Opinion Essay on Disability Accommodations

[the_geneticist]

This piece is a bit shocking:
https://www.chronicle.com/article/do-colleges-provide-too-many-disability-accommodations

I'm dismayed it was published. 

"Strong claims require strong evidence", but the author has no citations for the following (bold added):

However, a suite of acute, well-documented problems with disability accommodations demand attention. The data is clear, for instance, that a significant minority of diagnoses are fraudulent or mistaken. In many cases, there is no empirical basis for granting common accommodation requests like extended time or distraction-free testing. And there is further evidence that the current state of disability accommodation compounds inequities in student achievement, rather than alleviating them.

[marshwiggle]

This piece is a bit shocking:
https://www.chronicle.com/article/do-colleges-provide-too-many-disability-accommodations

I'm dismayed it was published. 

"Strong claims require strong evidence", but the author has no citations for the following (bold added):

However, a suite of acute, well-documented problems with disability accommodations demand attention. The data is clear, for instance, that a significant minority of diagnoses are fraudulent or mistaken. In many cases, there is no empirical basis for granting common accommodation requests like extended time or distraction-free testing. And there is further evidence that the current state of disability accommodation compounds inequities in student achievement, rather than alleviating them.

No citations? What about the article from Queen's?

This study set out to determine if postsecondary disability service providers use objective, third-party data when making accommodation decisions. Providers were asked if they would grant extra time accommodations to a fictitious prospective student. The student self-reported attention and academic problems that emerged during COVID restrictions, and that extra time helped her earn better grades and reduced her anxiety. While her neuropsychological report suggested superficial similarity to ADHD and contained accommodation recommendations, it lacked any objective evidence supporting either an ADHD diagnosis or functional impairments that would support extra time accommodation. Despite the lack of current or historical functional impairment, 100% of all DSO decision makers confirmed that they would grant extra time accommodations to this student. Results suggest that DSOs' accommodation decisions are not based on evidence of functional impairment but rely mainly on student self-report and the recommendations of a professional. As such, the current system of determining reasonable accommodations is flawed and inequitable, offering non-impaired individuals access to supports and services that may privilege them over their similarly abled peers. Postsecondary institutions must either develop more defensible methods of disability determination or provide all students with access to accommodations to create a more equitable learning environment.

[dismalist]

And, ya gotta take into account the incentives. Why should somebody not cheat to get extra time? Because they're Christian? Apparently, the faculty and staff have the incentive to just let it happen, so no one is gonna get caught.

The therapeutic university is upon us.

[fizzycist]

This article sounds spot on to me. The root may be that faculty don't have standing to weigh in (much), whereas these offices can plausibly claim to improve retention. Maybe they even pay for themselves through increased tuition? It's also only a little unfair, not a monumental problem.

I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't see similar trends in increased accomodations in public K-12 schools.

[marshwiggle]

This article sounds spot on to me. The root may be that faculty don't have standing to weigh in (much), whereas these offices can plausibly claim to improve retention. Maybe they even pay for themselves through increased tuition? It's also only a little unfair, not a monumental problem.

And if it makes people feel better, then it's a win, right?

[Langue_doc]

I have to agree that there is no medical basis for most of the accommodation requests, espcially those that require extra time on tests and exams. All that's needed is a letter from a doctor certifying that certain accommodations are required; no other medical information such as diagnostic tests or other proof of disability needs to be provided to the disability office. This gives the affluent students an advantage becasue they or their parents have the resources to pay a doctor for the disability letter. Students who need accommodations for medical reasons such as mobility issues or a handicap parking permit would be able to get letters from their treating physicians regardless of their ability to pay out of pocket, and also would have the necessary documentation.

The article correctly points out that anyone can get accommodations because there is there is "no empirical basis for granting common accommodation requests like extended time or distraction-free testing".

[Parasaurolophus]

Extended time is very common at my institution. As I said in the other thread, my students very rarely end up using all of the allotted time, let alone the extended time. But I don't see that as a problem, or as proof that it was unnecessary or undesirable. In fact, it seems pretty harmless to me. The same seems true of distraction-free environments for testing.

