the original article is factually incorrect. Accommodations at Stanford are only 25% of students, according to their website, and that includes every possible kind of accommodation, not just time and half on tests. If you had carpet replaced in your dorm because it gave you an allergy, it would be included. So, this is just an article that is just flat out bullshit.

▲ Aurornis an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> the original article is factually incorrect. Accommodations at Stanford are only 25% of students, according to their website, and that includes every possible kind of accommodation,

The original article said 38% students are registered with the disability office, not that 38% of students have accommodations.

Not all students registered with the disability office receive accommodations all of the time.

25% is still a very, very high number. The number of public universities is in the 3-4% range. From the article:

> According to Weis’s research, only 3 to 4 percent of students at public two-year colleges receive accommodations, a proportion that has stayed relatively stable over the past 10 to 15 years.

▲ adolph 25 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> The number of public universities is in the 3-4% range.

The National Center for Education Statistics disagrees with 3-4%.

  In 2019–20, some 21 percent of undergraduates and 11 percent of 
  postbaccalaureate students reported having a disability. . .

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=60

▲ vasilipupkin an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

yes, the original article is a flat out bullshit lie

https://oae.stanford.edu/students/dispelling-myths-about-oae

it's 25% registered, not 38%. How do you get this number wrong when Stanford has it on their website? how does that even happen?

this number includes literally every type of possible accommodation. A shitty carpet in your room is included, an accommodation for a peanut allergy is included. This is a 90 plus a year private school, I think it's fine that you can get a shitty carpet replaced in a way maybe you couldn't at University of Akron ? what's the problem? it's a nothingnburger.

the point is the article is somehow implying that 38% of students get some weird special treatment but that just is not the case

▲

Aurornis 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

Your link doesn't say "25%". It's also not an official, up-to-date statistics resource. It's website copy for the office of accessible education

The "1 in 4" number has been there as far back as Wayback Machine has that paged archived (2023): http://web.archive.org/web/20230628165315/https://oae.stanfo...

So it's definitely not a precise statistic, and it's likely out of date.

▲

vasilipupkin 37 minutes ago | parent [-]

1 in 4 is 25%

it's on their website. Along with all the other details. where is 38% coming from that is a better source than Stanford's own website. At a minumum the article should have said where they got that number and why it disagrees with Stanford's own number.

And again, it includes every possible kind of accommodation under the sun. Which is totally fine and not an issue of any kind.

	▲	Aloisius a minute ago \| parent [-]
		[delayed]

▲ EA-3167 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The bullshit nature of the article becomes clear as the author repeatedly begs the question as the sole means of making her actual argument.

Edit: To be clear there’s a lot of argument from incredulity or “obviously something is wrong,” without doing the work to establish that.