disability...to reveal or not

[runion]

I have a well-documented learning disbility. It does not affect my performance in science classes (BCPM 3.7+, GPA 3.5), but it does affect my reading and writing ability....reading is slow and laborious for me..so is reading comprehension, and writing is gut-wrenching. I will be taking the MCAT in 4/05. Question: whether to take the MCAT under a disabled status or regularly, knowing that my verbal and writing scores will be terrible. I have heard that MCATs are marked in some way when given under alternative conditions. Does anyone know just how this affects admission? Which is worse..very poor verbal or a disability check????

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PurpleHaze]

First off, way to go! Those are really good grades. I don't know if I would bring it up with my schools about the disability, but I don't think it would hurt you if you did. If anything it would show how hard you work and how far you've gone in order to overcome this disability.

 

[Anastasis]

I have a well-documented learning disbility. It does not affect my performance in science classes (BCPM 3.7+, GPA 3.5), but it does affect my reading and writing ability....reading is slow and laborious for me..so is reading comprehension, and writing is gut-wrenching. I will be taking the MCAT in 4/05. Question: whether to take the MCAT under a disabled status or regularly, knowing that my verbal and writing scores will be terrible. I have heard that MCATs are marked in some way when given under alternative conditions. Does anyone know just how this affects admission? Which is worse..very poor verbal or a disability check????

You mean 04/06 right? You're alittle late for this year!

I would think that med schools can't discriminate based on disabilities but I actually have nothing to back that up with.

 

[Chinorean]

I have a well-documented learning disbility. It does not affect my performance in science classes (BCPM 3.7+, GPA 3.5), but it does affect my reading and writing ability....reading is slow and laborious for me..so is reading comprehension, and writing is gut-wrenching. I will be taking the MCAT in 4/05. Question: whether to take the MCAT under a disabled status or regularly, knowing that my verbal and writing scores will be terrible. I have heard that MCATs are marked in some way when given under alternative conditions. Does anyone know just how this affects admission? Which is worse..very poor verbal or a disability check????

How poor is poor? Maybe you can take a practice test and see how you do on verbal and writing. Med schools often have a "technical standards" requirement, so you don't want them to think that you can't do the work in med school. On the other hand, you GPA shows you can handle coursework. I say go for it, report your disability. They have that option for a reason.

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

I would check the AAMC website to see if schools can see whether or not it was taken under special circumstances. I want to say yes, but definitely check the website.

Medical schools CAN discriminate based on disability if it interferes with your ability to function as a doctor. I don't know if needing more time to read is included in that. I don't see why it would be unless we're talking about serious time constraints, because you can obviously handle the material given enough time.

In general, though, I would say that if you take some practice tests under a time limit and get 5-6-7 on Verbal, then I would definitely take the test under special conditions. If you're getting 8+ and your other scores are good, you probably don't HAVE to, but it's your call.

No one cares about the writing score if your secondaries are well-written.

 

[Anastasis]

Medical schools CAN discriminate based on disability if it interferes with your ability to function as a doctor. I don't know if needing more time to read is included in that. I don't see why it would be unless we're talking about serious time constraints, because you can obviously handle the material given enough time.

I wonder what disabilities would interfer with your ability to be a doctor. Like, would blindness be enough of a disability? Blind and deaf? I don't think being wheelchair confined would be, except maybe for an orthoped. surgeon.

Sorry... not trying to hijack, I just think it's interesting.

 

[MoosePilot]

I wonder what disabilities would interfer with your ability to be a doctor. Like, would blindness be enough of a disability? Blind and deaf? I don't think being wheelchair confined would be, except maybe for an orthoped. surgeon.

Sorry... not trying to hijack, I just think it's interesting.

I've always wondered whether a real deficit in reading ability might not be seriously difficult to overcome. Why administer a standardized test under different standards?

 

[masterMood]

I would work hard to correct your reading/writing disability. For life skills, the USMLE tests in med. school, and general knowledge.

If you are pulling off a 3.7/3.5 gpa I would recommend trying some reading comprehension books and guides. There are guides on speed reading which focus on comprehension of course, and they do have valuable information.

