Estimated reading time: 15 minutes
Assistive technology for students with disabilities is any item, piece of equipment or product system, bought off the shelf, modified or customized, that is used to increase, maintain or improve the functional capabilities of a child with a disability (34 CFR 300.5), together with any service that directly helps the child select, acquire or use it (34 CFR 300.6). Under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), public schools must provide these devices and services, at no cost to the family, to any student with an IEP whose IEP team finds them necessary (34 CFR 300.105 and 300.17). This guide covers the definitions, the IEP team’s duty, evaluations, the SETT framework with a filled-in example, examples by need, communication devices, the IEP and funding. It describes federal rules, not legal advice: check your state’s rules and district counsel.
Table of contents
Executive Summary
In the 2024-25 school year, 8.2 million students ages 3 to 21 were served under IDEA Part B, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). For each of them, the IEP team must consider assistive technology (AT) every time it develops, reviews or revises the IEP.
The Department’s January 2024 guidance, Myths and Facts Surrounding Assistive Technology Devices and Services, was still posted on its IDEA website without a rescission notice as of October 2026. OSEP and the Office of Educational Technology released it with a Dear Colleague letter signed by the Assistant Secretaries for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) and for Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development. Among the myths it corrects: AT is not always electronic, it is not reserved for certain disabilities, and a district must fully fund the AT an IEP team finds necessary, whatever its budget.
Key Takeaways
- AT has two parts: the device and the services that make it work, from evaluation to training.
- Every IEP team considers AT for every student, at every IEP meeting, whatever the disability.
- No formal AT evaluation is needed before every device; simple tools can be tried right away.
- SETT puts the Student, Environments and Tasks before the Tools, then tests tools with data.
- AT goes in the IEP, with home use when the student needs it for FAPE.
- The district pays; insurance can be used only with parental consent and at no cost to parents.
What Is Assistive Technology for Students With Disabilities?
Assistive technology for students with disabilities is the combination of AT devices and AT services defined in 34 CFR 300.5 and 34 CFR 300.6.
| AT device | AT service | |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | Any item, piece of equipment or product system used to increase, maintain or improve a child’s functional capabilities | Any service that directly assists the child in selecting, acquiring or using a device |
| Examples | Pencil grip, calculator, screen reader, speech-generating device | Evaluation, purchase or lease, fitting, repair, training for the child, family and staff |
| Exclusion | A surgically implanted medical device or its replacement | None stated |
The six AT services listed in 300.6 are evaluation, acquisition, fitting and maintenance, coordination with other services and plans, training for the child and family, and training for professionals.
Surgically Implanted Devices and Hearing Aids
Related services also exclude a surgically implanted device such as a cochlear implant, its mapping and its replacement (34 CFR 300.34(b)). Schools must still check that hearing aids worn in school and the external parts of implanted devices are working (34 CFR 300.113). Whether a hearing aid is an AT device is an IEP team decision for each child; as a general matter, districts do not provide personal devices such as hearing aids or eyeglasses unless the IEP team finds the child needs one to receive FAPE (71 FR 46581, 2006). See our guide to related services in special education.
The IEP Team Must Consider Assistive Technology for Every Student
Every IEP team must consider whether the student needs AT devices and services, for every student with an IEP, when it develops the IEP and each time it reviews it (34 CFR 300.324(a)(2)(v) and (b)(2)).
AT is one of five special factors, next to communication needs and Braille instruction for students who are blind or visually impaired. The 2024 guidance adds that AT must be considered for all children with IEPs, not only those with sensory disabilities, and that a team lacking AT knowledge must bring in people who have it. How the meeting runs is covered in our IEP meeting guide.
Assistive Technology in Evaluations
An evaluation of a student’s AT needs is itself an AT service: a functional evaluation of the child in the child’s customary environment (34 CFR 300.6(a)).
- Not always required. The 2024 guidance says simple tools such as a graphic organizer generally need no AT evaluation; one may be needed for a tool used all day, such as read-aloud software.
- Flexible format. It can be part of an initial evaluation or reevaluation, or stand alone, with parental consent.
- Fair testing. Tests must reflect the student’s aptitude rather than impaired sensory, manual or speaking skills (unless those skills are what the test measures), and cover all areas related to the suspected disability, including communication and motor abilities (34 CFR 300.304(c)).
The full process is in our guide to special education evaluation.
The SETT Framework for Assistive Technology Decisions
The SETT framework is a decision-making tool, created by Joy Zabala, that helps a team build shared knowledge of the Student, the Environments and the Tasks before it chooses the Tools.
Zabala’s official site dates it to 1995. She calls it “a FRAMEWORK, not a protocol,” to be embedded in existing processes such as IEP development, and her Tools include services, strategies, training, accommodations and modifications, not only devices. The CEC and CEEDAR description of HLP 19, in the 2024 second edition of the high-leverage practices, says AT selection and evaluation should follow SETT; see our high-leverage practices guide.
| Area | What the team explores (paraphrased from Zabala) |
|---|---|
| Student | The area of concern, what the student cannot yet do independently, abilities, concerns, interests |
| Environments | Instructional and physical arrangement, support for student and staff, materials others use, access issues, attitudes and expectations |
| Tasks | The specific tasks in daily settings that lead to progress on IEP goals and to active participation |
| Tools | Whether progress is possible without AT, what a useful system looks like, which tools to try, how to run the trial, what data to collect |
Zabala asks teams to hold back solutions until the Tools step, because naming a device early turns the discussion into a debate about that device.
A Filled-In SETT Framework Example
This example is original, about a fictional student; adapt it to your forms and data.
| Area | Jordan, grade 5, specific learning disability in reading and writing |
|---|---|
| Student | Decodes slowly but understands grade-level text read aloud. Writes two or three sentences in 20 minutes. Strong spoken vocabulary, loves science, avoids writing in front of peers. |
| Environments | Class of 26 with one laptop per student; co-taught science three days a week; 30 minutes a day of reading intervention; family laptop at home; teachers new to text-to-speech. |
| Tasks | Read science and social studies texts, write paragraph answers and lab reports, take notes, finish homework, take the spring state science test. |
| Tools to try | Text-to-speech with highlighting; accessible digital textbooks; speech-to-text for drafts; word prediction; a paper paragraph organizer; training for Jordan, teachers and parents. |
| Trial and data | Four weeks. Words written in 15 minutes with and without speech-to-text, comprehension after listening versus reading alone, homework minutes, Jordan’s weekly rating. Check which tools the state test allows. |
| Decision | The team writes the tools that worked, the training and any home use into the IEP. Decoding instruction continues: text-to-speech gives access, it does not teach reading. |
Assistive Technology Examples From Low-Tech to High-Tech
Assistive technology ranges from low-tech items such as a pencil grip to computer-based tools such as a screen reader; the 2024 guidance stresses that AT is not always electronic.
The guidance reproduces an IRIS Center chart: low-tech devices are inexpensive and usually need no power, mid-tech devices are usually digital, and high-tech devices are typically computer-based and can be tailored to one student. Examples below come from that guidance, the 2020 NCAEP report and the Nebraska Department of Education’s 2022 guidelines.
| Need | Examples, from low-tech to high-tech |
|---|---|
| Reading | Page holder; audio book paired with print; text-to-speech; screen reader |
| Writing | Pencil grip; graphic organizer; digital recorder; word prediction; speech-to-text |
| Math | Number chart, abacus, manipulatives; calculator |
| Communication | Sign and gestures; picture cards; communication board; speech-generating device |
| Organization and attention | Visual schedules and calendars; binder clips and sticky notes; visual timers |
| Hearing | Audio amplification device; classroom amplification system; captioning software |
| Vision | Keyboard stickers for contrast; large text features; screen reader; electronic braille display |
| Physical access | Modified scissors; adapted seating; alternate keyboard; single switch; eye tracking |
| Daily living | Adapted daily living devices, such as a toothbrush holder |
States must also ensure that districts take all reasonable steps to give students who need them accessible-format materials at the same time as other students (34 CFR 300.172(b)(4)).
Communication Devices and AAC
An augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device supplements a student’s speech or replaces it, and the 2024 guidance treats an AAC device chosen by the IEP team as an AT device under IDEA.
