Supporting Students with Autism, ADHD with a PDA Profile

Autistic, ADHD Student with a PDA Profile engaging with Classroom Teacher

Proposed School Support & Reasonable Adjustment Framework

Prepared by: Nelle FrancesAutism Therapist | Autism Education Consultant | Early Childhood Educator

1. PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT

I have prepared their document to support professionals in regard to the educational adjustments required to enable students with Autism, ADHD who display a PDA profile, to participate more successfully in learning. The purpose is not to reduce curriculum expectations, excuse behaviour or remove appropriate boundaries.

Rather, the purpose is to identify the disability-related barriers that are currently interfering with the student’s ability to demonstrate their knowledge, skills and learning, in an effort to establish practical adjustments that enable their to participate more successfully, that may also assist their progress.

My professional position is that students with this profile regularly demonstrate significant capacity for learning and participation when their environment, communication demands and level of support are appropriately matched to their individual neurodevelopmental profile.

All progress should be recognised as evidence of capacity for positive change, rather than as evidence that the student should now be expected to function in exactly the same way as their neurotypical peers.  All of us – adults and children alike – every day are “doing the best we can.” If the students best looks less than other students they shouldn’t be punished for it OR pushed to be doing more.

None of us can give better than our best.

Our objective should be: High expectations with appropriate access. Not:  Identical expectations delivered in an identical way.

2. SUMMARY

Students with Autism, ADHD and a profile of significant demand sensitivity consistent with Pathological Demand Avoidance (PDA).

This neurodevelopmental profile impacts the way they experience:

·      all demands (verbal and implied)

·      transitions

·      executive functioning

·      attention

·      written output

·      task initiation

·      emotional regulation

·      perceived loss of autonomy

·      correction

·      uncertainty

·      sensory and cognitive load and

·      adult-directed expectations

A particularly important observation is that students with such a profile den’t engage in learning activities in a typical way.

They may complete less work than is requested. For example, they may answer two questions rather than four or provide an accurate verbal answer while being unable or unwilling to produce the same response in writing.

This distinction is important.

The available evidence should not automatically be interpreted as: “They can do it but refuses to.”

A more appropriate question is: “What is preventing the student from demonstrating the full extent of their knowledge and capacity under the current conditions?”

For these students, the barrier is likely to be the interaction between the learning task and:

·      executive-function demands

·      handwriting demands

·      sustained attention

·      task length

·      perceived demand

·      need for autonomy

·      regulation

·      fatigue and

·      the language and interaction style used by adults

Where students with this profile can typically demonstrate understanding verbally, through a scribe, multiple choice, speech-to-text or another appropriate response mode, continuing to require handwritten responses may inadvertently assess their written output capacity rather than their understanding of the curriculum content.

Queensland Department of Education guidance specifically identifies different approaches to assessment, teacher-aide support and assistive technology such as speech-to-text as examples of possible reasonable adjustments.

The recommended approach therefore is a regulation-first, relationship-based, autonomy-supportive model in which learning expectations remain meaningful while the pathway to demonstrating learning is adjusted.

3. NELLE’S POSITION

My professional view is that students presenting with this complex profile should be understood through a functional and neurodevelopmental lens, rather than primarily through a compliance lens.

I am concerned that some school environments may place significant emphasis on:

·      completing work in the prescribed format

·      completing the entire quantity of work

·      responding immediately to adult direction

·      complying with repeated instructions

·      remaining engaged for predetermined periods

·      behaving in accordance with the behaviour of neurotypical peers and

·      responding to consequences or punitive threats

These expectations, while understandable within a mainstream classroom environment, are inappropriate for the reduced classroom participation time that students with this profile often engage in.

For a student, who has Autism, ADHD and significant demand sensitivity, the above expectations represent disability-related barriers to participation.

Queensland Department of Education currently states that reasonable adjustments are intended to reduce barriers experienced by a students’ disability and that adjustments are based on individual learning needs. The Department explicitly recognises that reasonable adjustments may differ from student to student.

Therefore, the question shouldn’t be:

“Why can’t this student behave like the other children?”

Instead, a more useful question is:

“What does this student require in order to access the same educational opportunity as the other children?”