My real fear is that we might be heading to a point where AI use gets woven into the list of accommodations (there've been some rumblings in that direction here). That, I would need explained to me with significant evidence, and I'd need it to be shown to me that it wouldn't undermine the integrity of my assessments. And good luck with that.

[apl68]

We've seen several complaints here over the years of cases where it appears that students are gaming the accommodations system to try to gain some advantage or other.  Seems like the system as it exists now at many institutions is indeed open to abuse.

You see this sometimes outside of academia with things like people trying to pass off their pets as "service animals."  Though we've never had a problem with it here, public libraries in some cities have had real issues, between some people bringing in their (not always well-behaved) dogs as "service animals," and other getting very...exercised over the mere thought that some dirty, shedding animal has been in the library they're trying to patronize.  People in our society find the most ridiculous things to fight over, and catch hardworking public servants and workers in the middle over.

[marshwiggle]

Extended time is very common at my institution. As I said in the other thread, my students very rarely end up using all of the allotted time, let alone the extended time. But I don't see that as a problem, or as proof that it was unnecessary or undesirable. In fact, it seems pretty harmless to me. The same seems true of distraction-free environments for testing.

It won't be harmless if they start applying it to labs. Labs are often scheduled back-to-back. If any student with an accommodation gets more time for a lab, then that means labs can't be scheduled back-to-back because if even one student in the lab has an accommodation, the lab needs extra time.

This is a "tragedy of the commons" situation, where it's only workable as long as the number of people needing it is very small; as more people get it, the system breaks down.

[Parasaurolophus]

Extended time is very common at my institution. As I said in the other thread, my students very rarely end up using all of the allotted time, let alone the extended time. But I don't see that as a problem, or as proof that it was unnecessary or undesirable. In fact, it seems pretty harmless to me. The same seems true of distraction-free environments for testing.

It won't be harmless if they start applying it to labs. Labs are often scheduled back-to-back. If any student with an accommodation gets more time for a lab, then that means labs can't be scheduled back-to-back because if even one student in the lab has an accommodation, the lab needs extra time.

This is a "tragedy of the commons" situation, where it's only workable as long as the number of people needing it is very small; as more people get it, the system breaks down.

I thought we were talking about exams. Is this actually happening, or is it just a slippery slope worry about the future?

[marshwiggle]

Extended time is very common at my institution. As I said in the other thread, my students very rarely end up using all of the allotted time, let alone the extended time. But I don't see that as a problem, or as proof that it was unnecessary or undesirable. In fact, it seems pretty harmless to me. The same seems true of distraction-free environments for testing.

It won't be harmless if they start applying it to labs. Labs are often scheduled back-to-back. If any student with an accommodation gets more time for a lab, then that means labs can't be scheduled back-to-back because if even one student in the lab has an accommodation, the lab needs extra time.

This is a "tragedy of the commons" situation, where it's only workable as long as the number of people needing it is very small; as more people get it, the system breaks down.

I thought we were talking about exams. Is this actually happening, or is it just a slippery slope worry about the future?

I've certainly made non-time accommodations for labs; there's no reason why they won't start requiring time accommodations for labs. If it's not happening somewhere yet, it probably will be within a very few years.

[mythbuster]

The lab issue is a real one. We have exams (practicals) in our labs, and it can be difficult to accommodate the students who need extra time if both the sections before and after the slotted time are full rooms. We have also had students who have argued that they need extra time to complete the labs. To date, those arguments have not gone anywhere. And then there is the issue of "flexible attendance" and labs. Needles to say, students who don't show to lab regularly struggle.

In theory, I have no problem with all students having as much time as they think they need to complete an exam. The devil of curse, is in the logistical details of who, how, and when that exam will be administered and proctored. The students who uses our Disability Center for testing already have the disadvantage of not being able to ask me questions for clarification, or to hear about typos discovered mid-exam.

