By Betsy Hill and Roger Stark
A 17-year-old high school student recently walked into a high-stakes examination without the accommodations he had relied on for years. This decision was not made by school administrators; it was his. He explained, “All my life they gave me modifications, adaptations, or adjustments. In 10th grade I realized those crutches wouldn’t exist in the real world. I wouldn’t get extra time on the job. I wouldn’t have someone rephrasing instructions. I needed to learn how to do those things myself. So I threw away the crutches. It was hard, because everyone had been telling me I needed them.”
His story highlights a common pattern: when an Individualized Education Program (IEP) prescribes accommodations, those supports are often applied indefinitely without a plan for developing underlying skills. For many students, receiving accommodations is essential. If a student’s working memory is limited and remembering multi-step instructions is critical, giving the student written steps or presenting instructions one at a time allows him or her to complete tasks that would otherwise be impossible. Accommodations remove barriers.
But accommodations should not necessarily be permanent. Just as a child with one weaker leg benefits from graduated physical therapy rather than a lifetime of wheelchairs, students can strengthen cognitive abilities through targeted practice. When supports are in place solely to work around weaknesses, students may never have the opportunity to exercise and improve the cognitive skills that matter for independent success. Without intentional intervention, many of these students arrive at college or in the workplace underprepared and struggling.
There is, in effect, a cognitive equivalent to physical therapy. Many cognitive skills that underlie academic and workplace success — such as working memory, attention control, planning, and processing speed — can be improved with focused training and practice. When educational teams pair accommodations with a plan to develop the underlying cognitive capacities, students are more likely to gain independence over time. A graduated approach to supports provides the scaffolding students need while helping them build transferable skills.
Consider another recent scenario: a mother worried that her teenage son would fail a class because she had been managing all of his assignments, schedules, and planning. The school counselor suggested, “You should just let him fail once.” That advice assumes the student will suddenly learn responsibility simply by experiencing failure. In reality, this youngster struggles with executive function — the set of skills that includes planning, organizing, task initiation, and self-monitoring. For him, his mother has effectively been serving as his executive functions. Abruptly removing that support without teaching those skills is like throwing a child into the deep end of a pool without lessons: it may work for some, but it can be disastrous for others.
Suddenly discarding supports is risky and, in many cases, unfair. It took real courage for the student who chose to forego his accommodations, and he has faced a steep learning curve. That transition could have been safer and more successful if the IEP had included a clear, gradual plan to reduce accommodations while simultaneously building the student’s cognitive and executive skills.
Best practice is to view accommodations as part of a bigger strategy: provide necessary supports to access learning while also implementing evidence-informed cognitive skill development and executive function training. A deliberate plan should include measurable goals, timelines for reducing specific accommodations, and regular reassessment so educators, parents, and students can track progress and adjust supports as needed. This balanced approach respects students’ current needs while preparing them for future demands in higher education, employment, and daily life.
Ultimately, the goal is to help students become independent, confident, and capable adults. When teams pair appropriate accommodations with intentional instruction and a plan for fading supports, students have the chance to strengthen the skills they need to thrive long-term.
About the authors
Betsy Hill is the mother of three boys and an award-winning educator who has studied the neuroscience of learning with pioneers in the field. She coined the term neuroeducator. Betsy served as chair of the board of trustees at Chicago State University and teaches strategic thinking at Lake Forest Graduate School of Management, where she received a Contribution to Learning Excellence Award. She also received a Nepris Trailblazer Award for sharing knowledge and passion for the neuroscience of learning across classrooms in the United States. Betsy holds a Master of Arts in Teaching and an MBA from Northwestern University.
Roger Stark is CEO of BrainWare Learning Company. His work began with a question: what do we know about the brain? He envisioned combining multidisciplinary clinical cognitive training with video-game technology. Over more than a decade, Roger led efforts to make comprehensive cognitive training and assessment more accessible and helped develop BrainWare SAFARI, an integrated online cognitive training tool. He also delivered a joint Congressional briefing on neuroscience in the classroom.
This article was originally published by The Learning Counsel, a research institute and news media organization focused on the shift in education toward digital curriculum and practices.