Do you think extra time in exams is fair?

Scroll to see replies

But you would be, quite categorically and measurably a slow thinker regardless of cause.

I haven't denied this, but the cause is pretty important.

Yes if you had a severe impairment then you'd need to talk to your prospective employer, but most people are not severe and have no obligation to mention it. If they did, an employer could argue that they required someone who could process information quickly to make fast decisions, for example, and that the person with a slow processing speed, whilst not their fault, is not suited to the job. In the same way that a double amputee could not be a manual labourer. It's not discrimination, they just can't do the job.

Yes exactly. One of my first, if not my first comment to you was that it doesn't make sense for someone with a slow memory to apply for a job that requires a lot of memory.

I'm sorry but out there in the real world you don't have the benefit of all these exceptions being made for you, and often you are not treated in a particularly compliant way because you do not have the power to challenge an employer without negatively affecting your own prospects.

you keep mentioning the 'real world', we all live in the real world and everything I say is in reference to 'the real world'
You do have the benefit of those exceptions though. If you are not allowed to discriminate against someone for having a disability, it means that you will obviously have to make some allowances for them, as much as reasonably possible of course.

Reply 221

Mazzy95

Original post by xylas

"Why don't you enlighten me as to why you think I'm so called ignorant. I am actually the exact opposite. I'm a very open minded, nonjudgmental and empathetic person."

Ok since you asked I will enlighten you:
1) you judged me by calling me ignorant right off the bat, before I had even said anything to you.
2) you displayed zero empathy when you said "you can't understand these disabilities until you have them" That is the opposite of empathising.
3) if you think you're open-minded why do you get irritated with differing points of view?

With that out the way I will try to give what you are saying the benefit of the doubt despite this first impression.

Ok so you think that you can speak for Peroxidation?? Don't you think that contradicts everything you have said - the part about not being able to understand what someone else has gone through??? How do you know anything about me or what I know about autism? How dare you call me arrogant?!

You are one of the most hypocritical people I have ever met on this forum.

You then make your first relevant point to this thread "Just because someone with autism doesn't have a difficulty that means they need extra time doesn't mean that all people with autism are the same." I have said this before and I agree with this.

My main point is that just because you have autism doesn't automatically mean you should have extra time. Will some people with autism need extra time? YES.

See how completely wrong you were about my posts? That's why I think you are ignorant.

(Sigh...) I didn't mean you were ignorant/arrogant in general in life - I meant that your posts were displaying ignorance/arrogance. Sorry I thought that was self - explanatory. I would have to be a very stupid person if I thought that I could judge your entire personality based on a couple of posts that you wrote on an online forum. I don't do that. I only really have an opinion on someone's personality if I know them well. (Although there are lots of judgmental people in life that do like to make an informed opinion on someone, based on very little knowledge of that person.)

Examples that you have shown both ignorance and arrogance -
'I'm pretty sure coordination disorder is the inability to perform certain motor tasks quickly not processing information. If you can read the question fine but can't process what you have to do to answer it, this is not a disability and you shouldn't be given extra time. This is normal and just means you aren't as capable at the exam as someone else hence in a lower grade.'

You're pretty sure? So you don't actually know what it even is yet you think you have the right to make a judgmental opinion on it? Please explain to me how this is not arrogant? Don't have an opinion on something you know nothing/very little about.

Another two - 'If you have any sources to back up your position I would be interested to see them. As it stands I have given 4 reasons and provided 3 sources on this thread.' and 'If you expect anyone to believe your word over the official NHS-audited website then you will be disappointed.'

That to me is arrogant that you think a quick read off of the internet in order to provide evidence to your opinion means that you must be right and the person you were talking to wrong. There's lots of things I read about just on a daily basis but I rarely make a proper judgment or opinion on them unless I know a lot about something/ have been through that experience myself. (depending on what it is.) For example I feel that I don't know enough about Brexit to actually have an opinion on whether I want the UK to leave the EU or not so I don't have an opinion on it.

In regards to your second point I honestly have no idea what you mean so you must have misunderstood me. What I meant was that no one can truly and fully empathize with someone until they have gone through that said experience. They can understand and empathize to a certain extent of course but not to the extent that that person who has gone through that experience can. It would be an insult to say otherwise. Example - fortunately both my parents are alive and well. I feel immense empathy to those who have lost their parents, however it would be arrogant of me to say that I can understand and emphasize (i.e feel their pain) to the extent that others who have lost their parents feel. I can't imagine the pain that they' re feeling. Do you understand me now? You seem to be a fan of taking definitions off of the internet to back up your points so here is the internet definition of empathy:

Empathy is the experience of understanding another person's condition from their perspective. You place yourself in their shoes and feel what they are feeling. Empathy is known to increase prosocial (helping) behaviors.

