zlacker

[return to "Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?"]
1. shetay+xc[view] [source] 2025-12-04 19:08:42
>>delich+(OP)
Regarding Stanford specifically, I did not see the number broken down by academic or residential disability (in the underlying Atlantic article). This is relevant, because

> Some students get approved for housing accommodations, including single rooms and emotional-support animals.

buries the lede, at least for Stanford. It is incredibly commonplace for students to "get an OAE" (Office of Accessible Education) exclusively to get a single room. Moreover, residential accommodations allow you to be placed in housing prior to the general population and thus grant larger (& better) housing selection.

I would not be surprised if a majority of the cited Stanford accommodations were not used for test taking but instead used exclusively for housing (there are different processes internally for each).

edit: there is even a practice of "stacking" where certain disabilities are used to strategically reduce the subset of dorms in which you can live, to the point where the only intersection between your requirements is a comfy single, forcing Admin to put you there. It is well known, for example, that a particularly popular dorm is the nearest to the campus clinic. If you can get an accommodation requiring proximity to the clinic, you have narrowed your choices to that dorm or another. One more accommodation and you are guaranteed the good dorm.

◧◩
2. lostms+2d[view] [source] 2025-12-04 19:10:53
>>shetay+xc
I suppose cheating to get housing benefits is less of a dumpster fuck vs cheating to get ahead of other people in education.
◧◩◪
3. aaronb+tq[view] [source] 2025-12-04 20:13:33
>>lostms+2d
It means that the action we should take in response to this article is "building more dorms with singles" rather than "we need to rethink the way that we are making accommodations for disabilities in educational contexts".

That seems like an important distinction, and makes the rest of the article (which focuses on educational accommodations) look mistaken.

◧◩◪◨
4. IgorPa+4u[view] [source] 2025-12-04 20:28:03
>>aaronb+tq
I worked in residential life while in college and can tell you that placing freshmen in singles is a horrible idea. It leads to isolation and lets mental health issues fester. Some need it but you do not want to place anyone who doesn’t into a room alone especially in their first year.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. tomrod+Ov[view] [source] 2025-12-04 20:35:55
>>IgorPa+4u
Meh. I think you're overstating it. To meet your anecdata, I had both the first college year, and single > double by a large margin.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Onawa+my[view] [source] 2025-12-04 20:49:13
>>tomrod+Ov
It depends on the person. I lived alone in my last year of undergrad and it sent me into a deep depression. I figured out that living alone was too much isolation for me and moved back in with a roommate. That helped to pull me out of my depression and be able to finish my degree.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. duskdo+1y1[view] [source] 2025-12-05 03:49:07
>>Onawa+my
I don't think people advocating for more single rooms would say that no multi-occupancy rooms should exist for people who do want them.
[go to top]