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

I wonder what disabilities would interfer with your ability to be a doctor. Like, would blindness be enough of a disability? Blind and deaf? I don't think being wheelchair confined would be, except maybe for an orthoped. surgeon.

Sorry... not trying to hijack, I just think it's interesting.

There was actually a news article about a blind doctor awhile ago. The hurdles he had to overcome were incredible and he was obvoiusly an amazing human being to be able to pull that off. Even still, I'm pretty sure he was going into academic medicine. For the vast majority of people, total blindness and total deafness would be too much to overcome, if possible at all.

Of course it would depend on what type of disability, the level of disability, etc. Some disabilities you can work around, some you can't.

Most of the schools I've applied to list out the technical standards, which are for the most part understandably vague.

 

[Anastasis]

There was actually a news article about a blind doctor awhile ago. The hurdles he had to overcome were incredible and he was obvoiusly an amazing human being to be able to pull that off. Even still, I'm pretty sure he was going into academic medicine.

Wow. Do you remember where you read the article?

 

[izibo]

He is actually still at a student in the MSTP program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I think he finished his MD last year and is finishing up his PhD at the moment.

Pretty freaking amazing stuff, says a lot about the student and a lot about Madison... but I'm biased since thats where I am going next year

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7318398/

 

[Megalofyia]

I've always wondered whether a real deficit in reading ability might not be seriously difficult to overcome. Why administer a standardized test under different standards?

There was a dental student in San Antonio who was so severly dyslexic he could barely read his own name. He did every thing orally. He was one of their best students.

 

[argonana]

He is actually still at a student in the MSTP program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I think he finished his MD last year and is finishing up his PhD at the moment.

Pretty freaking amazing stuff, says a lot about the student and a lot about Madison... but I'm biased since thats where I am going next year

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7318398/

a post-doc in my lab TAd this guy during grad school at Madison. apparently, the guy is brilliant.

 

[letmein!please?]

a post-doc in my lab TAd this guy during grad school at Madison. apparently, the guy is brilliant.

And modest. When I think about how heavily I rely on my vision for studying, reading, labs, etc...I just can't imagine doing any of it blind, and he was in the top of his class. Im amazed.

 

[21JumpStreet]

I have a well-documented learning disbility. It does not affect my performance in science classes (BCPM 3.7+, GPA 3.5), but it does affect my reading and writing ability....reading is slow and laborious for me..so is reading comprehension, and writing is gut-wrenching. I will be taking the MCAT in 4/05. Question: whether to take the MCAT under a disabled status or regularly, knowing that my verbal and writing scores will be terrible. I have heard that MCATs are marked in some way when given under alternative conditions. Does anyone know just how this affects admission? Which is worse..very poor verbal or a disability check????

If you are asked about a disability, I would confirm it. Don't lie about it. This is especially important if you want to use their disability accomadation services. If they don't ask, let them know after you are accepted so you can use their services. By informing them and by providing documentation, you have a good chance of being able to get time extentions on exams and have the opportunity to take them under more appropriate test taking conditions.

Also, adcomms are not supposed to discriminate against your disability. It would be against the ADA.

hph

 

[DrBowtie]

If you are asked about a disability, I would confirm it. Don't lie about it. This is especially important if you want to use their disability accomadation services. If they don't ask, let them know after you are accepted so you can use their services. By informing them and by providing documentation, you have a good chance of being able to get time extentions on exams and have the opportunity to take them under more appropriate test taking conditions.

Also, adcomms are not supposed to discriminate against your disability. It would be against the ADA.

hph

Then what is the point of the technical standards requirement if you can get in without being able to fulfill them?

 

[21JumpStreet]

I would check the AAMC website to see if schools can see whether or not it was taken under special circumstances. I want to say yes, but definitely check the website.

Medical schools CAN discriminate based on disability if it interferes with your ability to function as a doctor. I don't know if needing more time to read is included in that. I don't see why it would be unless we're talking about serious time constraints, because you can obviously handle the material given enough time.

In general, though, I would say that if you take some practice tests under a time limit and get 5-6-7 on Verbal, then I would definitely take the test under special conditions. If you're getting 8+ and your other scores are good, you probably don't HAVE to, but it's your call.

