The 2019 college admissions scandal has reinforced feelings of unfairness towards accommodations received by students with learning disabilities, and is likely to make it more difficult for students to receive the help they need, according to a member of the board of the Learning Disability Association of New York.
As a learning disability activist, Kathryn Cappella, who sits on the board, emphasized the decades-old debate about the fairness of modifications for those who need them, and how the scandal only added to the negative views about people with disabilities and the modifications they receive. The recent scandal did not introduce the complexity surrounding testing accommodations.
Celebrities including Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman are ensnared in an admissions scandal that saw some students admitted to elite universities by lying about disabilities–among other infractions–to get extra time on the SAT and other college admissions tests, according to reports in The New York Times.
Students who have diagnosed neurological conditions often receive academic accommodations such as extended time on tests, a private testing room, or other changes based on the individual needs for each student. Twenty percent of children in the United States have one of these neurological conditions, which include dylexia, dysgraphia and ADHD, according to the National Center for Learning Disabilities.
Since news of the college scandal broke in Spring 2019, College Board, which administers the SAT, has emphasized its policies for students with accommodations, which some have seen as more restrictive and potentially exclusionary.
In an email from College Board to this reporter who inquired about the re-emphasis on accommodations policies, a link to a page explaining how to get accommodations was included. On this page, it explains that students need to complete a Student Eligibility Form and send in an official diagnosis of a learning disability. In some cases, a student may need a school verification.
Its website reads: “We want to know what the student’s disability is, how it is impacting them, and why they need the specific accommodation that they are requesting.”
“School verifications occur when a student receives and uses the accommodation for at least four school months,” according to the College Board’s website.
Many students, however, are not diagnosed with the learning disability until after that date has passed.
For people who require accommodations, they are a necessary part of their success on tests like the SAT. Some feel that people without disabilities don’t understand how tough it is for those diagnosed with an issue to complete tests without them.
Trent Powell, 17, of Bethesda, Maryland, receives accommodations for both ADHD and anxiety.
“The only reason why there’s extra time is because we have those obstacles to go over,” Powell said. “If I took the SAT without my extended time, I would have only gotten like five questions out of the 15 math questions.”
For students without disabilities, testing accommodations are seen as an unfair advantage.
In a 2008 study called “Perceptions of People with Disabilities: When is Accommodation Fair?” by Ramona L. Paetzold, students’ reactions to a dyslexic competitor receiving accommodations were in relation to the outcome of the contest. In other words, if receiving extra time won the competition after being given modifications, would the other competitors find that fair?
The results of the test proved the answer to be no. Despite believing the confederate had a disorder that would put her at a major disadvantage under normal conditions, students found it unfair to adjust these conditions. They believe that adjusting a test to fit an individual’s needs gives students with who need accommodations unearned benefits.
Maria Gramajo, 20, of San Rafael, California, though not believing this herself, understands how these people may feel. She recognizes the outward appearance of accommodations being advantages, but is quick to respond with a viewpoint similar to Powell’s.
Accommodations are “meant to create an equal playing field, not to put anyone in any sort of advantage,” Gramajo said.
This debate closely resembles the famous distinction between equity and equality. The image above helps to explain this distinction: Child A, a child with two hands, and Child B, a child with just one, have four cookies.
Equality is giving both children two cookies. At first glance, this option seems fair. Both children get the same number of cookies. However, since Child B only has one hand, she can only hold one cookie. In the end, Child A has an advantage since she can hold both of her cookies. Equity, however, would be giving both children two cookies, but also giving Child B a basket to hold her cookies. By giving Child B a basket, she and Child A both have the same number of cookies.
Paetzold’s study shows that most “Child As” would prefer equality, since it gives them exactly what they need, and is equal to everyone. Powell and Gramajo, on the other hand, find equity a better solution for these students – everyone gets what they need.
This debate is both ongoing, and ever-evolving. As Cappella emphasized, the 2019 scandal did not change society’s treatment of students with learning disabilities, but added to the pre-existing unfair view of accommodations held by many.
