just LOL
Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
661–670 of 1001 posts
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#662Earlier quoted context omitted.
> people that are just in the line where they are very productive workers anyway Of course, that applies to everybody who achieves a stable career at all. Exceedingly few people (if anyone) are competent and capable at everything, even when you're just talking about basic skills that are handy for common, everyday work. Your doctor may be a incorrigibly terrible driver, your bus driver may pass out at the sight of bl…
Some people have harder lifes than others. Saying everybody has a few things that they struggle is kind of offensive. I struggle because my parents were drug addicts and my father tried to kill us all when I was 5.
Somebody ALWAYS has a harder life than you.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#663Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Eliminating time constraints is entirely reasonable. Leaving exams early is generally an option in most standardized testing systems - though usually with some minimum time you must remain present before leaving. Taking what is currently scheduled as a three hour exam which many students already leave after 2, and for which some have accommodations allowing them 4 hours, and just setting aside up to five hours for it…
> Leaving exams early is generally an option in most standardized testing systems
I didn't because I'd use the extra time to go over my answers again looking for errors.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#664Would love to see the percentage of Forbes 30u30 who also had (sorry, claimed) a disability in college.
>Would love to see the percentage of Forbes 30u30 who also had (sorry, claimed) a disability in college.
Once they get out of prison, we should ask them.[0]
[0] I'll be here all week. Try the prime rib!
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#665Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have ADHD, for neurotypical people it might feel that you are performing better but results will not improve https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/smart-drugs-can-decrease...
Utter bullshit engineered to convince students not to do drugs. Adderall doesn't make you magically better at solving the knapsack problem, it's not NZT-48 from Limitless. That's not why anyone takes it.
> it's not NZT-48 from Limitless
Yeah, that's modafinil.
(Or for social situations, bromantane.)
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#666Earlier quoted context omitted.
One example of a malicious explanation would be: people are lying about having a disability to get some sort of benefits they don’t need, likely at the expense of someone who does need those benefits.
What they get is amphetamines, legally. 38% of stanford kids taking or selling drugs, legally, because they are rich kids: and the poor kids get jail time for buying it off them. Go USA. Wierd that no-one on this thread seems aware of it. There are two standard treatments for adhd: met & dexies midnight runners.
There are non-stimulant ADHD medications. Maybe they should try going on Intuniv instead.
(That one reduces anxiety a lot, which would be good for students, but it also kinda kills your sex drive.)
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#667Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at Stanford, but recent (PhD) graduate and I think you're pretty spot on, but also missing some things. The definition of disability is pretty wide. I have an emotional support animal but if it wasn't for the housing requirement I probably wouldn't have declared anything. I do have diagnosed depression[0] and ADHD. I tend to not be open about these unless it is relevant to the conversation and I don't really put…
>> I'd gladly pay the pet deposit and extra money per month for a pet Maybe, but my single data point: I'm on the board for a condo corporation and even though we spend a lot of time dealing with pet policies and the damage pets (read: dogs) cause, we have a total of ZERO pets registered (and paying the monthly fee), and these are overwhelmingly owners not renters who might be excluded from having pets to begin with.
I appreciate the insight, I'm definitely conjecturing there and I'm sure there's a lot of variables.
I'm curious, is this a few bad owners ruining it for everyone or commonplace. My suspicion is the former, as those things typically follow power distributions.
But I think the complete lack of options forces people's hands. If you're a pet owner, what do you do? The option of paying a pet deposit and monthly fee is either simply not available or extremely limited. So I think it is a bit natural that the abuse of the ESA system happened. My options are get rid of my cat or get an ESA. It's an obvious choice. And with the ESA you cannot deny me rent nor charge extra. That's why I call it the nuclear option. I've always offered to pay a deposit but when told there's a no pet policy it turns into "oh, sorry, I 'forgot' to mention she's an ESA". Most people I know with ESAs never make the first offer.
Truth is that there was an arms race and the pet owners won. The question now is if it is more profitable to charge for pets or get no extra money for ESAs. Either way people will not give up their pets. I have a legitimate rec but I know you can get them for pretty cheap. So whats the move from here? I suspect the best move is for landlords to at least try to get money for the pets that are there anyways.
Note: the ESA issue is only a minor part of my comment. I don't personally care about this issue beyond keeping my cat. But the other uses I'm much more concerned about
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#668Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are you to say what should be included or not, that something can be gauged as mild or not, and that there should be a treshold?
I have firsthand experience being diagnosed and prescribed medication for ADHD within about half an hour of self-reporting mild symptoms with a physician remotely, for one, so perhaps I'm more of an authority on this subject than most commenters here. I suppose it would be equally trivial to seek an ASD diagnosis, since Asperger's is now lumped in with autism and classified as a disability despite not being one.
I had a rather difficult time despite obviously having it (ie was late to the intake appointment). In particular it involved a questionnaire about current and childhood symptoms, and both myself and my parents had to answer it.
> I suppose it would be equally trivial to seek an ASD diagnosis, since Asperger's is now lumped in with autism and classified as a disability despite not being one.
I'm not sure about this one, but there is no treatment for ASD and so no particular reason to have a diagnosis, so there is probably less interest in giving you one.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#669Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't forget being observant of things that many people in our distracted (attention economy) society tend to miss/ignore. I had a friend's wife gas-light him into thinking he is on the spectrum and that many of his friends from college are as well... A well established and respected engineering school in the US. I'm not saying there aren't people there who would most likely fall onto it, but being detail oriented or…
If his friends are engineers that's, uh, believable. It depends on the kind of engineer of course, but they are certainly like that. The question is if they're high-functioning or not. I always think of the SMBC "old physicist" comic: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2012-03-21
"High-functioning" is contextual for most autistic people. (The trick is to remain in those contexts, while developing skills to push the boundary a bit further out: get good enough at it, and even your closest friends will say "wow, that meltdown came out of nowhere!".)
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#670Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Another big accommodation request is extra time on tests. Maybe the real problem is we are testing people on how fast they can do something not if they can do something. In general, being good at academics require you to think carefully not quickly. I suspect there is a correlation between people who think things through and people who do well in school.
Caltech had timed exams (2-3 hours) and infinite time exams, at the discretion of the professor. The students hated the infinite time ones, because nobody knew how much time other students spent on the test so one felt obliged to spend inordinate amounts of time on it. Besides, if you couldn't solve the exam problems in 2 hours, you simply didn't know the material.
That's basically a take-home at that point (assuming open book--or at least honesty) and, yes, you're now computing with classmates who will spend a weekend on it. It's the same problem as companies giving take-home interview problems that you should only spend an hour or two on.