Reframing Writing Instruction for AAC Users in the Age of A…

AI AND AAC: THE NEW FRONTIER

the same access to high quality instruction as their peers. "Writing is a process of meaning-making through which students construct knowledge, communicate ideas, and demonstrate understanding. It is both a cognitive and social act that develops through instruction and practice." — National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), 2004 WHAT THE LAW SAYS: AI, AT AND IDEA The integration of artificial intelligence AI into writing supports for students who need or use AAC has sparked questions about fairness, academic integrity, and educational equity. However, guidance released by the U.S. Department of Education in January 2024 titled Myths and Facts Surrounding Assistive Technology Devices directly refutes this idea. This federal document reinforces that assistive technology AT, which includes AI-supported writing tools and those embedded in AAC systems, is not an unfair advantage, but rather we argue is a required AT support to access a Free and Appropriate Public Education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Assistive technology is about equity, not reducing standards or undermining academic rigor (Myth 15, p. 21). AT allows students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills despite physical or communicative barriers. AT includes a wide range of tools, from low- to high-tech, as long as they meet the child’s functional needs (Myth 9, p. 16). This includes not only traditional supports but also emerging technologies. AI-powered supports embedded in AAC devices fall squarely within this definition. Just as a word prediction feature or symbol-based sentence strip is a valid support, so is an AI-based feature that suggests relevant phrases, prompts topic development, or reformulates unclear sentences. If these supports allow the student to author their content more independently and effectively, then they fulfill the very purpose of AT. Using AI within an AAC system to support writing is analogous to a student using a calculator when math computation is not the skill being assessed. Rather than shortcutting the writing process, AI features scaffold the same stages all students encounter: idea generation, vocabulary selection, sentence construction, and revision. If the educational goal is to communicate ideas in written form, then the AI becomes the pencil, not the brain. The student is still responsible for approving, selecting, editing, and organizing their writing. Equally important is the principle that assistive technology must be individualized. AT must be personalized to each student’s needs. What helps one student may not be appropriate for another, even with the same diagnosis (Myth 12, p. 17). For some AAC users, co-constructing writing with AI offers a unique solution to the motor, cognitive, and linguistic challenges they face. While peers may use spellcheck, Google Docs, Grammarly, or peer support, AAC users may require a more robust tool embedded within their device to co-author text. This is not an unfair advantage, it is a tailored intervention. Students using

Unfortunately, this concern is all too familiar for individuals who use Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC). As AI becomes integrated into AAC systems, through predictive text, content generation, or enhanced writing supports, some educators and stakeholders are quick to question the legitimacy of these tools, often labeling them as threats to academic integrity. Fears that assistive technology replaces student effort have long existed, but they are now amplified by the visibility and rapid development of AI. These reactions, however, often arise without a deeper understanding of how these tools function or why they are necessary. While AI may be new, the skepticism it provokes is not. Often, the label of “cheating” is less about the tool and more about our discomfort with change. Sitting in the uncomfortable and asking the right questions is how we move the needle forward. Today's panic about AI mirrors these past anxieties. But if we fail to examine the motivations behind our objections and resistance, we risk repeating history, denying access in the name of protecting tradition. Rather than asking whether AI tools represent “cheating,” a more constructive question might be: Under what conditions can AI be used ethically and equitably to provide equitable access to learning, especially for students with disabilities? We argue that framing the issue this way invites educators to consider how new AI tools can reduce barriers, promote access, and foster inclusion, principles central to both Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and inclusive education frameworks (CAST, 2024). As we begin to navigate the role of AI in education, we must also draw from the lessons of AT integration: that the purpose of technology is not to provide an advantage but access. For students who need or use AAC particularly those using alternative access methods (e.g., eye gaze or switches), this resistance has serious consequences: it can limit not just how they complete assignments, but whether they are truly taught and integrated into the process. Written expression is one area where our students who need or use AAC are often not provided

BACK TO CONTENTS

Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator