The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Hollyht
Maybe in extreme, extreme circumstances (bad illness and properly diagnosed dyslexia) but non of this "but I can't write fast 😭😭 business". Like if you can't handle exams do a BTEC.

What if someone GENUINELY writes 25% slower than the average GCSE student - shouldn't they get 25% more time? BTEC's are seen as inferior to GCSE's, yet you could be the most intelligent GCSE student in England, but have to do a BTEC because you have extremely slow writing speed - surely you are just being dismissive of people who genuinely have this issue?
Original post by OliviaBaggaley
In some aspects I believe it's unfair. I know someone who gets it and finishes exams before me, and I don't get extra time, therefore showing they don't need it. If you have mental disabilities I can very much understand, but it isn't fair for people who cheat their way around it and quite evidently don't use it anyways.

Does that mean we should just scrap the system? Or that the system ought to be fixed? And how would you fix it, I mean, it's not exactly easy to decide...
Original post by Martins1
What if someone GENUINELY writes 25% slower than the average GCSE student - shouldn't they get 25% more time? BTEC's are seen as inferior to GCSE's, yet you could be the most intelligent GCSE student in England, but have to do a BTEC because you have extremely slow writing speed - surely you are just being dismissive of people who genuinely have this issue?

Does that mean we should just scrap the system? Or that the system ought to be fixed? And how would you fix it, I mean, it's not exactly easy to decide...

I think it should be edited so testing is done to test whether they are responsive etc. under that sort of pressure, and if someone falls under a certain line they should get x amount of extra time, and so on.
Original post by Martins1
What if someone GENUINELY writes 25% slower than the average GCSE student - shouldn't they get 25% more time? BTEC's are seen as inferior to GCSE's, yet you could be the most intelligent GCSE student in England, but have to do a BTEC because you have extremely slow writing speed - surely you are just being dismissive of people who genuinely have this issue?

Yeah but let's just say I think a bit slower because I'm a bit thick should I get extra time too ?? Like exams are a way to differentiate between people if everyone was given extra time and what not the'd be not point in exams because everyone would do well. Maybe I'm not saying it's a good system of defining intelligence but if it's going to be done in this way everyone should begin with the same.



Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by OliviaBaggaley
I think it should be edited so testing is done to test whether they are responsive etc. under that sort of pressure, and if someone falls under a certain line they should get x amount of extra time, and so on.

Pretty easy to fake, unless people don't know that they are being tested?
Original post by Hollyht

Yeah but let's just say I think a bit slower because I'm a bit thick should I get extra time too ?? Like exams are a way to differentiate between people if everyone was given extra time and what not the'd be not point in exams because everyone would do well. Maybe I'm not saying it's a good system of defining intelligence but if it's going to be done in this way everyone should begin with the same.

If all you are is less intelligent, of course you shouldn't get extra time on account of that because GCSE's are testing intelligence - they are not testing writing speed.
Original post by Martins1
Pretty easy to fake, unless people don't know that they are being tested?

If all you are is less intelligent, of course you shouldn't get extra time on account of that because GCSE's are testing intelligence - they are not testing writing speed.


In that case get rid of time limits all together then because I could get like 95% on all my chemistry exams if I actually got a chance to finish them properly


Posted from TSR Mobile
Not really. There the test is not great at determining the need for extra time. Most people at my school could just take a long time to write the sentences and got it. I think there should be a fair test for those who truly need support.
No everyone is equal
I can't even believe how arrogant people are..."everyone should start with the same chance" omg just because your thick, doesn't mean u should get extra time
Reply 508
Original post by OturuDansay
I can't even believe how arrogant people are..."everyone should start with the same chance" omg just because your thick, doesn't mean u should get extra time


I think the important distinction is those who are getting it because they're 'thick' in your words, and those who are getting it for physical reasons. Would you say everybody who gets extra time is 'thick?'


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Kxjzh
I think the important distinction is those who are getting it because they're 'thick' in your words, and those who are getting it for physical reasons. Would you say everybody who gets extra time is 'thick?'


