The most progressive country in the world

[aimeeandbeatles]

If we accommodate a dyslexic, what's the worst thing that could happen? He misspells something? (Whether or not we should accommodate them is entirely another matter)

What happens if they become a pharmacist and reads the prescription wrong and gives the wrong one to a patient?

 

[aelf]

If we accommodate a dyslexic, what's the worst thing that could happen? He misspells something? (Whether or not we should accommodate them is entirely another matter)

But there are fields dyscalculics simply cannot do (such as engineering and architecture). Those fields rely very heavily on maths. If you cannot do maths, you cannot do engineering. Or would you like to use a bridge designed by a dyscalculic? Would you like to live in a house designed by a dyscalculic? Need I continue this list? Calculating the strength of materials is just an example, almost everything is done using maths in those fields. An engineer who can't do maths is a worthless (and perhaps even dangerous) engineer.

I don't think that tests really measure your aptitude at performing tasks in certain jobs anyway. For one, I can't imagine why an engineer wouldn't be allowed to use a calculator.

I think it really depends on just how well an individual manages with his/her handicap, and giving people extra time and calculators to use during tests is not really a basis for deciding whether they can manage or not in certain jobs in the real world.

If these persons, who have some kind of diagnose, whether it's dyscalculia or dyslexia, get special treatment in the tests - it should also reflect in how their testscores are measured against other people when applying for college. As I explained earlier - there are several other ways to apply for college and some ways aren't suitable for everyone, diagnosed or not.

Might as well not give them help if you're going to discriminate anyway.

Why should a person who needs someone to read a text out loud on a test to understand the text, have an advantage to someone who just is a slow reader, when applying to college? Tests are supposed to be discriminatory against those who can't compete in the tests. There are other ways to get into a college education here. If you can't compete in any of these ways, maybe you need to rethink your strategies and apply for something else.

The tests are newly designed and now calculators could be very helpful in some portions of the test. The notion that people with diagnosed dyscalculia should get special treatment on a math test to get into a college education seems ridiculous. I'm not sure you understand how arbitrary some of these diagnoses are given.

So I take it that you're questioning the medical verifiability of dyslexia and dyscalculia? To be honest, I'm not one to set you straight. I'll have to let someone with expert knowledge do so.

I hate to say it, but yes? Or at least if somebody is no good for a particular job they should not be able to claim that a certain disability gives them a 'right' to do it. If you're dyslexic you should be entitled to help through school, that's a given, but if that means that you haven't got the aptitude for a certain career then, unfortunately, you can't do it.

Do you know any dyslexic person? I had a dyslexic course mate who could do any module I did, which required a great deal of reading and writing. Apart from the occasional spelling errors and the extra time during tests, he was fine. That means he can do any job that I can, no problem.

I seriously doubt you know what you're talking about.

 

[luiz]

What's wrong with "discriminating" against people who are objectively worse at a given field? As someone said, a person without legs isn't going to be fisherman, no matter what sort of "progressive" attitudes the state takes. Someone with subpar mathematical skills should not be an engineer, no matter if the cause is a medical condition.

 

[aelf]

I'll buy that argument when people have proven that tests measure skills (other than test-taking skills) accurately.

 

[Akka]

Do you know any dyslexic person? I had a dyslexic course mate who could do any module I did, which required a great deal of reading and writing. Apart from the occasional spelling errors and the extra time during tests, he was fine. That means he can do any job that I can, no problem.

I seriously doubt you know what you're talking about.

I know several dyslexic person (among them, my own mother and a friend), and yes they can do fine in most fields.
I would not allow them to teach language though, that would be stupid.

I sersiously doubt you actually bothered to understand the point that Flying Pig and Hehehe were making.

 

[Linkman226]

What happens if they become a pharmacist and reads the prescription wrong and gives the wrong one to a patient?

One of the best English teachers in my school is dyslexic. You can get over these things.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I had no idea this particular malady even existed until reading this article. But various experts have been discussing it for quite some time. One of the citations in the Wiki article dates back to 1974.

It is quite well known that some people just aren't very good at math but are exceptional in verbal skills, and vice versa. As long as the standardized tests don't overtly discriminate against this particular group, and that other indicators are also used to assess who should be admitted into institutions of higher learning besides standardized test scores, I don't see a problem here. After all, it is also quite well-known that some individuals simply can't do well on standardized tests despite being quite intelligent.

 

[aelf]

I know several dyslexic person (among them, my own mother and a friend), and yes they can do fine in most fields.
I would not allow them to teach language though, that would be stupid.

I sersiously doubt you actually bothered to understand the point that Flying Pig and Hehehe were making.

I'd have thought it was the other way round and you're agreeing with me because, well, that's pretty much what I said

It's not like I said we should definitely have dyslexics teach languages and dyscalculics teach maths.

 

[Flying Pig]

Do you know any dyslexic person? I had a dyslexic course mate who could do any module I did, which required a great deal of reading and writing. Apart from the occasional spelling errors and the extra time during tests, he was fine. That means he can do any job that I can, no problem.

So he took longer to do the same task, and still did it to a slightly lower standard? Frankly if I were running an engineering firm I wouldn't want to hire someone that I knew would be less efficient than another candidate.

I know I've got a slightly different attitude, being from a military background, but I think the forces provide a good model. We're very big on ensuring that people from anywhere can join and do whatever job they can, but the standards come first - we let women in, for example, but insist that they do the same training as the others in their unit (they have lower standards for tests, but that's for other reasons that I'm happy to discuss if anyone wants), because Gunner Alice has to throw around the same 201b shell as Gunner Andrew, and, even though Andrew has a natural advantage being male. she can't claim that her natural disadvantage gives her the 'right' to be a gunner because she's worked just as hard as him.

I'm all for eliminating unneccessary discrimination and in some cases we do have tests which are unfair, because they practically test for things which are not in their remit (for example, a French exam with questions written in English will automatically test one's ability in both languages) - don't get me wrong, I worked a few years ago with another cadet instructor who happens to be dyslexic, and while she has the problems that can be expected she's one of the best people I know for the job, because the important part of her role is working with the kids, organising their training and instructing them. She couldn't do my officer's job in its entirety, because my role includes a huge amount of paperwork, writing orders, risk assessments, briefing notes, and so on, but being dyslexic doesn't stop her doing hers. However I would not support her promotion to my rank, because her dyslexia makes her less good at it than another, equally competant, officer.

 

[Hehehe]

What happens if they become a pharmacist and reads the prescription wrong and gives the wrong one to a patient?

Doctors' handwriting is so terrible that I don't think dyslexia even matters when reading the prescriptions . But seriously though, pharmacists are well trained and they ought to know what medication is used to treat a certain disease. And if they're in doubt, they can always call the doctor in question.

I don't think that tests really measure your aptitude at performing tasks in certain jobs anyway. For one, I can't imagine why an engineer wouldn't be allowed to use a calculator.

At least in the Finnish matriculation examination people are allowed to use calculators. Also, engineers can have calculators with them in just about every test.

I think it really depends on just how well an individual manages with his/her handicap, and giving people extra time and calculators to use during tests is not really a basis for deciding whether they can manage or not in certain jobs in the real world.

Might as well not give them help if you're going to discriminate anyway.

If somebody with dyscalculia actually can do maths then I'm not going to stop them. But from what I understand about the condition, they usually can't. What I am saying is, if they can make it, great, if not, then I'm not willing to give them extra bonuses.

I'll buy that argument when people have proven that tests measure skills (other than test-taking skills) accurately.

Here I go, again with the engineering. But I'll use it as an example since it is so heavily maths based. Basically since mathematics is so big part of engineering, you cannot do engineering if you cannot do maths. And every maths test I've ever been to certainly measured my ability to do maths (which is what they we're supposed to do, a skill which you need for a variety of careers)

 

[Akka]

I'd have thought it was the other way round and you're agreeing with me because, well, that's pretty much what I said

It's not like I said we should definitely have dyslexics teach languages and dyscalculics teach maths.

What you actually said is :

That means he can do any job that I can, no problem.

Which contradict the idea that a dyslexic would be able to teach language and a dyscalculics would be able to teach math.

 

[aelf]

So he took longer to do the same task, and still did it to a slightly lower standard? Frankly if I were running an engineering firm I wouldn't want to hire someone that I knew would be less efficient than another candidate.

No, in fact, he did very very well.