No one cares about the writing score if your secondaries are well-written.

Medical schools don't discriminate against the disability. They are looking at strictly the ability to do the work. If a student is disabled and doing well, the schools can't kick the person out. Now, if a person hasn't learned how to deal with their disability (this is obviously not the case of the Op because she/he is doing very well), this can cause the individual to do poorly. In this case, the individual would fail due to poor performance. If the schools discriminated against disabled students, then all disabled students whether poor performance or not would be kicked out.

 

[argonana]

Then what is the point of the technical standards requirement if you can get in without being able to fulfill them?

they can't get in everywhere. what strikes me is how the MSTP student at Wisconsin was rejected from so many medical schools. most schools make a generic statement along the lines of "school x does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion...age, or disability." (from the msar entry for one of the schools that rejected the MSTPer at madison...) however, their technical standards still set a certain bar for abilities.

 

[rush2]

i say take the test under special conditions, if you can... verbal tends to be challenging even for those of us without learning disabilities, so i can only imagine how difficult it may be for you to complete in the alloted time frame. wrt med schools potentially discriminating against you.... i think you have more than enough proof to show that your learning disability has not affected your academic performance, and will not during medical school.

i know that others have said to not disclose the disability if possible, but this way, i think you at least get the opportunity to present your case, as opposed to getting skipped over for interviews b/c of a very low score. also, if you end up needing special accomodations later in med school or for the boards, i think it will be much more difficult for you to get if you 'all of a sudden' disclose that you have this issue.

good luck!

 

[21JumpStreet]

Then what is the point of the technical standards requirement if you can get in without being able to fulfill them?

The med schools understand the need for accomodations. The learning disabled individual has a different brain. At the same time many of these people are very brilliant. The accomodations are often needed so they can show what they actually know. So, when they receive extra time for their exams, this extra hour or so is equivalent to your allotted test taking time.

 

[DrBowtie]

The med schools understand the need for accomadations. The learning disabled individual has a different brain. At the same time many of these people are very brilliant. The accomadations are often needed so they can show what they actually know. So, when they receive extra time for their exams, this extra hour or so is equivalent to your allotted test taking time.

Right. But they say you must be able to perform to these technical standards. How can a disabled person who cannot perform those tasks be admitted? If they aren't is it discrimination?

I'm not trying to argue anything, just confused on the point of these standards if someone can't be rejected for inability to perform them.

 

[21JumpStreet]

Right. But they say you must be able to perform to these technical standards. How can a disabled person who cannot perform those tasks be admitted? If they aren't is it discrimination?

I'm not trying to argue anything, just confused on the point of these standards if someone can't be rejected for inability to perform them.

The point is they can perform them under fair conditions. Now, if the student could not perform using these services, than I can see how the individual would not make it. You have to understand LD in order to understand this issue.

 

[rush2]

Right. But they say you must be able to perform to these technical standards. How can a disabled person who cannot perform those tasks be admitted? If they aren't is it discrimination?

I'm not trying to argue anything, just confused on the point of these standards if someone can't be rejected for inability to perform them.

well, i think the whole point is that some disabilities do not prevent one from performing to these standards. taking long to understand what you are reading simply means just that... you take long. but its the fact that you DO comprehend that's important.

if someone can't perform, b/c of a disability or otherwise... then no, they can't be admitted. thats not discrimination.

 

[MoosePilot]

There was a dental student in San Antonio who was so severly dyslexic he could barely read his own name. He did every thing orally. He was one of their best students.

See, things like this irritate me. He was the top student because they redefined the standards. As long as he had someone reading all the material to him and did every thing orally, he was the top student. Don't dentists have to read charts? What if "severely allergic to novocaine" is written all over someone's chart? How awesome will this guy be then? Maybe his tech can read him the chart or he can get a briefing from a patient, but techs aren't ultimately responsible and patients forget. What then?

What if you could read if you were smarter, but you're just dumb? How is that different from not being able to read because your mind is sharp, but doesn't process the written word? They're both problems with the mind, but one has been defined to "not matter" and the other hasn't. Who knows who could do what with all sorts of extra help and different standards?

