Why Doge’s One-Size-Fits-All Approach Harms Students Who Thrive on Individualized Learning
Imagine a classroom where every child is handed the same pair of shoes on the first day of school. Some students find them too tight, others too loose, and a few can’t even walk in them. This is the reality facing children with special needs if initiatives like Doge—a growing trend in standardized education reform—continue to ignore the importance of individualized learning plans. For the 7 million U.S. students who rely on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), Doge’s rigid framework isn’t just inconvenient—it’s a direct threat to their right to equitable education.
The Lifeline of IEPs: Why Personalization Matters
IEPs exist for a simple yet profound reason: every child learns differently. These legally binding documents ensure students with disabilities—whether autism, dyslexia, ADHD, or physical impairments—receive tailored support. A student with sensory processing challenges might need noise-canceling headphones during tests, while a child with dyscalculia could require extended time for math problems. IEPs aren’t about giving “advantages”; they’re about leveling the playing field.
But Doge, a policy-driven model gaining traction in school districts nationwide, aims to streamline education through uniform standards. While efficiency sounds appealing, this approach overlooks a critical truth: cookie-cutter solutions don’t work for kids whose needs defy averages. By prioritizing standardization over flexibility, Doge risks dismantling decades of progress in special education.
How Doge Undermines Critical Accommodations
At its core, Doge pushes for “consistency” in curriculum delivery and assessment. For example, it mandates strict timelines for completing lessons and limits teachers’ ability to modify tests or assignments. For a student with an IEP requiring breaks every 20 minutes or visual aids for reading comprehension, these restrictions are disastrous. Teachers report being pressured to “stick to the script,” leaving little room for the creativity and adaptability that IEPs demand.
Take math instruction under Doge’s framework: A fourth grader with dysgraphia, whose IEP allows them to verbally explain answers instead of writing them, might now be forced to complete timed written tests. Not only does this ignore their disability, but it also sets them up for unnecessary failure—damaging their confidence and love of learning.
The Hidden Bias in “Neutral” Systems
Proponents argue that Doge treats all students “equally.” But equality isn’t equity. A policy that refuses to acknowledge differences isn’t neutral—it’s discriminatory. Consider wheelchair ramps: Building stairs instead of ramps doesn’t make a building “equal” for everyone; it excludes those who can’t climb them. Similarly, Doge’s refusal to accommodate IEPs sends a dangerous message: Conform or get left behind.
This bias extends beyond academics. Many students with IEPs rely on social-emotional supports, like speech therapy or behavioral interventions, woven into their school day. Doge’s rigid scheduling often clashes with these services, forcing schools to choose between compliance and meeting students’ needs. In one Ohio district, therapists reported a 30% reduction in session times for kids with autism because Doge’s schedule “didn’t allow flexibility.”
The Legal—and Moral—Stakes
Ignoring IEPs isn’t just ethically wrong; it’s illegal. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees students with disabilities the right to a free, appropriate public education. By sidelining IEPs, Doge violates federal law and opens districts to lawsuits. But beyond legalities, there’s a deeper issue: What does it say about our values when we prioritize bureaucratic efficiency over vulnerable children?
Parents and advocates are fighting back. In Texas, a coalition recently sued a school district for adopting Doge-based policies that eliminated quiet testing rooms for students with anxiety disorders. “They’re telling my son his panic attacks are an inconvenience,” said one parent. “It’s heartbreaking.”
A Path Forward: Advocacy and Awareness
The solution isn’t to reject progress but to demand inclusivity. Schools can adopt technology and policies that enhance personalization—think AI tools that adjust reading levels in real time or platforms that let teachers easily modify assignments. Training educators to advocate for IEPs within Doge’s framework is also crucial.
Families, too, play a role. Documenting how Doge impacts your child’s access to services and filing formal complaints can pressure districts to reconsider. Social media campaigns like DontEraseIEPs are already amplifying voices often ignored in policy debates.
Final Thoughts
Education should empower every child to reach their potential—not force them into boxes that don’t fit. Doge’s rise highlights a troubling shift toward systems that value metrics over humanity. For students with special needs, whose victories are measured in small, personal triumphs, this isn’t just a policy debate. It’s a fight for dignity, opportunity, and the right to learn in a way that honors who they are. Let’s ensure their needs aren’t erased in the name of “progress.”
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Why Doge’s One-Size-Fits-All Approach Harms Students Who Thrive on Individualized Learning