Is extra time fair?

Extra time is there to make a level playing field - would you rather people got lower results even though they are as good ss you? It is not easy to get additional time ...

You’re worrying about disadvantage yet call those who abuse the advantage “idiots”? Sure hope you can see how small of a issue (relative to the entirety of the UK) we’re talking about. In fact, this small issue gets smaller when those who ‘abuse’ the extra time still get low grades.

Getting extra time isn't based on whether someone cares or not, it's based on whether they have a diagnosed medical condition which means that they need extra time to give them a fair chance. That might be because it takes them longer than others to read and process information, or because it takes them longer than others to physically produce their answers. I know someone who got extra time for their GCSEs because they broke their dominant hand the week before so had to write everything with their wrong hand, the alternative being a scribe who they had almost no time to get used to working with. Pretty sure they'd much rather have had neither the broken hand nor the extra time.

When it comes down to it, someone who doesn't care will get a crap mark whether they have two hours to stare at questions they haven't revised for or three.

Precisely, I'm disabled and don't get extra time, even though I need it. It isn't up for OP, who is not in these people's lives, nor knows their circumstances, to judge them. I seem able bodied, but I'm not, OP would think I'm cheating when I leave the exam room to take a break. Don't assume, OP

i get extra time and i have autism. i wouldnt see why it concerns you if someone gets extra time. idk about your school but not just anyone gets extra time. the ones i know that get extra time in my school usually have disabilities and mental conditions. i'd say dont assume if someone needs extra time or not. what you should understand is it isnt just given to anyone. those 'idiots' may have hidden disabilities and conditions that you arent aware of. i find it weird people assume others dont need extra time, as if you'd know who's permitted. focus on yourself same way they are focusing on themselves. the exam boards have very strict regulations for who is eligible for extra time. evidence from a properly certified professional, such as physicians, educational psychologists, or occupational therapists, is required. there must also be evidence that you would be disadvantaged if you were not given more time. good luck with your mocks, maybe focus more on revising than on your peers getting additional time.

thanks for replying!! I'm not worrying at all, it effects me little and I'm enjoying being opinionated about something for ages, I stand by saying those who abuse extra time are idiots, they don't care and multiple of them are perfectly capable of producing the same amount of work than me in exams but get given extra time for a range of dumb reasons... one of my personal favourites is this person who loves neat handwriting, they don't care about school and is constantly pitied for absolutely nothing at all. I'd be incorrect to say that they brag about their benefits at school, but they make it clear they don't believe they need the extra time but are happy to take it... Idk if that makes all that sense but, again, I'm saying that this isn't everyone.

Going to a 'mean' perspective here... If people can't process information as quick, it doesn't mean they should get extra at all, it means they just aren't as mentally intelligent which is pretty much the reason FOR exams, to test how quick students can answer questions so that people, eg. colleges and employers, understand the mental capacity at which their applicants work..?
Circling back to 'a level playing field', what's level about two people with different intelligence and quick thinking? it literally undermines the whole point of exams in my opinions, right? I don't understand... (PS. NOT REFFERING TO EVERYONE HERE)

First of all, very disrespectful calling people with extra time ‘people who are not ‘typical’’. You might not consider this offensive but I promise you that many disabled people do.

Also, how do a students’ past achievements in any way discredit their need for extra time?

I’ve scored well in all my exams the last two years without extra time, yet I’ve now been told I should’ve been entitled to the additional time.

Getting an A* doesn’t mean I shouldn’t get extra time, it means that I’ve had to put in more work than the average student and getting additional time would only level the playing field between me and people who don’t need extra time.

"in fact it's known by extra time people to mark more early on in the test saying thats where they finished / would have finished if they were following the actual time frame... which isn't right as they're lying about where they got up to..."

Or maybe they wouldn't have finished the test? There isn't exactly a collective, to my knowledge, of "extra time people".

"I stand by saying those who abuse extra time are idiots, they don't care and multiple of them are perfectly capable of producing the same amount of work than me in exams but get given extra time for a range of dumb reasons"

Have you personally examined these people's exams? How do you know how much they write? How do you know the quality of what they write? Plenty of people with E.T can write a lot quickly, I can write the alphabet to fill pages and pages. That doesn't mean I'll do well. You seem to have the view that writing amount is the only measure of success.

" one of my personal favourites is this person who loves neat handwriting, they don't care about school and is constantly pitied for absolutely nothing at all. I'd be incorrect to say that they brag about their benefits at school, but they make it clear they don't believe they need the extra time but are happy to take it... "

So a person is receiving extra time, extra support, for a reason you aren't aware of, therefore they're an idiot?

" Although I don't know everything about everyone,"

No, you don't.

"whatever made up reason"

I'm not even going to go into how damaging that is.

