It seems unfair when other people are treated differently. I think mobility issues such as broken hand should be given more time but giving dyslexic people extra time in exam seems odd to me, it's just like reducing the distance of a marathon for asthmatic people. Surely people with fast reading and interpreting skills are not given lesser time to answer the exam? So, no they shouldn't be given extra time cause that would just give them the advantage of being different.
Results 11 to 20 of 56
-
-
05-12-2012, 09:54 AM #12
first of all, everyone I've met with dyslexia (and that's a lot of people) and other forms of those kind of disabilities aren't bad at english or any other subject. They get given extra time because their brain struggles to correctly formulate at a "normal" pace. And just because you're slower than other people, doesn't mean you're not any better so yes, give them extra time.
-
Just a quick question, why should people with a broken arm be given more time if dyslexics are not given more time? Why is a physical impairment more important then a mental one? People can't help if they are dyslexic, the same way that people can't help if they are knocked down by a car and lose the use of their writing arm. It is just a bit silly to say that everyone should be equal, oh, but a broken arm can get you more time...
-
05-12-2012, 12:25 PM #14
If somebody breaks their arm they aren't going to be able to work at their normal pace so it's only fair they get either a scribe (which is the usual case) or extra time as it makes up for them taking longer compared to how they usual work and unlike dyslexia, a broken arm is only temporary and to not give them extra help would mean their grades were not a true representation of what they are capable of. Dyslexia doesn't just appear for a short while and then disappear like a broken arm will, they will remain consistent which is why giving extra time is unfair as it would give them inaccurate grades since weren't tested under the same conditions as everybody else.
Originally Posted by Kardan
That's when Ron vanished, came back speaking Spanish
Lavish habits, two rings, twenty carats
-
So should we not give extra time to the blind as well? Originally Posted by The Don
-
05-12-2012, 12:36 PM #16
You're argument is ridiculous. People with dyslexia take more time to do the same amount of work as other people, why should exams take this into account and inflate their marks? Should people with low IQ's get extra marks to compensate for their low intelligence? No, they shouldn't as it renders exams and grades pointless. Originally Posted by Kardan
That's when Ron vanished, came back speaking Spanish
Lavish habits, two rings, twenty carats
-
Who says it inflates their marks? When does more time = better marks? And my argument about blind people is only ridiculous, because your statement was ridiculous about dyslexia not 'disappearing', well, neither does blindness Originally Posted by The Don
-
05-12-2012, 01:03 PM #18
I think it's fairly obvious that somebodies marks will improve if they are given more time to spend answering questions... Originally Posted by Kardan
Who says it inflates their marks? When does more time = better marks? And my argument about blind people is only ridiculous, because your statement was ridiculous about dyslexia not 'disappearing', well, neither does blindness
Exam conditions are the same for everyone so that everybody's results/ability can be compared. Giving somebody different exam conditions because they are slower than others is extremely unfair and renders exams pointless.That's when Ron vanished, came back speaking Spanish
Lavish habits, two rings, twenty carats
-
So surely by your logic giving people different exam conditions because of a broken arm, or because they are blind is also unfair and renders it pointless? Originally Posted by The Don
And more time does not equal better marks. If you give a crap person 2 hours and 15 minutes to write an essay, they won't get a better mark than a good person who had the correct 1 hour 30 minutes to write it. Personally speaking, I have never ran out of time in an exam, and I don't know anyone who has ran out of time in an exam. With exams I've done badly in, I have always left before the time is up, because I know that sitting there for an extra 30 minutes won't get me anywhere.
-
05-12-2012, 01:19 PM #20
People with a broken arm/blind don't write for themselves, they receive a scribe, they have extra time because it takes longer to communicate with someone else and tell them what you want them to put than writing it yourself. People with dyslexia have nothing preventing them from writing or doing anything themselves, they simply take longer than other people to read/write. Since the exam time is restricted so that everybody has the same conditions as each other, giving them extra time is unfair. Originally Posted by Kardan
More time doesn't always equal better marks but it usually does. If you give a crap person an extra hour in an exam they most certainly will have the conditions to do better than if they didn't receive that extra time, they will have more time to plan out their answers and respond to the questions, so yes, time does usually equal better marks.That's when Ron vanished, came back speaking Spanish
Lavish habits, two rings, twenty carats
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts