Closely monitor student engagement and performance in programming tasks, debugging exercises, and problem-solving activities (Tomlinson, 2014).

• Use assessments like short coding challenges or pair programming sessions (pair programming entails working with an elbow partner or other classmate -Ann) (Vygotsky, 1978).

• Collect student work samples (e.g., code snippets, pseudocode explanations).

• Have in one-on-one conversations with the student to assess comprehension and identify potential barriers.

A. Signs of a Language Need (English Learner - EL):

• Struggles more with technical vocabulary than with coding logic (Ladson-Billings, 1995).

• Can grasp concepts visually but struggles with written instructions.

• Shows progress when provided bilingual resources or extra time (Echevarria et al., 2017).

B. Signs of a Learning Disability

• Persistent struggles with understanding sequences, patterns, or logic despite repeated practice (Ehri, 2005).

• Trouble with problem-solving, memory recall, or organization in both programming and general academic tasks (Swanson & Hoskyn, 2001).

• Little to no improvement even after multiple interventions.

If language appears to be the barrier, provide English language supports; if a disability is suspected, consider referral for special education evaluation (IDEA, 2004).

• Chunking content: Break down coding tasks into smaller, manageable steps (Tomlinson, 2014).

• Assistive technologies: Use speech-to-text tools, screen readers, or interactive coding platforms like Scratch (Mechling, 2007).

• Explicit instruction: Model coding concepts with step-by-step guidance and repetition.

• Visual aids: Use flowcharts, diagrams, and screen recordings (Mayer, 2009).

• Pair programming: Partner ELD students with fluent peers for guided practice.

• Multilingual resources: Provide translated materials or coding syntax guides in their native language.

Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167-188. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0902_4

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D. J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model. Pearson.

Fletcher-Watson, S., McConnell, F., Manola, E., & McConachie, H. (2016). Interventions based on technology for autistic people: A systematic review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(2), 600-615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-015-2599-0

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491.

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Mechling, L. C. (2007). Assistive technology as a self-management tool for prompting students with intellectual disabilities to initiate and complete daily tasks: A literature review. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42(3), 252-269.

Swanson, H. L., & Hoskyn, M. (2001). Interventions for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of treatment outcomes. Guilford Press.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). ASCD.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.