SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
Students are suing a major college admissions test maker for allegedly selling information about their disability statuses with universities, which they say could hurt their chances at getting into schools and impact the rest of their lives.
When students register to take the ACT—a standardized test used for college admissions taken by more than a million high schoolers each year—they answer a barrage of personal questions. As part of this, they are asked to note if they have disabilities that require "special provisions from the educational institution."
The ACT, which is administered by ACT, Inc., is the only real competitor to the College Board's SAT exam. The lawsuit claims that the ACT is selling the data it gleans from those student questionnaires—connected directly to students' individual identities—to colleges, which then use it to make important decisions about admissions and financial aid.
"A lot of students and parents have no idea how these testing agencies, which are gatekeepers to college, are using very sensitive and confidential data in the college admissions process," Jesse Creed, one of the plaintiffs' lawyers, told me in a phone call. "[Colleges are] hungry for disability data, because they have limited resources, and it's expensive to educate people with disabilities."
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday August 15 2018, @03:12PM (4 children)
It's worth noting here that the word "disability" may not refer to what most people immediately think of when they see "disability." Yes, there may be some who are blind (or severely visually-impaired), deaf (or severely impaired), have major dyslexia or other conditions that make learning in a "traditional" classroom difficult.
But unless you teach or are an upper-class parent, you may not be aware of the large trend in the past couple decades to deliberately get students classified as "disabled" to garner an advantage in things like standardized tests. Just for a couple data points, a few years back I taught in public high schools and averaged about 150 students per year that I taught directly. Out of those, I saw I think 1 student with a learning disability per year. So, about 1:150.
A year later, I taught in an elite private school, which not only had richer kids on average, but also much more talented ones. (I think 25-30% of the graduating class went to Ivy institutions every year.) However, there, I had 7 or 8 "learning disabilities" while teaching only 50 students per year. Roughly 1:7. I've since taught at universities and saw similar patterns for elite students vs. students at lesser institutions. Rich kids are at least 10-20 times more likely to get a diagnosis for a learning disability. (It's called "diagnosis shopping" in the trade.)
What's going on? It's simple. I had a friend who was a school psychologist at the time, and she explained it to me: there are so many vague disorders now that it's easy for rich parents with a kid who is lagging just a bit to get some sort of "diagnosis" for something. And then magically that kid gets extra time on standardized tests like SATs and ACTs. And since (as noted in TFA) the ACT stopped reporting those who got extra time back in 2002, those students get a significant advantage on a major admission tool for colleges. Additionally, they usually get extra time for class tests in high school, so they can raise their GPA. And if they choose, they can often get accommodations in college too, to help out their GPA to get them into med school or whatever.
I'm not saying the majority of parents abuse the system outright like this. And many of them are just trying to help their kids, and they happen to take them to a psychologist who identifies more nuanced learning problems than most parents would ever notice. But the point is that probably the majority of students who identify as "learning disabled" for the ACT are students who would probably succeed okay in a traditional classroom (though they might not do quite *as well*) and likely don't seem any different from "typical" students to the layman or even to an experienced educator.
Obviously I'm not arguing against accommodating those with disabilities. (I have two people in my extended family who had significant cognitive problems -- one borderline mentally retarded -- and needed support to get through school. So I'm familiar with those with major issues who the system was originally designed to help.) And major disabilities (like blind or deaf students) are often the most resource-intensive for colleges to deal with. But part of the story not highlighted in TFA may be colleges just trying to figure out how many students are they going to have to set up a special testing center "without distractions and with extra time" for, because that's the most common thing. I'm sure almost all students would benefit from taking a test in a distraction-free environment and with extra time, but large universities who have to accommodate lots of students with learning disabilities often can't just rely on a professor to allow a student to take a test in their office... they need separate testing centers.
Of course, the broader question I hinted at earlier is how this plays out as the new way for rich kids to get ahead. But that may be a separate discussion (nevertheless, it may also be something useful for colleges to consider in admissions).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 15 2018, @03:28PM (2 children)
Wouldn't surprise me. The wealthy have been doing similar things trying to cheat their way into gifted programs for which their children aren't ready for for years. It's not unusual for them to hire consultants to figure out how to bully their way past the testing procedures that apply to everybody else in order to get into those programs. And thanks to the lack of validity in the testing procedures, they can usually get in on appeal.
Really, the only way around a lot of it is to just detrack everybody and eliminate private schools. The public school problem would be fixed within a matter of a few years if the elites were forced to use the same schools as everybody else.
(Score: 2) by OrugTor on Wednesday August 15 2018, @04:39PM
One specific example: to get into the elementary gifted program in my local district the child takes a test. The gifted teacher administers the test, scores it and registers the result. A kid with a score under but close to the cutoff can appeal. Looks objective, but there's a workaround for aggressive parents. They can take the kid to a third-party tester who provides a "compatible" test. The kid takes the test in the provider's location and the parents send the test result to the gifted program administrator. There is no vetting of the test provider. If they give the kid some of the answers no-one will know and no-one is asking. So you can pay for entry to the gifted program.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 15 2018, @05:42PM
The overwhelming determinant of student success is their family's level of achievement or motivation. You would have to provide a stable family where education and behaving properly are valued and reinforced by the parents. You don't have to be rich to have this, but you can't be really ghetto either.
It's not money that makes for a good school. The city of Washington, DC spends more per pupil than its neighboring Northern Virginia suburbs. Care to guess which outperforms?
People don't like to hear this because it makes it sound like nothing can be done by the school to fix the gap. Sadly, the gap has proved stubborn to fix. Have hope, but don't expect miracles. Slow improvement, not fast fixes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 15 2018, @06:22PM
As a parent with two children that just got diagnosed with dyslexia, I think that there should be more done to allow dyslexics succeed in a "traditional" classroom. The statistics I got about it had 20% of the population affected by dyslexia to some degree, but the reading programs don't include methods to teach these people. As a result, there was a study that found that over 40% of the prison population was dyslexic, because without the help they need, that can't participate is society well.