Accommodated students abusing their status

[dr_codex]

Is anyone else seeing a massive increase in this type of thing? I have more in a single class than I used to get in many years put together. It seems everything needs to be accommodated these days--general anxiety disorder (uh, pretty much all of us introverts have that and still manage to do our work), depression, ADHD.. I mean, at some point, everyone is disabled and then nobody is disabled/deserves special accommodation.

Yes, an increase in total numbers, and also in the scope of assistance required, as reported by our Student Affairs admins.

[Caracal]

Is anyone else seeing a massive increase in this type of thing? I have more in a single class than I used to get in many years put together. It seems everything needs to be accommodated these days--general anxiety disorder (uh, pretty much all of us introverts have that and still manage to do our work), depression, ADHD.. I mean, at some point, everyone is disabled and then nobody is disabled/deserves special accommodation.

Not where I teach. I have 150 students this semester and only one has used any accommodations.

[Hegemony]

In the past a lot of those kids simply wouldn't have made it to college. 

[polly_mer]

In the past a lot of those kids simply wouldn't have made it to college.

Yep.  I certainly saw a big difference in percent of accommodations in my general education classes versus my upper-division engineering/physics classes.  We had some people doing well with accommodations in the major and I can think of a couple students every term in general education who seemed to really thrive with a quieter test area with a little longer time or access to lecture notes.  Just yesterday, I came across https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/ed/19/08/no-need-speed and that resonates with me.

However, I also saw a lot of students in general education who had accommodations that didn't seem to be anywhere near enough to allow them to succeed.  A little extra time with provided lecture notes doesn't make up for a poor K-12 education combined with a disability that makes material mastery harder.

[hamburger]

My point was that "hamburger" is not happy at this place anyway and does not have a career there. Taking the posts at face value, this is a terrible place to work. The only rational course of action is to do only what is absolutely required to keep on getting a pay check there for the rest of the semester or the academic year, and to put all other energies into getting a better job elsewhere. Anything which requires the OP to be less efficient with their time should be avoided.

I agree, it sounds like the OP's department has a strange culture. However, it's one thing to talk about applying for jobs elsewhere and it's a whole other thing to actually get a job offer somewhere better. Since the OP might be stuck in this department for a while, the timing might not be right to just give up trying and do the minimum.  There seems to be a clear set of actions that the OP could take towards preventing this type of treatment in the future and based on that set of issues described in this thread alone, I would be hesitant to encourage the OP go on the job market.  It really seems like something that can be dealt with and avoided in the future.

That's a fair point. But if the OP can't get a teaching job elsewhere (and this is just an adjunct position, I gather, so there should be other better options), then I'd suggest that the OP move into a different line of work. To make a career of academic life, OP needs a big rethink.

The other issue is that the OP seems to have trouble drawing boundaries and asserting themselves. The students, administrators, and even parents seem to be in control. The OP needs to practice saying "no."

In universities I taught, we only used the final grade to determine whether a student passed a course or not. In this CC, they also have  a list of addition conditions that need to be satisfied in order to pass the course. However, based on experience, they often bend the rules in an attempt to make the students happy. So what is the point of listing these additional conditions on course webpage? To show the public that they have high standard? I found it confusing.

[hamburger]

In the past a lot of those kids simply wouldn't have made it to college.

What caused the a large number of such kids in higher education these days? Equal education for all? Loans from the government? Human Rights?

[hamburger]

Is anyone else seeing a massive increase in this type of thing? I have more in a single class than I used to get in many years put together. It seems everything needs to be accommodated these days--general anxiety disorder (uh, pretty much all of us introverts have that and still manage to do our work), depression, ADHD.. I mean, at some point, everyone is disabled and then nobody is disabled/deserves special accommodation.

Yes, an increase in total numbers, and also in the scope of assistance required, as reported by our Student Affairs admins.

Very often I see lots of students lining up in those special test centres. They can form a big class themselves.

[Hegemony]

"What caused the a large number of such kids in higher education these days?"  I think the answer is clear: they wanted an education, and the advantages of an education, like everyone else, and they were no longer held back by school systems that penalized them for challenges that were unrelated to their basic smarts. The same way that now blind people can get an education, and deaf people, and people in wheelchairs, and all the other people who also used to be regarded as "too much trouble to accommodate."

[AJ_Katz]

In this CC, they also have  a list of addition conditions that need to be satisfied in order to pass the course.

To be honest, I'm a little confused by what you're trying to describe.  Isn't the final grade almost always determined based upon a collection of scores earned or tasks completed throughout the course?  I am going to assume that the "list of additional conditions" is a set of activities or criteria that each student must meet in your course, similar to other assessments.

So what is the point of listing these additional conditions on course webpage? To show the public that they have high standard? I found it confusing.