NCAEP’s 2020 review lists AAC among 28 evidence-based practices for autistic learners, from unaided systems (sign, gestures) to aided ones, from picture exchange to speech-generating devices and tablet apps. In 2024-25, speech or language impairment was the category of 18% of students ages 3 to 21 served under IDEA (OSEP). The guidance’s example of a nonverbal preschooler shows that the device comes with services: customizing, coordinating with other services, and training for the child, family and staff. A student who needs a communication device needs it all day. Teachers, related services providers such as the speech-language pathologist (SLP) and AT specialists share this work; goal examples are in our speech IEP goals guide.
How Assistive Technology Is Written in the IEP
Assistive technology is written in the IEP’s statement of special education, related services and supplementary aids and services, so every teacher and provider knows what to provide (34 CFR 300.320(a)(4) and 300.323(d)).
- Home use of school devices is required when the team finds the student needs it for FAPE (34 CFR 300.105(b)).
- Tests: the IEP lists assessment accommodations, and states allow only those that keep scores valid (34 CFR 300.160(b)). Compare our list of IEP accommodations.
- Transition: the guidance asks teams to include needed AT in the transition plan; see transition IEP goals.
- Timing: services start as soon as possible after the IEP (34 CFR 300.323(c)(2)); the guidance suggests interim AT while a device is ordered and says a delay may call for compensatory services.
- Family devices: a student may use a personal device if parent and district agree; otherwise the district provides one.
Collecting Data on Assistive Technology Use
Data show whether a device helps, so collect them during the trial and before each review. If performance stays flat or drops, the guidance says to explore other tools; if a student refuses a device, the team looks for the cause, such as disliking the device, stigma or not knowing how to use it. A short log records date, task, tool, prompting, one measure and the student’s comment; formats are in IEP data collection sheets.
Funding and Staffing: Who Pays for Assistive Technology
The school district pays for the AT an IEP team finds necessary, and the family pays nothing, because FAPE is provided at public expense and without charge (34 CFR 300.17).
| Source | Rule |
|---|---|
| District | Must fully fund AT required for FAPE; lack of funds is no reason to refuse (ED, 2024) |
| IDEA Part B | District subgrants; state funds for technology and AT devices (34 CFR 300.704(b)(4)(v)) |
| Medicaid | Only with written parental consent, never at a cost to parents (34 CFR 300.154(d)) |
| Private insurance | Only with parental consent each time; a refusal does not end the district’s duty (300.154(e)) |
| Other payers | The IEP may not be delayed while the payer is decided (34 CFR 300.103(c)) |
| State AT programs | Device demonstrations and short-term loans before a purchase |
Many devices cost little, and the guidance says needs, not price, decide. Staff time also counts: in many cases, the guidance says, AT is delivered by classroom teachers, special educators or related services providers, and training them is itself an AT service. State programs are listed by the AT3 Center.
Assistive Technology, Accessible Technology and UDL
Assistive technology is chosen for one student’s tasks, while accessible technology and universal design for learning (UDL) are built for many learners, so neither replaces the other.
| Term | Meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Assistive technology | A device selected for one child and written into the IEP | Screen reader |
| Accessible technology | Tools designed so all learners can access digital content (ED, 2024) | High-contrast PDF |
| Universal design for learning | A framework for designing instruction with flexible options for all students (20 U.S.C. 1003(24)) | Several ways to show learning |
The guidance’s test case: software may have good contrast and text size, yet a student who is blind still needs a screen reader. CAST’s UDL Guidelines 3.0 (July 2024) include access to assistive and accessible technologies among their considerations. See our guide to universal design for learning.
Common Mistakes District Leaders Make
- Checking the AT box without a discussion.
- Treating AT as a sensory-disability issue. It applies to every category.
- Buying a device without training for the student, family and staff.
- Waiting for an evaluation before trying a simple tool.
- Keeping devices at school when the student needs them at home for FAPE.
- Letting cost or IT approval decide. The IEP team decides; the district funds.
- Ignoring abandoned devices. Refusal calls for a review, not a note.
Recommended Actions
- Adopt one consideration process, such as Zabala’s SETT scaffolds, for every IEP meeting.
- Name an AT contact per campus and use your State AT program’s loans.
- Keep a device inventory with loaners and a repair process.
- Write training into IEPs as an AT service.
- Check AT against the state assessment manual before testing season.
- Review AT in every transition plan.
Questions District Leaders Should Ask
- How do our teams document AT consideration beyond a checkbox?
- How many days pass between an IEP decision and the device reaching the student?
- Which devices in IEPs go unused, and why?
- Have we borrowed before buying expensive devices?
Frequently Asked Questions
What is assistive technology in education?
Assistive technology in education is any device, low-tech or high-tech, that increases, maintains or improves the functional capabilities of a student with a disability, plus the services that help the student choose, get and use it (34 CFR 300.5 and 300.6). Every IEP team must consider it, and the district provides what the team finds necessary at no cost to families.
What are examples of assistive technology?
Low-tech examples include pencil grips, page holders, graphic organizers and visual schedules; mid-tech examples include calculators, audio books and digital recorders; high-tech examples include screen readers, text-to-speech, speech-to-text, braille displays and communication devices. These come from the U.S. Department of Education’s January 2024 guidance and the IRIS Center chart it reproduces.
What is the SETT framework?
The SETT framework is Joy Zabala’s decision-making tool for choosing assistive technology. A team first builds shared knowledge of the Student, the Environments and the Tasks, then selects Tools and tries them with data. It is a framework rather than a fixed protocol, and the CEC and CEEDAR high-leverage practices site recommends it for AT selection.
Is text to speech assistive technology?
Yes. When an IEP team selects it for a student’s need, text-to-speech software is an AT device, and the Department’s January 2024 letter names it among its examples. A built-in feature of software the district already owns may meet that need. It gives access to content but does not teach decoding, so reading instruction continues.
Is a calculator considered assistive technology?
Yes. The IRIS Center chart in the Department’s 2024 guidance lists the calculator as a mid-tech AT device, and Nebraska’s guidelines describe it for students whose disability affects calculation but not reasoning. On state tests, a calculator is allowed only where the state’s assessment rules permit it.
What is an AAC device?
An augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) device supplements or replaces a person’s speech. It can be a low-tech picture or letter board or a high-tech speech-generating device or tablet app. The Department’s 2024 guidance treats an AAC device chosen by the IEP team as an AT device under IDEA, and the district also provides training to use it.
Related Resources
- IEP Accommodations: List by Category
- Speech IEP Goals
- IEP Meeting Guide
- Universal Design for Learning
- Special Education Evaluation
- Related Services in Special Education
Conclusion
Assistive technology for students with disabilities follows a simple path: consider it for every student, decide with the student, settings and tasks in view, test tools with data, write devices and services into the IEP, and fund what the team finds necessary. Districts that train staff and families and follow up on unused tools turn AT into daily access.
Sources: 34 CFR 300.5, Assistive technology device; 34 CFR 300.6, Assistive technology service; 34 CFR 300.105, Assistive technology; 34 CFR 300.324, Development, review, and revision of IEP; U.S. Department of Education, Dear Colleague Letter on the Provision of Assistive Technology Devices and Services for Children with Disabilities under IDEA (January 22, 2024); U.S. Department of Education, Myths and Facts Surrounding Assistive Technology Devices and Services (January 2024); Joy Zabala, SETT Framework resources, including Using the SETT Framework to Level the Learning Field for Students with Disabilities (revised 2005); CEC and CEEDAR Center, HLP 19: Use Assistive and Instructional Technology; Steinbrenner et al., Evidence-Based Practices for Children, Youth, and Young Adults with Autism, NCAEP (2020); U.S. Department of Education, OSEP, 2024-25 Static Tables (Part B Child Count & Educational Environments). Other sections of 34 CFR Part 300 are linked where they are cited.
Join the 2027 Special Education Pilot
The right tools open access to a lesson, but the skills behind each IEP goal still grow through many repetitions of practice, and adult 1-on-1 time is scarce. Telo AI is being adapted for students with IEPs: patient, 1-on-1 practice aligned to each student’s IEP goals, with teachers setting the goals, topics and rules. It is a practice tool that does not diagnose or treat any condition. We are inviting districts to shape it with us in a 2027 pilot.
Apply to pilot Telo AI in your Special Education program
Found this guide useful?
Preferred sources show up more often in your Google results, including AI Overviews.