Group of students sitting at desk with laptop and books and writing exam at university
In the January issue of The Atlantic (yes, I still read magazines), there was an article featuring statistics on the increasing number of students in higher education who are saying they have a disability. 20-34% of students at Ivy League and other prestigious schools are registered as disabled.
The article goes on to identify that the diagnosed conditions are often ADHD, anxiety and depression resulting in access to accommodations ranging from private rooms, added time for taking tests, ensuring they won’t be called on in class and permission to miss classes. This sparked great conversations in our office.
Now, five months later, the May publication (same magazine) has posted probably just a few of the letters they have received. Let me share a few phrases:
“…the vagueness of crucial terms allows for easy manipulation of the process.”
“The determination of a disability has become more subjective.”
“…some of my peers sought accommodations out of legitimate need…sometimes because of the competitive pressure…”
“…making accommodations harder to obtain is the wrong solution…”
“…difficult for disability-service professions to apply consistent standards…about which academic adjustments are genuinely warranted, and which are simply desired.”
“…wouldn’t it be better if everyone had the time and means to demonstrate their mastery of a new concept.”
“Why not allow extended time for all students?”
Who truly knows how many students should qualify for accommodations? It is not up to me to define disability for anyone but myself. Disability is not a contest as to who is more or less disabled. Has the prior stigma of disability been offset by the privileges that come with accommodations?
As was cited in the original article, ADA was written to make life more equitable and not to ease the path for those in highly competitive environments. Following the principles of Universal Design, I think the writer of that last letter had a worthy idea. More time for everyone? Do we all do better on tests if distractions are minimized? Rather than verbalizing in class, are there alternative methods of participating?
Indiana is now seeing barely 31% of its new labor force with college degrees. The rate of highschool students in Indiana going to college after graduation is between 37% – 69%. When the task is not dependent on speed (such as needed for air traffic controller or Lucille Ball on the assembly line) could allowing more time for tests likely increase college completion or provide better quality outcomes?
Or is this a remnant of the increases in COVID anxiety? Today’s young adults (18-29) report significant anxiety and depression related to the social isolation, fear of illness and disrupted milestones during the COVID-19 pandemic. A supportive and predictive community, as is being provided at these schools, could also be a Universal Design attribute. Or is there another reason for the decreased attention spans and inability to maintain sustained concentration?
Cal Newport, computer scientist and author of Deep Work, writes about how smartphones are destroying our ability to concentrate. With attention spans now a third of what they were prior to the introduction of cell phones, we are going to see more and more of this “disability.” Newport proposes a new practice of Cognitive Fitness, where there is greater separation from digital devises and everyone is encouraged to read and write using books and paper rather than screens and keyboards. Such practices have shown to enhance attention span and concentration.
Whether this is an actual increase in prevalence, cultural shift or a generational trend, lifting everyone to a higher sense of this type of cognitive training and security might be one solution to addressing this pattern.
