Extra-time, reader, scribe etc. - Is it fair?

The fact that people are actually arguing against extra time etc when they don't have to deal with the reasons people get extra time is kind of disgusting. People who don't get extra time have privilege that people who do get extra time do not, and have no right to say people without that privilege shouldn't get extra measures to help put them on equal footing with the majority of people. They can't help having the problems that cause them to need extra measures.

Agree with you on autism and physical illness. Anxiety over exams just has to be dealt with in my opinion, everyone gets stressed but most people manage.

The whole point of anxiety is that it isn't just stress. Most people manage because they don't have anxiety, the mental health condition. Anxiety is much more than just stress, and causes problems that people without anxiety don't have to deal with during exams. If you don't have anxiety, you have no idea the kind of problems it causes. It isn't even comparable to the stress most people deal with, and is often unmanageable, which is the whole reason people get extra help for it.

It is shameful, I've had to defend myself multiple times this year, some people just can't fathom that someone with a learning problem can achieve too! In my book, it's jealousy.

You speak as if real life and school are completely different things
No, (what you call) real life often isn't fair. I'm not quite sure how that has anything to with exams to be honest, why should the unfairness of 'real life' mean people should have to deal with unfairness in school? So unis and employers may choose advantaged people over disadvantaged, but why in the world should that effect how school exams work? And anyway, like someone before me said, a lot of the time exceptions are made for people with disadvantages. 'Exams are supposed to reflect people's ability in a subject, not put people on an even playing field' that's quite contradictory. How are exams supposed to accurately reflect our ability on a subject if people aren't given an even playing field? You can be incredible at a subject but have disadvantages related to exams and not to the actual subject that means in the exam you'll do worse, and so the exam won't reflect your ability in the subject.

The fact that people are actually arguing against extra time etc when they don't have to deal with the reasons people get extra time is kind of disgusting. People who don't get extra time have privilege that people who do get extra time do not, and have no right to say people without that privilege shouldn't get extra measures to help put them on equal footing with the majority of people. They can't help having the problems that cause them to need extra measures.

Yup. I also have generalized anxiety disorder, and having extra support for exams does help with some of my anxiety issues.

Yeah, it is shameful! You shouldn't have to defend yourself to anyone!! This whole thread is so awful; the fact that people feel like they have the right to argue against people getting extra help when the people arguing have /no need/ for that extra help is awful!!

I have social anxiety disorder, and I'd really like people without it to find out what it feels like, and then try to tell me 'it's just stress that everyone else can deal with so I should be able to do so too'

Agree with you on autism and physical illness. Anxiety over exams just has to be dealt with in my opinion, everyone gets stressed but most people manage.

I agree with you 100%

My opinion is: If you don't need extra time, then how does my need for extra time and other measures impact your life in any way shape or form?

However selfish this sounds, extra time (in some cases) can means that people's grades are higher than their true ability. This means people that don't get extra time are at a disadvantage when it comes to 6 form, uni and jobs.

I'm leaving this thread now as I think I've made my views clear and don't want the 'disagreement' to escalate. Good luck to everyone with whatever exams you have left!

Being stupid puts you at a disadvantage but you don't get the answers.....no extra time in real life!

Having a disability isn't being stupid. In the work place, there are often provisions for disabled people so they can do their work to the standard necessary.

I have recently noticed there is a huge number of people in my school, whom have the ability to sit their exam in a completely different hall and gain extra time, scribes and readers. Also some people are able to do their exam on the computer instead! Should all exams not be done in the same conditions to make it a 'fair test?'

Totally understand what you mean. But I know for a fact in some circumstances in my school, people using computers are able to use word with internet connected and can use a thesaurus etc. Maybe it is just the exam board that need to realise they are being mugs!

It is shameful, I've had to defend myself multiple times this year, some people just can't fathom that someone with a learning problem can achieve too! In my book, it's jealousy.

When did I ever say that people with disabilities are stupid?

Also if you like do a job and you take too long to do something then they will not say ohhhhh thats fine you can have 25% extra time to do that.

No. Because it wouldn't be fair for someone with some form on learning disability who either can't spell, can't read properly, or has completely illegible handwriting, to sit the exam in the same conditions. They'd be at a disadvantage.



They don't test your ability to read words. They test your reading comprehension.



Your friend is stupid.