As our society becomes more familiar with what learning disabilities are and how they are diagnosed, the next question that logically follows is what to do about them. This question is answered quite easily in public primary education. Every child deserves an education, and states mandate what accommodations must be given to students that have all and any types of disabilities to make sure they receive their education.

As high school rolls around the corner, so does a new wave of problems. SAT’s, the ACT and IB exams (crucial for any college-bound student) are all administered by private companies. State colleges must adhere to disability guidelines, but what about private universities? It is no secret that students with learning disabilities will be at a disadvantage if they are not provided with appropriate accommodations such as extended time on exams or distraction-free, test-taking areas. Most people will agree that private institutions have an obligation to provide these accommodations, but some disagree. One position argues these accommodations give an unfair advantage to students with learning disabilities. The second argues that these accommodations are just, but that they should be provided to students without learning disabilities as well, upon request. Wait what?Isn’t the point of an accommodation is that it is only provided to the specific group that needs it? I will argue why providing students with learning disabilities with special accommodations for test taking is a fair and reasonable policy.

First of all, these accommodations are (or should be) designed to negate the effects of the disabled student’s condition, placing them on an equal opportunity of success as other non-disabled students. To address the first argument against these policies, I will say that justice and fairness are not the same as equal treatment. The disabled students are receiving benefits that other students do not, but, these accommodations do not give them an advantage over other students, so therefore they are not unfair.

To address the second argument, yes, it would benefit most students to have distraction-free setting and extended time on exams, but these goals are not plausible and would still do a disservice to those with learning disabilities. Placing every student in their own classroom or distraction free room would require a ridiculous amount of proctors/ professors and more classrooms than any school could provide. Providing extended time limits would encourage professors to make exams harder and longer, which would take away the benefit disabled students receive from extended time. It is just counterproductive — plain and simple.

For example, say a professor gave her students a half hour to write an essay that is at least 100 sentences. If the average student can write four sentences per minute but a dyslexic student can only write two sentences per minute because of her disability, it makes sense to give the dyslexic student double the amount of time to take the writing test. But if every student were to have double the amount of the original time, they may use their newfound “extended time” to write longer, better, essays since they now have a chance to edit and revise. Meanwhile, the dyslexic student would only barely finish writing when time is called. We can assume that even if the dyslexic student had the same writing skill as the average non-dyslexic student, her grade on the essay would be below average because she had less time comparatively to write.

Both arguments that criticize common college learning disabilities policy fail to realize that these policies do not give disabled students an advantage over other students, but simply level the playing field. Giving non-disabled students these accommodations would be pointless and contradict the original intent of the accommodations, which is to give every student a fair chance of success.

I believe a lot of these attacks on accommodation policies have stemmed from the same reasons as criticism of affirmative action in education: plain, old competition and jealousy. So much pressure is put on students to get the highest SAT scores, and then continue in college to get the best GPA. But there is only so many acceptance letters and A’s to go around. At some point, whether it is during college admission applications or a college chemistry midterm, every student learns the grim reality that he is competing against his fellow classmates. This competition has driven some students (or their parents) to point their fingers and say “that kid is getting extra time and I want extra time too! This is not fair!” Not to mention the abuse of the word “fair,” saying this will also make you sound like an insensitive you-know-what.

To conclude, we must not worry about “reverse discrimination” to the point that we treat students equally and not fairly, and hence undo the decades of research and petitioning that have allowed students with learning disabilities to feel comfortable in the education system.