In a national teacher survey, nearly six in ten respondents agreed that AI improves accessibility for students with disabilities. Writing is one of the areas where that promise is easiest to see and hardest to deliver responsibly. Students with dyslexia, dysgraphia, attention difficulties, or processing differences often have strong ideas but face obstacles in getting them onto the page and in using feedback afterward. Any tool used with them must respect their rights, their plans, and their dignity.

The first principle is that accommodations belong to the student's individualized plan, not to a teacher's preferences. An individualized education program or a Section 504 plan may specify supports such as extended time, speech-to-text, graphic organizers, or chunked tasks. Any use of technology should align with these plans and be discussed with the case manager. Teachers should not assume a tool is appropriate because it is popular.

The second principle is that the goal remains the same: students should be assessed on the skills the assignment targets. If the skill is argument, a tool that helps a student organize notes may be acceptable. If the skill is handwriting or spelling, it may not. Clarity about the target prevents confusion and protects both the student and the integrity of the assessment.

Make the rubric work for diverse writers

A rubric that separates ideas, evidence, and organization from conventions and handwriting allows teachers to credit what a student understands even when mechanics are difficult. Write descriptors in plain language and share them early. Provide checklists and examples that students can use as they plan and revise. When expectations are visible, students with processing difficulties can approach tasks with less anxiety.

• Align any tool use with the student's IEP or 504 plan and consult the case manager
• Separate ideas and organization from mechanics in the rubric
• Give short, concrete feedback with one or two priorities
• Review and adapt any draft comment for tone, length, and clarity
• Confirm district approval and privacy practices before entering student writing

Make feedback accessible and manageable

Students who struggle with attention or processing often benefit from short, concrete feedback with a clear next step. Limit comments to one or two priorities and present them in a consistent format. Offer feedback in more than one form, such as written comments plus a brief conversation or an audio note. Chunked and predictable feedback is easier to act on.

When a rubric-based tool drafts comments, the teacher can review and adapt them for the student's needs. Shorten sentences, replace abstract language with specific examples, and check that the tone is encouraging and respectful. A draft that works for the class as a whole may need substantial reshaping for an individual. The teacher's knowledge of the student is essential, and a short revision log of the changes you made to each draft helps you refine your approach for the next assignment.

Protect privacy and avoid labeling

Student writing may contain information about a disability or a personal experience, and student records are protected by law. Before using any tool, confirm that it is approved by the district and that data practices meet legal requirements. Do not enter information from a student's plan or diagnosis into a tool unless it is explicitly permitted and necessary. Privacy is a basic part of respect.

Avoid language in feedback or conversations that stigmatizes or highlights a student's disability in front of peers. Provide supports discreetly and make them available to anyone who would benefit when possible. Universal design, in which tools and options are offered to all, reduces stigma and helps many students. A supportive classroom culture matters more than any single tool, and a quiet word with the student about how they prefer to receive support often settles questions that a policy cannot answer.

Collaborate with specialists and the student

Work with special education teachers, speech-language pathologists, and occupational therapists, who often know what supports are effective. Share samples of student work and feedback and ask for their input. Their expertise can guide decisions about when a tool helps and when it interferes with skill development. Consistency across settings strengthens progress, and a ten-minute shared planning session each month is usually enough to keep classroom writing supports aligned with the student's service plan.

Ask the student what helps. Many students have clear views about which supports make writing easier and which feel intrusive. Invite them to try options and report back, and respect their preferences where possible. Self-advocacy is a valuable skill, and it grows when students feel their voice is taken seriously, and writing their preferences into a brief note for the next teacher saves them from having to explain everything again each year.