Posted from TSR Mobile


no I would not:smile:
it should only be allowed for people with severe disabilities i.e. downs syndrome, severe autism etc. Even then it should show on the grade certificate and perhaps limit the highest grade you can get or maybe reduce it by 10%
Original post by OturuDansay
*Working class, there's no such thing as "Class".....If you work for a living, you're working class personally


I didn't mention working class, all I said was that rich people get extra time because private schools cheat the system
Original post by georgia-hughes
I was in private education from the age of 4 until 16, only received extra time once I moved to an academy for sixth form. Barely anybody at my private school had extra time compared to where I am now. And I think you ought to educate yourself in the class system, you're getting confused with upper class and middle class.


Sorry mate, I go to a private school myself and have been since age 4.I am 16, so i have as much experience, if not more, considering that i have been to three schools. I am middle class(or at least think I am). Around 30% of people in my year get extra time(or a computer).The only education that needs to go on here is of yourself, regarding how to write polite replies.Simply, your private school is not representative of most.
Reply 513
Original post by OturuDansay
no I would not:smile:


Good. People don't get extra time for being less intelligent. They get it for various reasons- I wrote an essay about it a few posts back! But some people misuse the system. Sadly that's life.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Martins1
OK this just got unnecessarily rude. I go to a private school. We do not "abuse the system" - one person in my year has extra time, out of about 180. About three have supervised rest breaks. How exactly do we abuse the system? Everyone has to get diagnosed by doctors, and so do we - we do not abuse the system.

This is totally unfair - how can you rid of it because of cheaters. You cannot say that everyone cheats- there are tens of thousands of children nation wide with genuine disabilities - it is totally unfair to scrap the system just because some people are cheating on it. What you should do is make it harder to cheat. Full stop.


You ask how? it is very simple, Nicky Morgan writes a letter to OCR, AQA,EDEXCEL, and any other exam boards, telling them extra time no longer exists.
In my school, which is one of 3 private ones I have been to, about 30% of people get extra time.Also, we were all assessed internally, and only checked by a member of staff, who, coincidentally, did not even have a masters, talkless of having a doctorate.

Extra time is is unfair to those who miss out marginally, because had they been tested again, they might qualify.It is also unfair because it does not take account of real life, because in real life there is no such thing as extra time.
BTW , your school must be massive, my year is the biggest in the school, and there are 100 of us.
I have heard of schools coaching pupils so that they get extra time and can give out 'emergency' extra time during the exam period with out having to go through any of the testing so long as they can kind of justify it. THAT is wrong.

I am very dyslexic (50% AT) and struggle to read things and have to have rest breaks due to breaking my writing fingers twice meaning that they seize up if I write for too long. To prove that I had to go for x rays, have a doctors note and had several tests to get those rest breaks, including writing to the point where my hand seized up- which is quite painful.

On the other hand, my best friend- who does have episodes of crippling anxiety- gets 25-35% extra time and rest breaks IN CASE she panics, which she more often than not doesn't. She is a very fast writer, has a high IQ and is generally really smart and I think that it is so unfair that she gets always gets extra time (which can be an additional 35 mins) to write when in most cases she has no need for it. The school gave it to her on her first exam with no testing required.

It sounds very b****y as we are best friends, but at the moment it is a constant source of tension between us, though I imagine this happens elsewhere too. It means that the playing field within extra time is even more unequal than it already would be from lumping together thousands of students into 3 general categories for 25%/35%/50% extra time and means that really the extra time does not give the students- who generally need it- the full benefit.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 516
Original post by Martins1
Spot on! Very well written, and precisely what needs to be said! Although this also adds on to the reasons why exams themselves ought to be reformed!


Thank you. I would also agree exams, and potentially the education system itself, needs to be reformed.

My opinion is very controversial and likely to be bashed by many, but getting good grades does not necessarily make you intelligent. I'm not saying people who do well aren't intelligent because the majority are, as well as hardworking ect. But school now seems to be what you regurgitate rather than what you can build upon or add to what we know. It also doesn't really prepare you for real life and true independent thought and creation.
There are a lot of people who fail school who are incredibly intelligent, but simply do not test well, have differing interests or specialist areas than the curriculum or have a different learning style to the mainstream. A better education system could feed those minds and better so many more young people in various areas and have a huge global benefit.