I don't hold it against him that he got extra time for exams. I think it's fair because he has clearly worked to overcome his handicap. Even if he might not be able to write an essay in 1 hour as well as I can, he could certainly meet deadlines for assignments and do well for them. I think the latter is a better indication of how well he would manage in jobs that require a lot of reading and writing. These days we have spell check to make sure the spelling is fine.

If somebody with dyscalculia actually can do maths then I'm not going to stop them. But from what I understand about the condition, they usually can't. What I am saying is, if they can make it, great, if not, then I'm not willing to give them extra bonuses.

Here I go, again with the engineering. But I'll use it as an example since it is so heavily maths based. Basically since mathematics is so big part of engineering, you cannot do engineering if you cannot do maths. And every maths test I've ever been to certainly measured my ability to do maths (which is what they we're supposed to do, a skill which you need for a variety of careers)

I don't know anyone with that condition, but if it's similar to dyslexia, I have no problem with giving them extra time for exams. That just doesn't matter very much in terms of compromising tests' ability to measure real world skills in the whole scheme of things.

Insisting that tests must be completed in a fixed amount of time with no allowances for people with medically-attested handicaps would merely be tantamount to being strict about the format of the exam, for which test-taking skills are of primary importance.

Which contradict the idea that a dyslexic would be able to teach language and a dyscalculics would be able to teach math.

What if I told you that I can't teach language or maths because I have little or no aptitude for teaching those subjects?

 

[Akka]

What if I told you that I can't teach language or maths because I have little or no aptitude for teaching those subjects?

I'd say it may be true, but it's still a very weak cop-out from the actual rhetorical point you were making before ?

 

[aelf]

I'd say it may be true, but it's still a very weak cop-out from the actual rhetorical point you were making before ?

No, I made myself the object of that sentence, so my own skills are absolutely relevant to its truth value. My knowledge of grammar rules are atrocious because I never really learned them. Therefore, when I said that he can do any job I can, I actually was thinking about the jobs that I can do right now, which excludes teaching languages.

 

[Hehehe]

I don't know anyone with that condition, but if it's similar to dyslexia, I have no problem with giving them extra time for exams. That just doesn't matter very much in terms of compromising tests' ability to measure real world skills in the whole scheme of things.

Frequent difficulties with arithmetic
Difficulty with everyday tasks like reading analog clocks
Inability to comprehend financial planning or budgeting, sometimes even at a basic level; for example, estimating the cost of the items in a shopping basket or balancing a checkbook
Difficulty with multiplication-tables, and subtraction-tables, addition tables, division tables, mental arithmetic, etc
Often unable to grasp and remember mathematical concepts, rules, formulae, and sequences
Inability to concentrate on mentally intensive tasks

I find it a bit hard to believe that someone who has great difficulties in grasping simple arithmetic and the basics of mathematics would do well in algebra for example. But then again I am not an expert on the condition. In some fields, mathematics is a real world skill.

 

[aelf]

I find it a bit hard to believe that someone who has great difficulties in grasping simple arithmetic and the basics of mathematics would do well in algebra for example. But then again I am not an expert on the condition.

I'm just working off what I know about dyslexia. And doesn't the degree to which people suffer from these conditions vary? I don't think the allowances are unlimited, so if people's abilities affect them badly enough then, yeah, they still wouldn't be able to pass after reasonable allowances have been made.

In some fields, mathematics is a real world skill.

I wasn't suggesting that it isn't.

Test-taking skills have to do with answering questions in an exam format and setting, which are often vastly different from real world conditions.

 

[Flying Pig]

I don't hold it against him that he got extra time for exams. I think it's fair because he has clearly worked to overcome his handicap

That's something, and it's why we let women pass their fitness tests with lower scores - the tests are actually testing your determination to keep yourself in physical state, and it takes as much effort for a woman to get to be able to do 22 press-ups as it does for a man to get to be able to do 44. However, when we're actually testing aptitude - for example, loading artillery peices as I said - everyone, be they male, female, tall, short, whatever, has to stack the same number of shells in the same time. You may as well say that these tests are discriminating against skinny people, and they are - but that's entirely right and entirely the point.

Insisting that tests must be completed in a fixed amount of time with no allowances for people with medically-attested handicaps would merely be tantamount to being strict about the format of the exam, for which test-taking skills are of primary importance.

