Hi Everyone

We have had this discussion here in Australia at various times and I would like to make a couple of comments if I may.

While I have been a strong advocate for universal access and inclusive practice for many years, this is one area where I don't believe it can work without disadvantaging students with certain disabilities.

It has been our practice to grant extra time based on the impact of the disability on the student's capacity to perform the necessary tasks compared to their Rees without the disability. If a person's disability requires them to undergo an inherently more time-consuming process then that should be compensated for, regardless of whether the time allowed got the exam is generous or not. If a student needs to take more time to do the same task, such as slower processing speed for the intake or output of information or because the technology or adjustments they need to use requires extra steps or more time, then any time-limited task will place them at a disadvantage.

Even though the student with a disability may be able to complete the exam within the time allowed, where the time limit is generous, other students have the choice of now they use that extra time, while the student with the disability does not. They can work more slowly and thoroughly, check their responses more carefully, write more, etc. While the student with the disability must use all the time just to complete the exam, therefore they are disadvantaged.

I have also found over many years that many academics underestimate the time it will take to complete exam tasks, and there is the danger that the exam would grow to fit the extra time.

I was recently in a discussion with some academics who were arguing that the time given for a practical exam was very generous and students should have no trouble completing it in that time, so students with disabilities should nit be given their approved extra time. However, when questioned, they admitted that mist students used most of the time allowed by being more thorough and checking their work more carefully. They agreed to allow the extra time.

I firmly believe that when we set any time limit for an exam, we need to adjust for the effects of a student's disability where it impacts on the speed of performing that task if we are to avoid discriminating against the students with disabilities.

Cheers
Trev

Sent from my iPhone
Trevor Allan
Head, Student Equity Welfare & Disability Services
University of Western Sydney

On 13/05/2011, at 12:03 AM, "Roddy Slorach" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

I very much agree with Paddy

Aren't we in favour of making education more accessible to all? Lots of the time, provision of reasonable adjustments is reserved for students with particular impairments, but as advisers, we often argue for a cross-institutional anticipatory adjustment.

If additional time was made available to everyone, this would prevent any need for disabled students who qualify for it being separately identified. As Paddy says, if other students don't need it, then they won't use it. If there is little advantage to the latter in having extra time, then why not apply it across the board, and advertise it as an example of progressive and inclusive education?

We won't be able to win this (extra time for all) across St George's this year, but hope to be able to implement it next year. Meantime, go for it, Margy!

Roddy


On 12/05/2011 12:36, Turner, Paddy wrote:
Hi Scott et al,
Surely the logic of both the points you make is based on the idea that the time limit for an exam affects the capacity to answer the questions set. If the exam is set to ensure everyone has ample time to complete what is required, then to add more, do more, becomes irrelevant and no-one gains by having any more time.
The vast majority of exams are set mainly to ensure that the student has the required knowledge and understanding without access to any other resource not to test their ability to respond quickly or under pressure. These latter ‘tests’ are side effects that we merely have come to expect based on traditional approaches and yet they disadvantage so many – and not just those we support. We need to get back to a proper understanding of what we are really trying to assess, I think, so that we can become more inclusive.

Whilst most disabled students appreciate the extra time, many refuse it simply because they dislike intensely the idea that they are singled out as different and do not want to sit their assessment separately from their cohort. Others accept the recommendation despite the same feelings.

….and let’s face it, honestly, how ‘fair’ is extra time anyway? If we examine it too closely we quickly realise it is pretty random. Exam papers and students vary hugely – some questions require huge amounts of reading, others little, some papers require huge amounts of writing, others little. Some students have great difficulty reading and processing, others have great difficulty producing written work and yet we slap the same 25% extra on across the board. I understand why, I support the provision of extra time, it has been the best we could do to try and even things up.

I accept that this is not an easy task and I agree that a blanket ruling to simply give everyone the extra is not the best way to resolve it, but neither is simply maintaining the status quo, in my view.

Good debate, this…..
Paddy

From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [<mailto:[log in to unmask]>mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lissner, Scott
Sent: 12 May 2011 12:12
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: universal extended time?

Since I am based in the United States my experience may not apply but there are two issues that arise when everyone is granted extended time.

1) Once everyone has it then it is an increase in standard time. Over time Instructors consider it when designing tests; students consider standard and request their additional time beyond this standard so the playing field is level in comparison to their peers without disabilities.

2) The logic of extended time is not based on an objective fixed time for taking an exam but an extension for the student with a disability related need over the time her peers have to compensate for impacts of the disability.

________________________________
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. <<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
To: <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Thu May 12 06:35:53 2011
Hi All,

We are currently thinking about phasing out the 25% extra time for students with dyslexia and offering all students the extra time – thus dispensing with the problem of finding alternative rooms for exams.

Has anyone else gone down this route.

Would be very grateful for any comments.

Many thanks

Margy Appleton
Disability Service
Buckinghamshire New University



--
Roddy Slorach

Disability Adviser
Registry
St George's, University of London

<http://www.sgul.ac.uk/studying-at-st-georges/student-support/student-with-disabilities>http://www.sgul.ac.uk/studying-at-st-georges/student-support/student-with-disabilities
020 8725 0143
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>