 

[MoosePilot]

The point is they can perform them under fair conditions. Now, if the student could not perform using these services, than I can see how the individual would not make it. You have to understand LD in order to understand this issue.

How does "fair" not always mean the same thing? Couldn't a less intelligent person do better with more time? What's the difference? Wouldn't it be "fair" to give them the time their brain needs to process the material? Why is one reading problem or processing problem different from another?

Edit: I want to be clear that my intent is not to be nasty or attacking. I just truly marvel at the number of ways that people's brains are different and don't understand why levels of mental processing speed or memory do not garner unusual help on the MCAT, are in fact what the MCAT is meant to distinguish, but slow reading, when caused by dyslexia, is compensated for with extra time.

 

[45408]

for the OP, I'd say that you should take lots of practice tests before the actual MCAT (as should anyone), and if your VR is lower than an 8, you may want to consider special conditions. However, if extra time doesn't improve your score, then don't bother with special conditions.

 

[21JumpStreet]

How does "fair" not always mean the same thing? Couldn't a less intelligent person do better with more time? What's the difference? Wouldn't it be "fair" to give them the time their brain needs to process the material? Why is one reading problem or processing problem different from another?

Edit: I want to be clear that my intent is not to be nasty or attacking. I just truly marvel at the number of ways that people's brains are different and don't understand why levels of mental processing speed or memory do not garner unusual help on the MCAT, are in fact what the MCAT is meant to distinguish, but slow reading, when caused by dyslexia, is compensated for with extra time.

A person with lesser intelligence probably would not get it even with extra time. But, a learning disabled individual would. Learning disability does not mean that the individual is not intelligent. Big major difference between the two.

 

[21JumpStreet]

How does "fair" not always mean the same thing? Couldn't a less intelligent person do better with more time? What's the difference? Wouldn't it be "fair" to give them the time their brain needs to process the material? Why is one reading problem or processing problem different from another?

Edit: I want to be clear that my intent is not to be nasty or attacking. I just truly marvel at the number of ways that people's brains are different and don't understand why levels of mental processing speed or memory do not garner unusual help on the MCAT, are in fact what the MCAT is meant to distinguish, but slow reading, when caused by dyslexia, is compensated for with extra time.

A person with lesser intelligence probably would not get it even with extra time. But, a learning disabled individual would. Learning disability does not mean that the individual is not intelligent. Big major difference between the two.

Also, the term learning differences are beginning to be used instead of learning disabilities. The dentist learned the material by using a different method. However, an individual that was unintelligent would never have learned the material regardless of the method being used.

 

[Megalofyia]

See, things like this irritate me. He was the top student because they redefined the standards. As long as he had someone reading all the material to him and did every thing orally, he was the top student. Don't dentists have to read charts? What if "severely allergic to novocaine" is written all over someone's chart? How awesome will this guy be then? Maybe his tech can read him the chart or he can get a briefing from a patient, but techs aren't ultimately responsible and patients forget. What then?

What if you could read if you were smarter, but you're just dumb? How is that different from not being able to read because your mind is sharp, but doesn't process the written word? They're both problems with the mind, but one has been defined to "not matter" and the other hasn't. Who knows who could do what with all sorts of extra help and different standards?

There is a difference between being smart and being able to figure things out logically and being able to articulate your thoughts versus being stupid and having poor reasoning skills.


There is also nothing that says he cant color code the charts in his practice. Since reading is all about decoding I dont see how using color to decode or other symbols would be a whole lot different.

To the OP: You have a PM

 

[MoosePilot]

Then why not eliminate the time limit for everyone? Make that the standard.

I think that would boost everyone's scores significantly, don't you?

 

[MoosePilot]

There is a difference between being smart and being able to figure things out logically and being able to articulate your thoughts versus being stupid and having poor reasoning skills.


There is also nothing that says he cant color code the charts in his practice. Since reading is all about decoding I dont see how using color to decode or other symbols would be a whole lot different.

Your first paragraph makes no sense to me. Which is the learning disabled person or the dyslexic person?

