The learning support assistant who is completing the work
Sharjah, Grade 5, 28 students. Yousef, who has Down syndrome, is included for literacy, IPC and PE - about 60% of the week - and works in the resource room for the remainder. His learning support assistant sits beside him in every included lesson. In the current five-lesson persuasive writing unit the class is building a 200-word letter to the principal about recycling. The LSA's practice, seen in three lessons, is to place her finger on the correct option in the gap-fill and to write sentence starters that Yousef then copies. He produces a complete worksheet but cannot say what his letter is about. The class teacher believes giving him a different task would be 'unfair' and would 'single him out'. His mother has asked that he 'do the same work as everyone else'. Two other students have dyslexia and need audio versions; the school holds a five-device licence. The observation rubric rewards 'all students completing the same task'.
1. What is wrong here, and what principle is doing the work in your judgement?
Read the worked answer
The support has replaced the learning. If the LSA locates the answer and supplies the sentence, the cognitive work is hers. Yousef's product looks like participation; his learning does not. This is prompt dependency, and it is created by well-intentioned adults, not by the child's disability.
The evidence is the child's own account. A completed worksheet plus an inability to say what the letter is about is the whole diagnosis in two facts.
The principle: equity is access to the same learning, not to the same paper. The unit's intent is persuasion - opinion, reason, audience. Yousef can be held to that intent with a different response mode. A 200-word handwritten letter is one way of demonstrating the intent; it is not the intent itself. Sameness of task is a proxy for fairness that fails whenever a student cannot access the task.
The mother's request is rational, not obstructive. She has probably seen years of withdrawal and wants her son in the room. The answer is not to argue about inclusion; it is to show her what inclusion that produces learning looks like.
The rubric is part of the problem and cannot be fixed at the classroom door.
2. Design the persuasive writing unit so that Yousef is included and learning. Give concrete structures.
Read the worked answer
Hold the concept constant, vary the route.
- Same audience, same purpose, different product. Yousef writes a four-line letter to the principal: 'I think… because… Please…'. Success criteria for him: states an opinion, gives one reason, addresses the principal, reads it aloud. Those criteria are visible to him and to the LSA.
- Pre-teach the content, not the worksheet. Three picture-supported reasons for recycling, rehearsed orally the day before, so the writing lesson is a second encounter.
- Change the LSA's role in writing. She rehearses orally, scribes only what Yousef dictates, then withdraws to a timer - she does not point at answers. Fade prompts across the five lessons and record which prompts he still needs.
- Response mode. Choice board of reasons with symbols, or a recorded oral letter on a tablet for lesson 3, redrafted into four written lines by lesson 5.
- The two students with dyslexia get the audio versions on the five licensed devices; set a rotation so the licence is used, not admired.
- Peer partner for rehearsal, changed weekly, so access does not depend on one adult.
3. What do you say to the mother, and what do you do about the observation rubric?
Read the worked answer
To the mother: lead with the goal, not the method. 'He is doing the same unit as everyone - the same audience, the same opinion, the same reason. He is showing it in a shorter letter and with more talk first.' Show her two work samples - the copied worksheet, and a four-line letter he can read back - and ask which she would rather he could do. Invite her to watch the rehearsal session. Avoid 'modified curriculum', which will sound like exclusion; use 'same goal, different way of showing it'. Be honest that copying is not learning, and say it once, plainly, without blaming the LSA.
The rubric: raise it in writing with the coordinator before the observation, with a one-paragraph rationale and a suggested wording - 'all students working towards the same learning intention with planned access'. In the meantime, write the differentiation into the lesson plan explicitly and narrate it during the observation, so the observer sees the professional decision rather than inferring a gap. A rubric that rewards identical worksheets will keep producing identical worksheets; fix it through the channel that owns it.