010 3:07 pm

seespotrun wrote:
A'nold wrote:
rbgrocio wrote:
A'nold wrote:How many issues you can spot in 3 hours does not a sufficient advocate make. Sure, if it takes you three days, then, well, maybe the street sweeper thing is accurate. If it takes someone 5 times as long to read a case, but he is just as smart as you and will get the work done on time in an equal if not better way, then you really think he shouldn't be allowed to work as an attorney?

I actually thought that was what the ADA and all of this "people w/ disabilities can succeed too" mumbo jumbo was about: helping people that are just as good but are hampered in one way or another where a reasonable accomodation can even the playing field and not make these people become street sweepers, lol.

Btw- fat = not a good analogy, neither does ESL, neither does the street sweeper analogy. It is more like: you don't have money, therefore you cannot go to college and must be a street sweeper.



I dismissed my own analogy by saying that you can change your weight and learn the language. I mean, I arrived to this country four years ago, when I was a senior in high school. I didn't speak English and had to take my SAT without knowing the language. Still, I was able to get a scholarship to college (the standards in Florida are not so high) but still, I made it. I then did college in less than two years. I took a year off and now I'm in law school... thus, I know that you can change your language and that you cannot change a disability. I think many people try to set excuses to get away with things. As some people said, ADD is over diagnosed. People say: "oh.... I can't concentrate, let's see what the doctor says." This weak standards of letting people with ADD get extra time when they can take medicine for it, is a disservice to them and to everyone in a curve. In real life there is no extra time, and unfortunately a firm is going to hire the one person who can work fast and efficient than someone who is going to need extra time.

But it is OK... we can agree to disagree!


It seems like people in this thread have a fundamental misunderstanding (i.e., what they see on t.v. and what they've seen in those they knew) about ADD, such as how you said earlier that they "can just take a pill." True ADD is pretty debilitating. That said, let's get off of the ADD idea and think of every other mental diagnosis which might impair somebody to where they need a little extra time and stop focusing on the red herring of ADD. I mean, you know I love you rbgrocio and your story is impressive, but I think our fear of the curve is guiding a lot of our feelings in this regard.


I have terrible ADHD.

*Oh, look a squirrel*

But anyway, the meds work perfectly. If you have ADHD and you take meds, there is absolutely no reason for extra time. I can't speak for other learning disabilities.

Your experience =/= a sample from which you can make such broad generalizations. Disability is a personal issue and must be handled with care.

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Fri May 14, 2010 3:22 pm

A'nold wrote:
Baylan wrote:
mikeytwoshoes wrote:
Baylan wrote:I'm going to jump on this wagon here. There are many disabilities where you might be able to quantifiably adjust the amount of time one has, or create accommodations which will level the playing field, but I believe that it is doing a disservice to those that are given the accommodations. How can they be expected to perform on the same level as any other student if they have a different set of rules? The real world is far from fair, and in all honesty, how is it perfectly equitable for two separate sets of rules to exist?

I am honestly sick and tired of government attempting to create equality for people with different talents, abilities, and work ethic. One must perform to the best of their abilities and find their own way in the world.

I am also in favor of equal benchmarks between men and women in professions that have physical components. I don't understand why firefighters, police officers, and other professions which have a physical component would hire and allow for what would be a "substandard" employee, because of being a different gender.

I know this sounds harsh to those with disabilities, but in the same vein, if you don't have legs, you can't be a fireman. Why go into a profession that involves lots of high level reading, quickly, and writing, quickly, if you can't do the work at the same level as everyone else?

And so you don't all hate me, some of the inspiration from this is coming from a man much greater than I, Martin Luther King Jr.

"If a man is called to be a street sweeper, he should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and earth will pause to say, here lived a great street sweeper who did his job well.”

No one is saying that you should be able to be a lawyer if you don't have a brain. We're not asking for the government to be the Wizard of Oz. There is a reason that it's called reasonable accommodations. It isn't that there are two standards, but that the standard is inaccurate. Grades from race horse examinations don't measure our ability to be lawyers. Exams are only a rough proxy for ability. Having a disability doesn't mean we were called to be street sweepers. Calling is about personality not ability, jack ass.