4. STRENGTHS AND CAPACITY

Planning should begin with what the student can do, rather than with a catalogue of what they can’t consistently do yet.

For example, ask if the student:

·      has demonstrated significant behavioural improvement with appropriate intervention

·      demonstrates the capacity to engage with learning

·      demonstrates understanding of curriculum content

·      can provide verbal responses

·      can complete at least part of assigned tasks

·      responds positively when expectations are appropriately structured

·      is capable of learning new skills and is a ‘natural’ learner

·      benefits from supportive adult relationships

·      benefits from predictability

·      benefits from reduced demand intensity

·      benefits from autonomy and choice

·      benefits from positive reinforcement

·      can demonstrate substantially greater competence orally than through handwriting and

·      has demonstrated progress when their support environment is responsive to their neurodevelopmental needs.

These are important indicators.

A child who has demonstrated significant improvement in response to appropriate intervention has demonstrated capacity for learning and behavioural development.

The task for Student Support Teams is then not to automatically increase demands. It is to determine which conditions allow the students capacity to be expressed consistently.

5. UNDERSTANDING THE FUNCTION OF BEHAVIOUR

All behaviour should be understood as communication and analyzed in that context.

For example:Observed behaviour: “Student refuses to complete worksheet.”

Functional interpretation

The worksheet may involve:

·      a layout that’s too ‘busy’ or word heavy

·      difficulty with task initiation

·      not understanding what is expected

·      excessive writing

·      requiring sustained attention

·      handwriting fatigue

·      lots of questions

·      fear of making mistakes

·      previous negative experiences with similar tasks

·      perceived loss of control

·      increasing cognitive load

·      increasing emotional arousal

Intervention

Reduce the student’s barriers, rather than simply increasing the demands.

For example: “Would you like to tell me your answers or type them?”

or: “Let’s do the first two together.” (This has always been a successful tool for me – I scribe for the first 2 as well and continue to scribe the next 2 if necessary….  the student is feeling the success of their work, without motor skill demands adding to the load.) or: “You can choose which two questions you want to start with.”

This is not removal of the learning expectation.

This is modification of the access pathway to the learning expectation.

6. AUTISM, ADHD AND DEMAND SENSITIVITY

For Students with this neurodevelopmental profile, a task that appears straightforward to an adult may contain multiple simultaneous demands.

For example: “Complete these four questions.”

This actually requires the Student to:

1.        stop the activity they is currently engaged in;

2.        shift their attention; (we know they finds this extremely difficult)

3.        interpret the instruction;

4.        organize the necessary steps;

5.        tolerate the perceived demand;

6.        retrieve information;

7.        formulate a response;

8.        organize their response;

9.        physically produce the written response;

10.  sustain attention;

11.  monitor their work;

12.  tolerate possibly making errors;

13.  continue after the novelty has disappeared; and

14.  remain regulated throughout the process.

For Students with ADHD, Autism and a PDA profile, these demands may accumulate and escalate dysregulation, rapidly.

Students with this profile display a pronounced demand sensitivity, so the perception of externally imposed control may increase the difficulty of initiating the task.

Therefore, escalating the verbal demand is likely to produce the opposite of the intended outcome.

7. THE PRINCIPLE OF HIGH EXPECTATIONS WITH FLEXIBLE ACCESS

I recommend that school personnel adopt the following principle:

Curriculum expectations should remain appropriately challenging; however, the method, quantity, timing and format of participation will require individual adjustment.

For example: Curriculum expectation: “Demonstrate understanding of a text.”

Possible access methods

·      written response

·      verbal response

·      scribed response

·      speech-to-text

·      keyboard

·      multiple-choice response

·      visual response

·      teacher questioning

The learning objective remains. ONLY the response mechanism changes. This distinction is critical.

8. WRITTEN OUTPUT AND HANDWRITING

Where handwriting is a recognised difficulty, handwriting should not unnecessarily become a barrier to demonstrating knowledge.

If the Student can verbally articulate a correct answer, but cannot produce the same answer in writing, this should be recorded as two different capacities:

Knowledge/understanding: demonstrated

Written production: difficult

These should not be treated as synonymous.

