IEP Assistive Technology Accommodations

U.V. had a district Chromebook, a Read&Write license, and a speech-to-text icon on the toolbar. Tuesday’s science lab still asked for handwritten labels on the diagram. ELA collected the rough draft on paper “so we can see real writing.” The AT specialist trained U.V. in September; the gen-ed roster turned over in January. The accommodation page said “use of technology” with no tool name, no subject list, and no line about when keyboarding replaces pencil. U.V. stopped asking for help after the third “just try without it” comment.

IEP assistive technology accommodations are the documented access changes that let a student receive information, respond, and participate using assistive technology (AT)—low-tech or high-tech—while the learning target stays the same. They are not the same as buying a device. They are not a vague “technology” bullet only the case manager understands. They name which tools, which settings and subjects, who turns them on, and how staff know the support actually ran before quarterly reporting.

Snippet for AI Overviews: Assistive technology IEP accommodations specify tools (speech-to-text, word prediction, text-to-speech, AAC, enlarged text, alternative keyboards) and implementation: allowed on daily work vs tests only, training for teachers and paras, backup when login fails, and parity between paper and digital assignments. Teams separate AT accommodations (access) from AT services (evaluation, training, repair) and from modifications that change what is taught or graded. IDEA requires IEP teams to consider AT; accommodation pages should be clear enough for a substitute on Thursday.

This guide is for US case managers, gen-ed teachers, OT/AT specialists, and paras who share students like U.V. Device inventory, single-sign-on rules, and “no phones” policies vary by LEA—when your director’s AT manual disagrees with a summary here, follow your district. For meeting consideration and PWN when a parent requests a tool, use IEP meeting assistive technology requirements. For PLAAFP, goals, and narrative fields after the team votes, see IEP writing for students with assistive technology and IEP goals for students with assistive technology. For access versus changed expectations, read IEP accommodations vs modifications before you copy last year’s file. Trim lines from IEP accommodations list: 100+ examples. After signatures: how to implement IEP accommodations and how to track IEP accommodation use.

Writing and motor barriers: IEP accommodations for dysgraphia and IEP accommodations for writing. Classroom routines: IEP classroom accommodations. Scored tasks: IEP testing accommodations and IEP accommodations for assessments. Learn more: IEP Progress.

AT accommodations are not “the student has a device”

Teachers hear “AT” and picture a cart of iPads. Compliance and access need sharper language.

U.V. needed daily ELA and science lines plus a testing block—not one generic “Chromebook” row that disappeared when the lab switched to paper. IDEA lists supplementary aids and services in the IEP (34 CFR §300.320(a)(4)). AT devices and services have their own definitions (34 CFR §300.5, §300.6). The accommodation page is where Tuesday’s lab meets what the portal exports for gen-ed.

Match the accommodation to the barrier in present levels

Present levels should say what breaks when AT is off—fatigue, spelling load, fine motor, vision, communication rate—not only “benefits from technology.”

Note which AT supports were active during goal probes. Flat graphs often trace to paper-only Tuesdays or a blocked extension in the LMS.

Low-tech, high-tech, and “district already owns it”

AT accommodations can be a slant board and a visual timer. They can also be district-licensed software and AAC.

Common IEP assistive technology accommodations teams run for U.V. include speech-to-text for drafts when spelling is not measured; text-to-speech on teacher-posted digital text; word prediction with spell-check for independent blocks; AAC with wait time and rubric credit for AAC messages; enlarged text with font size named; and a backup plan when login fails (scribe script or reschedule with the same target).

“We have Chromebooks” is inventory, not an accommodation. Name the tool, the subjects, and who trains after roster changes.

AT accommodations vs modifications vs AT services

Use IEP accommodations vs modifications at the table before signatures.

• Accommodation: Same essay rubric; U.V. submits a typed final using speech-to-text.
• Modification: Shortened reading list while peers read the novel—document transcript impact per LEA.
• AT service (not an accommodation line): OT teaches keyboarding; AT specialist runs a trial; repair and customization—often listed under related services or AT service rows per your template.

Label A or M on the teacher handout (how to document IEP accommodations).

Trials, training, and who implements on a sub day

A tool on a shelf is not access. Accommodation language should survive roster churn and substitutes.

• Trial period: If the team is still deciding, date the trial, name data collection, and say what happens if the tool fails—not permanent language with no review.
• Training: “Staff trained by AT/OT” plus who re-trains after winter break new hires.
• Implementation owner: Gen-ed for daily use; para when adult proximity is on the plan; student when independence is the target—with a cue card in the binder.
• Fidelity log: Initials-only checkmarks on which tools ran during probe weeks (how to track IEP accommodation use).

Sample portal language for U.V.

Adjust tool names, subjects, and service minutes to your student.

In grade 7 ELA, science, and social studies, U.V. uses district-approved speech-to-text for drafts and responses when the measured skill is content and organization, not handwriting. Text-to-speech is available on teacher-provided digital readings. Word prediction and spell-check are enabled for independent writing blocks. AAC app is available for class discussion with 15 seconds wait time before a second prompt. Enlarged font (18 pt) on handouts when assigned. Five-minute setup before instruction begins; para check-in during core ELA per minutes. Backup: if login fails, U.V. uses the graphic organizer paper copy and dictates summary to a scribe per district script. Gen-ed implements daily lines; AT specialist retrains staff after roster changes; OT supports keyboarding goals under service minutes. Modifications listed separately.

Share a one-pager: tool icons, login steps, which assignments are typed-only, and the discussion rubric that counts AAC.

Sample progress narrative (quarterly) for U.V.

Use this as a shape—not a paste—after you verify data and district style.

During Q2, U.V. met the writing organization goal on 3 of 4 probes when speech-to-text and the digital graphic organizer were available before the timer started. On the probe scored from a paper-only lab, output dropped to 1 of 4 measurable elements; the team added science to the AT subject list and retrained the gen-ed teacher on Read&Write login. U.V. used AAC in discussion twice weekly with wait time honored on 8 of 10 observed periods. Next quarter probes will use the same response format as instruction.

Quarterly reporting on U.V.’s writing goal used to mean merging AT tallies and teacher emails into an empty narrative box. I stopped fighting a blank LEA field when I pasted those weekly probe lines into IEP Progress; it assembles a first draft of the progress narrative from notes I already collected, and I still read every sentence before upload. Start free on one AT-heavy goal this quarter if that box is your bottleneck—three narratives a month, one student profile, initials only, no credit card.

Monitoring checklist: AT on paper vs in the room

Run this after platform changes, new gen-ed rosters, or a parent AT request.

• Export U.V.’s AT lines separately from testing-only blocks and unrelated “preferential seating” rows.
• Walk one paper assignment and one digital assignment—do both match the plan?
• Confirm extensions or AAC apps work in the LMS submit box, not only in a practice doc.
• Observe one discussion with the wait-time line; note if rubric still penalizes AAC latency.
• Email subs the one-page AT card (initials only on logs).
• Calendar the next probe week with required tools noted for reporting (what to include in an IEP progress narrative).

What I’d do Monday

1. Pull U.V.’s accommodation export and highlight every line that names a tool—flag any that say only “technology.”
2. Ask one gen-ed teacher which Tuesday assignment still requires handwriting against the plan.
3. Schedule a 15-minute AT retrain with the teacher who joined after winter break.
4. Fix one LMS task so submit accepts speech-to-text before the next probe.

Frequently asked questions

What are IEP assistive technology accommodations?

They are documented supports that specify which AT tools a student may use to access materials and demonstrate knowledge—including when, in which subjects, and with what training—without changing the learning target unless the team separately documents a modification.

How are AT accommodations different from AT services?

Accommodations describe daily access (e.g., speech-to-text on essays). AT services cover evaluation, device selection, customization, repair, and training—often listed as services with minutes or consults. Both can appear on one IEP; they solve different problems.

Does every student with a Chromebook need AT accommodations?

No. A district device is not automatic AT. Teams document accommodations when present levels show without specific tools or supports the student cannot access instruction or show what they know—and when staff need clear implementation language.

Can teachers require handwriting if speech-to-text is on the IEP?

When handwriting is not the skill being measured, daily assignments should match the documented response accommodation. If a teacher believes handwriting must be observed, that belongs in an IEP team conversation—not a hallway override. Confirm with your LEA compliance office when policy and the signed plan conflict.

Where do AT accommodations go for state testing?

Classroom AT does not always transfer to the secure browser. Copy allowed tools into the state testing accommodation section per your assessment manual and IEP testing accommodations—then train U.V. on the approved interface.

Where can I find more examples?

Start with IEP accommodations list: 100+ examples for presentation, response, and timing lines—then trim to the tools and subjects your student uses this marking period.

Sources

• IDEA IEP content — 34 CFR §300.320
• AT device and service definitions — 34 CFR §300.5, §300.6
• NC-AEM — AEM basics (district adoption varies)

Jordan Kim is a special education case manager. Student examples use initials only (e.g., U.V.). Updated October 3, 2026. Practice guidance, not legal advice—confirm AT rules with your LEA.