Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#421

Post by Aloisius » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:06 PM UTC

mapontosevenths wrote: post #79

hibikir wrote: post #58

I think there's a non-malicious explanation for a percentage of this. As I grew up in the 80s, there were two kinds of gifted kids in school: The kind that would ace everything anyway, and the kind that, for a variety of reasons, lacked the regulation abilities to manage the school setting well, with the slow classes and such. A lot of very smart people just failed academically, because the system didn't work for the…

> Because they really are both very smart and disabled at the same time. I agree with almost everything you say here. However, I wanted to point out that you make the same mistake the articles author does. "Disabled" and "Diagnosed" are not actually the same thing, even though we do describe ADHD and the like as "learning disabilities." Being diagnosed with a learning disability or other type of neuro-divergency does…

A majority of the 38% are receiving accommodations:

> This year, 38 percent of Stanford undergraduates are registered as having a disability; in the fall quarter, 24 percent of undergraduates were receiving academic or housing accommodations.

Mind, the disability rate for 18-34 year olds is 8.3% in the US, so even 24% is shockingly high. That's the same disability rate as 65-74 year olds.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#422

Post by loremip » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:06 PM UTC

oefrha wrote: post #61

> "It's just not. It's rich kids getting extra time on tests." Talented students get to college, start struggling, and run for a diagnosis to avoid bad grades. Okay, I was an undergrad at Stanford a decade ago, I graduated with two majors (math, physics) and almost another minor (CS) so I took more credits than most and sat in more tests than most, and I don’t think I’ve seen a single person given extra time on tests…

They go to other rooms. I had several friends who would not be around during the exam days. On a high stress day like final exam day it's hard to notice but they were definitely gone (so like 1-2 people in a 20ish person class). UC system, mid 2010s.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#423

Post by bluGill » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:07 PM UTC

pessimizer wrote: post #264

hibikir wrote: post #58

I think there's a non-malicious explanation for a percentage of this. As I grew up in the 80s, there were two kinds of gifted kids in school: The kind that would ace everything anyway, and the kind that, for a variety of reasons, lacked the regulation abilities to manage the school setting well, with the slow classes and such. A lot of very smart people just failed academically, because the system didn't work for the…

> As I grew up in the 80s, there were two kinds of gifted kids in school: The kind that would ace everything anyway, and the kind that, for a variety of reasons, lacked the regulation abilities to manage the school setting well, with the slow classes and such. A lot of very smart people just failed academically, because the system didn't work for them. Some of those improved their executive function enough as they we…

Blame the system is only useful if there is a different/changed system that would be better. The current system isn't perfect, but if you can't handle it I'm not aware of any change that would be worth it - there are a lot of changes that would get worse results (sometimes for everyone, sometimes for a different subgroup of people). Remember results is not how well you do in school, it is how well you do in life after school that counts. (economics is only one measure of this, it is important because wealth is a good proxy for a lot of useful things like enough food)

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#424

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:07 PM UTC

jaredklewis wrote: post #395

Aurornis wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original article which is linked in this post goes into much better detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-universit... Schools and universities have made accommodations a priority for decades. It started with good intentions, but parents and students alike have noticed that it's both a) easy to qualify for a disability and b) provides significant academic advantages if you do. Another big acc…

Can someone explain to me why the accommodations make sense in the first place? Like what's the point of having the test be time constrained? If there is no point, then just let everyone have more time. If there is a point to having the test be time constrained, then aren't we just holding one group to a lower standard than another group? Why is that good? Same question about lectures. Is there a reason everyone can'…

Eliminating time limits on standardized tests is infeasible; it would require changes to processes on a state or national levels, and mindsets in education as a whole. It's also a complex enough issue that you'd have factions arguing for and against it six ways to Sunday. It's not going to happen.

