Extra time in exams

it infuriates me when they put up the finish times of exams at the front of the hall (like today actually for a maths exam) and I dont even have enough time to finish the exam and I see some people have got another 40 minutes to do it in :/
Maybe I'm being unfair but this is just how I feel.

what do you mean "you were saying?" What i said still stands, I personally have never seen another thread on this and this is the first time I have posted about it.
I can't talk about what other people have seen because I'm not them, I've just got my own experience to go on...

Just wanted to know some general opinions really...

Is it right that people with conditions such as dyslexia should be given extra time in exams? Think of it from the side of the employer, they're not going to give someone an extra 40% time or so for a job to be completed compared with an employee without said condition. If they were to, it would be bad for our economy in terms of competitiveness with other countries. So, in my opinion, A level grades are giving a "fake" indication of intelligence which disadvantages people that aren't given extra time...

On the other hand, I can see how it's unfair to expect someone with some form of learning difficulties to work at the same pace as others.

I'm not looking for negs, positives/pos'? or reps I just want some general opinion, what do you guys think?

the motivation for this post is you crying over others in your maths exam getting extra time and not you. You I assume did not do well in it or finish it so you feel the need to rant about extra time.

In the end, it's your exam your interest in other peoples exams and additional help is not important. You are not trying to beat those in the room, you are trying to gain a qualification showing you have the skills needed for a job.

Stop posting about stuff which you clearly do not understand.

Come back when your dyslexic and you accurately know how hard it is to do exams. Also I am sitting on AAB (History, Moving Image Arts and Sociology) and I have both extra time and a scribe, what you going to do about it?

I have met a few very intelligent students who were completely incapable of expressing their ideas on paper and they would fail dismally in exams without access arrangements. They got good grades at A level with a scribe as they did know their stuff but I'm not sure how they are going to use their knowledge in the real world if they can't even write an email - voice recognition software is getting better but it still has its limitations.

The current system is deeply flawed - one expert will say someone needs extra time with a writing speed of 16wpm, while another will say someone of the same age doesn't get it at 14wpm. Assessments are full of phrases like 'X would benefit from access to up to 25% extra time in some exams' - well wouldn't we all? It is then left to the Exams Officer to try and decide what it is fair to apply for. School league tables may pressurize you into applying for everything you think you can get, whether or not it is fair on all the other students whose parents haven't paid lots of money for an Ed Psych to find they write slowly.

The X gets nothing, but Y who is only marginally worse gets 25% extra is also deeply unfair. My school tries to operate a stepped system with candidates getting 10%, 17% or 25% extra but this is a pain to administer and causes howls of rage from parents who say the Ed Psych says their son would benefit from 'up to 25%' (which is the standard phrase) and why can't they have 25%?

Laptops are another bone of contention. We have candidates who type at 35wpm who, logically, ought to be given significantly less time than anyone else because they produce significantly more than anyone could handwrite. One boy last week churned out 13 typewritten pages in an exam; that's just unfair.

I could go on. I don't think access arrangements should be removed completely but they currently favour the middle classes and are badly regulated and often illogical.

Ironically, my daughter's school assessed her as qualifying for extra time without me ever mentioning it. She wrote a letter to say she didn't want it. Yes, I am sure have influenced her but that's what parents do.

I don't think extra time should be allowed (wonder how many negs I'll get for that)...

I personally know someone who gets extra time in exams, on the pretext of 'Slow Processing'. When asked, she said 'The problem is, what you can read in five minutes would take me ten, so I should get extra time and it doesn't mean I'm stupid.' What I was thinking is that if people with slow processing get extra time, shouldn't those with fast processing get less time? Does this mean that everyone must be given their own score and, based on that, get a certain exam time of their own? Also, one could argue that people with lower intelligence can't answer a maths equation as quickly as a more intelligent person, so they should get extra time; however, this is grossly unfair towards the intelligent person. For this reason, I believe that, to make it fair for everyone sitting an exam, every single person sitting an exam should do so under the same conditions.