Accommodations

Previous Chapter

Short Answer

“Be careful of charity and kindness, lest you do more harm with open hands than with a clenched fist.”

Kreia, Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (2004)

The quotation above isn’t here to show I’m against accommodations. It’s warning against treating accommodations as generosity over obligation and misapplying accommodations when they aren’t needed in the first place.

If I were to put it another way, will this accommodation make it harder to succeed outside of education where that accommodation no longer exists?

Many accommodations are not purely acts of good-will. They have legal protections, ethical necessities, and are often non-negotiable. You also may not openly disclose accommodations for any students as they’re typically under strict, legal protections and carry swift, significant consequences for breaking those protections.

There are unreasonable accommodations, which you can push back against as permitted by law/policy. There’s also accommodations you should support, fight for, and defend to not jeopardize a student’s learning journey. Lastly, there’s accommodations made purely to avoid litigation, which are dubious in intent and likely weaponize accommodations, but probably need to be followed anyways.

Despite the accommodations you provide (or have to meet), there are times you’ll have to accept you cannot meet the needs of every student in every context. This is not a moral failure, but a system limitation. When there’s not enough resources, it’s harmful to the learning experience. Just like how you cannot expect even top-tier management to differentiate or include perfectly for every direct report under them, you cannot reasonably expect teachers/instructors to provide sufficient differentiation and inclusion to every student under their care.

E.g. “Inclusion at all costs” policies negatively impact the experience for everyone involved, but it is quite a contested claim in special education with research supporting both sides.

The whole point of accommodations is to provide equal opportunity for students to succeed in their courses and showcase their potential. It is NOT meant to elevate them above their peers; only bring them closer to the level of their peers.

Not all accommodations are feasible. Even if accommodations are feasible, if they are unreasonable, unrealistic, and/or remove accountability, they may cause harm to students instead.

A class being “tough” shouldn’t be a reason to request an accommodation for it.
- Opinion: students should not be permitted in “tough” classes without proof of competency and/or recommendation in the first place!
Getting an accommodation is not the equivalent of bringing a student suddenly up to grade level with peers; all it really does in practice is try to help their efforts in learning.

Lastly, and this is the ONE takeaway every reader should remember if nothing else: Accommodations in educational systems do not mean anything outside of them.

They also do not act as “get out of jail free” cards.

Long Answer

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice and also heavily opinionated.

Everything I’m writing in this chapter is based on the assumption that every accommodation must be followed per federal law. I am not suggesting you can ignore accommodations.

I.e. if I were a teacher and a student has one of these accommodations, it’s a reflection of my views on it, how reasonable it may be, and/or how it might occur in practice if I’m required to satisfy that accommodation.

If a teaching framework is the backbone for how you deliver lesson content, conduct tests, and oversee activities, then accommodations (and modifications/strategies/interventions by extension) test how flexible that framework is when it asks you to do an entire graduate thesis from 0 to 100 in under 2 weeks.

Add on top of this that many accommodations are legally required, thanks to IEPs and 504s, to fulfill and your framework is almost, if not absolutely, certain to not survive first contact. You’re expect to adapt and adjust how you deliver content with, or without, whatever supports you have.

I believe the ideal goal of a student going through any education system is functional independence. Students should leave that system able to do what they learned without being told how to do it, or prompted to do it, every time. A student unable to do this either did not learn the material properly, the system itself is poorly designed, or the system was exploited by either students (or third parties assisting students) to get through without properly learning the intended content. This advice should hold true to all students, regardless of whether or not they receive accommodations.

Put another way: they shouldn’t move on when they aren’t ready.

The “Reasonable” Accommodation

A reasonable accommodation enables a person with a disability to enjoy equal employment opportunities, benefits, and privileges.

U.S. Department of Education (2024)

Yes, I’m using an employment definition instead of a student accommodation definition. Nevertheless, the goal is preparing students for future lives as working, functional adults.

Accommodations provide equity, not advantages, to students with physical, mental, or medical conditions putting them at disadvantages compared to peers. That means assisting people with diseases and conditions like dyslexia, ADHD, cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, diabetes, and more. It helps them up to the same academic level, or as close as possible to, their healthier peers. Accommodations are not just for one type of student; it’s for many types of students.

Additionally, the number and intensity of accommodations students need should decrease over time as students develop better techniques to deal with any issues. Students should also avoid relying on accommodations, and their condition(s), as an excuse. It’s similar to physical therapy, where you’re trying to restore functions so you can operate without assistance or minimal assistance.

One example of “fading supports” is from the Paraeducator Support files of Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) (2022)

Even “reasonable” accommodations still require work to be done on time and meet standards. Many accommodations which may be harmful (e.g. enabling learned helplessness) include things like the following:

Students not understanding the accommodation as written and its intent.
Misaligned goals, such as automated text for self-writing practice.
Cannot get the accommodation in a workplace or outside education.
- This doesn’t include accommodations required by federal/state laws.
- Businesses and workplaces can still provide reasonable accommodations, but may not choose to do so unless legally required.