Recommended adjustments:

Depending on the learning objective

·      verbal responses

·      using a scribe

·      speech-to-text app

·      keyboard/tablet

·      reduced handwriting requirements

·      multiple choice

·      offering sentence starters

·      partially completed worksheets

·      graphic organizers

·      oral assessment

·      teacher questioning

·      recording an oral response

·      use of assistive technology

·      teacher-aide support

These are all recognised as REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS in learning environments, by the Queensland Department of Education.

9. TASK QUANTITY

I advocate that the schools distinguish between:

Quantity of work and Evidence of learning.

Eg: - if four (4) questions assess the same learning objective and the student accurately answers two questions; the support team should determine whether two responses have already provided sufficient evidence of the targeted skill.

If additional questions are required for consolidation, they could be:

·      completed later

·      completed orally

·      supporting their writing

·      completed in smaller blocks

·      reduced in number

·      offered following a regulation break

The objective mustn’t become: -

“The student must complete exactly the same number of written questions as everyone else.”

The objective should remain:

“The student must have an appropriate opportunity to demonstrate the required learning.”

10. THE “MINIMUM VIABLE TASK” APPROACH

I recommend introducing a graduated task model. Level 1 — ENTRY: One question or one component.  Goal: Initiation.

Level 2 — DEMONSTRATION: Two questions/components. Goal: Demonstrate understanding.

Level 3 — CONSOLIDATION: Additional work if regulation and capacity remain adequate. Goal: Practice and consolidation.

Level 4 — EXTENSION: Additional challenge when the Student is demonstrating readiness. Goal: Extension rather than coercion.

This prevents the situation where, “They didn’t finish the worksheet” becomes the only measure of the student’s success.

Instead, schools can identify: “The Student independently initiated the task, completed two questions accurately and verbally demonstrated understanding.”

That is meaningful educational data.

11. AUTONOMY-SUPPORTIVE COMMUNICATION

The language adults use with Students is particularly important in producing their positive engagement in tasks – this is an important part of their PDA profile.

We (their team) must understand that Student’s with this profile aren’t trying to be defiant or choosing to “refuse”.  Their brain can interpret ordinary demands as a threat to their autonomy and safety, triggering a neurobiological threat response that they have no conscious control over.

This is the Students’ nervous system saying, ‘I can’t do this right now”.  A more effective response from the Student’s Support Team members is not greater pressure or punishment but reducing the “perceived threat” and creating the conditions in which the Students’ brain can access regulation, flexibility and learning.

This is the most difficult part of supporting Students / Clients with a PDA profile, as it often triggers a negative thought response in us (their Support Team).

Language to minimise

·      “You have to.”

·      “I’ve already told you.”

·      “Everyone else is doing it.”

·      “If you don’t do it, then…”

·      “You’re choosing not to cooperate.”

·      “Stop refusing.”

·      “You’re wasting time.”

·      “You won’t get [preferred activity] unless you finish.”

These statements can increase perceived pressure and may escalate demand sensitivity.

Instead, use language that acknowledges the Students’ alternate “brain wiring” (PDA), not student as a person.

·      “Let’s work out how we can help your brain manage this.”

·      “Would you like to write it or tell me?”

·      “Which question would you like to start with?”

·      “There are four questions – how many can your brain answer today?”

·      “I can help your brain get started.”

·      “Is your brain finding this difficult today.”

·      “Let’s change the way we’re doing it.”

·      “I know your brain knows the answer. Let’s find a way for you to show me.”

·      “Would you like help or a little more time?”

The Support person retains responsibility for the learning objective.  The Student receives appropriate autonomy over the process.

12. CONTROLLED CHOICE

Choice should be structured rather than unlimited or open-ended

Examples:

“Pencil or computer?”

“Tell me, or let me write it?”

“Start with question 1 or question 4?”

“Do two now or one now and one after your break?”

“Work at the desk or at the quieter table?”

This provides the Student autonomy, without removing the educational expectation.