I think the saying 'you can't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree' is very relevant here. There needs to be more acceptance that everyone is good at different things and has the capability to improve the world via their contributions to them. You can't say someones talents are more valid than someone elses dependant on what field they're in. There needs to be more support for varying attributes and not just english/math/science. It think it is a shame BTEC has so much stigma because they can be very valuable to certain areas such as sport that are more practical.
What I'm getting to is that there is a difference between equality and equity; it is the latter that will benefit society but our current education system doesn't really allow for that. Extra time is a movement in that direction...

at the end of the day extra time allows people who struggle to express themselves as quickly as others to show that that they ARE intelligent and have useful knowledge, points, opinions and arguments which deserve to be valued and recognised as much as anyone else's in society. These people can make just as valuable contributions as any of us, they just need longer to express it. In the real world, when it comes down to the most important things in life, nobody cares if it takes you an hour or a day to come up with a point, they care who makes the better point.
Yes people abuse the system and get extra time when they don't deserve it, but that means there is a fault with the means testing, not the principle itself... Stop being bitter toward your peers and be bitter toward the system.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Martins1
Completely agreed - quite confused why they do get extra time - the problem is not his timing, but handwriting, so surely extra time is unnecessary - unless his typing speed is much slower than that of his writing speed, I guess.


You have to undergo a test if you use a laptop to see how much time you really need. I, for example, type much faster than I write; so if I was to use a laptop, (I don't need to - my hands are fine) my time would be adjusted.

Well, I think that if someone hasn't been disagnosed they should immediately get diagnosed - there is often a tonne of help and advice from professionals concerning this. It could very well be affecting her learning and this could be what means whe has to do foundation tier rather than higher tier. On the other hand, the professionals may also say that it isn't affecting her learning - either way, she ought to find out.


It really isn't that simple.
Reply 518
This is an interesting question, i dont have any scientific condition, but in many exams (essay based or long-writing) my hand flares up and i get cramp, in my recent english language exam , I spent 40% off the time waggling my hands trying to get blood circulation, as Ive broken my index finger maybe 10 times (basketball :wink: ). As a test is meant to say how you understand a subject and how good you are at it and at conducting the exam I feel I deserved extra time, whereas over 30-35% of kids in my year get extra time there reason is usually, i rarely finish exams, that gets on my nerves. It just seems like a part of a test is to see how fast and how well you can answer something, taking a long time to process is a part of the challenge, that's like someone being excluded from algebraic maths questions cos they're not great at algebra, it defeats the point. I guess its tough to draw the line but even a friend of mine who got extra time walked out of the exam early cos he didnt agree with it.

If you can answer all questions with someone dictating at normal pace in 1 hour and can do the same thing writing but in 15 mins extra then I think you should get extra time, but if you need the extra 15 mins to think then i dont think you should get extra time
Original post by V ugvg jhi
You ask how? it is very simple, Nicky Morgan writes a letter to OCR, AQA,EDEXCEL, and any other exam boards, telling them extra time no longer exists.
In my school, which is one of 3 private ones I have been to, about 30% of people get extra time.Also, we were all assessed internally, and only checked by a member of staff, who, coincidentally, did not even have a masters, talkless of having a doctorate.

Extra time is is unfair to those who miss out marginally, because had they been tested again, they might qualify.It is also unfair because it does not take account of real life, because in real life there is no such thing as extra time.
BTW , your school must be massive, my year is the biggest in the school, and there are 100 of us.

Well yes, that sounds like cheating the system to me. At the same time, I'd be very surprised if they aren't getting any external diagnosis. Either way, just because people cheat, doesn't mean we can give up on people who NEED this help and extra time - it just means we need to fix the system - so that schools such as yours can not get away with that and so that everyone needs external diagnosis. Just to say, that although there is no "extra time" in life, there are also no exams. How many times have you EVER heard of an employer ask their employee to sit down without the aid of the internet and complete as much as they can in an hour? Never, assignments are typically given much more time and much more freedom to carry out how and when you like.
In my school I referenced one person with extra time - he has extremely slow handwriting - I've seen it in exams and man do I feel sorry for him. The two people I know who have supervised rest breaks; well one has frequent panic attacks and the other has a rare heart condition. The latter is in my English set and before the English speaking and listening I witnessed him having a panic attack. It was truly terrifying and there was no way he could complete his speaking and listening - our teacher moved it back a week for him. As he became stressed he started putting his head in his hands, lashing out violently at anyone who tried to help and breathing heavily. That 100% deserves supervised rest breaks in order to stop that happening.
Original post by Panzamad
I have heard of schools coaching pupils so that they get extra time and can give out 'emergency' extra time during the exam period with out having to go through any of the testing so long as they can kind of justify it. THAT is wrong.

