These colleges are raising the next generation of lying elites. Government funds should not go to these schools - most of the money ends up in administrators pockets. If you want good research, fund researchers directly, not through universities.
Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
981–990 of 1001 posts
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#982Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is probably not good if nearly half (38% qualifies as nearly half, right?) of students are considered disabled and needing accommodations, right? Surely nearly half of any given public population can't be disabled?
25% of Americans have a disability, https://www.cdc.gov/disability-and-health/media/pdfs/disabil... We don't know what's the percentage broken down by age. If 38% is almost 50%, 25% is almost 38%.
CDC also says 74% of Americans are overweight. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm
I guess it’s not as bad as women rating 80% of men as unattractive.
Some people just don’t believe in normal distributions or binary search. I don’t believe disabilities, obesity, or attractiveness follow a power law.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#983American society is at the point where if you don't play these sort of games/tricks, you'll get out-competed by those who do. Bleak.
I think all societies do this; this is just being human. All human groups migrate to whatever metric or rewards are provided.
It's much, much, more common in low-trust corrupt societies. USA is one of those.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#984Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't all students get the extra time, then?
Doesn't satisfy the ADA. Department of Ed will sue and say that an accomodation given to everybody is no accomodation at all.
So it's not really an accommodation that's required by the ADA, but an advantage over the baseline?
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#985Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you don't have a disability, you aren't allowed to record lectures Why is that gated like that?
The reasons I've encountered range from philosophy ("Students don't retain knowledge as well if they rely on recordings") to environment ("I want students to be able to ask questions and be wrong without being recorded") to petty ("I don't like lecturing to a half-empty room").
How come those aren't arguments against recording by students with disability?
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#986Earlier 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.
Why should students care how long it took for other students to perform the test? Is this because tests are graded on a curve? If so, that's the real problem
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#987Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So where were these people during my time? Testing accomodations are generally done at a separate time. So students with an accomodation requiring a low distraction environment or extra test time would all take their test after the main test takers. This came with the dual advantage of providing an alternate time for students who had excused absences to take the test as well. TLDR: You don't normally see the studen…
Most of my courses beyond freshman year were 10-20 people where I basically know everyone (unless they never come to class), so I would know if they weren’t showing up at exams. I’m pretty sure if these people were evenly distributed I would notice every exam for every class missing 1-2 people. So this is not it.
Really? Even the CS140 series had hundreds of students. I don't think I remember any CS class that had fewer than 70 students.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#988Makes me wonder what's the Venn diagram of Stanford parents driving around with unjustified disabled person plates/parking placards and children exploiting "disabled person" college benefits like exceptional housing.
A former friend who was quite sociopathic would often parrot "if you're not cheating you're not competing"... There's plenty of evidence in plain sight supporting that trope.
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#989Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
Wow. Great to know we're basically raising an entire generation without any integrity. Can't wait to be in a nursing home where all the staff are trying to meta-game for lowest amount of responsibility rather than caring for the elderly. And believe me, I'm the last person to disparage the truly disabled or those down on their luck. But 38% in a developed country is just straight up insane. Not to mention that if you…
To me this is just the logical end result of capitalism where the only thing that really matters is profit at any cost. Many people would be fine with being an average person living moderate life, but capitalism is always incentivizing people to exploit and abuse others in the name of profit and the average person is constantly getting screwed and everyone knows it. And there are only 2 real solutions to escaping that problem, eschew modern society and live a subsidence life, or find a way into the top percentage of society so you have more money than you need so you can ignore most of those problems.
Shitty boss/job? Having extra money lets you tell them to fuck themselves and move to another job at any time. If you don't have extra money, well you are not going to be able to tell your shitty boss to shove it unless you want to risk becoming homeless and destitute. Legal trouble? Well money is the solution, which is why poor people are so often screwed over by legal trouble because they can't lawyer their way out. Etc etc
Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?
#990Earlier quoted context omitted.
It means that the action we should take in response to this article is "building more dorms with singles" rather than "we need to rethink the way that we are making accommodations for disabilities in educational contexts". That seems like an important distinction, and makes the rest of the article (which focuses on educational accommodations) look mistaken.
I worked in residential life while in college and can tell you that placing freshmen in singles is a horrible idea. It leads to isolation and lets mental health issues fester. Some need it but you do not want to place anyone who doesn’t into a room alone especially in their first year.
I can't say I agree since I seen many people struggling with being forced into close quarters with a complete stranger that they might have nothing in common with or actively dislike and have nowhere truly private.
Maybe its fine for many extroverts, but forcing an introvert into a room with others is a great way to drive many people absolutely mental.