How can he read the material to color code? You said he can barely read at all. He has to trust someone else without his professional qualifications to do it for him, which they will not ultimately be responsible for. No matter how that person annotates the info, with color or verbally, if they don't pass it on, he won't get it and could make a fatal mistake.

 

[Megalofyia]

Your first paragraph makes no sense to me. Which is the learning disabled person or the dyslexic person?

How can he read the material to color code? You said he can barely read at all. He has to trust someone else without his professional qualifications to do it for him, which they will not ultimately be responsible for. No matter how that person annotates the info, with color or verbally, if they don't pass it on, he won't get it and could make a fatal mistake.

The first paragraph assumes that neither person can or cant read. It doesn't matter because there is a difference between being smart and being stupid.

Why not make the color coded chart as the patient is telling him the details to start with? It would be a stupid move to see a patient without doing the patient history yourself anyways.

 

[MoosePilot]

The first paragraph assumes that neither person can or cant read. It doesn't matter because there is a difference between being smart and being stupid.

Why not make the color coded chart as the patient is telling him the details to start with? It would be a stupid move to see a patient without doing the patient history yourself anyways.

Ah. So you mean that if a person is in all ways intelligent, except in reading. The problem is that academics are so tied up in reading that not being able to read well is a huge handicap.

Take a verbal history? Yes, probably the best choice, although I'm not sure how the doctor is going to record the information. A color for every allergy?

 

[DrBowtie]

MCAT related time extensions baffle me because they have different allowances for different people. Sure the peoeple have different disabilities but what standardizes someone's ADD giving them 10 extra minutes or 30 extra minutes?

Giving someone reasonable accomodations is fine. But who decides what is reasonable? I'm sure the applicant and school have differing opinions. If the student doesn't get what they think is reasonable would a lawsuit be brought?

 

[21JumpStreet]

Your first paragraph makes no sense to me. Which is the learning disabled person or the dyslexic person?

How can he read the material to color code? You said he can barely read at all. He has to trust someone else without his professional qualifications to do it for him, which they will not ultimately be responsible for. No matter how that person annotates the info, with color or verbally, if they don't pass it on, he won't get it and could make a fatal mistake.

Dyslexia is considered to be a learning disability. However, a learning disabled person can be very intelligent. In order to be diagnosed with a learning disability a person must be of average intelligence. Many are above average in intelligence.

It is beginning to sound like a lot of people have reading disabilities on this forum.

 

[spot the cat]

The ADA uses the language "reasonable accommodation" - which can be almost anything that will assist the worker or student in a way that doesn't pose a signifcant cost or risk for the employer or school (not exactly a thorough legal description, but you get the idea). So yes, extra time is a reasonable accommodation. If the dentist is not self employed, but is employed by a corporation, they could provide extra time with an assistant to help the dentist go over files and color code them (if he is self employed, hopefully he'd have the common sense to put this in the job description of an assistant). Basically, if someone can perform a job in a fully competent way by making some minor physical or staffing adjustments, you cannot disqualify them from a job or school. If the disability is serious enough that nothing can compensate, then disqualification (yes, based on a disability) is legal. But that is almost like saying that I, five feet tall and about as athletically coordinated as a baby giraffe, ought to be able to walk into a job as an NBA coach if I wanted to.

I was diagnosed with ADD in my 3rd year of a 3-year program in grad school at a competitive (Ivy) school, at the age of 30. I had been doing OK all along, but at one point that fall, the pressure became too much, so I saw a psychologist at the school who specialized in such things - it was reassuring that the university is was at had enough others with LD/ADD problems as to hire a guy devoted to those disorders! I disclosed the problem to the student affairs department, and I was given the opportunity to take exams in an empty room, and take as much time as I wanted. The empty room was definitely a benefit, and I never needed the extra time when I could take the exam alone. However, I also disclosed to my advisor, and things got kind weird after that. He said "Oh, that's going to have a bad effect on your career," and he seemed to drop me from his roster of "good students" - the ones who got good TA opportunities, spring break research trips to Paris & Florence, etc. So my benefit was mixed.

To the OP, I would say that it is worth it to take practice tests - even postpone your application a year if you have to in order to get a handle on your capabilities. Somewhere along the way, I was advised not to ask for the extra time, because the MCAT score is flagged, and adcoms will know right away that there is something afoot. You will get in to school based on your accomplishments, and if you can swing the MCAT, don't bother with the accommodations - however if it is going to mean the difference between a 20 and a 30, I think that a 30 with accommodations will look better to anyone. If it is the difference between scoring a 30 and a 35, I don't know if the benefit is so clear cut. Schools are not supposed to be able to discriminate based on disability, but they are looking for easy reasons not to admit someone, and your application will become less competitive... however unfair this is. And, if you tried to pin them down on it, they could always point to something else on your transcript - I think we have all seen examples of the apparently arbitrary nature of the application and admissions process to realize that they probably could find something in anyone's transcript that would make the applicant less than desirable for some dumb reason.

As for the theory that given extra time, anyone could do better on the MCAT, all that would do for me is give me extra time to change my answers to the wrong ones. I work much better under a time constraint - helps me to focus.

 

[fpr85]

I have a well-documented learning disbility. It does not affect my performance in science classes (BCPM 3.7+, GPA 3.5), but it does affect my reading and writing ability....reading is slow and laborious for me..so is reading comprehension, and writing is gut-wrenching. I will be taking the MCAT in 4/05. Question: whether to take the MCAT under a disabled status or regularly, knowing that my verbal and writing scores will be terrible. I have heard that MCATs are marked in some way when given under alternative conditions. Does anyone know just how this affects admission? Which is worse..very poor verbal or a disability check????

I find it amazing that your "reading is slow and laborious.. so is [your] reading comprehension", Science seems to be heavily dependent on those two things... how are you able to read your Chemistry text and Biology text if you have a tough time comprehending it and yet do so well?

 

[MoosePilot]

Dyslexia is considered to be a learning disability. However, a learning disabled person can be very intelligent. In order to be diagnosed with a learning disability a person must be of average intelligence. Many are above average in intelligence.

It is beginning to sound like a lot of people have reading disabilities on this forum.

Because you don't understand my disagreement with your definition of intelligence I've got a reading disability?

Ok, let's say I measure two men's strength against each other. One has torn some muscles and can't do the standard lift, but has to do a really unusual exercise that's much less related to a common job. Is he still strong if he can't lift the weight during a normal workday?

Medical school is all about reading. Many students don't even go to class. So what good is an MCAT score that makes you look the same as everyone else if you've got severe difficulties reading the material? Even if the school agrees to test you differently, how do you learn the material?

Let's get away from intelligent vs. unintelligent. It's clouding the issue because it carries values that will not let people look at it clearly. Fine, someone who can't read might be super-intelligent verbally. Just like someone who has an average IQ might be very socially adept. There are many strengths that can be considered intelligence and it's really just irrelevant to the discussion, because someone who can't read has a problem in a skill that is central to medical school. How and why should an academic institution with limited resources overcome that problem when there is a vast surplus of applicants who don't have that disadvantage? Is medical school a social program or an institution meant to turn out doctors for the least investment?

 

[MoosePilot]

As for the theory that given extra time, anyone could do better on the MCAT, all that would do for me is give me extra time to change my answers to the wrong ones. I work much better under a time constraint - helps me to focus.

If extra time wouldn't help anyone who is not somehow disabled, why not eliminate the time constraint? Everyone could take the time needed and get their best score. It would again be standardized and nobody would have an advantage. Hmmm?

 

[21JumpStreet]

For those wondering about the extra time, studies have shown that an EXCESSIVE amount of extra time for a learning disabled student meant doing poorly on an exam. Students would change their correct answers to wrong ones. Whereas, this was not the case for those that weren't diagnosed with a learning disability.

 

[MoosePilot]

For those wondering about the extra time, studies have shown that an EXCESSIVE amount of extra time for a learning disabled student meant doing poorly on an exam. Students would change their correct answers to wrong ones. Whereas, this was not the case for those that weren't diagnosed with a learning disability.

Isn't that the special circumstance being debated, though? Doesn't the student have any responsibility at all?

 

[21JumpStreet]

If extra time wouldn't help anyone who is not somehow disabled, why not eliminate the time constraint? Everyone could take the time needed and get their best score. It would again be standardized and nobody would have an advantage. Hmmm?