The "list of additional conditions" imposed upon the students might be related to the broader curriculum and expectations of what students coming out of your course or the program would learn.  Those list of additional conditions might or might not have been designed by someone who knew what they were doing or they might be out-dated conditions that the program no longer sees as critical to the program but can't revise.  It's impossible to know the underlying reason without asking around and finding the right person who knows.

In universities I taught, we only used the final grade to determine whether a student passed a course or not.

It sounds like you're fighting with the institutional culture you've been hired into.  Rather than fighting the new culture by comparing it to what you've experienced at other universities, it may be a better use of time to try to learn the "why" about the "list of additional conditions" and try to better understand why certain decisions are made.  Sure, one might find that some of the reasons you hear are ridiculous, but try not to create an internalized battle over this.  Seriously, I know what that is like. 

When I was hired into my department, I quickly saw something that to me was an obvious deficiency (lack of a certain academic program despite having students taught in that area).  I proposed changing things and quickly got shot down over and over again.  It was only after I talked with one of the people who has been in the department for 50 years that I learned the history....  it turned out that the faculty DID want to change this and had put in a proposal to change it in the 90s, but the administration at the time told them that this would never happen, so they left it at that.  So, what did I learn?  Trying to immediately battle the department's culture is a losing battle, especially when you're the new kid on the block.  It's better to get to know the "why" and understand what can and cannot be changed, whether by virtue of the current faculty or the higher administration.

If you're new in a department, the first goal should be to learn the culture and get to a point where you can manage the students within this culture.  The only thing you can truly change is you, so try to identify what can be done to make this process run more smoothly.  Sometimes it means just adapting and accommodating these students.  However, in your specific case, I think you could protect yourself from having to deal with some of this again by placing explicit language in your syllabus and also reading it aloud in class on the first day.  If you can get to a point where more of your students are going through the class and actually meeting those course requirements without requesting accommodations, wow... what a success -- put that metric on your annual report!

Sometimes these challenges we're faced with are really opportunities in disguise.  In my own case, after several years, I was able to have conersations with enough people to be able to reinvigorate interest in creating the academic program that I thought was missing and our department is now on it's way to having that program (thanks mostly to having new administration that supported this).  So, I'm not necessarily advocating that you give up on this issue, but rather, to take your time and understand the culture before openly criticizing it and trying to change it before you understand how it first came to be. 

[polly_mer]

In universities I taught, we only used the final grade to determine whether a student passed a course or not. In this CC, they also have  a list of addition conditions that need to be satisfied in order to pass the course. However, based on experience, they often bend the rules in an attempt to make the students happy. So what is the point of listing these additional conditions on course webpage? To show the public that they have high standard? I found it confusing.

As one of my colleagues teaching lab science put it, there are so many ways to fail this course.  I've certainly taught under systems where the total points may not indicate mastery of all the necessary prerequisite skills for the next course and thus other requirements were added to ensure all the skills were at a sufficient level.

Typical instances I've seen and used are:

* 10/12 lab reports must be submitted and score higher than 50% or the course grade is an F.
* 8/10 quizzes must be written and the quiz score average must be at least 75% or the course grade is an F.
* 3/4 during-term exams must be written and the exam score average must be at least 75% or the course grade is an F.
* The final exam must be written and that score must be at least 70% or the course grade is an F.

Why would someone make that list of requirements and then do individual waivers for the student with only 9 lab reports or 7 quizzes or a 68% on the final exam?  Each of those requirements were implemented based on bitter experience with a specific pupil who managed to find a crack in the system to everyone's detriment. 

That student who is topping out all the assessments, but got sick twice and caught in traffic once should not fail the course for missing a third quiz.  Someone who mastered nearly everything based on the other evidence, but is fighting a fever during the final to not quite finish all the problems in the time allotted may be ready to move on.  However, the person who only mastered the first 70% of the course based on the evidence and confirms that situation by scoring low on the final that is weighted heavily towards the last quarter of the class is not ready to move on.


Often the institution has agreed, that brilliant students who refuses to believe that daily work is required of him absolutely should keep repeating courses until he does enough of the "busy work" to be ready for the classes where that practice won't be busy work or the employment situation where doing the boring, but necessary, tasks is the minimum expectation.  We're not doing anyone any favors by passing them on material if the overall goals include acquiring the additional "soft skills" like dealing with crucial details and meeting paperwork requirements.

[hamburger]

In universities I taught, we only used the final grade to determine whether a student passed a course or not. In this CC, they also have  a list of addition conditions that need to be satisfied in order to pass the course. However, based on experience, they often bend the rules in an attempt to make the students happy. So what is the point of listing these additional conditions on course webpage? To show the public that they have high standard? I found it confusing.

As one of my colleagues teaching lab science put it, there are so many ways to fail this course.  I've certainly taught under systems where the total points may not indicate mastery of all the necessary prerequisite skills for the next course and thus other requirements were added to ensure all the skills were at a sufficient level. Colleagues told me that the school allows that so students keep pushing.