"Going to a 'mean' perspective here... If people can't process information as quick, it doesn't mean they should get extra at all, it means they just aren't as mentally intelligent which is pretty much the reason FOR exams, to test how quick students can answer questions so that people, eg. colleges and employers, understand the mental capacity at which their applicants work..?
Circling back to 'a level playing field', what's level about two people with different intelligence and quick thinking? it literally undermines the whole point of exams in my opinions, right? I don't understand... (PS. NOT REFFERING TO EVERYONE HERE)"

I...I.. Oh, dear. I'd delete this ASAP. What?? Exams are not a measure of speed, unless specialised exams such as the UCAT ( in which you can also qualify for extra time ) they're a measure of knowledge. Jobs don't have stop clocks to see how quickly their employees can solve a problem, they just want to know you can.

"You should defo talk to your school's learning department, if you need it they should at least test u right? Because I agree that people with disabilities, that obviously aren't always visible, should get access arrangements such as extra time."

Thank you, I have, but as everyone is saying, it's very difficult to get, and since I don't yet have a diagnosis, and manage to finish my exams, through considerable stress, on time, I don't qualify at the moment.

" Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT ableist."

Uhm, see above?

thanks for everyone replying!! I love to hear all sides of this argument and it has helped me to take a different view towards this!! <33

I'm glad you're willing to listen, but chat to a SENCO about what actually happens to get extra time. It's not as easy as you think, you simply don't know these people's circumstances.

"Or maybe they wouldn't have finished the test? There isn't exactly a collective, to my knowledge, of "extra time people"."

the majority of people who have extra time in my school do it. everyone knows to do it.


"You seem to have the view that writing amount is the only measure of success"

Not the only, but it limits everyone. It's a challenge to write a decent amount in exams and its what separates lower from high..? If there wasn't a time frame to go by, I'd have nines...???


"So a person is receiving extra time, extra support, for a reason you aren't aware of, therefore they're an idiot?"

What? read it again


"I'm not even going to go into how damaging that is."

:/ ?? I really don't see how anyone's gonna really care about that? Literally not referring to everyone? Pls- ??


"they're a measure of knowledge"

You don't go into an english language test having revised a load of content? If it were a measure of knowledge, it wouldn't be used to categorise people, eg. when getting a job?? Oh because one person knows their content and 3D Pythagoras they're gonna be the right candidate to become a receptionist? Nah exams are all about how much you can remember and fit into an exam, eg. what are you gonna talk about??


"Jobs don't have stop clocks to see how quickly their employees can solve a problem"

But it does say a lot about their intelligence? A cashier wouldn't be employed if they took 5+ minutes to figure out how much change to return..?


"Uhm, see above?"

Nah thats like cancel culture now, don't accuse me of that.


you're not really helping me see anything now you're going into a tantrum? but go off.

Hi, you often have to have a letter from a psychiatrist or a doctor to allow extra time. I didn't get extra time at GCSE or A-Levels but I get it now at university and it's very helpful. I have ADHD-PI which wasn't diagnosed for GCSE and my sixth form's disability team was just awful so they forgot to process it for A-Level. I work at half the rate of a normal person on a good day so I don't think that a 25% extra time in order to partially make up for 1/2 the work rate (for something that I was born with).

Hot damn- 20% is quite a bit. I've never known anyone who got extra time in my classes so I guess my upbringing was a bit off the norm, but I didn't expect it to be this bad (do we really have that weak a population? :_:...)

"Or maybe they wouldn't have finished the test? There isn't exactly a collective, to my knowledge, of "extra time people"."

the majority of people who have extra time in my school do it. everyone knows to do it.


"You seem to have the view that writing amount is the only measure of success"

Not the only, but it limits everyone. It's a challenge to write a decent amount in exams and its what separates lower from high..? If there wasn't a time frame to go by, I'd have nines...???


"So a person is receiving extra time, extra support, for a reason you aren't aware of, therefore they're an idiot?"

What? read it again


"I'm not even going to go into how damaging that is."

:/ ?? I really don't see how anyone's gonna really care about that? Literally not referring to everyone? Pls- ??


"they're a measure of knowledge"

You don't go into an english language test having revised a load of content? If it were a measure of knowledge, it wouldn't be used to categorise people, eg. when getting a job?? Oh because one person knows their content and 3D Pythagoras they're gonna be the right candidate to become a receptionist? Nah exams are all about how much you can remember and fit into an exam, eg. what are you gonna talk about??


"Jobs don't have stop clocks to see how quickly their employees can solve a problem"

But it does say a lot about their intelligence? A cashier wouldn't be employed if they took 5+ minutes to figure out how much change to return..?


"Uhm, see above?"

Nah thats like cancel culture now, don't accuse me of that.


you're not really helping me see anything now you're going into a tantrum? but go off.

I propose an alternative system - I wonder if cbrr would prefer it?

I actually read really fast, I write fast, I process things fast. I have literally never got to the end of an exam and thought "gee, I wish I had some more time", in fact it's really rare that I haven't been twiddling my thumbs for half an hour even after having checked everything through a dozen times.

