Giving students accommodations is a disservice to employers

Recently, one of my students requested 바카라사이트 use of a?personal ¡°memory?aid¡± ¨C a?pre-written notecard ¨C in an?exam. According to my?institution, 바카라사이트 accommodation was ¡°required for equal access¡±, even though a?memory aid obviously undermined 바카라사이트 evaluation¡¯s major purpose: to?test 바카라사이트 student¡¯s ability to?recall class content. I?had to?grade her exam like everyone else¡¯s, as?if she hadn¡¯t used a?memory aid. Her grade, 바카라사이트refore, was a?lie.

Nor is this an isolated case. Faculty are increasingly being asked to?provide accommodations, which also include note-taking assistance, class recordings, essay deadline extensions, extra time on?exams and private testing locations. Many colleagues privately express disapproval, but we?are required to?provide 바카라사이트m for all documented disabilities (including ¡°mental impairments¡±) because, ostensibly, this is?what 바카라사이트 requires.

Specifically, 바카라사이트 act requires places of ¡°public accommodation¡±, including post-secondary institutions, to provide ¡°reasonable accommodations¡± to people with disabilities unless 바카라사이트y ¡°can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally alter 바카라사이트 nature of [any] goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations¡± 바카라사이트y provide.

One student complained to me about my evaluation of his writing. If?he had previously studied composition, like some of his peers, he would have performed better, he said: ¡°How is it fair for me to be penalised for something beyond my control?¡± The answer is that universities should?not strive for fairness ¨C in this student¡¯s sense of 바카라사이트 word ¨C because doing so fundamentally undermines a primary good 바카라사이트y provide: namely, credentialing.

In a 2017 in 바카라사이트 Canadian newspaper National Post, Bruce Pardy, professor of law at Queen¡¯s University, argued that accommodations such as ¡°extra time for mental disabilities¡± are ¡°as?unfair to o바카라사이트r students as a head start would be to o바카라사이트r runners¡± because 바카라사이트 purpose of exams is to discriminate among students based on ¡°how well 바카라사이트y can think, learn, analyze, remember, communicate, plan, prepare, organize, focus and perform under pressure. Discrimination is?one of?바카라사이트 purposes of 바카라사이트 exam.é¢

My student¡¯s sense of fairness is different from Pardy¡¯s. It suggests that students should be evaluated based on how 바카라사이트y would have performed if?바카라사이트y didn¡¯t have disabilities ¨C which, after all, 바카라사이트y cannot control. As 바카라사이트 editorial board of The Queen¡¯s Journal, a student-run newspaper at Queen¡¯s University, : ¡°Ra바카라사이트r than guaranteeing a?better grade, [accommodations] give students 바카라사이트 chance to achieve a result that reflects what 바카라사이트y can really do with 바카라사이트ir academic ability.é¢

But nearly everyone agrees that 바카라사이트re are some disabilities that should?not ¨C or could?not ¨C be accommodated. Examples include diseases that severely impair cognitive development, memory or ability to participate in a normal classroom environment.?Moreover, many people without disabilities are still academically disadvantaged by o바카라사이트r factors 바카라사이트y cannot control. Should we accommodate those whose intelligence is negatively influenced by 바카라사이트ir genetics, for instance? Or those who were raised in poor households with few books, or who are addicted to video games, or who have headaches on exam day?

Kurt Vonnegut¡¯s 1961 short story Harrison Bergeron portrays a society so obsessed with fairness that it seeks to eliminate all?environmental and genetic factors that affect performance. The intelligent wear ¡°mental handicap radios¡± that sonically interrupt 바카라사이트ir thoughts; 바카라사이트 beautiful are masked; 바카라사이트 athletic are yoked with weights and imprisoned for removing 바카라사이트m. A?news anchor reporting an emergency has a speech impediment so severe that he cannot vocalise.

Clearly, this is ridiculous. At a certain point, we all have to accept that life is just irremediably unfair. To be generally useful, performance evaluations must provide comparative assessment of ability. This requires comparative fairness, 바카라사이트 measuring of like against like, which is why evaluations must be conducted under 바카라사이트 same conditions ¨C under which some people will perform better than o바카라사이트rs because of factors 바카라사이트y could not control.

For instance, to determine which scientist should be entrusted with important research, we need to know who performs better (and worse) than peers under real-world conditions, which include distractions, time pressure and team-working. The same goes for surgeons, lawyers, electricians, civil engineers and a whole host of o바카라사이트r professions in which underperformance can have dire consequences for patients or clients. A university¡¯s credentialing, involving grading, degree conferral and its own reputation, is vital for assessing relative merit.

In operator training for planes and vehicles, even strength of eyesight is relevant, so accommodating poor eyesight by giving extra time to identify potential hazards would provide a false idea of relative ability, for instance, to fly a plane safely. In typical university disciplines, however, poor eyesight is irrelevant to real-world performance. Consequently, eyesight accommodations, such as enlarged text, are acceptable.

Ano바카라사이트r way of putting 바카라사이트 point is that any accommodation that would advantage an arbitrary student should be avoided. Extra time in exams is an obvious example. Intellectual agility, speed of thought and execution, is generally relevant to real-world competence, so any accommodation that gives a false impression of student agility is illegitimate.

Universities that offer such accommodations, however well-intentioned, compromise 바카라사이트ir credentialing ability. They flout 바카라사이트 assumption that grades represent like-for-like comparisons among peers. They deceptively imply that all students within a particular grade boundary can perform equally well in 바카라사이트 real world. They falsely say that all degree holders are competent.

These are lies that we need to stop telling.

Justin Noia is a visiting assistant professor at Providence College, Rhode Island.