The point is it is not an advantage to the disabled person. If the exam is one hour, extra time for the NORMAL individual would mean getting a chance to check and recheck their work. Whereas a disabled individual with extra time, WOULD NOT have time to check and recheck their work. The extra time is needed so they have an opportunity to COMPLETE their exam. If you eliminate the extra (extra is not even the correct word to be used) time for a disabled person, that is like asking you to stop your exam before your time is up.

For a disabled person, it should not even be called extra time. It is equal time. This is what I have learned while working as a counselor for learning disabled students.

 

[MoosePilot]

The point is it is not an advantage to the disabled person. If the exam is one hour, extra time for the NORMAL individual would mean getting a chance to check and recheck their work. Whereas a disabled individual with extra time, WOULD NOT have time to check and recheck their work. The extra time is needed so they have an opportunity to COMPLETE their exam. If you eliminate the extra (extra is not even the correct word to be used) time for a disabled person, that is like asking you to stop your exam before your time is up.

For a disabled person, it should not even be called extra time. It is equal time. This is what I have learned while working as a counselor for learning disabled students.

It is *not* equal time. That's playing with language and is bull****! Helping people is great, but at some point, all this education is geared to one final test - the real world. There is no "extra" time in the real world, there is just the time you have. If everyone got all the time they wanted, then it would be equal conditions and scores would just be based on ability. Ever read Harrison Bergeron, I think by Vonnegut? Good read.

 

[Megalofyia]

Ah. So you mean that if a person is in all ways intelligent, except in reading. The problem is that academics are so tied up in reading that not being able to read well is a huge handicap.

Take a verbal history? Yes, probably the best choice, although I'm not sure how the doctor is going to record the information. A color for every allergy?

The problem is that academics is so tied up in reading as a means to learn things that it doesn't realize that there are many other ways to learn information.

For example:I hate reading, so when I can I go and talk to profs about what we're learning make sure that I'm understanding it correctly, I make posters of stuff we discussed in class, and I draw pictures in the margins of my books and my notes to demonstrate what that section is describing, etc...

I also hate writing, with a passion, so when I go to the clinic and the docs ask me to do a history on a patient and I dont have a computer to type on I dont necessarily write out all the patient is telling me, not only that but it's time consuming and takes away from the patient/student doctor interaction. Instead I have symbols to mean different things and then later I can go and verbally tell the doctor wha the patient told me (seeing as how they are goign to go back in and do it again themselves) or go and use the computer to type up my notes.

It would be rather easy for this dentist to take notes on a small cassett recorder so that later he can play back the interview and use a program like Dragon Naturally Speaking to dictate the patient's visit.

Alternatively -- using a method similar to what I do is take notes with a four colored pen so that say red was allergies and then draw symbols to indicate what each allergy was, blue to mean general complaints and the symbol method again...etc.. and then again later go back and dictate the notes into the computer.

There are also programs around that could then, later, read the notes back to him on his computer.

 

[MoosePilot]

The problem is that academics is so tied up in reading as a means to learn things that it doesn't realize that there are many other ways to learn information.

For example:I hate reading, so when I can I go and talk to profs about what we're learning make sure that I'm understanding it correctly, I make posters of stuff we discussed in class, and I draw pictures in the margins of my books and my notes to demonstrate what that section is describing, etc...

I also hate writing, with a passion, so when I go to the clinic and the docs ask me to do a history on a patient and I dont have a computer to type on I dont necessarily write out all the patient is telling me, not only that but it's time consuming and takes away from the patient/student doctor interaction. Instead I have symbols to mean different things and then later I can go and verbally tell the doctor wha the patient told me (seeing as how they are goign to go back in and do it again themselves) or go and use the computer to type up my notes.

It would be rather easy for this dentist to take notes on a small cassett recorder so that later he can play back the interview and use a program like Dragon Naturally Speaking to dictate the patient's visit.

Alternatively -- using a method similar to what I do is take notes with a four colored pen so that say red was allergies and then draw symbols to indicate what each allergy was, blue to mean general complaints and the symbol method again...etc.. and then again later go back and dictate the notes into the computer.

