The New York Times
February 8, 2001
Disabled Win Halt to Notations of Special Arrangements on Tests
By TAMAR LEWIN
In a major victory for disability rights groups, the Educational
Testing Service announced yesterday that on many of its standardized
exams it would stop flagging the results of students with physical or
learning disabilities who receive special accommodations, like extra
time, for the tests.
The new policy, covering the Graduate Record Examination, the Graduate
Management Admission Test, the Test of English as a Foreign Language
and Praxis, a test for teachers, will go into effect in October. More
than two million students take those tests each year, and thousands
receive accommodations for disabilities.
The announcement is part of the settlement of a lawsuit filed two
years ago by a California man with no hands who was granted extra time
and the use of a computer with a trackball for taking the management
test.
It does not cover the tests given for medical or law school. Nor does
it cover the SAT, which is also administered by Educational Testing
Service but owned by the College Board, an independent entity not
named in the lawsuit. Nonetheless, the settlement includes an
agreement that the College Board will convene a group to re-examine
its flagging policy and recommend by March 31, 2002, whether it should
be continued, changed, or ended.
"This is a huge, major step forward for equal opportunity in testing,"
said Robert Schaeffer, the public education director of FairTest, a
Cambridge, Mass., group that is critical of standardized testing. "The
pressure now is on the College Board to do the same for the SAT, since
it's untenable to have one policy for the graduate-school admission
test and a completely different one for the SAT."
For decades, students granted extra time or other accommodations on
the standardized tests had their results flagged with the notation
"Scores Obtained Under Special Conditions."
When the plaintiff in the California suit, Mark Breimhorst, was
rejected from the business schools to which he applied, he filed his
suit charging that the testing service's flagging policy violated
state and federal anti- discrimination laws, stigmatizing disabled
students with a kind of scarlet letter.
The International Dyslexia Association and Californians for Disability
Rights joined his suit.
The testing service initially moved to dismiss Mr. Breimhorst's
lawsuit, but last year, Judge William Orrick of Federal District
refused to do so, ruling that the service's exams should "equally
measure the skills of disabled and nondisabled test-takers" and that,
if they did so, there would be no reason to flag the scores of
test-takers who received accommodations.
In settling the case, the testing service did not admit any violation
of the law.
"Having carefully weighed the expressed concerns of people with
disabilities," said Kurt Landgraf, the president of the testing
service, "we decided, in the spirit of furthering opportunity, to end
flagging" for the tests.
David Wilson, president of the Graduate Management Admission Council,
said yesterday that business school admissions officers seemed
comfortable with the settlement.
"The people I've talked to say that if that's what the applicants
want, so be it," Mr. Wilson said. "The unfortunate thing is, most of
them thought it was beneficial for applicants to have that flag,
because when admissions officers looked at the applicant's experience,
and saw that a person had achieved all that despite a disability, it
usually had a positive effect."
Although Mr. Breimhorst had a physical disability, the largest,
fastest-growing and most controversial group of students with
disabilities accounting for 9 out of every 10 accommodation granted
are those with attention deficit disorder or a learning disability
like dyslexia.
Over the last decade, the number of students diagnosed with such
disabilities, and requesting special accommodations, has mushroomed.
At the same time, there has been increasing concern that affluent
white students receive accommodations on their standardized tests far
more often than poor black or Hispanic students. Last year, for
example, the California state auditor found that, among the state's
1999 high school graduates, students in private schools were four
times more likely than students in public schools to have received
accommodations on the SAT.
Whether for physical or learning disabilities, almost all the
accommodations include extended time. But there is little solid data
on how much extra time disabled students need to fairly show their
skills.
With ever-more competitive college admissions, and more high- stakes
testing, the debate over accommodating disabled students has heated
up. And with increasing awareness of the federal anti-discrimination
laws, students with disabilities have become more litigious about
their right to receive accommodations on everything from bar exams and
medical-school admission tests to the yearly state assessment tests.
"Our settlement doesn't cover every standardized test," said Joshua
Konecky, the lawyer at Disability Rights Advocates in Oakland, Calif.,
who represented Mr. Breimhorst, "but E.T.S. is so important in the
field that we are hoping other groups, like the one that administers
the medical school test, will look and see that if E.T.S. can
administer tests without flags, they can, too."
The SAT is the test for which the most accommodations are granted:
nearly 50,000 tests will be administered under special conditions this
year, compared with about 17,000 in 1990-91. About two million
students applying for college take the SAT each year.
As part of the settlement, the College Board has agreed to have a
panel of experts on testing, university admissions and disabilities
examine the practice of flagging, and make recommendations on whether
it should be continued, changed or ended.
"There are good reasons for flagging," said Gaston Caperton, president
of the College Board, who is himself dyslexic, "and we are pleased
that the merits will be weighed by an expert panel."
Chiara Coletti, the spokeswoman for the board, said there was a
consensus among the colleges and universities on the board that
accommodations and flagging warrant re-examination.
Among other things, the experts will consider the extent to which
extended time affects the comparability of scores between people with
disabilities and people without them.
"One easy way to end the whole problem would be to give everyone more
time on the test, like four and half hours instead of three, or to
remove enough questions, so that reading speed is no longer an issue,"
said Mr. Konecky of the Disability Rights Advocates. "If you don't
have time restraints, you don't have the problem with accommodations.
I expect that will be on the table."
Under the terms of the settlement, Mr. Konecky can take the issue back
to court before the same judge if the disability groups he represents
do not accept the panel's recommendations.
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
|