I think the problem exists when a kid with accomodations is at the top of the class because without those accomodations, the student would still be doing very well (most likely.) So, the question arises regarding the intentions of accomodations. Are they meant to help a student pass and meet the requirements of the class, or are they meant to help a student be at the top of his or her class?
I don't know.......I see both sides. If a kid does well without accomodations, then I think it's best to go without them. On the other hand, I see the opposing side as well.
I've heard it said that accomodations are only intended to allow a child to PASS a class....and not an advanced class, either, just "regular ed." I think that is ridiculous. First, isn't it in society's best interest if each child lives up to his orher potential? Let's see...with accomodations a kid could be a college graduate; without, he could mow lawns...Hmmm....
Second, can you imagine telling the parents of a kid in a wheelchair that the school doesn't need elevators, because all the "regular ed" classes are on the ground floor and you don't need to accomodate her to get to the AP classes upstairs? There would be seen as illegal. But kids with neurological issues are told that they can't have accomodations in AP classes.