13. REGULATION-FIRST CLASSROOM RESPONSE

I recommend a simple regulation framework for Students with this profile, such as:

GREEN — AVAILABLE FOR LEARNING

Indicators may include:

·      talking

·      joking

·      asking questions

·      initiating

·      accepting assistance

·      flexible engagement

Support staff response

·      normal instruction

·      positive feedback

·      appropriate challenge

·      choices

·      encouragement

AMBER — INCREASING DEMAND SENSITIVITY

Possible indicators:

·      arguing

·      negotiating

·      repeated questioning

·      distraction

·      slowing down

·      leaving seat

·      saying “no”

·      increased silliness

·      avoidance

·      disengagement

Support staff response

·      reduce verbal language

·      reduce task size

·      offer choice

·      offer assistance

·      change response method

·      provide brief regulation opportunity

·      avoid repeated commands

RED — SIGNIFICANT DYSREGULATION

Possible indicators:

·      shutdown

·      leaving the area

·      intense distress

·      aggression

·      emotional escalation

·      inability to communicate effectively

Support staff response

Firstly, stop increasing demands

·      Reduce language

·      Prioritize safety

·      Support regulation

·      Allow recovery

·      Return to the learning expectation once the Student is regulated (very often this is not possible)

When the Student is dysregulated, they are unlikely to demonstrate their highest level of cognitive performance.

14. POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT

Positive feedback should be:

·      immediate

·      specific

·      genuine

·      linked to effort (our job as adults is to “identify” effort that may look different to our expectation)

·      linked to strategy

·      linked to regulation

·      linked to persistence

Examples:

“You found a way to get started – well done.”

“You told me the answer when writing was too difficult – good job.”

“You came back after your break.”

“You solved that by yourself.”

“You asked for help instead of giving up.”

“You managed that change really well.”

“You completed the part we agreed on – good on you.”

The purpose is not simply to “reward good behaviour”. The purpose is to build the Students’ understanding that: “I am capable of solving difficult situations.”

15. CORRECTION AND ERROR

Correction should be:

·      quiet, and offered privately where possible

·      brief

·      specific

·      emotionally neutral

·      proportionate

·      focused on the learning task rather than the child’s character

Avoid: “You’re not listening.”

Use: “Let’s look at this part again.”

Avoid: “You’ve got this wrong.”

Use: “Let’s see if there is another answer that fits.”

Avoid: “You weren’t paying attention.”

Use: “I’ll explain that part again.”

16. BREAKS SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A PUNISHMENT

Regulation breaks should be viewed as an access strategy, not a reward for compliance. The purpose of a break is to enable the Student to return to learning in a more regulated state.

A suggested sequence is:

Demand → early signs of stress → adjustment/break → regulation → return to learning

rather than:

Demand → refusal → escalation → punishment → further demand.

17. PARTICIPATION DOES NOT MEAN SITTING STILL

For students with ADHD/autism, physical movement assists with learning and engagement.

Where safe and appropriate, consider:

·      standing desks

·      have a rebounder in the classroom, use directed by teacher e.g. Joey your brain needs 20 bounces

·      movement breaks – consider push-ups; bunny hops; a hopscotch mat beside desk

·      working at a different table

·      movement while listening

·      working on a whiteboard;

·      standing while answering orally

The question to consider is: “How can the Student access the learning?” 

18. REDUCING COGNITIVE LOAD

Tasks should be presented to Students in manageable components. Instead of: “Complete this page of work.”

Use: “Let’s do these two.” Then: “Good. Shall we look at the next part?” (You will need to accept “no” as you’ve asked the question.) Once the student trusts they have 'autonomy' (may take 12 months) they will engage more.

Strategies may include:

·      one instruction at a time;

·      visual instructions;

·      worked examples;

·      highlighted key information;

·      checklists;

·      reduced visual clutter;

·      predictable routines;

·      clear start and finish points;

·      timers where helpful;

·      advance warning of changes.

19. TRANSITIONS

Transitions should be explicitly supported.

Recommended strategies:

·      advance warning

·      visual countdown

·      first/then language

·      predictable transition routines

·      opportunity for controlled choice

·      brief preparation time

·      avoiding abrupt termination of preferred activities

Example: “Five minutes until Maths.”

Then: “Two minutes.”

Then: “Would you like to take your pencil or your computer?”

This provides preparation and support.

20. ASSESSMENT ADJUSTMENTS

Assessment should measure the intended concept. Where the curriculum objective is not handwriting, handwriting should not unnecessarily determine the result.