In contrast, special-casing few disadvantaged students is a local decisions every school or university could make independently, and initially it was an easy sell - a tiny exception to help a fraction of people whom life treated particularly hard. Nobody intended for that to eventually apply to 1/3 of all students - but this is just the usual case of a dynamic system adjusting to compensate.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#425

Post by Aurornis » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:08 PM UTC

vasilipupkin wrote: post #412

Aurornis wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original article which is linked in this post goes into much better detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-universit... Schools and universities have made accommodations a priority for decades. It started with good intentions, but parents and students alike have noticed that it's both a) easy to qualify for a disability and b) provides significant academic advantages if you do. Another big acc…

the original article is factually incorrect. Accommodations at Stanford are only 25% of students, according to their website, and that includes every possible kind of accommodation, not just time and half on tests. If you had carpet replaced in your dorm because it gave you an allergy, it would be included. So, this is just an article that is just flat out bullshit.

> the original article is factually incorrect. Accommodations at Stanford are only 25% of students, according to their website, and that includes every possible kind of accommodation,

The original article said 38% students are registered with the disability office, not that 38% of students have accommodations.

Not all students registered with the disability office receive accommodations all of the time.

25% is still a very, very high number. The number of public universities is in the 3-4% range. From the article:

> According to Weis’s research, only 3 to 4 percent of students at public two-year colleges receive accommodations, a proportion that has stayed relatively stable over the past 10 to 15 years.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#426

Post by cryzinger » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:08 PM UTC

hibikir wrote: post #58

I think there's a non-malicious explanation for a percentage of this. As I grew up in the 80s, there were two kinds of gifted kids in school: The kind that would ace everything anyway, and the kind that, for a variety of reasons, lacked the regulation abilities to manage the school setting well, with the slow classes and such. A lot of very smart people just failed academically, because the system didn't work for the…

> Because they really are both very smart and disabled at the same time.

There's a term for exactly this: "twice exceptional"!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twice_exceptional

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#427

Post by Sparkle-san » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:09 PM UTC

dctoedt wrote: post #100

I'm mostly a law professor these days. When final-exam time rolls around (as in, this week), I raise my eyebrows when I'm sent the list of students who get 50% extra time. I wouldn't presume to judge the propriety of any given student's accommodation. But many of the accommodated students seem to have done just fine in class discussions during the semester. FTA: "Unnecessary accommodations are a two-front form of che…

I don't see how getting 50% extra time on exams is anything remotely close to cheating. Almost nothing I do in my day to day job comes close to being as time-boxed or arbitrarily restrictive as exams were in college.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#428

Post by 10000truths » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:09 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #199

Is that something a Stanford student would want on their permanent record? Employers or the government might be able to obtain that information. You could be flagged for life as a reject. Under the Trump administration, accommodations for mentally disabled people are no longer enforced. Most of the enforcers were laid off. The new policy is “encouraging civil commitment of individuals with mental illness who pose ris…

Disclosing an individual student's information to third parties without express consent is a violation of FERPA laws.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#429

Post by jaredklewis » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:12 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #424

jaredklewis wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can someone explain to me why the accommodations make sense in the first place? Like what's the point of having the test be time constrained? If there is no point, then just let everyone have more time. If there is a point to having the test be time constrained, then aren't we just holding one group to a lower standard than another group? Why is that good? Same question about lectures. Is there a reason everyone can'…

Eliminating time limits on standardized tests is infeasible; it would require changes to processes on a state or national levels, and mindsets in education as a whole. It's also a complex enough issue that you'd have factions arguing for and against it six ways to Sunday. It's not going to happen. In contrast, special-casing few disadvantaged students is a local decisions every school or university could make indepen…

You say it is infeasible for standardized tests, but why? Is it that much harder to give 50 students and extra hour than to give 5 students an extra hour? Or just design the tests so that there is ample time to complete them without extra time.

But putting aside standardized tests, in the context of this discussion about Stanford, I think these accommodations are being used for ordinary tests given for classes, so Stanford (or any other school) has full control to do whatever they want.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#430

Post by loremip » Thu, Dec 04, 2025, 9:12 PM UTC

New York Times had an interesting podcast recently where they talked about how so many children are being diagnosed with autism to the point where it's hurting the severely autistic student population (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/24/podcasts/the-daily/autism...). There's a finite set of resources pooled for special needs students, and now most of these students have relatively minor symptoms compared to those with "profound autism" (which is a severe disability associated with the inability to speak or live independently).

I suspect this is similar - rich parents are doing anything for an edge in their child's education and can get any diagnosis they desire. It's an unfair system.