Many classrooms, whether in-person or online, offer accommodations towards students to provide a better learning environment for them. There’s considerations made based on behavior, educational records, conditions/diseases, and more. Sometimes, the “least restrictive environment” isn’t the general education, but the special education, classroom.

In practice, some accommodations are either not practical or infeasible to reasonably implement due to various issues, like not enough resources, inadequate environment(s), and lack of personnel. These tend to be issues with systems rather than teachers/professors.

E.g. A teacher has 200 students with a significant portion with IEPs/504s/etc. One teacher cannot reasonably and fully meet all legally binding needs and any 1:1 support needs without sacrificing education for all students unless there’s additional staff, smaller classes, and specialized support networks assisting them.

Sometimes people drafting accommodations may have little to no experience with the student or the context from experience as a teacher to inform their decisions. There’s also cases where even students do not know why they have accommodations or get a say in their accommodations; the very people we’re designing accommodations for. All of these factors combined may lead to a disconnect and necessitate multiple meetings throughout the school period to review accommodations and plans periodically.

There are also times unreasonable accommodations are in place, despite legitimate evidence from teachers and professors showing they are unreasonable. The teacher and professor may also be sued or under threat of litigation for not meeting all accommodations in the classroom.

There’s also other accommodations outside of learning, such as meal planning for celiac disease and lactose intolerance. If a party or event is hosted, those accommodations need to be accounted for as well.

Types of Accommodations

Several categories cover most accommodations you may see (Center for Accessible Education, n.d.):

Presentation (how information is shared)
Response (how work is completed)
Setting (how environment is set up)
Timing/Scheduling (when work gets completed)

These accommodations are commonly met through assignment modifications and curriculum modifications. Accommodations are quite different from modifications. Accommodations focus on how students learn, whereas modifications affect what students learn.

You may see many accommodations and modifications in plans like IEPs and 504s mentioned earlier in the book. This chapter focuses on accommodations because modifications typically involve alternative assessments and work provided at lower difficulty and/or complexity. I want to focus on what levels the playing field over changing it.

To showcase their differences in examples:

Accommodation: highlighting text on assignments for a student
Modification: changing a 3 question assignment to 2 questions

For simplicity’s sake going forward, I’m putting both modification and accommodation under the “accommodation” umbrella. I’m aware there’s a technical difference between the terms, but I see them interchanged often enough I should be OK with this caveat.

There’s also strategies and interventions, such as mnemonic devices (e.g. apple in tree, car in garage for DNA), but I won’t be covering those here. For now, know these strategies are employed to adjust the playing field for students and their learning journey.

Are Accommodations Harmful or Beneficial?

Some accommodations are beneficial, but some accommodations may hinder learning and development. A lot of what I’ll say is based more on personal experiences, which may correlate with findings from others in more formal research settings such as Kulow and Missirian (2019).

At the end of the day, accommodations are still legally required to be provided and followed per various laws, like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2025).

The intent of accommodations is to provide supports to people and remove barriers to entry in a given environment. They should elevate someone up to the level of their peers without accommodations.

It is not meant to reduce or replace rigor/requirements to perform the necessary work or bypass the effort required for learning. It is also not meant to abuse a system, commit fraud, or acquire unjust advantages over other students.

Consider accommodations another way: Two students need to get 100 points.

Student A receives 100 points on their own.
Student B receives 80 points on their own, with support provided for the final 20.

Both students are responsible for reaching 100 points. The accommodation for Student B provided opportunity to achieve that goal; not reduce it down to 80 points as their new goal.

If accommodations reduce rigor, they may undermine appropriate mastery of skills. Though accommodations are made with good intentions, they may persist despite their harm due to administrative pressures or legal mandates.

Another factor often overlooked is the relationship between the student with accommodations, other students with accommodations, and students without accommodations all in the same classroom. If accommodations are given to students without considering this context, there is a unintentional and harmful strain on staff, resources, and students. This can undermine the learning experience for everyone and renders the accommodation(s) counterproductive.

Accommodations cannot be made in isolation. They must be made while considering the classroom and available resources.

Lastly, and this is especially important: a student is not required to use provided accommodations, but accommodations are legally required to be available to the student. They are safety nets. You are free to interpret how this statement applies in practice.

Non-specific vs Specific Accommodations

Whenever possible, do NOT leave any accommodation open to interpretation or too general. Any ambiguous accommodation is almost always pushed to legal and practical limits.

An example is the difference between allowing “extra time on all assignments” vs “extra time on only tests.” You can further this specificity with something like “Extended time 100% on assignments” so a 2 day deadline on an assignment now has 4 days to complete, but no additional time beyond that before it takes normal penalities.

It ensures the accommodation stays reasonable, maintains accountability for the student, and further assists with any issues down the line.

Mid-way Advisory

For the remainder of the chapter, I’ll go over more specific accommodations and talk about how reasonable they are and how they may practically be approached in classrooms.

They’re not listed in any particular order or fashion.

You may be restricted based on the administration’s rules, but even the administration of a school is obligated to provide accommodations to students like how a teacher provides accommodations in a classroom.

Acceleration / “Gifted” Student Programs

I’ve seen this typically applied to mathematics, and sometimes science/engineering, over other subjects. I’ll address this as a single student getting it rather than a class as a whole.

Be aware acceleration can mean skipping or summarizing content and courses to cover more ground in the same timeframe. This isn’t always the case, but it is possible.

It’s reasonable, but depends on available resources and if the student is even willing and able to meet the heightened pace. I’d also caution against optimal progression and focus more on ensuring students like and develop passion for any accelerated subjects or they may fall off and lose dedication midway. Acceleration may also be bad if it’s going to destroy any sense of humility or social/emotional intelligence in a student; no one likes a rude person, even if they’re smart.

If you have to tell someone you’re smart, you’re likely not smart.
Just because you’re smart doesn’t grant a license to be cruel and disruptive.

I’d also avoid calling a student “gifted” in the first place. It places an unspoken expectation of perfection on the student and anything less puts them under more stress than necessary. If I emphasize talent over effort, I’m more likely to see students collapse under pressure and spiral into depression and learned helplessness when, not if, talent alone cannot succeed.

Sure, talent/affinity exists, but riding on that without effort is a recipe for disaster.
Two examples are from Aronson et al. (2002) and Dweck et al. (2014).

To clarify an earlier point: a student needs to have an exceptionally strong understanding of basics first before accelerating. Without a strong foundation, they risk stumbling quickly and falling behind non-accelerated peers.

Resources are another issue, but not in a way people may typically expect. If, for example, a student goes into a school system and they only offer up to X level of math, the accelerated student may have completed X level of math far before they officially graduate. This leaves a deficiency to fill with other meaningful options, like appropriate electives, to cover that gap.

You may not even need a school-provided accommodation either. In the Information Era, there’s multiple resources online available for use. They may cover topics significantly more in-depth compared to physical schools.

Because external resources may offer more depth than typical coursework, I’d advise starting/reviewing content at least one level below student’s target level first.
This helps catch gaps they might have missed on earlier concepts before going into advanced material.
If, with certainty, they’re well-prepared, then raise difficulty up to accelerated goals.

Anxiety (and ADHD) Accommodations

Depending on how the accommodation addresses student anxiety, it ranges from reasonable to unreasonable. Many accommodations here are based on anxiety too.

Think about it this way: your future work boss likely won’t give you another day to do an urgent report because you were anxious.

I’m not sure how controversial this opinion is, but if a student is anxious their accommodations should help them overcome the source of anxiety, not avoid it. I’ve also seen many cases where a student claims they’re anxious, much like how someone claims they’re OCD, and detract from those who actually have the issue(s). I’d also be wary about a student whose only accommodation is anxiety, or requested accommodations only due to anxiety.

Though there is general advice on how to handle it, a unique treatment plan on anxiety for each individual should be deferred to a licensed medical professional. Some examples of general advice, which do not act as diagnostic tools or formal assessments, include (APA, 2026):

Being patient with the student
Giving warning about what will happen and why
Normalizing uncertainty and mistakes
- Because learning certain content actually is just hard.
Trusting the student actually is struggling and not just seeking attention.

To emphasize once more, per what the American Psychological Association states, “Only a qualified mental health professional can determine whether the anxiety a student displays should be diagnosed as an anxiety disorder” (2026).

As for when it is unreasonable? I would say when the accommodation ignores the root problem. Additionally, if the accommodation is from someone who isn’t medically licensed wants to formalize the disorder OR it drastically alters the curriculum/course in its current state. The former is based on an ethical standpoint and handling medical conditions, while the latter can be resolved through support staff (like a disability resources office) about the issue.

Test Retakes

Short answer: It’s fine as long as it comes with strict conditions increasing/maintaining accountability and demonstrating learning.

Long answer: Sometimes this is a general policy for all students at schools. Other times it’s written as part of an accommodation. Is it reasonable? Depends.

Overally, I’d say to avoid offering retakes unless any one of these following is true:

You’re willing to take on the additional workload.
Administration, or the law, forces you to provide retakes.

If a student asks for a retake on a test, I would say 4 options exist without compromising learning too much.

A test of similar difficulty, but with different, related questions
A test of much higher difficulty compared to the original
The retake is found in a remedial class
Alternative work to raise the grade, but only up to a minimum passing grade.