The ability to work quickly is a vital skill in all fields. It's an often-repeated maxim that an imperfect plan implemented quickly and with aggression is generally more successful than a perfect plan implemented late. As I said, if you can't work fast and accurately I don't care what your reason for that is, I wouldn't want you to be working for me.

Test-taking skills have to do with answering questions in an exam format and setting, which are often vastly different from real world conditions.

Applying intellect under stress, working alone, and where you can't go and look up an answer you don't know? That sounds pretty valuable to anyone, regardless of what aides are 'normally' available; to be able to do without them is not only a sign of greater ability but very helpful in many real-life situations. Again a military example, but if somebody can't write a decent essay under exam conditions that doesn't make me entirely confident in their ability to come up with a good plan-of-attack in battle, however different the two situations are.

From my experience there's always enough time if you know what you're doing, and if you don't then no amount of time is going to change that. Every maths test I have taken tested my ability to do maths.

Yes, and it also tests your ability to express yourself clearly, to work to a time limit and therefore to prioritise tasks if you can't answer every question, to work without asking for advice or looking up the answer - as I keep saying, these aren't neccessarily maths skills, but they're all important for life.

 

[Hehehe]

I'm just working off what I know about dyslexia. And doesn't the degree to which people suffer from these conditions vary? I don't think the allowances are unlimited, so if people's abilities affect them badly enough then, yeah, they still wouldn't be able to pass after reasonable allowances have been made.

If these people can do maths, they don't need allowances. If they can't, they shouldn't.

Test-taking skills have to do with answering questions in an exam format and setting, which are often vastly different from real world conditions.

From my experience there's always enough time if you know what you're doing, and if you don't then no amount of time is going to change that. Every maths test I have taken tested my ability to do maths.

 

[aelf]

That's something, and it's why we let women pass their fitness tests with lower scores - the tests are actually testing your determination to keep yourself in physical state, and it takes as much effort for a woman to get to be able to do 22 press-ups as it does for a man to get to be able to do 44. However, when we're actually testing aptitude - for example, loading artillery peices as I said - everyone, be they male, female, tall, short, whatever, has to stack the same number of shells in the same time. You may as well say that these tests are discriminating against skinny people, and they are - but that's entirely right and entirely the point.

The ability to work quickly is a vital skill in all fields. It's an often-repeated maxim that an imperfect plan implemented quickly and with aggression is generally more successful than a perfect plan implemented late. As I said, if you can't work fast and accurately I don't care what your reason for that is, I wouldn't want you to be working for me.

Applying intellect under stress, working alone, and where you can't go and look up an answer you don't know? That sounds pretty valuable to anyone, regardless of what aides are 'normally' available; to be able to do without them is not only a sign of greater ability but very helpful in many real-life situations. Again a military example, but if somebody can't write a decent essay under exam conditions that doesn't make me entirely confident in their ability to come up with a good plan-of-attack in battle, however different the two situations are.

Yes, and it also tests your ability to express yourself clearly, to work to a time limit and therefore to prioritise tasks if you can't answer every question, to work without asking for advice or looking up the answer - as I keep saying, these aren't neccessarily maths skills, but they're all important for life.

Combat situations are different from normal job situations. In the latter, being able to meet deadlines and do well for assignments is a much better indication of how well a person can manage in most normal jobs. In very few cases would they put you in the kind of conditions that exams simulate, such that I don't think it makes much of a difference if the people doing them were normal graduates or dyslexic ones who got some extra time during exams.

Honestly, I'm surprised that quite a few people here are against allowances for dyslexics. Apart from my position, that seems to be the consensus right now.

If these people can do maths, they don't need allowances. If they can't, they shouldn't.

So you're completely against allowances for people with dyslexia as well?

From my experience there's always enough time if you know what you're doing, and if you don't then no amount of time is going to change that. Every maths test I have taken tested my ability to do maths.

So, going by what you're saying, people with dyslexia and discalculia don't know what they are doing if they need extra time?

 

[Hehehe]

So you're completely against allowances for people with dyslexia as well?

Like I said, in the grand scheme of things allowances for dyslexics don't really matter. Maths is a different case. A dyslexic with allowances can function somewhat as well as a normal person without allowances (with a few exceptions of course). This is not the case with mathematics.

So, going by what you're saying, people with dyslexia and discalculia don't know what they are doing if they need extra time?

I'm saying, usually there is time. Tests test the skill that is being tested, at least when it comes to mathematics.