Hence the people that can really truly understand that person's experience, are the people that have gone through similar experiences. Anyone can feel empathy for someone but people that have gone through similar experiences tend to be able to feel that bit more empathy towards people that have gone through said experience.

Please don't say that I lack empathy based on my post. It is very cruel and not at all true so you must have misunderstood my point. I don't understand how else otherwise you came to that conclusion.

Being open minded isn't as simple as just considering others ideas. I do listen and find others ideas and interpretations very interesting (particularly in regards to religion as I have no religion myself) but when those ideas and opinions are unkind and narrow minded towards others I don't enjoy listening to them. Part of being open minded is not to stereotype and act prejudiced.

Okay I think you are backtracking on what you said earlier, either that or the way you conveyed your opinion earlier was different to your intention. I don't know. Based on your earlier posts you are saying that someone who has been diagnosed with autism and autism alone shouldn't get extra time. However if they have a secondary condition alongside their autism then they could be entitled to that extra time. E.g. when you said 'If that is the case, it's a joke that he gets extra time just because of autism and no other intellectual disability. What is it about autism that makes you think that someone with autism doesn't deserve extra time? As I've said before a key part of taking an exam is communication. One common anomaly of autism is lack/difficulty in communicating. Another trait is inability to concentrate. Another key factor of taking an exam. As you said on this post just because you have autism doesn't mean you should be entitled to extra time. I agree. Like with any condition. However if that condition affects your ability to take exams then YES they should be allowed extra time. Initially you were saying that having autism shouldn't be an excuse to be entitled to extra time unless they have a condition alongside but now you're changing your tune? I'm confused.

I'm not hypocritical this claim doesn't make any sense. Also really? I'm 'one of the most' hypocritical people you've met on this forum! You must have only had lovely experiences on TSR then because there are hundreds of hypocritical people on this forum. Not to mention ignorant people, rude people, there are some really vile people I've seen on other threads. One accused me of being a rapist because I said I didn't find jokes about rape funny (Very vile and bizarre person.)

Lastly nowhere have I claimed to speak for Peroxidation. I was actually just trying to help and defend them as I thought the way you were talking to them about autism when you knew they had autism was out of line. Sorry there are some honorable and kind people out there that just want to help and stick up for others when they feel people are speaking to them inappropriately, Unfortunately most people in life will just ignore and not care because it has nothing to do with them. I was also trying to defend autism in general.

Reply 222

ItalianGuy1897

I have extra time as I don't get things as easily as other people. I need extra help in order to understand things and know exactly what to do. In my December mocks I used the extra time to reread questions and make mental notes of what the questions wanted me to do. I also have dyslexia so having extra time, for me, helps because it gives a little bit of less stress on me because I can take the exam slower.

Because of the extra time I got 2 Ds 5 Cs and 1 B

Reply 223

xylas

Original post by Mazzy95

Spoiler

Unless that is some half-hearted attempt at an apology I couldn't be less interested...

"I'm pretty sure" =/= arrogance. Once again, unlike you, I have never judged anyone on this thread.

If you want an example of arrogance keep reading your post until you get it. The fact you are trying to teach me things is laughable. The fact that you are no more qualified on this matter than me but think you know better is quite sad really.

Finally, I never said you lacked empathy. Read what I said again. I said you "displayed zero empathy". If you can't see the difference that is ignorance at the highest level.

P.S. you are not honourable or kind for "defending" someone when you think someone else is "out of line". You are just incredibly arrogant.

Reply 224

nemofoot

Original post by Abstract_Prism

If you had extra time in your exams, (for those who don't already have it) do you genuinely think you would get significantly better grades?

I was drinking tea and saw your profile picture and honestly nearly choked to death. I don't know why I found it SO funny.

Reply 225

Platopus

In my opinion, it's fair. However, my school do exploit it. The amount of extra time one can be awarded is meant to range from 5% to 50%. At my brother's school, this means that people who are, for example, only slightly dyslexic get about 10% extra time, while more severely dyslexic people get 25%. Meanwhile, my school awards 25% extra to everyone as a minimum, regardless of how slight their disability is. It seems unfair that the same individual would get 10% extra time at one school, but 25% extra at another.