Depending on the accommodation’s writing and intent, you may not be allowed some of the options or have to modify how the options work.

Option 1 is so students cannot simply memorize the answers from the first test and get easy points without expending sufficient effort. Keep in mind this may encourage them to think the first attempt means nothing, so you should add other conditions before they can retake a test. Some conditions that come to mind are the following:

Capping the maximum grade allowed on the retake
Completing all missing assignments before a retake is permitted
Specific and limited timeframe to complete a retake (<5-10 days since test day)
If the grade on the retake is lower, that becomes the new test grade
Complete a separate assignment, like a study guide or essay, before a retake is permitted

Option 2 is so students can realize if they don’t prepare properly the first time around, the retake will punish them for not taking their school work seriously by providing them even more work; the thing they likely want to avoid.

Option 3 is letting the students fail the test entirely. Rather than permit a retake, they need to make up their lack of preparation by taking away even more of the student’s time as a consequence.

Option 4 is something I’ve personally done and the idea is to make it inconvenient to raise the grade. If a student really cared about their learning, they’d deal with the inconveniences to get to their destination. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t bother and take the worse grade as is, even when an opportunity to raise it was available.

This feels like a parallel to the types of parents who show up to parent-teacher conferences, but I digress.

A policy I had was a student could get an 80 percent on a test they did poorly on provided they met the following conditions:

Set up an appointment within school hours on their own time
Were willing to give up their own time to raise the grade

The intention was a student needed to overcome the problem on their own to earn the grade they want.

In hindsight, I should’ve been far stricter. Some students abused it after bombing a test, even with the retake, and it showed in their grades and lack of understanding on the material in general. If I were to do it again:

Minimum grade earned back is a “passing grade.” They can make the hole easier to climb out of, but I won’t give them the rope all the way to the top.
The makeup requirement should’ve been harder.

On makeup requirements: rather than an appointment to go over the questions, I should’ve made students do an in-person (or video) oration test as a retake (or other means if accommodations didn’t allow that). I ask questions, they provide answers, they can write on a whiteboard/projector if needed, and I decide if it merits raising their grade then and there.

This format means no extra paperwork, no extra assignments written out, and I get to extract active demonstration of understanding instead of memorization of facts. I already knew the material to ask about anyway because I had to write the initial test, so it’d be pretty easy to do this method.

The major caveat though, is scaling up. This works with smaller class sizes, but for large class sizes it becomes an inefficient timesink.
You could argue AI tools may make this format redundant, but it’s incredibly easy to see when someone is using AI as a crutch for properly learning and demonstrating knowledge.
- A student would fare better admitting outright they don’t know the answer or at least show a honest attempt to solve the problem/question.

“Student not given assignments when [mentally] unavailable for learning”

Firstly, yes this is a real accommodation. Secondly, I’d almost immediately call it an unreasonable accommodation. Thirdly, if I ever see this again, you bet it is saved as documentation in case said student ever fails and people ask about it.

I’m documenting when and how the student utilizes this accommodation and seeking an emergency meeting as soon as humanly possible to remove. This accommodation, if approved, effectively excuses the student from all work and will undermine their learning experience.

If the student decides this means napping excessively, I’ll need to treat it as a medical issue and request they go to the nurse’s office, or the front office in case nurse unavailable, mark them under an excused absence, and provide make-up work.

Put another way, this accommodation may give the student more homework to make up for lost class time. They may be “unavailable for learning” during my class, but claiming they’re unavailable through the entire day is far more unlikely. They’re still expected and able to complete the work later, whether at home or in class, to stay caught up with the class.

One-to-one Aides

More unreasonable than reasonable; it depends entirely on what resources the school has and the personnel available for this accommodation.

For schools with higher teacher:student ratios, I’d say this is unreasonable in practice. For schools with lower teacher:student ratios, or more dedicated aides in classrooms available to assist, this is far more reasonable but can become unreasonable depending how staff is allocated.

If anything, assigning a dedicated staff member (what the medical field may call a “sitter”) may be excessive and unlikely due to school budgets. I’d reserve this accommodation for students who truly cannot function in a school environment without significant assistance, such as those in wheelchairs, mobility issues, significant motor functions, and hearing problems requiring interpreters.

This feasibility issue compounds itself as more and more students in a school require this accommodation as well.

Notes Provided / Note Use on Tests

Depends on the subject covered and intensity you’re aiming for. I can speak for science and STEM here.

For science and STEM classes, I may provide them equations (without defining the variables) they can reference to answer questions on the test. They’ll still have to know how to apply those equations to answer the problems, which is what I’m testing on anyway.

E.g. In an electronics problem, I may give them the equation “P=IV” without defining the variables.

I may also consider giving them an open book test, with the goal of practicing their ability to search for information to solve a given problem.