I am very dyslexic (50% AT) and struggle to read things and have to have rest breaks due to breaking my writing fingers twice meaning that they seize up if I write for too long. To prove that I had to go for x rays, have a doctors note and had several tests to get those rest breaks, including writing to the point where my hand seized up- which is quite painful.

On the other hand, my best friend- who does have episodes of crippling anxiety- gets 25-35% extra time and rest breaks IN CASE she panics, which she more often than not doesn't. She is a very fast writer, has a high IQ and is generally really smart and I think that it is so unfair that she gets always gets extra time (which can be an additional 35 mins) to write when in most cases she has no need for it. The school gave it to her on her first exam with no testing required.

It sounds very b****y as we are best friends, but at the moment it is a constant source of tension between us, though I imagine this happens elsewhere too. It means that the playing field within extra time is even more unequal than it already would be from lumping together thousands of students into 3 general categories for 25%/35%/50% extra time and means that really the extra time does not give the students- who generally need it- the full benefit.

I've never witnessed schools 'coaching' kids for extra time - but that is plain wrong. I'm not sure how anyone can fake the test that you had - surely it seizes up or it doesn't? On a more personal note I would drop the subject of extra time with your friend because it's not worth losing a friendship over extra time in exams - friendship is far more important than any grades :smile:
Original post by kisaki
Thank you. I would also agree exams, and potentially the education system itself, needs to be reformed.

My opinion is very controversial and likely to be bashed by many, but getting good grades does not necessarily make you intelligent. I'm not saying people who do well aren't intelligent because the majority are, as well as hardworking ect. But school now seems to be what you regurgitate rather than what you can build upon or add to what we know. It also doesn't really prepare you for real life and true independent thought and creation.
There are a lot of people who fail school who are incredibly intelligent, but simply do not test well, have differing interests or specialist areas than the curriculum or have a different learning style to the mainstream. A better education system could feed those minds and better so many more young people in various areas and have a huge global benefit.

I think the saying 'you can't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree' is very relevant here. There needs to be more acceptance that everyone is good at different things and has the capability to improve the world via their contributions to them. You can't say someones talents are more valid than someone elses dependant on what field they're in. There needs to be more support for varying attributes and not just english/math/science. It think it is a shame BTEC has so much stigma because they can be very valuable to certain areas such as sport that are more practical.
What I'm getting to is that there is a difference between equality and equity; it is the latter that will benefit society but our current education system doesn't really allow for that. Extra time is a movement in that direction...

at the end of the day extra time allows people who struggle to express themselves as quickly as others to show that that they ARE intelligent and have useful knowledge, points, opinions and arguments which deserve to be valued and recognised as much as anyone else's in society. These people can make just as valuable contributions as any of us, they just need longer to express it. In the real world, when it comes down to the most important things in life, nobody cares if it takes you an hour or a day to come up with a point, they care who makes the better point.
Yes people abuse the system and get extra time when they don't deserve it, but that means there is a fault with the means testing, not the principle itself... Stop being bitter toward your peers and be bitter toward the system.
YES YES YES and YES! So very true - the fact is exams do not equal intelligence and sadly school life is now solely focused on getting grades when it should be about expanding your horizons, forming your own opinions on world views and the important questions in life, getting morals (which would stop people cheating on tests out of moral conscience) and most importantly forming interests - so that people know where they want to go and feel impassioned by what they do so that they can have an enjoyable life. BTEC's stigma is another thing which needs to be fixed - this is why I created the thread about educational reform, so please do comment on there as I guess we are sidetracking a lot...
Sadly people believe only in equality nowadays - the fact is equality is not fair - equality in OPPORTUNITY is what is fair and we should be moving towards that, rather than just out and out equality.
I would even say try not to be bitter towards the system - just try to help reform the system nicely, its more likely to get done then - and you are completely right - just because a system is flawed, doesn't mean you give up on it and scrap it - no you work and improve it!
Original post by Tiger Rag
You have to undergo a test if you use a laptop to see how much time you really need. I, for example, type much faster than I write; so if I was to use a laptop, (I don't need to - my hands are fine) my time would be adjusted.

It really isn't that simple.


Either way, its a good idea to get diagnosed to see what the genuine situation is rather than wondering around blindly in the dark.

Latest