Live data from Hacker News

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

reason.com

671–680 of 1001 posts

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

#671
There's a GAO report from last year about the dramatic increase of students with disabilities in college.

In 2004/2008/2012, 11% of college students had disabilities. It was 21% in 2020.

In 2020, 69% of students with disabilities had behavioral or emotional conditions - up from 33% in 2004.

https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-105614.pdf

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

#672

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the gym I go to, there are a lot of college-age kids. I overhear them talking about getting on Ritalin or Adderall to help them study. Not because they really need it, it's just seen as a "performance hack" to get an advantage. They talk about what doctor they went to and how easy it was to get a prescription.

I read somewhere that Adderall does not improve cognitive function in people without ADHD and in some cases can even decrease it.

The same is true for every individual person who takes it. At some dose it helps and at other does it doesn't.

And in the gym, it raises your heart rate so that hurts exercise, but without it I can't do any cardio because I get so bored 5 minutes in I have to stop.

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

#673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a high stakes, challenging environment, every human weakness possible becomes a huge, career impeding liability. Very few people are truly all-around talented. If you are a Stanford level scientist, it doesn't take a lot of anxiety to make it difficult to compete with other Stanford level scientists who don't have any anxiety. Without accommodations, you could still be a very successful scientist after going to a…

> putting water on the toothbrush before toothpaste Wat? I had no idea I had a disability!

Same here. My logic is that my toothbrush is in the same room as a device for aerosolizing fecal bacteria, which is kinda gross but also not that different from a lot of other surfaces and environments, and that it's going to collect some amount of stuff floating around. A quick rinse is going to dislodge a good fraction of what has accumulated over the course of a day.

I thought I was just being logical, but apparently I also have a deficit of attention. Okay, then. I guess I'd rather bear that burden than brush my teeth with shi... sorry, I probably should terminate that sentence before I get carried away.

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

#674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a high stakes, challenging environment, every human weakness possible becomes a huge, career impeding liability. Very few people are truly all-around talented. If you are a Stanford level scientist, it doesn't take a lot of anxiety to make it difficult to compete with other Stanford level scientists who don't have any anxiety. Without accommodations, you could still be a very successful scientist after going to a…

> Being diagnosed doesn't immediately mean you should be accommodated. This is the loophole. Universities aren't the ones diagnosing, they're the ones accommodating. The current meta-game is for parents and students to share notes about which doctors will diagnose easily. Between word of mouth and searches on Reddit, it's not that hard to find doctors in any metro area who will provide diagnoses and accommodation req…

> There are now also online telehealth services that don't hide the fact that this is one of their services. You pay their (cash only, please) fee and they'll make sure you get your letter. The same thing is happening with "emotional support animal" letters.

This used to be a thing with medical marijuana as well (maybe still is?).

The answer is for schools to grab their share of this money by selling each of these accommodations directly, or perhaps via some kind of auction. Acceptance to such a school will be the “basic economy” of attendance. If you want to pick your seat, you can pay to upgrade.

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

#675
It’s matter of incentives. Everyone knows the value of college is in the piece of paper they give you at the end, the things they teach you are not super helpful in real world. So people cheat so they don’t have to waste time learning useless knowledge and instead spend that time on something valuable, like working out or going to a party.

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

#676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, consider that some of these students may need the accommodation specifically because of the pressure of the final exam. Many mental health disabilities will become worse with stress. A low stress environment and a high stress final exam could trigger entirely different symptoms. For example, I have OCD (real, diagnosed, not the bs "omg im so ocddddd"). I have extra time accommodations because I have to spend ti…

> some of these students may need the accommodation specifically because of the pressure of the final exam. Success as a lawyer often requires the ability to handle a certain amount of pressure. Timed exams are one way of screening for that ability. But it's by no means a sure-fire predictor of success: Legendary trial lawyer Joe Jamail [0] flunked his first-year Torts class at UT Austin [1], yet went on to become a…

You are praising billionaires while complaining about people gaming the system?

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

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

#677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how you spending time in ways that work well with your challenges is different from your job providing accomodations, except that if your employer is willing to work with you then you don't have to randomly roll the dice until you come up with an employer where things happen to work in whatever way you wanted. It's not like one of the accomodations on the table is "not doing your job"

The difference is how you relate to the job providing accommodations. If you know certain employers are more willing and able to provide accommodations then you can consciously weigh that piece of information when considering a job/career field. By consciously accepting who you are and how you work with the world, it lets you navigate better in it. For some people that is just feeling it out and ending up in a career…

What is your personal experience here?

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

#678

It's funny how upset most comments are with the realization that a lot more people are disabled while most of the users in HN are probably on the spectrum

I grew up in a Danish town of 20.000 people and two schools. In my school there were 3 dyslexic children. They went to the "special" class 4 hours a week. I'm not sure what to call it, "special" isn't the right word, but it's not just because my English is not sufficient to come up with the right name. It's because this was the place they put all the children with what we'd call disabilities today. Some of the studen…

> I'm not sure what to call it, "special" isn't the right word, but it's not just because my English is not sufficient to come up with the right name.

It's the sort of thing that doesn't have a fixed name, because once it's had a name for ~10 years everyone decides the term is offensive and gives it a new name.

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

#679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some of these students may need the accommodation specifically because of the pressure of the final exam. Success as a lawyer often requires the ability to handle a certain amount of pressure. Timed exams are one way of screening for that ability. But it's by no means a sure-fire predictor of success: Legendary trial lawyer Joe Jamail [0] flunked his first-year Torts class at UT Austin [1], yet went on to become a…

You are praising billionaires while complaining about people gaming the system? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It wasn't praise — just an observation about how grades and class standing aren't always a good predictor of success.

(I never met Joe Jamail, but by reputation there was a lot about him that I didn't especially admire.)

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

#680

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> But for lack of playing such games, I saw my children’s opportunities slip away. Examples? I most certainly don't play these games and believe my kids are further along in developing the most valuable, lasting characteristic: grit. So many things in life require you to grind, and the only way to gain this is to practice.

Children were passed up for elementary school admissions. Whereas the schmoozers and their kids got in. I can’t provide proper education and practice. There is no grit or grind. They’re just falling further and further behind the ones who actually got access to good schools and teachers. One who tested highly gifted (145 IQ) after years of educational neglect now tests at 120. It’s pathetic. And even if I spend all m…

Schmoozers learned grit and grind? That's opposite of my experience and observations.

What role do you play in the educational neglect? I am not sure I understand the decline here.

Post reply on HN