If you permit typing or writing the notes themselves, they’ll try to cram in as much information as possible on whatever medium you permit. They may also claim that because it wasn’t in their notes, it shouldn’t have been on the test. They may also claim that because notes were allowed they didn’t need to study (and probably still flunk anyways).

Phones [and Similar Technology] as Emotional Support Device

Increasingly illegal to have phones in classrooms. More and more states in the United States are banning cellphone use inside of classrooms (Amy, 2025).

Even if it isn’t illegal, it is highly likely to not be a reasonable accommodation outside of extreme medical conditions. Not to mention cell phones have cameras, which means capacity to record the classroom and potentially violating FERPA/HIPAA.

If cell phones are still allowed, then I’d consider moving the student to a location where they cannot easily obscure what they’re doing on their phone. This helps ensure the accommodation is not abused and they’re satisfying the primary goal of learning.

Alternative Test Location (and similar items)

Typically unreasonable, but depends on available resources. If those resources are available, then it leans towards reasonable.

In some cases, there are no places teachers and staff can send students to conduct tests outside of their assigned classrooms without either:

A staff member, NOT another student, available to proctor to ensure academic integrity.
An area available for the test emulating the conditions of the original classroom.

If there’s a time and place this accommodation is most likely abused, it’s during high-stakes testing like ACT, SAT, and similar items due to the sheer advantage it can provide someone.

Physical Accommodations

Some activities may be accessible for able-bodied students and present issues for students with disabilities. These accommodations are reasonable or unreasonable depending on accessibility, resource availability, and if it affects the activity’s intended purpose.

Even without the explicit accommodation, the facility may be designed to comply with laws like ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) to ensure baseline accessibility Technology can also bridge the gap, but it still requires the resources available to properly implement.

There are various examples where this could apply. Sometimes it’s as easy as providing a chair for someone to sit in. Sometimes it isn’t easy and may not be feasible without fundamentally altering the activity.

Sit Near a Helpful Peer

You want another student who has no legal obligations to assist and ensure I, the teacher with the legal responsibility, am satisfying the accommodation?

That is a terrible idea.

The student peer isn’t a school or district employee; they’re a student. They can do whatever they want and they don’t have to follow the same rules as teachers and staff, but the blame ultimately falls back on the teacher at the end of the day.

In the absolute, but improbable, best case, this works out fine without issues.

In practice, however, this places undue stress and threatens the learning environment of the “peer” they sit next to. Essentially, the accommodation asks me to assign extra labor to a student with risk of educational harm. That harm affects multiple people now; the peer and the student requiring the accommodation.

Additionally, many classrooms aren’t designed to support this accommodation well in the first place. You may be in a 30 foot by 30 foot (or 10 meter by 10 meter) square/rectangular room, alongside 30-40+ students, and moving people around wouldn’t make a reasonable or measureable difference.

Trigger Words

These accommodations range from somewhat understandable to impossible.

If a trigger word is being told “No” then that’s unreasonable.

If the trigger word is a slur or already offensive word, that’s excessive; society deemed it socially unacceptable, so people shouldn’t be saying that in the first place and may face punishments anyways.

If the trigger word is a socially acceptable word, then it’s the risk of that word suddenly appearing in text, said, or shown to them without the instructor knowing about it. That means it’s now an accountability issue where the teacher can be held responsible, despite the teacher not being at fault, and more documentation.

Nonverbal Reminders and Cues

Totally reasonable.

You can write out reminders on the board, times to do things like take breaks, etc. You can also do appropriate hand gestures for a student to say they need something without actually saying it. These gestures can also work as cues to keep students on task.

I’d say to review which cues and reminders to use with the student(s) in a separate meeting. You could also implement it in a classroom management plan if it covers multiple students with this accommodation.

Preferential/Required Seating

Depends on how many other students have this same requirement.

This accommodation also could let teachers decide where to best put students to maximize their learning potential and limit distractions.

Even if that’s stuck in a corner with a wall in front of them.

Besides that: One to a few students? Totally reasonable. Several students? Less reasonable. Several students in a classroom environment that, by architecture and engineering constraints, prohibits certain seating arrangements? Unreasonable.

There’s only so much space to assign seats in a classroom. The difficulty and accommodation issues also spike if it’s a case like “must sit next to the teacher” when there’s only one reasonable spot next to the teacher in the first place.

Reduced Workload

Less practice leads to less mastery. Practice is often the only way to improve your skills in a particular field, subject, or topic. This accommodation potentially robs a student of that practice and directly harms the learning experience.

In many cases, I’d argue asking for extended time instead of reduced workload is a better accommodation.

Despite the drawbacks, it isn’t wholly unreasonable. It’s like a manager asking for an executive summary instead of the entire technical report, which means there’s a few ways to approach this:

Breaking information into smaller chunks (i.e. 1 big assignment -> 3 small assignments).
Testing/assigning a smaller set of problems covering vital information.
Eliminating “filler” content when able to.