There are also programs around that could then, later, read the notes back to him on his computer.

I think those things are great as long as they don't consume huge amounts of additional resources. Reading is a huge part, because every student can have access to a text. Every student can't have enough access to the prof to learn the material directly. If the software is cheap, available, or the person who needs it purchases it, I think it makes sense. In the real world, everything is about providing the needed services with limited resources. Why train a doctor at 2x the cost? Just because he'd like to be a doctor?

 

[Megalofyia]

I think those things are great as long as they don't consume huge amounts of additional resources. Reading is a huge part, because every student can have access to a text. Every student can't have enough access to the prof to learn the material directly. If the software is cheap, available, or the person who needs it purchases it, I think it makes sense. In the real world, everything is about providing the needed services with limited resources. Why train a doctor at 2x the cost? Just because he'd like to be a doctor?

Many public library's offer machines that you put your book on and it reads the text. They are there for the blind and dyslexic. The software to have your computer read to you is free.
When chosing a school pick one that has an open door policy for profs. So far I have had no issue with finding a professor that's around who wouldn't be more than enthusiastic to help explain something to me.

The beauty of learning is that people learn different ways so it's not like every student would want to go talk to a prof to learn. Many prefer to just go home and read their books, some perfer to study in groups with other students, some, like me, prefer to talk to the teachers, and some like to make up their own notes and such to study. So it's not like all the resources would be used up at once.
If this were the case schools that cater, granted on an undergraduate and high school leve, to only learning disabled kids would have mega issues with runing out of services to help these kids.

So yeah you can train a doctor with a learning disability at little to no extra cost to the school if your creative and work with the person's strengths. And as far as real world accomodations -- those are actually FAR easier to come by than accademic accomodations.

 

[masterMood]

out of all these ways to learn? Which one is the most efficient in time and depth of knowledge? I would say learning from the textbook.

 

[MoosePilot]

Many public library's offer machines that you put your book on and it reads the text. They are there for the blind and dyslexic. The software to have your computer read to you is free.
When chosing a school pick one that has an open door policy for profs. So far I have had no issue with finding a professor that's around who wouldn't be more than enthusiastic to help explain something to me.

The beauty of learning is that people learn different ways so it's not like every student would want to go talk to a prof to learn. Many prefer to just go home and read their books, some perfer to study in groups with other students, some, like me, prefer to talk to the teachers, and some like to make up their own notes and such to study. So it's not like all the resources would be used up at once.
If this were the case schools that cater, granted on an undergraduate and high school leve, to only learning disabled kids would have mega issues with runing out of services to help these kids.

So yeah you can train a doctor with a learning disability at little to no extra cost to the school if your creative and work with the person's strengths. And as far as real world accomodations -- those are actually FAR easier to come by than accademic accomodations.

An open door policy that gives you how much time with each professor? The medical students that I know are using in excess of two hours per day with a biochem text or notes (read material) and the same with anatomy material or the cadaver. Can you get about three hours per day outside of class with your profs?

That's cool if the software and acommodations are readily available. I have no problem with someone who can do the same job for the same cost in a different way. That's not my perception of special accomodations, though. For instance on the MCAT extra time = extra cost. Does it cost the student or is their extra cost distributed among all takers?

 

[Megalofyia]

out of all these ways to learn? Which one is the most efficient in time and depth of knowledge? I would say learning from the textbook.

Depends on which way you learn best.

If I go and talk to a prof about say renal glomerular function I'll probably remember that information for a very long time with having only spent 30 min with the teacher.

If I read the same information out of a text book it will take me a lot longer and I'd have to re-read it many times before the exam to get it really cemented.

 

[MoosePilot]

Depends on which way you learn best.

If I go and talk to a prof about say renal glomerular function I'll probably remember that information for a very long time with having only spent 30 min with the teacher.

If I read the same information out of a text book it will take me a lot longer and I'd have to re-read it many times before the exam to get it really cemented.

Would you get the level of detail and memorize all the little nitnoid facts you'll be tested on? If you will/would you're built much differently than I am (or anyone I've worked closely enough with to know).