Out of the 337 members of Parker’s upper school, a notable number receive extra time on assessments as an academic accommodation. Nationwide, millions of people live with disabilities. Accommodations play a key role in ensuring that students with disabilities are able to function equitably within academic settings. However, systems designed to provide support risk being stretched beyond their intended purpose. In these situations, ambiguous diagnosis criteria, external evaluation variability, and a cultural normalization of short-cuts, cause accommodations to not always reach only those who require them, diluting their effectiveness for students who truly depend on them. So, while the granting of accommodations for all may seem positive, it can actually be the opposite. It can level a playing field that is meant to have peaks and valleys for students with disabilities. In essence, it is promoting equality as opposed to equity, a key differentiating factor that seems to be lacking from our environment. So naturally, this forces us to consider the question: is there a lack of focus and support at Parker for the disabled community?
To help accommodate students who may struggle in a typical classroom setting, Parker provides extra time to those who get a recommendation from an out of school specialist. However, this system has proven vulnerable to misuse. Potential candidates must complete a variety of tests that help determine their thinking abilities. Since the tasks usually involve demonstrating critical thinking skills or showcasing one’s thought process, it is certainly not impossible for test-takers to intentionally warp their results in order to receive accommodations that are not intended for them. Additionally, since there is an unregulated set of specialists students can see, there are likely to be inconsistencies. Extended time may be permitted in amounts unsuitable for individuals because specialists view the needs differently.
Similarly, while the school has multiple elevators for the sole purpose of accommodating those unable to use stairs, many take advantage. A recent poll showed that 71% of Upper School students use the elevator to get to class. Additionally, some far-right politicians have renormalized the use of the r slur. In hallways, crowds of freshman boys use the word as an insult to criticize classmates. Friend groups use it in a joking manner. Peers say it online in after school calls. This hate speech, already harmful on its own, creates an opening to normalize other slurs and actions that directly attack minorities. At Parker, these behaviors not only dilute the impact of resources designed to help students, but they can often further exacerbate exclusionary patterns. It becomes increasingly more plausible that students lack the sympathy and respect for neurodivergent and non-abled bodied people.
The 2025-26 school year is certainly not the first time that Parker students have taken advantage of and twisted a system that suits abled-bodied, neurotypical students. It is natural for people to lean into situations that benefit them, even if they harm others. But, this thinking is never okay.
As a community, we must address our faults and strive to better our mindset. To do so, we suggest starting by increasing recognition that support systems can lose their effectiveness when they are applied too broadly, limiting their ability to meaningfully serve those who need them most. Though it may sound simple, there is no way to make change if we don’t acknowledge the issue in the first place. And it seems as though adults in the community are already taking some steps to do so. On January 23, a Disability 101 presentation by the Center for Enriched Living’s The Nora Project was held at Parker to focus on the building of a school environment where people with and without disabilities feel a strong sense of belonging. However, students were not invited to the event nor made aware of its existence. School social change starts within the classroom, so in order to create a space in which everyone feels safe, we must hold more healthy conversations featuring (and showcasing student voices).
Additionally, we must rethink how accessibility tools are used. Though we have two elevators in the building, they are often occupied by students who do not need to use them. While it may be convenient in the moment to use them rather than the stairs, it is important to recognize that others need them in order to get around the building. By using them as an unnecessary shortcut instead of a required resource, you are taking away a space from someone.
It is completely possible to fix these issues. But to do so, we must stay aware and put in the effort.