These modifications can fit this accommodation reasonably enough, as they’ll reduce workload but still have the student showcase some level of mastery.

Checks for Understanding

If it’s not already done in a general education environment, you probably should be doing it anyways.

This isn’t always tests or quizzes though. The intent of this is more like occasionally asking questions to students about the material as you go through it, as well as lower intensity checks like exit tickets they can do within the allotted class time.

What is a “check” though depends on the specifics of the accommodation, so double check that first. If it doesn’t define it explicitly, then stick with what is reasonable.

“Nothing below a 60 (Grade)”

Short answer: Don’t do this please, even if it’s with the best intentions.

Long answer:

I gave 60% (a “D” or “D-“) as an example, but this applies to any grade floor. I may also argue it’s a symptom of grading system issues, since we’re bucketing/categorizing percent values under letter grades, rather than sticking with one or the other consistently.

Overall, if a student is able to, and aware of, the ability to fail assignments without a major penalty to their grade, they’re likely to do just that and receive no penalty for it.

E.g. College students deciding how well they need to do on their final to keep or earn a grade in a class.
- Even I’ve done this when I was younger without the grade floor accommodation in engineering school. Path of least resistance still applies.
E.g. A student saying “just give me the 60” instead of ever attempting the assignment.

This is an accommodation I’d tell you never to add, but more than likely is pushed forward by administration, parents, colleagues, and more despite its prominent issues. The motivation for this may include increasing the value of a metric, such as a passing rate.

There’s also the case where it’s the “alternative” to countless meetings, paperwork, non-renewal (“laid off” for non-teachers) and potential litigation because a child failed of their own accord, even if the teacher or school isn’t at fault.

The counterpoint is a scenario like so: A student gets a 0 on an assignment. To get back up to a B, or an A, they have to score well on multiple other assignments just to dig themselves out of a deep hole. It sounds nice when there’s a grade floor as a safety net, because that means there’s less of a hole to dig out of and it’s easier to recover from a single bad mistake.

The biggest problem is, in practice, this is poorly implemented and there’s rarely, if ever, other measures to bring back up student accountability to counterbalance this accommodation. The student is essentially given a free pass to disengage with the work and not need to learn because they don’t have to learn or do much work for a passing grade. This is how you get students who are at a higher education level, or even adults, who are several levels behind and unable to perform basic functions as they’re passed along.

If you were to try earning 60% of a paycheck for doing 0% of the work, the employer would probably just laugh at you and maybe fire you in the same breath.

That or you’re an investor earning “passive income.” I can’t account for all edge cases here.

There’s also the ethical implications and potential academic fraud involved. You may also be lying to a student about the grade they really earned. By providing an advantage against other kids who also fail without this accommodation, it also undermines accountability and cheapens the effort of other students.

The student could get a 0 on every single assignment, test, quiz, etc. and still receive a 60 in the class. You could argue that “Well, a D (60/100) is still a bad grade,” but they’re still passing the class and not failing.

If the floor was 50, they could fail, but that doesn’t erase the issue where they’re given half a grade regardless of effort put in.

Now, you could track their real grade on a spreadsheet, or similar method, and keep their posted grade at a 60. That’d likely fit the letter of the accommodation. You could also make it so the lowest possible grade is 60 in the class, but a student’s posted grade does not increase so long as the real grade you’re tracking in the background is below 60. It may still “comply” with this accommodation, but it won’t increase motivation lost because the accommodation is already granted.

No Deadlines / No Late Work Penalty

Please never add this.

This accommodation removes accountability on student work, which means it’s harming the student and left entirely to the motivation of said student to do the work and keep up with the class.

It’s especially bad for any student with disorders like ADD or ADHD where structure is beneficial and strict deadlines (even if extended a bit), set in stone, are actually a good thing instead.

E.g. many guidelines from the CDC suggest scheduling, managing distractions, planning and organization to help these conditions (2024).

If this accommodation is forced, despite clear implications of what it allows, the typical “split 1 large task into multiple smaller tasks” tactic could alleviate it a bit. Also consider looking into frequent meetings and check-ins to help with organizational skills. Despite whatever tactics you employ, the drive to complete their work and learn the material is still heavily in favor of the student.

Again, this is a bad accommodation.

Extended (“Extra”) Time and Deadlines

It’s complicated who really needs this accommodation and where it applies. There’s cases for it, but I’d say they’re exceptions for medical conditions significantly affecting learning abilities. In general, I’d avoid giving this accommodation (and its variant “open ended extra time”) unless truly necessary.

I’d also say this accommodation is not a way for a student to play games, watch non-educational videos, or be on social media instead of using that time for their coursework.

