Should people with Dyslexia (or anybody for that matter) get extra time in exams?

[The Don]

As I'm sure most of you already know, people with Dyslexia get given extra time in exams (as do people with other disabilities) which I disagree with. I think that everyone should receive equal conditions in exams (unless the person has a broken arm or something which means they physically can't write for themselves in which case they should receive a scribe). The main argument defending people is that those who do receive extra time have a disadvantage compared to those who don't and therefore this added time helps lower their disadvantage.

However, their grades will not truly represent what they're capable of. This can mislead employers who may not realise that the candidate they may hire could in fact be less suitable than other potential candidates (who unfortunately scored lower due to having less time in their exams). Also, if you agree that exam conditions should change to suite individuals then surely one could argue that people with lower IQ's should receive extra time too? After all, they are at a disadvantage compared to more intelligent students...

[Kardan]

I'm not entirely sure on my viewpoint, I'm not dyslexic so I wouldn't know if I would need more time. My brother has quite bad learning difficulties and suffers from dyslexia and gets extra time, and I would say he needs it, for him it's not as easy to read a question and write down an answer as it is for me.

On the other hand, in my classes at Uni, I have a friend who suffers from Aspergers and he is also dyslexic, and he gets an extra 50% of time in exams, which is an extra hour. Does he need it? Perhaps. But he always gets 90%+ and has the best results on our course. Maybe it's just coincidence.

In my opinion, I don't really care, when it comes to exams, I'm only focusing on myself, as long as I do well and get the questions right, that's all that matters. Other peoples grades do not effect me.

[dbgtz]

To be quite honest exams should be longer generally. I don't see when I'd ever need to write so quick and all it has done is hinder what I do because I feel like I'm going too slow causing me to rush thus I may forget some things in the moment. Though to actually answer the question, no for pretty much the same reason in your employer scenario.

[Kyle]

I completely disagree with your idea about it misrepresenting the true ability and misleading employers and such. Exams are about being able to display and apply your knowledge so as long as they're not reading what they're writing from a sheet of paper in front of them and have actually being paying attention in class in order to learn what they need to, it shouldn't really matter that they were given some more time to construct what they want to say. They have every right to their grade if they've learned what is required of them.

I don't really mind that dyslexic people are given extra time. I think it's fair because they clearly have difficulty processing some questions so won't be able to organise their thoughts in the same manner as those without it can. What I do despise is that on top of the extra time some people are even given word processors, too! I would love to sit and type out my exams, I'd be done in half the time it takes me to write them by hand! I wasn't sure if the thread was aimed at extra time in general or the addition of option to type in exams.

As someone who asked and was denied the opportunity to word process my exams I did feel at a (very slight) disadvantage but I have done what everybody else has to do - learned to write faster and more concisely so I can fit everything I need to into my essays. Yes, it requires a little work, but I'm at least grateful that I'm not burdened with any of the aforementioned learning disabilities and am actually able to adopt these techniques relatively easily.

My view is that if extra time isn't something offered to you then you need to find a different way to maximize your achievement, it's not that difficult. It's is something that most people with learning difficulties seems do really need in order to prevent them from failing abysmally because they haven't had enough time to even understand what they're being asked to write.

Not sure about your point about low IQ - it's not really relevant time-wise. I'd assume that having a low IQ would also mean that they'd have less knowledge so wouldn't be able to do anything with that time, whereas a dyslexic that has learned what they need to will have.

[Chippiewill]

I 100% agree, I don't see how you can justify giving someone extra time in say an English exam where their ability to read and write is being assessed. It just means they'll end up with a higher grade than they're capable of. Sure they've been knocked back by their condition but if you're being hired by a newspaper because of your english language exam result they're assuming you can read and write to that standard which simply is not true.

[FlyingJesus]

Pretty sure people who aren't good at maths don't get given calculators and people who can't draw aren't given stencils of A-grade work in art exams, so no there is no reason whatsoever why dyslexic people (which is essentially just being bad at reading and writing) should be given bonuses for not being as good as other people. Personally I think it's utterly awful that we focus so much on bringing up the weak to an acceptable level while totally ignoring talented people who could go so much further if they weren't held back by state inhibitions

[Kardan]

I think one thing that is worth asking, is does time really matter? Speaking from experience, I have never ran out of time in an exam, so even with more time, I don't think I would have done any better.

[Shockwave.2CC]

I think yes, they should

[-:Undertaker:-]

why dyslexic people (which is essentially just being bad at reading and writing)

This, I don't understand exactly why a medical sounding term has been applied to people who just aren't good at writing or reading. I can tell you, that if there was a term for those who are bad at mathematics then I would certainly fall under it's classification - even the most simple sums I simply cannot struggle despite having an amazing teacher for a period of 5 years. I'd also add that until a certain year in Primary School, I was absolutely terrible (one of the very bottom) at English and writing, pretty much everything.

As for genuine disabilities, I think it's sensible that somebody who has arm trouble or mobility issues is given extra time, yes.

[Kardan]

Dyslexia isn't simply a condition that means you're bad at reading or writing, it's obviously a lot more complicated.

For example, adults that were perfectly capable at reading and writing can develop dyslexia from a brain injury. My brother who has dyslexia went through complications when he was born and stopped breathing, my mother was basically told she has five minutes to give birth to him, or he dies, and he needed to be resuscitated and put into intensive care. Our family are pretty sure that his dyslexia and other learning disabilities are related to this.

But hey, don't give him extra time in exams, it's his fault he can't read(!)