Typical instances I've seen and used are:

* 10/12 lab reports must be submitted and score higher than 50% or the course grade is an F.
* 8/10 quizzes must be written and the quiz score average must be at least 75% or the course grade is an F.
* 3/4 during-term exams must be written and the exam score average must be at least 75% or the course grade is an F.
* The final exam must be written and that score must be at least 70% or the course grade is an F.

Why would someone make that list of requirements and then do individual waivers for the student with only 9 lab reports or 7 quizzes or a 68% on the final exam?  Each of those requirements were implemented based on bitter experience with a specific pupil who managed to find a crack in the system to everyone's detriment. 

That student who is topping out all the assessments, but got sick twice and caught in traffic once should not fail the course for missing a third quiz.  Someone who mastered nearly everything based on the other evidence, but is fighting a fever during the final to not quite finish all the problems in the time allotted may be ready to move on.  However, the person who only mastered the first 70% of the course based on the evidence and confirms that situation by scoring low on the final that is weighted heavily towards the last quarter of the class is not ready to move on.


Often the institution has agreed, that brilliant students who refuses to believe that daily work is required of him absolutely should keep repeating courses until he does enough of the "busy work" to be ready for the classes where that practice won't be busy work or the employment situation where doing the boring, but necessary, tasks is the minimum expectation.  We're not doing anyone any favors by passing them on material if the overall goals include acquiring the additional "soft skills" like dealing with crucial details and meeting paperwork requirements.

Yes, additional rules like you listed. For example:  1) successful completion of all labs. Now students are requesting me to let them submit missed labs. 2) assessments A+B combined over 50%, etc.  I have spent too many unpaid hours dealing with lazy and poor students who want to game the system. Colleagues mentioned that students are trying to push as much as they can to get high marks. I have heard from an administrator, fellow professors and even students that nowadays even companies do not trust the grades on the transcripts.

[mythbuster]

    I have similar type requirements for my course. Students must pass both the lab and the lecture components to pass the class, and must earn at least one lecture exam score of 60 or better. This is to prevent people totally blowing off the lab, especially if repeating, and ensuring a minimum level of knowledge. I have homework and in-class quizzes etc that are easy points- so I don't want those "bumping" you to a passing grade.  But many in my department have similar rules and we really do enforce them.
    For completing all the labs, I would say let them turn it in late but have a large point penalty for being so late. They have "completed" so they can get a grade, but take a big hit, so there are consequences. That or you have a make up lab day at the end of the semester, which is a PITA to do.

[polly_mer]

Hamburger, have you considered saying no to the student requests and just holding firm until a dean tells you otherwise?

[Aster]

Is anyone else seeing a massive increase in this type of thing?

Yes. This has been known for several years now. I read an article from either CHE or Inside Higher Ed that actually put a percentage value on how much the rate of accommodations were going up nationally. It was at least 6 years back but for some reason (11% more per year) is sticking out in my brain.

There are different reasons for the increase. Much better self-reporting of disabilities to the universities is one reason. There is far less social stigma in the U.S. for someone to acknowledge that they have a learning disability.

Another reason for the increase in accommodations is that arguably "low level" disabilities like Asperger's and certain ranges within ADHD wouldn't even have been considered anything 10-15 years ago. We've lowered the bar on what a learning disability is. Some can argue that this is a good or a bad thing. Good because some of these students who were overlooked before might actually get some good help. Bad because people who don't really need the help might clog up academic services with unnecessary requests and/or abuse their status. It goes both ways.

[marshwiggle]

Another reason for the increase in accommodations is that arguably "low level" disabilities like Asperger's and certain ranges within ADHD wouldn't even have been considered anything 10-15 years ago. We've lowered the bar on what a learning disability is. Some can argue that this is a good or a bad thing. Good because some of these students who were overlooked before might actually get some good help. Bad because people who don't really need the help might clog up academic services with unnecessary requests and/or abuse their status. It goes both ways.

This goes with the article Polly pointed to earlier. From the article:

What I found is that speed does not predict ability. Students who progressed through the course more quickly did not perform better, nor did the students who took longer. There was no meaningful relationship between time and performance. Some students who did well in the course took a long time while others did not. I also examined whether a student's speed is stable. Can we expect that faster students will be consistently faster throughout the semester or across different subject matters? The answer is no.
.
.
This assumption is so commonplace that in order to get more time on exams you need to be identified as having some kind of "learning disability," which implicitly suggests you are deficient or less capable than other students.

When I used to give exams, I got to making them much "shorter" than usual for the allotted time period, so that everyone would finish early. Again from the article:

My analysis showed that time wasn't the predictor — mastery was. When students are allowed to master material, they perform better in the course. That seems obvious, almost too obvious to need a study to tell us this, but if it's so obvious that mastery is key, then why aren't all of our schools adopting models of mastery learning and why haven't we done away with rigid fixed-pace instructional environments?

And the answer to her question, of course, is that it would totally upend our western education system. Which isn't to say that it would be a bad thing....