I also like the idea that the exam is constructed to be finished in a reasonable period of time. Going to all untimed could easily lead to more unrealistic exams.

[EdnaMode]

Fraudulent or not, I think in many cases we are setting these students up for failure in the workplace. At work, you do not get extra time to complete projects, you don't always have a quiet place to work all by yourself, you often have to take your own notes in meetings, and you may be expected to make snap decisions. And at my institution, faculty are now receiving requests for accommodations for extra time and 'leniency' that cover not just exams, but classwork, homework, projects with deadlines, etc. Anything that may cause the students distress, or to feel under pressure.

We have a new head of student services who is trying to insist that all needs in all classes be accommodated, and she has been getting serious pushback from us in engineering. The last head understood that not all accommodations are reasonable. Several of our courses have 4 hour labs and the work must be done during that time using equipment, the use of which must be supervised. No faculty member is going to stay for an extra two hours to accommodate half time extensions. Some of our practical exams take place in computer labs and have the room scheduled in two hour time blocks. Students are given two hours to finish the work using the computers, some finish in less than two hours, some are working up to the last minute. And there is typically another class that comes in right after. No, they cannot take the exam at the testing center because the computers there are not powerful enough to run the software and even if they were, no one is going to pony up the money for another computer or another seat of the software. And is there going to be someone there to answer questions when the software does something squirrely? Nope.

I'm all for equity, but there's a point where accommodations are not at all reasonable. Regular exams in a testing center? Sure. Having to change the basic content and outcomes of a course to accommodate a special circumstance? No. Definitely does not fall under reasonable accommodations.

[spork]

The obvious solution is no exams, no labs, no assessment of learning whatsoever. Pay your money, get your degree. Everyone is happy!

For the first time in my career, I have received a student accommodations notification ("flexible deadlines," etc.) from my employer's Title IX office. I seem to be legally prohibited from asking how the accommodations might plausibly help the student learn.

I've also seen over the last few years an increase in personal (non-ADA-related) requests from students for extensions on deadlines and resubmission of work for an assumed higher grade. E.g., "I decided to sign up for this university-sponsored event that involves travel, and I'm really busy right now, can I have an extension?" To which I reply with my standard boilerplate that says "No, see the course syllabus for policies on deadlines." I'm starting to think about inserting "Life Involves Trade-Offs; You Are Responsible For The Consequences Of Your Decisions" in 60-point font into my syllabi.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Fraudulent or not, I think in many cases we are setting these students up for failure in the workplace. At work, you do not get extra time to complete projects, you don't always have a quiet place to work all by yourself, you often have to take your own notes in meetings, and you may be expected to make snap decisions. And at my institution, faculty are now receiving requests for accommodations for extra time and 'leniency' that cover not just exams, but classwork, homework, projects with deadlines, etc. Anything that may cause the students distress, or to feel under pressure.

We have a new head of student services who is trying to insist that all needs in all classes be accommodated, and she has been getting serious pushback from us in engineering. The last head understood that not all accommodations are reasonable. Several of our courses have 4 hour labs and the work must be done during that time using equipment, the use of which must be supervised. No faculty member is going to stay for an extra two hours to accommodate half time extensions. Some of our practical exams take place in computer labs and have the room scheduled in two hour time blocks. Students are given two hours to finish the work using the computers, some finish in less than two hours, some are working up to the last minute. And there is typically another class that comes in right after. No, they cannot take the exam at the testing center because the computers there are not powerful enough to run the software and even if they were, no one is going to pony up the money for another computer or another seat of the software. And is there going to be someone there to answer questions when the software does something squirrely? Nope.

I'm all for equity, but there's a point where accommodations are not at all reasonable. Regular exams in a testing center? Sure. Having to change the basic content and outcomes of a course to accommodate a special circumstance? No. Definitely does not fall under reasonable accommodations.

The bolded is my concern. I'm not a professional in assessing whether students have disabilities and I am not going to accuse anyone of fraud or say they were misdiagnosed. But it seems to me that we are doing more harm than good by being endlessly accommodating.