Possible adjustments include:

Learning objective	Possible response
Knowledge	Oral response
Comprehension	Verbal questioning
Written composition	Keyboard/speech-to-text/scribe where appropriate
Mathematics reasoning	Oral explanation
Sequencing	Visual arrangement
Vocabulary	Verbal response
Reading comprehension	Oral response
Problem solving	Demonstration/explanation

The assessment method should be selected according to what is being assessed.

21. TEACHER-AIDE SUPPORT

Teacher-aide support should be purposeful and linked to identified barriers.The objective isn’t: “Someone needs to make the Student do their work.”

The objective is: “The Student requires targeted support to access and demonstrate the curriculum.”

Potential support includes:

·      scribing

·      supporting task initiation

·      reducing cognitive load

·      simplifying instructions

·      supporting transitions

·      prompting use of agreed strategies

·      facilitating assistive technology

·      supporting regulation (co-regulation helps – check your heart rate, slow your breathing)

·      recording verbal responses

·      helping the Student re-engage following dysregulation

The classroom teacher remains responsible for curriculum delivery and teaching.

22. RELATIONAL SAFETY

For Students with ADHD, Autism and a PDA profile, “relational safety” is their felt experience that the adults around them are trustworthy, predictable, accepting and emotionally available, particularly when the Student is distressed or unable to meet expectations.

It means the Student can experience boundaries and support without experiencing the relationship itself as a threat to their autonomy, dignity or sense of belonging. Relational safety is not the same as being permissive.

The Student needs to sense that the adults around them are emotionally safe, predictable, trustworthy and accepting—even when they are struggling, dysregulated or behaving in ways adults find challenging.

Students needs to experience school personnel as people who:

·      know them

·      understand their communication

·      recognize their strengths

·      notice their effort

·      believe they is capable

·      help them when tasks are difficult

·      don’t shame them for disability-related difficulties

·      separate inability from unwillingness

·      repair relationships after difficult interactions

23. BEHAVIOUR RECORDING

One-School behaviour reporting is a necessary tracking process in schools, but for students with this profile their “behaviour” needs to be considered in conjunction with their co-occurring Autism, ADHD and PDA profile. Student’s don’t ask for their brain to be wired this way. Labels such as:

·      refusal

·      defiant

·      non-compliant

·      manipulative

·      deliberately disruptive

Don’t demonstrate that: -

- the Student’s Autistic brain seeks rules and predictability; but

- the Student’s ADHD brain seeks interest, and immediate relevance; while

- the Student’s PDA profile seeks autonomy and psychological safety.

24. REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS

Queensland Department of Education’s current guidance states that state schools are required to make reasonable adjustments for Student’s disabilities so they can access and participate in education on the same basis as students without disability. The Department identifies adjustments including alternative teaching methods, different assessment approaches, teacher-aide support, assistive technology, environmental modifications, regulation spaces and additional supports.

Accordingly, I recommend consideration of the following adjustments for Student’s with Autism, ADHD with a PDA profile: -

Curriculum and task presentation

·      reduced task quantity where appropriate

·      chunked tasks

·      concise instructions

·      visual supports

·      reduced cognitive load

·      worked examples

·      flexible task sequencing

Communication

·      concise language

·      one instruction at a time (wait for processing)

·      avoid repeated commands (wait for processing)

·      collaborative language

·      controlled choice

·      notice of changes

Assessment

·      oral responses

·      scribing

·      speech-to-text

·      keyboard

·      flexible timing where appropriate

Regulation

·      access to a quiet space

·      movement opportunities (standing desk, hoki-stool, short, adult-directed exercises e.g. show me 10 push-ups [instruct “push-ups help your brain relax / do good work”]

·      proactive regulation breaks

·      sensory supports

·      predictable routines

·      transition preparation.

Social/emotional

·      positive reinforcement

·      private correction

·      relationship-based support

·      avoidance of punitive escalation

·      explicit repair following difficult interactions

Adult support

·      targeted teacher-aide assistance

·      consistent implementation of agreed strategies

·      staff understanding of demand sensitivity

·      regular communication between key adults

28. NCCD CONSIDERATION

I recommend that the school’s regularly review the NCCD adjustment level of Student’s such as these. Their co-occurring disabilities and PDA profile will impact them differently in each age and stage.

The 2026 NCCD (Nationally Consistent Collection of Data on School Students with Disability) framework requires school judgements to be evidence-based and documented, including evidence of consultation and collaboration, assessment and identification of need, reasonable adjustments, and monitoring and review of those adjustments.

The 2026 NCCD framework identifies four levels:

·      support provided within quality differentiated teaching practice;

·      supplementary;

·      substantial; and

·      extensive.

The level should reflect the adjustments actually required due to the Student’s disability, rather than simply the presence of a diagnosis.

I therefore recommend that School’s consider:

1.        What adjustments are currently being provided?

2.        How frequently are they required?

3.        Across how many learning environments?

4.        How much adult support is required?

5.        What happens when the adjustments are not provided?

6.        What evidence demonstrates the functional impact of disability?

7.        What has been documented over the required period?

8.        Does the current NCCD level accurately reflect the level of adjustment actually required?

The NCCD guidance specifically states that school team judgements should be evidence-based and formally documented.

29. RESOURCING

I recommend that discussions about resourcing remain separate from discussions about a Student’s educational needs. Queensland’s current reasonable-adjustment resourcing model provides additional resources to schools to support Students with disability, with resources allocated to schools rather than individual students. The Department states that the model includes Students with autism and ADHD, and that additional resources are informed by NCCD adjustment levels.

Therefore, the starting question should ALWAYS be:

“What adjustments does this Student require?”

followed by:

“What resources and departmental supports are available to enable the school to provide that adjustment?”

Rather than:

“We cannot provide this level of support because there is not enough funding.”

30. SCHOOL TEAMS MUST CONSIDER

School Teams must consider the following:

1. That Student’s behaviour is to be considered within the context of Autism, ADHD and significant demand sensitivity

2. That behaviours of concern not automatically be interpreted as deliberate defiance or wilful non-compliance.

3. That the school distinguish between capacity and performance (behaviour).

4. That verbal competence be recognised where written output creates a disability-related barrier.

5. That reasonable alternative response modes be routinely available where appropriate.

6. That task quantity be differentiated where the additional work doesn’t provide any additional evidence of the targeted learning outcome.

7. That staff use autonomy-supportive and collaborative language.

8. That positive reinforcement be increased and made specific to effort, strategy, participation and regulation.

9. That a formal adjustment plan be developed and consistently implemented across relevant staff.1

10.That the effectiveness of adjustments be monitored through objective data, rather than through subjective perceptions of compliance.

11.That Students such as this be given an opportunity to communicate what helps them learn and what makes learning difficult. Involving them Support Team meetings (IEP meetings)kis the first step to educating the Student in Self-Advocacy - a skill they will require in every age, life stage, environment and relationship across their lifetime. (collaborative meetings will need to look and sound different - I'm more than happy to discuss this with clients and School personnel - feel free to email or reach out)

32. LANGUAGE MATTERS

I recommend that School Support teams consciously shift their thinking from: “How do we make the Student comply?”

to: “How do we make participation achievable?”

From: “Why won’t the Student do it?” to: “What’s making this difficult for the Student?”

From: “The Student knows how to do it.” to: “What is preventing the Student from demonstrating what he knows today?”

From: “The Student needs to learn that they can’t always get their own way.” to: “The Students needs to develop flexibility while retaining an appropriate sense of agency.”

In my professional opinion, the goal for Students with Autism, ADHD and a PDA profile should be to support them to become progressively:

·      independent

·      regulated

·      flexible

·      able to communicate their needs

·      able to tolerate appropriate demands

·      able to access learning

·      able to use effective strategies and

·      confident in their own capacity

I strongly believe these goals are best achieved through relationship, predictability, appropriate challenge, autonomy, explicit teaching, reasonable adjustment, positive reinforcement and carefully graduated expectations.

As part our students’ Support Teams, we are the ones who will shape and grow their self-advocacy skills - their ability to get their needs met, across their lifetime.

Self-advocacy ability is interwoven with a person’s sense of self-worth. Helping Students understand (and verbalize) what their brain needs to be successful will ensure a more positive future for them.

Nelle FrancesAutism Therapist | Autism Education Consultant | Early Childhood Educator nelle@nellefrances.com.au  m: 0482 830 158