RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceThe Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education is currently conducting two separate investigations of the University in response to student allegations that the administration has violated the Americans with Disabilities Act, Jim Bradshaw, spokesman for the Department ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
I can't believe the University gave in to Metcalf-Leggette's demands. They have sent a message that if ever you want an unfair advantage on your exams, all you have to do is sue the University.
"a bias against extended time"
you have to be shitting me -- we're being sued for having a bias against "time"?
The evidence that the accommodations were insufficient is that she "ran out of time on every exam"... because, ya know, nobody without disabilities requiring accommodations ever runs out of time on exams...
Kudos to Princeton for "prioritizing a commitment to “academic integrity”. And shame on Princeton for abandoning that commitment in the face of a law suit.
"We didn't lose the game; we just ran out of time".
Vince Lombardi, 1960
If the case was so clear cut as those who have already commented seem to think, why would the University have settled? It has far more resources than a student to pursue this, if it thought it was right and in compliance with the law. Students are too quick to sympathize with the University based on understandable insecurities, especially given grade deflation, that allowing learning disabled students extended time would disadvantage other students. But this is not the case. Read the excellent column on this subject in the Prince earlier this semester. Don't let the University PR manipulate you into accepting their viewpoint without greater knowledge. What remains to be seen is whether this Task Force will be in earnest or a sham.
I love how I see this girl out on the street multiple times a week. In her future job, is she going to get 100% extended time? For example, if she becomes a trader, will the market remain open for a few more hours so she can catch up? Or how about a surgeon...will the patients kindly stay alive for twice as long as they would have otherwise so she can fix them up? This is ridiculous. Plenty of other athletes give up the sport they play so they can keep up with the curve at Princeton (not saying athletes are less intelligent--just saying athletes are humans many of us and it's incredibly difficult to keep up with some of the robots here)--may this girl should consider that route before basically suing for permission to cheat on exams.
I completely agree with the comments here that its not fair to give someone an excessive amount of extra time on exams because of a learning disability, especially the way that '12 put it about how that would affect her in the "real world". The only thing that I disagree with is the University's timeline on alerting the students to their accomodations. It really isn't fair to force a student to decline other institutions without knowing what would actually be provided at Princeton. The University should adjust their timeline, but keep their academic integrity!
the alleged claim of "academic integrity" is a silly allegation with no meaning. Allowing additional time to a student who is dyslexic is not any "advantage" at all. It is at best an effort to make things level and fair because the student starts with a huge disadvantage. No "integrity" is preserved by forcing students with dyslexia to try and read as though they do not have dyslexia. That approach demonstrates a lack of "academic integrity," not the other way around, because it tests her dyslexia rather than her grasp of the material. The University's position until now brought to mind a word other than "integrity" -- such as "arrogance." They like to think they have a higher standard but have been following a lower one.
you still don't say how this would accomplish anything good. this girl is going to have to adapt to her disability because outside of the ivory tower, jobs aren't going to give a shit. this is like giving a time advantage to dumb students because they can't think as quickly and need extra time. is it a disadvantage? yes. is it a good idea to cater to this sort of thing in the long run for anyone involved? no.
as for ADHD, please. i've met one person in my life who legitimately had ADHD; if this girl had ADHD, it would be noticeable. more likely her parents are like my older sister and thinks their kid has ADHD when she really doesn't.
that being said, whatever outside counsel sent that email to her is a dick. students shouldn't be threatened when they take legal action. denied? sure. threatened? no.