Grades from any examination don't accurately reflect or measure ability in many cases. That doesn't stop everyone using grades as a reflection of ability. Literally, at every point in your life, your grades are used as a reflection of your ability (until you get your first job).

And I never said that having a disability meant that you were called upon to be a street sweeper, I simply said that I feel that everyone should have the same standard - no matter what. I believe that in pretty much every testing scenario. I feel that the accuracy of one's ability, relative to others, which is all that grades and standardized testing is really about, cannot really be accurate if some (or any) students are given a different set of standards/rules to abide by.

The meaning of the quote was simple, from my interpretation, and it wasn't "go sweep streets." I believe it means this: No matter what you're doing, do it the best you can. Even if it isn't your first love or first option.


Sorry, but this is just stupid. The bolded shows how backwards your view is. Do you honestly think that one's ability to to be a top student or a lawyer is predicated on his ability to read 1/2 a line faster or type just that much more quickly? Sure, if one's ability to THINK or APPLY the law is less than another, then we are comparing apples to apples, but the speed at which he does it should not matter (to a REASONABLE extent). Think about it: If you can process and type crap 3 times faster than Mikey, but are dumber, you could still smoke him in an exam. If Mikey had the equivalent of what you had, say 4 hours instead of 3, his exam would be lightyears ahead of yours. Law school is not basketball. Someone's physical ability to process a tad quicker does not mean they should be at the top and the other below them. This would defeat your purpose of the "best man wins" darwinian type scenario.

+1 :mrgreen:
Using me as an example shows how stupid some of these arguments are. People rail against accommodations for persons with ADD, and then they say that no one should get accommodations. As I have maintained throughout this thread, accommodations should only be given when necessary. This is why I support robust documentation requirements. It's also why I didn't complain when I had to do extra testing before LSAC would give me accommodations.

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby seespotrun » Fri May 14, 2010 3:29 pm

[strike]mikeytwoshoes[/strike] wrote:
seespotrun wrote:I have terrible ADHD.

*Oh, look a squirrel*

But anyway, the meds work perfectly. If you have ADHD and you take meds, there is absolutely no reason for extra time. I can't speak for other learning disabilities.

[strike]Your experience =/= a sample from which you can make such broad generalizations. Disability is a personal issue and must be handled with care.[/strike]

User avatar
mikeytwoshoes
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 11:45 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby mikeytwoshoes » Fri May 14, 2010 3:35 pm

seespotrun wrote:
[strike]mikeytwoshoes[/strike] wrote:
seespotrun wrote:I have terrible ADHD.

*Oh, look a squirrel*

But anyway, the meds work perfectly. If you have ADHD and you take meds, there is absolutely no reason for extra time. I can't speak for other learning disabilities.

[strike]Your experience =/= a sample from which you can make such broad generalizations. Disability is a personal issue and must be handled with care.[/strike]

I disagree with what you say and the manner in which you say it.

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby seespotrun » Fri May 14, 2010 3:39 pm

mikeytwoshoes wrote:
seespotrun wrote:
[strike]mikeytwoshoes[/strike] wrote:
seespotrun wrote:I have terrible ADHD.

*Oh, look a squirrel*

But anyway, the meds work perfectly. If you have ADHD and you take meds, there is absolutely no reason for extra time. I can't speak for other learning disabilities.

[strike]Your experience =/= a sample from which you can make such broad generalizations. Disability is a personal issue and must be handled with care.[/strike]

I disagree with what you say and the manner in which you say it.

No, I see your point. I'm just addicted to the strike feature. At any rate, disability is personal, but my personal experience is also grounded in statistics. See: google search effectiveness of ADHD medication.

hubtubrub
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:02 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby hubtubrub » Fri May 14, 2010 3:52 pm

striking feature=amazing.

User avatar
apper123
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: extra time on exams for disabilities

Postby apper123 » Fri May 14, 2010 3:58 pm

tbh I really have enjoyed reading the conversation and debate on this thread. It's an interesting topic, especially in today's world/legal industry. The post about what you need to go through to get accommodations with the LSAC was pretty eye-opening as well. Did not realize it was such an expensive (seemingly almost prohibitively so) and time-consuming process. I must say if these are the hoops people must jump through to get accommodations, then they do not bother me at all.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ArtistOfManliness, Exabot [Bot], splitterfromhell and 18 guests