Reply 226

john2054

Original post by nemofoot

I was drinking tea and saw your profile picture and honestly nearly choked to death. I don't know why I found it SO funny.

I get extra time in my uni exams, because i have schizophrenia. And if you think this is a joke, try taking the drugs i am on, and doing the years in locked wards, i have done, and see if you come out laughing okay?!?

Reply 227

Abstract_Prism

Original post by nemofoot

I was drinking tea and saw your profile picture and honestly nearly choked to death. I don't know why I found it SO funny.

It's the expression I most often find myself making when I'm on these forums.

:biggrin:

Reply 228

Mazzy95

Original post by xylas

Not sure why you'd think I was apologising to you (I have no reason to.) I said sorry I thought that was self explanatory to try and explain something you misunderstood but other than that no hint of an apology in my post. I personally feel you should apologise to the previous poster but no chance of that happening because you can't even see that what you said was wrong. And I don't care about you apologising to me. Arrogance is something I find confusing in people and trust me it is the complete opposite to what I am. I actually have very low self esteem snd constantly doubt myself. We must have different definitions of arrogance. I was trying to help another poster and generally defend autism because you were'nt being very empathetic. Maybe this concept of helping others is alien to you so you don't understand that. Fine. You don't know anything about me but ignorance and arrogance are traits that couldn't be further from me. You did judge another poster therefore I judged what you said. You've ignored pretty much everything I said in my last post. I'm not trying to 'teach you things' you misunderstood my previous post so I was trying to elaborate. I never said or implied that I 'know better' however it is judgemental of you to make a statement saying that I don't know any better than you when you don't know of my diagnoses or past experiences.

We clearly have different understandings of the words arrogance, ignorance and empathy and you seem to be an impossible person when having a discussion with someone so I no longer wish to speak with you. There's just no point. You clearly aren't going to listen or open your mind to anyone else. I come on TSR to learn from others as I find others differing perspectives interesting and I always enjoy expanding my mindset. I constantly try and improve myself and make myself a better person. I feel everyone should try and make themselves better people - there's always something you can learn from another person. Maybe every now and then someone might learn from me too. (My insecurities say probably not but it's possible.) However whenever I see someone that I think needs help and is being uneccessarily targeted on a thread or even just spoken to inappropriatley and no one else has stepped in to defend them sometimes I try and help. I understand that most people find this concept alien as they don't really care about other people, especially strangers but every now and then you will see someone on TSR step in and help that person. It's just in my nature. I was brought up that way to help others.

Lastly it makes me sad to think that you'd think someone trying to help another human being is arrogant. Perhaps people don't often help you in life so you don't understand this concept? I'm sorry if they haven't, that must be difficult. I no longer wish to speak with you as it is very draining and just makes me unhappy so this will be my last post to you.

Reply 229

xylas

Original post by Mazzy95

Spoiler

Couldn't be less interested.

You want me to apologise to another poster?? You are the most arrogant, judgemental piece of work I have ever come across.

I couldn't care less about any diagnoses, self esteem issues or insecurities you might have. You are arrogant to think I would be interested in your problems.

If you want to "constantly try and improve yourself" then keep reading that bit underlined until you see exactly how terrible your behaviour is. Or continue being "sad" and "irritated", like I said I couldn't be less interested.

Reply 230

Tinka99

Original post by xylas

I agree with your point of view that if someone has autism this does not directly entitle them to extra time they must have a difficulties related to the autism which means they cannot complete the exams in normal timings.

Reply 231

xylas

Original post by Tinka99

Exactly! It's so simple that others are saying the exact same thing but not realising it.

Reply 232

Compost

Original post by Platopus

They changed the rules this year - if you get anything then now you get at least 'up to 25%'.

Reply 233

Platopus

Original post by Compost

They changed the rules this year - if you get anything then now you get at least 'up to 25%'.

Oh, is 25% the minimum now? If so, it's good that they standardised it. I've always felt very sorry for people who only got 10% at my brother's school when I they would have got 25% at mine. Just seemed they were at a disadvantage, purely because of the school they happened to attend!

Reply 234

username1560589

But not all autistic people have slower processing speeds. Autism on its own shouldn't be a basis for extra time, but slower processing speed should.

Original post by Tinka99

Some people do deserve extra help but just having an autism diagnosis is no reason the person must have issues related to the autism which prevents them from completing the exams in normal timing. I am sick of people using autism as an excuse for extra time.

Agreed.

Original post by Mazzy95

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. You clearly know nothing about autism. A common anomaly that most people on the autistic spectrum tend to have is difficulty with COMMUNICATION. Writing is a form of communication. You have to write in an exam. Hence help such as a scribe or extra time etc. Maybe read some more about autism than the NHS definition you copied and pasted into one of your previous posts.Very confused as to who I am talking to now! Sorry - part of this comment and the next one are directed at another poster as you replied to the post that I sent them.

There are many forms of communication. Someone with autism may for example struggle to have a conversation but be amazing at writing essays. It should be considered case by case.

Original post by Андрей

Exams in general are an inefficient and unfair way of assessing people.There are also far too many examination points throughout compulsory education. The SATS and GCSE examinations are essentially nonsense and could easily be abolished with few to no complications arising...

While I agree that GCSEs could be removed with little effect, SATs are required to ensure that primary schools keep some standard of teaching.
I don't think there's any real alternative for A-levels. For university courses coursework could be used more but I think exams are still necessary.

Original post by xylas

For example, if someone is very slow to process what a maths question is asking this is the same as being 'less able' at maths and should be reflected in the grade.

Mathematics isn't a sprint. Ideas can take months or decades of work to see the implications. Problems can take centuries to solve. It's not so much about the speed of someone's work but the quality and originality of their ideas.

Original post by TheMcSame

E.G. If you can't write quick enough, yet have nothing wrong with you, you shouldn't get extra time. If you can't write quickly, that's your own damn fault if nothing is wrong with you, stop acting like the world owes you a favour you so and so.

How is it your own fault if you can't write quickly?

Original post by Mihael_Keehl

With mine, I was in the 99% percentile for some and in the 1% percentile for some others.I am not sure how people could cheat in the actual diagnosis stuff not for bad handwriting etc.Won't the confidence intervals/standard deviations be able to inidcate if someone is messing around or not :P

Just read/write whatever you're supposed to slowly. If you want a computer type quicker than writing(not too quickly though so you still get extra time). It'd be easy to cheat. The results won't distinguish between a positive and a false positive.

Original post by CathyHeathcliff

Someone I know is autistic so he gets extra time. He is in a few of my classes and he works a lot quicker than me and he reads a lot quicker than me too.

Original post by sue99

But I think some people really don't need it. One of my friends has Asperger's so he gets 15 minutes more in each exam he does but I honestly don't think he needs it; he is just unbelievably clever -to be honest I need it more than he does

To both of the above: you don't know everything about how he works so he could have some difficulty that you are unaware of. Or you could be right and he's getting it unfairly.

Another friend of mine gets 15% extra time because she writes slowly, and I sort of think it's a poor excuse, but it must be a medically recognised condition because otherwise it would never be allowed.

Why do you think it's a poor excuse? She takes ~15% longer to get her ideas down.

Reply 235

TheMcSame

Original post by morgan8002

How is it your own fault if you can't write quickly?

Why isn't it your own fault if you can't write quickly, again, if you have nothing wrong with you? The vast majority of people are capable of writing quickly, and again, if you have nothing wrong with you, you should be more than capable of writing quickly.

Reply 236

username1560589

Original post by TheMcSame

I just asked you the opposite of that question. No-one would choose to write slowly. What has someone done wrong to deserve writing slowly? Yes, but what if you aren't capable of writing quickly?

Reply 237

TheMcSame

Original post by morgan8002

I just asked you the opposite of that question. No-one would choose to write slowly. What has someone done wrong to deserve writing slowly? Yes, but what if you aren't capable of writing quickly?

If you aren't capable of writing quickly then you need to improve your writing skills to allow yourself to write faster. The only valid reason for not being able to write quickly is if you have something wrong with yourself, some sort of disability for example.

Reply 238

username1560589

Original post by TheMcSame

Ok. How do you suggest going about that? If you don't know of a root cause then any treatment is likely to be ineffective.

Reply 239

xylas

Original post by morgan8002

I agree with this and your view on extra time in exams.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying regarding "processing what a maths question is asking".

My argument in logical form:

X finds processing a maths question more difficult => X is less able at (this kind of) maths

This is not the same thing as (affirming the consequent fallacy):

X is less able at (this kind of) maths => X finds processing a maths question more difficult

Therefore your argument that maths (problem solving) ability does not rely totally on speed actually supports what I'm saying since processing speed is only the pre-requisite to maths ability, but there are other reasons (e.g. lack of quality or originality of ideas) why they might still be less able at maths.

Hope we're on the same page :smile: