[Sam_1996]

(Original post by In One Ear)
What? Exams most certainly are a competition. Your grade is directly influenced by the performance of others!

Yeh but you don't go out to beat others,you try to do the best you can.

[In One Ear]

(Original post by Stray)
JCQ say that 15% of pupils receive extra time. Not all are for dyslexia - some have physical disabilities such as dyspraxia, CP, spinal cord injury, juvenile arthritis, severe visual impairments etc.

Within that 15% there will be a small number who have an accompanying impairment in their IQ (as part of a complex condition such as 22Q syndrome), but that the vast majority are evenly distributed, mirroring the general population's normal curve.

There's also no reason to believe that these students are either more or less diligent, or more or less well taught, than the general population.

No disagreement here.

Assuming that you're not arguing that all those people who get extra time are so smart / hard working that they only get As and A*s, their impact is distributed.

Thus, of that 15%, you are only "in competition" with those who are within the grade boundary you are aiming at, +1 and -1. Because of how the grade curves are fitted, the performance of students at the D/E boundary has no impact on the A/B boundary.

I'll take your word for it- i didn't realise this was the case.

So, in a typical exam (excluding Latin / Greek / Further Maths etc which have untypical grade curves) at most only 5% of those being given extra time are impacting on your grade boundary. (Which isn't to say that they are having an impact of 5%!)

The bolded bit may be true but this dilutement argument is flawed since you must also remember that only a certain % of the overall candidature is also aiming at your particular grade area. If (as you claim earlier) people recieving this extra time are evenly distributed across the grades then still within your grade area 15% of the candidates will be getting bonus time.

If you were to exclude that 15% who are given extra time from the grade curve it could not possibly shift dramatically - especially as they are likely to be evenly spread. The 'inertia' of the 85% of the population would be too great.

At most, taking away the extra time might shift the boundaries by a percent or two (while having a much greater distorting effect on the grades of those individual students).

First paragraph is true but a couple of % can make all the difference and end up changing what you can do/where you can go if it makes the difference between a B or an A etc. Actually i suggested earlier that if extra time is kept for these conditions that the grade curves should be determined only by candidates sitting the exams under standard conditions and then once those are decided, the grades people with extra time get are decided by these boundaries. The effect will be that all the boundaries will drop slightly (since the mean mark has now gone down slightly- assuming you are correct about the uniform distribution of performance from candidates getting extra time). The candidates with extra time will now have an easier time by a couple of % and get extra time but won't influence the grades of others. In the end boundaries will have to go up overall to compensate but the final effect will be that candidates under normal timing will not be influenced by those with extra time, yet those with extra time retain exactly the same advantage of having extra time. As it stands, every candidate who enters for an exam having extra time actively makes it harder for every candidate under normal time conditions to get the same grade. [/QUOTE]

If you're worried about a percent or two then your own result would be more strongly impacted by direct action (extra revision / better exam technique) to lift your performance relative to the 85% than worrying about how you compare with the 15%.

Personally i have no worries, but there will be people out there who are working their socks off anyway and for whatever reason miss the grade they need by only 1-2% who might have just scrapped through if some people hadn't artificially inflated grade boundaries by getting extra time. At the end of the day we can all have time issues with exams, people can be prone to panicking and breaking down in exams yet as far as i'm aware you can't recieve extra time for being more susceptible to this than average ( ability to cope with exam pressure can really make the difference of entire grades even between candidates with the same skill/knowledge under non-pressurized conditions).

I guess at the end of the day i'm just against the idea of people getting an advantage in exams testing for a particular skill just people they are weak in that area. For instance i think its ridiculous people with reading difficulties get extra time in english exams (which are supposed to test for reading competancies) though i don't have a problem with people with reading difficulties getting extra time in an exam testing skills seperate to their area of difficulty- for example in a maths exam to give them more time to understand whats being asked ( a lot of difficult questions tend to be stated in long paragraphs) since here they are being tested on a seperate set of skills to their area of difficulty.

[Sirrod]

They all still do **** anyway so it doesn't really matter

[In One Ear]

(Original post by Sam_1996)
Yeh but you don't go out to beat others,you try to do the best you can.

But thats the thing, you do (in disguise). Simply because the worse others do the better you do with the same raw score result. You may not go into the exam hall with the mentality of "i want to beat x% of people" but at the end of the day, how well you do, in terms of the grade you recieve, is unfortunately determined by the performance of others.

[AvaM]

(Original post by ShredMaster)
It really pisses me off in maths. They have no reason to get extra time.

That is completely untrue. Reading numbers can sometimes be even harder for a dyslexic. Just like dyslexics can confuse letters and words they can also very easily confuse numbers and can take longer to work out very simple addition or multiplication. Its not a question of knowledge its a question of having extra time to display numbers in the right oder or double check very simple calculations.

[danny111]

I think they should get more time since an exam essentially tests your knowledge and how you can apply it.

However, I think they should have to state their dyslexia on their CV - some jobs you just cannot afford to have one employee take twice as long as another. But for jobs where this is not the case, then dyslexics should not be at a disadvantage in terms of lower grades that do not reflect their ability.

[Stray]

(Original post by In One Ear)
I guess at the end of the day i'm just against the idea of people getting an advantage in exams testing for a particular skill just people they are weak in that area.

The arrangements should never allow for this. For example, someone with dyspraxia can have assistance in drawing a curve if the purpose of the curve is to be able to read off a value, but they lose any marks rewarded for the drawing of the curve itself (while still getting the marks for knowing that they need to read the value in a certain way).

I'm not aware of us testing reading *speed* after Key Stage 2. In an English exam, the only purpose of the extra time is to allow the candidate equal opportunity to demonstrate their comprehension / creativity (and whatever other skills are measured). Ability to read and write is *not* what is being measured at this level.

People with dyslexia aren't allowed to use a dictionary to check their spelling, and word processing software has to have all spell checking and so on switched off, so actually great care is taken to ensure that the arrangements never give an advantage.

Also, many people getting extra time don't get 25% - that's the upper limit, many only get 10%.

To be clear - access arrangements specifically prohibit compensating for a skill that is being examined. This is taken from the JCQ documents -

"Access arrangements allow candidates/learners to show what they know and can do without changing the demands of the assessment."

They give numerous examples of adjustments that are not allowed to be made as they would alter the integrity of the assessment. This is partly why the exam specification documents are so important - they set out very clearly what skills and knowledge is being tested, so that any access arrangements can be tailored appropriately.

Another example (again from the JCQ documents):

"Extra time will not be permitted in examinations testing the time in which a skill is performed, such as sports, musical performance, or expressive arts, where the timing may be a crucial part of the assessment."

Students with dyspraxia don't get extra help for the practical skills part of Science A-levels - they have to be informed at the start of the course that they may not be able to achieve high marks in the practical modules which make up around 20% of the A-level.

So - it sounds like the system already works in the way that you want it to? Or should - not every situation and decision is handled perfectly, but the bulk are handled well enough.

[manchesterunited15]

(Original post by Sam_1996)
Personally I think you shouldn't care.Exams arent a competion,you have to do the best YOU can.

And why do you do that? Because there's a million other people taking those exams and whoever does best will get sixth form or university places. Obviously you are competing against them.

[Dalek1099]

I completely agree its like saying people,who can read and write perfectly,should get less time because they are quicker at reading the questions and rereading their answers and getting an A* at English Lit isn't right if they are dyslexic because they can't read very well and this should be presented in the exams.Dyslexia is just a dumbness in reading and people shouldn't get more time because they are dumb-if you failed your reading tests,at a young age,,you would get classed as dyslexic and its not that you are dyslexic,you are dumber at reading,it doesn't mean you are dumb because many people can be dumb in some subjects and clever at others-I have seen it happen on TSR myself,with some people getting A*s and Fs and Gs.

[teach4fun]

I think you are all missing the point- dyslexia only means you have certain difficulties i.e. with reading and writing. To suggest that they are "dumb" or "less intelligent" in particular areas is ridiculous and very insensitive, as it is viewed as a disability.

I do understand why everyone is annoyed about the extra time dyslexic students get, but they do need it. I think you should instead fuel your anger at those who cheat the system- giving them an advantage over everyone else, when they have no difficulties.

[Bukhatir]

(Original post by EMPStudent)
Surely that's not fair. Their incapability of reading and writing is an intellectual flaw, which will not be given an advantage in the real world at work. This especially annoys me in maths exams. It's mostly numbers, so it's stupid that extra time is given. It's like giving someone extra time to do their english exam if they can't count.

What do you think?

why should a man not beat up a woman?

[kayjay]

(Original post by jennifex)
But bad handwriting isn't a disability. If you have bad handwriting, and you have an exam for which you are scored on handwriting, you can get better by practising. It's like saying people who can't think quickly enough should be given extra time, people who aren't as clever should be given extra tim, people who aren't as good at the subject should be given extra time. These are things which just vary between people. They're not disabilities, they are variations in normal ability.

People with dyslexia have a fundamental difficulty with reading and writing which is not going to get better with practice and is not their fault. Compared to their overall abilities, their reading and writing is lagging behind due to factors completely out of their control. Obviously they should still be able to demonstrate their abilities. I think you're being a bit harsh, as it's not like they don't still have to read and write at all, even with the extra time the exam will still be at least as challenging for them as it is for other people.

It's not like they are saying "have 100% on reading and writing for this exam because you're dyslexic!", they're just getting an extra 15 minutes or whatever to decode words. It's not a big deal!

It's not that you are scored for your handwriting but that if it's bad you can be penalised, therefore people who struggle with handwriting will not be able to show all that they know just as dyslexic people wouldn't. So the fairest thing to do is give everyone the same conditions as this best mimics real life. If dyslexic people need extra time to decode words then people who struggle to write need time to get there knowledge down on the page.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by kayjay)
It's not that you are scored for your handwriting but that if it's bad you can be penalised, therefore people who struggle with handwriting will not be able to show all that they know just as dyslexic people wouldn't. So the fairest thing to do is give everyone the same conditions as this best mimics real life. If dyslexic people need extra time to decode words then people who struggle to write need time to get there knowledge down on the page.

Yes but if you have bad handwriting because you only ever handwrite in exams but you could improve it through practice but you just don't then that's different to dyslexics because they have no choice in their deficits and very often cannot get rid of them without things that would be prohibited in most exam conditions (coloured overlays, screen readers, writing in a certain coloured pen or on a certain coloured paper).
I think if you have terrible handwriting and it's the week before your exam and nobody has ever said there would be a problem and given you advice to fix it before and there's no way you can make it better within that week then arrangements should be made for your exams and you should also be given advice on how to improve it for after your exams - but say this happens in your Jan exams, you have plenty of time to make it better yourself by June! Dyslexics can try all they like, but they'll never get better at reading and writing within the strict time frame by June, no matter how much work they put in!

[Multitalented me]

I think a better question would be "What should constitute extra time"

[Stray]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
Yes but if you have bad handwriting because you only ever handwrite in exams but you could improve it through practice

Wrong.

People who have enduring handwriting problems have a physiological fault which prevents them from being able to control their fine motor skills to the same extent as other people. We call these faults dyspraxia, low muscle tone, hypermobility etc.

Their 'bad handwriting' is already as good as it can get with practice.

Depending on where the problem is, they have some or all of the following problems:

1) Unable to stabilise their thumb and finger joints - so if you want to sympathise with that, try snapping a pencil in half, loosely joining it together so that it still wobbles, and then writing while holding it above the joint.

2) Lack of proprioception - sensory feedback about how much resistance the pencil or pen is providing - so that they can't tell whether they are gripping and pressing too hard or too softly. The consequence is muscle cramps in their hands as well as crappy writing.

3) Sensory integration disorder, so that their brain doesn't process the visual input, that allows us to perform fine motor tasks, properly. Try handwriting something with your eyes shut. Now try while looking in a mirror. You'll find that both are extremely difficult.

The process of handwriting requires your fingers, hands, eyes, nervous system, optical processing and so on to all co-ordinate *perfectly*.

So - a small imperfection can make a big difference. Plus you're not just writing casually in an exam, you're having to think very hard about the content - if your handwriting requires you to concentrate intensely on it, how can you concentrate on the content as well?

At the point at which people get moved on to a laptop, they have already been diagnosed with a condition which means that 'practice' is not going to make a difference. The doctors (dyspraxia is diagnosed by a paediatrician), physiotherapists and educational psychologists have made a decision based on evidence and careful assessment. They don't just jump to conclusions.

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by Stray)
Wrong.

I said if your handwriting is bad because you don't practice but you could improve it through practice.
I know not everyone who has bad handwriting because they don't practice, my brother has dyspraxia. I also have a problem with physical pain in my hands which means I can't handwrite for very long and if I do it's really messy because of the way I have to hold the pen. If you have poor handwriting because of a disorder that cannot be changed then the rules should be the same as dyslexics with reading in terms of extra time or possibly needing a laptop if extra time won't be helpful. If you have bad handwriting because you can't be bothered to handwrite often, you should be given advice on what to do to improve it, but if you don't bother then that's your own problem - everyone else without disorders manages it.

[sarahw17]

in my exams i have a reader i think it is because i went to a special school and when i have an exam the reader asks me if i want them to read the questions i say yes even though i can read it perfectly well otherwise the reader will be just sat there doing nothing as they cant leave until the exam has finished

[Stray]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
If you have bad handwriting because you can't be bothered to handwrite often, you should be given advice on what to do to improve it, but if you don't bother then that's your own problem - everyone else without disorders manages it.

I don't believe there are people who still have (really) bad handwriting by the time they sit GCSES other than through a disorder.

Taking the example of my step-son, when he was diagnosed with dyspraxia (and a ton of other stuff) at 14, the school's reaction was "there are at least 3 or 4 other boys in his year who have handwriting as bad as his - it's just that some boys have problems with handwriting."

They had a very backward attitude to SEN, but after he was diagnosed and they saw such a change in his performance, they then had these other "ordinary, messy boys" sent for testing and all of them were diagnosed with having similar problems causing their handwriting to be terrible.

So, in order to get extra time, you would have to have a real problem leading to your handwriting being difficult to control. (And that problem would also be the basis of having a laptop in class, as that's not given out without a diagnosis either).

These cases you're talking about, where someone at 15 or older, has bad handwriting because they can't be bothered to improve it, and gets extra time as a result - do not exist!

Edit: The only thing I can think of now is that possibly I have completely misunderstood what you are arguing? Perhaps you are actually arguing the same point as me - that special consideration should be given to those who have a barrier to expressing themselves with pen and paper, and that they have problems well beyond what constitutes normal messy handwriting?

[minimarshmallow]

(Original post by Stray)
I don't believe there are people who still have (really) bad handwriting by the time they sit GCSES other than through a disorder.

Taking the example of my step-son, when he was diagnosed with dyspraxia (and a ton of other stuff) at 14, the school's reaction was "there are at least 3 or 4 other boys in his year who have handwriting as bad as his - it's just that some boys have problems with handwriting."

They had a very backward attitude to SEN, but after he was diagnosed and they saw such a change in his performance, they then had these other "ordinary, messy boys" sent for testing and all of them were diagnosed with having similar problems causing their handwriting to be terrible.

So, in order to get extra time, you would have to have a real problem leading to your handwriting being difficult to control. (And that problem would also be the basis of having a laptop in class, as that's not given out without a diagnosis either).

These cases you're talking about, where someone at 15 or older, has bad handwriting because they can't be bothered to improve it, and gets extra time as a result - do not exist!

Edit: The only thing I can think of now is that possibly I have completely misunderstood what you are arguing? Perhaps you are actually arguing the same point as me - that special consideration should be given to those who have a barrier to expressing themselves with pen and paper, and that they have problems well beyond what constitutes normal messy handwriting?

I am saying if they have a disorder they should get extra time (or a laptop, or whatever), because there isn't anything they can do about it. If they have bad handwriting because they can't be bothered to improve, then they shouldn't get extra time.

However, if for some bizarre reason they have poor handwriting that is not due to a disorder that nobody has picked up on and told them to improve yet (maybe it was good at GCSE and then deteriorated through lack of practice in the first term of college for example - happened to a guy I knew in college) and there isn't enough time for them to practice and improve before the exams (the tutor in college noticed this guys handwriting was illegible when he had to handwrite a letter in class about 3 days before the exam) then they need help just for that exam or exam period and advice on how to improve for afterwards.
This won't apply in very many cases at all, but if it does and nobody realised there was a problem (he could read his own handwriting on the few occasions he did handwrite stuff, but nobody in the department could read it) then they should get some help. He failed that exam, presumably because the marker couldn't read what he was writing, he then resat after being given advice on how to improve his handwriting and improving to an acceptable standard. It was only a key skills exam and it was taken in about November the first time so there were plenty of chances to make it right and it didn't affect his uni chances or anything, but say he didn't have that exam and it got to January AS exams and he failed them all because they'd only just picked up on the handwriting issue and he was applying for something like medicine where they're not fond of retakes (although he would qualify in terms of doctor's handwriting ).
Its fantastically unlikely that this happens often, but I've seen it happen once, so I've given it a bit of thought.

But generally, yes, we're mostly arguing the same point - I'm just trying to think of ways to make the system a bit more fair so people like the OP wouldn't be moaning because 'people with messy handwriting in general don't get extra time, why should dyspraxics?' Like I said, my brother is dyspraxic but he's done a lot of training at the gym to try and improve his coordination etc., but would probably be entitled to extra time if he asked for it.

[kayjay]

(Original post by minimarshmallow)
I am saying if they have a disorder they should get extra time (or a laptop, or whatever), because there isn't anything they can do about it. If they have bad handwriting because they can't be bothered to improve, then they shouldn't get extra time.

However, if for some bizarre reason they have poor handwriting that is not due to a disorder that nobody has picked up on and told them to improve yet (maybe it was good at GCSE and then deteriorated through lack of practice in the first term of college for example - happened to a guy I knew in college) and there isn't enough time for them to practice and improve before the exams (the tutor in college noticed this guys handwriting was illegible when he had to handwrite a letter in class about 3 days before the exam) then they need help just for that exam or exam period and advice on how to improve for afterwards.
This won't apply in very many cases at all, but if it does and nobody realised there was a problem (he could read his own handwriting on the few occasions he did handwrite stuff, but nobody in the department could read it) then they should get some help. He failed that exam, presumably because the marker couldn't read what he was writing, he then resat after being given advice on how to improve his handwriting and improving to an acceptable standard. It was only a key skills exam and it was taken in about November the first time so there were plenty of chances to make it right and it didn't affect his uni chances or anything, but say he didn't have that exam and it got to January AS exams and he failed them all because they'd only just picked up on the handwriting issue and he was applying for something like medicine where they're not fond of retakes (although he would qualify in terms of doctor's handwriting ).
Its fantastically unlikely that this happens often, but I've seen it happen once, so I've given it a bit of thought.

But generally, yes, we're mostly arguing the same point - I'm just trying to think of ways to make the system a bit more fair so people like the OP wouldn't be moaning because 'people with messy handwriting in general don't get extra time, why should dyspraxics?' Like I said, my brother is dyspraxic but he's done a lot of training at the gym to try and improve his coordination etc., but would probably be entitled to extra time if he asked for it.

In exams people have to write particularly fast and as someone said have to concentrate on answering the questionns not writing them down, therefore if they have to do extra to concentrate on handwriting it is a hinderance for them that doesn't reflect their knowledge of the subject. And as mentioned byt he age of 16+ handwriting is bad through nature.


But apart from all this the fundamental lremains that the only fair system is to give everyone the same conditions, and mimic real life, there is no extra time in real life so why in exams?