So I suggest using me as a benchmark. We'll stop the exam the moment I've finished, which will probably be at about half time, maybe less depending on the subject. What, cbrr won't have completed their answers by then? Well, I guess they won't get a very good mark - not because they couldn't do it, but because they couldn't do it as fast as me and the other super speedy people. But isn't that what the exam is for - to separate those who can and those who can't?

There are exams which are basically speed tests like this - often aptitude tests for jobs/careers/ specific training. That's not what GCSEs are, nor A levels, nor degrees. For the record, I don't think they should be.

Nice analogy, yeah let's take off of 20 mins the GCSE French exams (AQA at least) whilst we're at it too. Who needs an hour am I right? 40-45 minutes is plenty of time

Exactly - it'll be much easier to differentiate between people who can understand everything first time and people who can't then!

"the majority of people who have extra time in my school do it. everyone knows to do it."

Not everyone, again.

"Not the only, but it limits everyone. It's a challenge to write a decent amount in exams and its what separates lower from high..? If there wasn't a time frame to go by, I'd have nines...???"

No, no-one would, because if you don't know the content it doesn't matter how long you spend staring at the paper. Take it from someone who got 7 9s and 3 8s, the time frame was not the limiting factor. Have you sat mocks yet?

"What? read it again"

I have. You say that this boy abuses extra time, since he wants to write neatly? You say he doesn't have a reason. Going by your earlier statements, you're calling him an idiot. Tell me where you said different.


"I'm not even going to go into how damaging that is."

:/ ?? I really don't see how anyone's gonna really care about that? Literally not referring to everyone? Pls- ??

I care. I care a whole lot. You assume that because you don't know a person's reason, it's made up. Do you know how many people have been accused of faking it when they actually need support? I got told that I was having a panic attack when my heart rate was high enough an ambulance had to be called - for my heart condition. People constantly get told they're making it up. Doesn't matter if you're not referring to everyone, saying that anyone would actually lie about having something that affects their life is just plain offensive, hurtful, and unecessary.


"You don't go into an english language test having revised a load of content? If it were a measure of knowledge, it wouldn't be used to categorise people, eg. when getting a job?? Oh because one person knows their content and 3D Pythagoras they're gonna be the right candidate to become a receptionist? Nah exams are all about how much you can remember and fit into an exam, eg. what are you gonna talk about??"

If you're not revising for english, learning content, there's a problem. I learnt different forms of writing, informal, formal, when to paragraph, how to adress certain people, etc. You can't tell me a science exam is not a test of knowledge. What are you going to do otherwise, write a story?

What? If someone knows pythagoras, I assume they're applying for a job in the math/finance/engineering sector. I would be incredibly worried if my engineer that built the bridge I'm standing on didn't know the basics of triangles! "How much you can remember" - this is literally the definition of content.

"But it does say a lot about their intelligence? A cashier wouldn't be employed if they took 5+ minutes to figure out how much change to return..?"

Please stop comparing intelligence and speed. You seem to think people don't play to their strengths. I need extra time in exams because my disability means when I move, my heart goes nuts, obviously I can't be answering questions in that time. Very obviously, I am not going to become a professional athelete. That cashier could be an absolute genius at writing books, yet you're saying because they may not process number's as quickly, they're not intelligent?

Stephen Hawking. He would need acess arrangements in an exam if he were to take a common, written physics exam. He wouldn't finish on time due to his ALS. He would maybe need a scribe. By your definition of people actually needing extra time not being intelligent, Stephen Hawking is not intelligent.

Albert Einstien - qualifies for modern extra time, he was dyslexic and always had trouble spelling and with grammar. You would define him as unintelligent.

Do you see how this is nonsense.


"Nah thats like cancel culture now, don't accuse me of that."

Then don't be ableist. Don't say people with conditions are less intelligent.
"discrimination in favour of able-bodied people." is the literal definition of ableism. Now, to a direct quote from you:

"If people can't process information as quick, it doesn't mean they should get extra at all, it means they just aren't as mentally intelligent"

Which is quite literally, discrimination in favour of able bodied people, because you would take away what people with conditions need to have a level playing field and not face discrimination.


"you're not really helping me see anything now you're going into a tantrum? but go off."

I've literally written an essay about how what you're saying is damaging, helping you to see how speed is not intelligence, how content over amount is the point of exams, so on, but I'm not trying to help?

I propose an alternative system - I wonder if cbrr would prefer it?

I actually read really fast, I write fast, I process things fast. I have literally never got to the end of an exam and thought "gee, I wish I had some more time", in fact it's really rare that I haven't been twiddling my thumbs for half an hour even after having checked everything through a dozen times.

So I suggest using me as a benchmark. We'll stop the exam the moment I've finished, which will probably be at about half time, maybe less depending on the subject. What, cbrr won't have completed their answers by then? Well, I guess they won't get a very good mark - not because they couldn't do it, but because they couldn't do it as fast as me and the other super speedy people. But isn't that what the exam is for - to separate those who can and those who can't?

There are exams which are basically speed tests like this - often aptitude tests for jobs/careers/ specific training. That's not what GCSEs are, nor A levels, nor degrees. For the record, I don't think they should be.