I’ll give some examples where I think it’s reasonable:

Example 1: A student with ADHD requests extra time for tests as they perform well in the class in general but poorly under test-specific conditions.
Example 2: A student with cerebral palsy receives extra time because they physically cannot write down all their answers in the normal timeframe.
Example 3: The law in a given state/nation mandates the accommodation(s) for student.

Additionally, I would force a specific extension amount and NEVER leave it open to interpretation. I’d say only 100% extended time at most beyond the due date and strictly limit which work gets that extension.

From personal experience, even if you do grant extended time and deadlines, that usually results in a student putting it off longer and feeds into procrastination.

Easy proof of this is checking submission time vs deadline time

Extended deadlines, and extended time in general, is a slippery slope where the student risks falling behind and unable to keep up with classroom pacing and work. If that happens, the accommodation is harmful rather than beneficial.

Extended time also opens the door to a student asking for, and getting, and extension on all work, which means harming the student and hurting their accountability. For example, if the accommodation says “double time” on assignments, that puts them in a compromised position where massive amounts of work can pile up and all become due on the same day. That’s when a teacher should be documenting extensively what happens with that student so they don’t lose their job.

A Case for Abusing Time Extensions

Some people may call this an “edge case,” which is also appropriate. The accommodation deals with equity of time, not equality of time.

This accommodation is easy to abuse and has plenty of incentive behind it to abuse. For high-stakes testing and tests intentionally designed with time constraints, time extensions are a substantial advantage for anyone “gaming” the system. How well someone scores determines scholarship money, cost of tuition, opportunities for success, access to higher tier colleges, what programs you can pursue, and more.

It’s possible the system can be abused and it’s possible diagnoses from medical professionals for conditions warranting extra time may not be accurate or precise. It’s why there’s restrictions and requirements in place before those accommodations are provided. It’s also a reason why a request for an accommodation in one test may not guarantee those accommodations in another test.

I don’t think the risk of abuse is enough to warrant banning or disregarding the extended time accommodation entirely. It is, however, a significant enough risk to address the possibility it can happen and muddy the efforts of people who truly do need the accommodation.

Assistive Technology

This is a “it depends” scenario.

In some cases, totally fine and encouraged. Student’s blind and needs to use a screen reader or Braille? Go for it. Speech-to-text and text-to-speech with proven benefits for the student? Also good.

There’s also a case where a student may use a computer (or similar technology) for handwritten assignments. That’s generally OK, but then I’d probably have to monitor that student more strictly compared to other students to ensure they’re on task.

In other cases, this is easy to abuse and misuse. As an example, assistive technology should not be used in scenarios where the task specifically practices a skill without the technology used.

Written (and Visual) Directions and Assignments

This is pretty reasonable to accommodate and teachers may already do it anyways for all students.

Visual can also mean written.

To give an example: Say you’re giving a lab safety demonstration and going over the various tools and how to use them. Chances are, you probably prepared a script beforehand that is written. You could give said student with accommodations this so they can follow along.

Food/Drink Allergies

Pretty reasonable accommodation, but it adds a risk management and liability issue.

One student, or multiple students, with one allergy? Manageable. For example, staff can bring in an alternative item, like gluten free pizza, for the student(s) or restrict one type of item, like peanuts, from being brought into the classroom.

Multiple students with different allergies in the same classroom? Potentially unreasonable. If there’s an event involving the class, or a group of students, it limits what anyone can bring into the classroom. If there’s too many allergies to account for, it may actually reach the point where the only food/drink allowed is water.

If an edge case occurs where someone is allergic to water, like aquagenic urticaria, then that means no food/drink period (Dice & Gonzalez-Reyes, 2025).

Keep in mind, even if the problematic food/drink wasn’t distributed by the teacher, the teacher is still accountable for what happens to students in their classroom.

Treats as a Reward

This is less an accommodation for a particular student and more something planned for the whole class, but I’ll include it in this chapter anyways.

Treats can be used if reasonable for the class and as a reward for correct behaviors and completing the requested work. Nevertheless, I would avoid treats in general for two reasons:

Issues with food/drink allergies
Promoting an extrinsic reward for learning instead of an intrinsic reward.

If you permit this, accommodation or not, it should be outlined when something warrants a treat as a reward versus no treat. You may also add in a general food/drink policy as well, if one isn’t already established, so students aren’t setting up a restaurant in the classroom (unless you actually allowed that, then more power to you).

Notable exceptions include elementary schools, pre-Kindergartens, and Kindergartens with snack time. There’s also special events like student birthday where the birthday student brings in food for other students.

I’d avoid following your punishment/reward treat system with these scenarios because you’re not the one providing said treats. You should, however, be mindful of allergies and watch out in case a food or drink slips through.

On allergies: if a parent or other person tells you a student wants to bring in food, you can tell them what ingredients to avoid bringing in as due diligence. Be careful not to name any students though; just give a list of ingredients to avoid.

