Accommodations Don't Lower the Standard

I tried several ways to make the intro to this post very general, but I don't know how to. It's inspired by a short thread I saw on Twitter this morning, mocking a graphic that promotes "differentiation." The article accompanying the graphic referenced students with disabilities, accommodations, and collaborating with special educators, so if one were to click the link and read the article it was pretty obvious that the graphic referred to students with disabilities. However, when people brought up the fact that the graphic was geared toward students with disabilities, the person who posted the thread either ignored them or accused them of a "non sequitur." The people replying to the thread generally responded with comments ridiculing kids for wanting to sit next to their friends, or jokes about kids who can only express their ideas through interpretive dance instead of writing an essay, and a whole lot of talk about "lowering the standard."

I've seen each accommodation I've ever written into an IEP slammed as "lowering the standard," both on social media and in real life. Even with extensive medical, cognitive, academic, speech, motor, etc. etc. etc. evaluation, with loads of data compiled into a multidisciplinary report, accommodations are often given the side eye. Even with specific recommendations from school psychologists who are experts in this field, accommodations are often only grudgingly adhered to because it's the law do to so. A lot of time, consideration, and research has been put into planning how best to facilitate access for these kids based on their individual needs.

I come away convinced that for many people, not being able to see a disability means that even provided with standard scores and percentiles they won't believe that a student needs accommodation. This morning's thread is an example of that - none of the kids in the graphic are in wheelchairs, so even though the accompanying article mentions special educators and students with disabilities, the default assumption was that that kids in the graphic were neurotypical, just looking to get out of school work.

We can all agree (I hope) that providing a wheelchair to a student who has difficulty walking due to a disability doesn't "lower the standard" in a PE class. Providing glasses to a student who is nearsighted doesn't "lower the standard" for seeing the board. Providing hearing aids to a student who is hard of hearing doesn't "lower the standard" for listening.

How about providing visual supports for students with auditory processing disorder or autism? Or providing audio books along with the written text for students with dyslexia? How about speech-to-text software for students with dysgraphia, or other difficulties with fine motor? Or what about providing a timer for timed breaks for kids with attention issues?

Instead of focusing on how an accommodation may be unfair or "lower the standard," consider what is being suggested, and what skills you are evaluating.

I can't think of an instance where allowing a student to type instead of handwrite "lowers the standard" unless the skill being evaluated is literal handwriting. Allowing a student to use a notecard with math formulas on a test doesn't "lower the standard" unless the skill being evaluated is memorizing math formulas. Allowing a student to follow along with an audio book while they read doesn't "lower the standard" unless you're evaluating decoding skills. Providing written as well as spoken directions doesn't "lower the standard" unless you're evaluating listening comprehension. Allowing a student to dictate an essay or long form response doesn't "lower the standard" unless you're evaluating the action of writing or typing. For kids with motor skills deficits, or auditory processing disorder, or dyslexia, or autism, these accommodations may be necessary in order to evaluate their ability to communicate what they know, or to apply concepts, or comprehend written information, or follow multi-step directions. Accommodations aren't meant to lower standards, they're meant to allow access to those standards.

And who decides what accommodations are appropriate and which ones are not? It's a team decision, of course. The parents provide input - a disability needs accommodation at home, too, and parents know their children the best. The school psychologist provides input - they are specialists who have studied both education and psychology and provide important context into how a student's brain is working in relation to an "average" student. The special education teacher provides input - we have training and experience in what an accommodation may look like in a classroom. The general education teacher has input, as well - they can provide input into what is realistic to expect in a classroom of 35 students, and which of several options to accommodate a disability will work best in that classroom. As a student grows and matures, that student becomes the most important contributor to the team - a student can provide insight that no one else can provide: what accommodations they prefer to use.

But what is not okay is unilaterally deciding that an accommodation is unfair or not effective. It's not okay to mock students needing accommodations, even if it's in the context of using a hypothetical student to blow off steam on social media. It is certainly not okay to dismiss a multidisciplinary report and suggest that if a student has a learning disability in the area of reading or math or writing, or motor skills, that they simply need to practice more. If an accommodation is too burdensome, be part of the team. Help brainstorm how best to facilitate access that works for the student and for your class. Talk to the student, the parents, the special educator, the school psychologist.

What do we communicate when we decide that a student's input into their needs is something to mock and dismiss? What do we communicate when we say it's too much work to accommodate a disability? What do we communicate when we generalize that kids are just looking to get off easy, and using their disability to do so? And believe me, kids are good at noticing. Even if a teacher doesn't say a thing to their face, a kid knows when that teacher doesn't believe their disability is real. They know when a teacher thinks an accommodation is too burdensome. They know when they're being written off. And that message gets internalized, and fast.