Washington, D.C., November 3, 2006 - The AAMC (Association of American Medical Colleges) issued the following statement in response to the recent decision by the California Superior Court in the lawsuit, Andres Turner et al. v. Association of American Medical Colleges. The Court ruled that California state laws can be used when determining whether individuals diagnosed with learning disabilities or attention deficit disorders are entitled to extra testing time on the Medical College Admission Test® (MCAT):

Read the Court decision (PDF, 29 pages)

"The AAMC believes the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides an appropriate national standard for evaluating accommodation requests on national tests such as the MCAT examination. The ADA defines an individual as disabled only if the impairment imposes a 'substantial limitation' on his or her ability to perform a major life activity, and the extent of the limitation must be determined after considering whether medication or assistive devices address any resulting functional limitations. California law, in contrast, defines 'disabled' much more broadly.

While the AAMC disagrees with the Court's decision, it is not sweeping in scope. It simply says that California's general disability laws are applicable in the context of the AAMC's administration of the MCAT, and that the AAMC must apply those laws when evaluating future accommodation requests from California residents who wish to take the MCAT in that state.

Significantly, the Court concluded that the AAMC's policies are 'consistent with the policies of other national testing organizations,' including policies that the plaintiffs' own expert on learning disabilities 'found to be reasonable.' The Court also noted that the association has a 'legitimate interest' in flagging the scores of individuals who currently receive accommodations. The AAMC flags those scores because of concerns regarding their comparability to scores achieved under standard testing conditions.

Contrary to a press release issued by the plaintiffs' counsel, the Court did not rule that anyone's equal protection rights had been violated, or that the plaintiffs had been discriminated against in the evaluation of their accommodation requests. Instead, it merely decided whether California's two general disability laws applied to the MCAT. The Court also ruled that the AAMC did not violate California's unfair competition law, as plaintiffs had claimed, and it dismissed the claims of the two organizational plaintiffs because they failed to show that they had standing.

The AAMC continues to believe that it is appropriate to apply a single, fair national standard when evaluating requests for extra testing time and other accommodations on the MCAT, and that the standard should not have the effect of altering the comparability of MCAT scores or undermining the usefulness of the MCAT in helping medical schools evaluate students. As the Court noted in its decision, the 'MCAT has significant value to medical schools because it provides a tool for comparing how applicants performed on a uniform test taken under standardized conditions.'

The AAMC intends to appeal this decision so that we can continue to apply a fair national standard for all MCAT examinees. The Court has indicated that its decision will be automatically stayed pending the outcome of that appeal."

# # #

The Association of American Medical Colleges is a not-for-profit association representing all 129 accredited U.S. and 17 accredited Canadian medical schools; nearly 400 major teaching hospitals and health systems, including 68 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers; and 94 academic and scientific societies. Through these institutions and organizations, the AAMC represents 109,000 faculty members, 67,000 medical students, and 104,000 resident physicians. Additional information about the AAMC and U.S. medical schools and teaching hospitals is available at www.aamc.org/newsroom.

Contact Us    © 1995-2008 AAMC    Terms and Conditions    Privacy Statement