If a student does get denied treats, and a parent tries to ask why they didn’t get a treat, I’d be more concerned if they focused solely on the treat rather than the behaviors leading up to why a treat was not handed out.

If it really becomes an issue, then I’d probably restrict treats as rewards for the classroom altogether if it’s not legally mandated.

Teaching for an “Absent” Student

If a student is perpetually absent from class, they’re functionally absent. You can’t reasonably expect a teacher to help a student that is gone from class for a large part of the school year, semester, etc.

This is especially true for classrooms where attendance is required as part of a grade.

The only exception I can readily think of is posting the lectures, assignments, tests, etc. in an online format, but that has two potential drawbacks:

You may enable the absentee, and possibly truant, behavior.
You risk turning the physical classroom into a management environment (daycare/adult care) instead of a learning environment.

There are more reasonable asks, such as leaving the classroom for a short period of time to “cool down.” In the same breath, however, if they’re gone for more than a third to half the class, that’s when I think it’s an issue and becomes harmful to the student.

These cooldown periods also shouldn’t be required or expected, because it enables the student taking advantage of them and causing a scene. If it’s truly an issue, the teacher can provide those short periods when the teacher recognizes it actually helps the student.

Submission Checklists

Mostly reasonable; depends how the class is operated. The typical intent is written guidelines on what to do for big assignments like projects.

It’s like a list of tasks. Each item doesn’t need to be long and is like asking you “can you briefly describe what we need to do for this work?”

A risk with this accommodation is the student may do the absolute bare minimum and not go above and beyond, citing the checklist as evidence of the work requested. They may also expect a full grade because they met your requirements by the letter of your word, even if the quality of the work isn’t to sufficient standards.

This request gets less reasonable if it’s an extremely long or complicated checklist, or if every piece of work in the class requires a “checklist.” Consider limiting what assignments and work get this accommodation if it’s a concern.

Grading Adjustments

Another “it depends” scenario, but generally reasonable with the right conditions.

For a student with a condition like dyslexia, where they can mismatch letters and words unintentionally, it’s understandable. Though the answer is wrong, perhaps partial credit is provided for the part(s) they got right rather than all or nothing credit.

For cases like the above, you’ll want to develop a plan to help them work through it. You may need to provide modifications, but they could be as simple as changing the assignment font to something like Arial, Helvetica, Verdana, or other common fonts.

This is easier to apply in scenarios where “showing work” is required, like science and math assignments with multiple variables in play, compared to scenarios where it’s explicit and easily understood/readable questions and answers.

Bibliography

American Psychological Association (APA). (2026). Students Experiencing Anxiety. Apa.org. https://www.apa.org/ed/schools/primer/anxiety
Amy, J. (2025, August 21). Cellphone bans are changing US classrooms. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/schools-cellphone-bans-social-media-parents-d6464fbfdfae83189c752fe0c40fd060
Aronson, J., Fried, C., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the Effects of Stereotype Threat on African American College Students by Shaping Theories of Intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 113–125.
CDC. (2024, May 16). Treatment of ADHD. Attention-Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). https://www.cdc.gov/adhd/treatment/index.html
Center for Accessible Education. (n.d.). Why do universities provide accommodations? UCLA. https://cae.ucla.edu/faculty-handbook/why-do-universities-provide-accommodations
Dice, J. P., Gonzalez-Reyes, E. (2024, April 25) Physical (inducible) urticaria. UptoDate. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/physical-inducible-urticaria
Dweck, C. S., Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2014). Academic Tenacity Mindsets and Skills that Promote Long-Term Learning. https://ed.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/manual/dweck-walton-cohen-2014.pdf
Kulow, M., & Missirian, D. (2019). Building STEPs Down the Precipitous Cliff from University to Workplace: A Proposal to Modify Regulation of Higher Education Mental Disability Accommodations. Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights (U Texas Austin), 24(2). https://sites.utexas.edu/tjclcr/files/2022/11/DelPo-Missirian_Building-STEPs-down-the-Precipitous-Cliff-from-University-to-Workplace.pdf
Obsidian Entertainment. (December 6, 2004). Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords (PC Version) [Video game]. LucasArts.
- Dialogue used written by Chris Avellone.
U.S. Department of Education. (2024). HANDBOOK FOR REASONABLE ACCOMODATIONS DEPARTMENTAL HANDBOOK ACSH-OFO-011. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/about/offices/or/docs/handbook-reasonable-accommodations.pdf
- “ACCOMODATIONS” is not a mispelling.
U.S. Department of Education. (2025). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). U.S. Department of Education. https://www.ed.gov/laws-and-policy/individuals-disabilities/idea
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). (2022, December) Appendix A: Best Practices for Planning Paraeducator Support. https://ospi.k12.wa.us/sites/default/files/2022-12/tap_6_best_practices.pdf