Tailoring AI-Driven Reading Scaffolds to the Distinct Needs of Neurodiverse Learners

arXiv cs.CL / 3/31/2026

💬 OpinionSignals & Early TrendsIdeas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The study argues that while reading scaffolds can help neurodiverse learners, adding more visual/semantic support can sometimes overload attention and working memory rather than improve comprehension.
  • Using a construction–integration and contingent scaffolding framework, the researchers compare four reading-interface modalities: unmodified text, segmented text, segmented text with pictograms, and segmented text with pictograms plus keyword labels.
  • In a within-subject pilot of 14 primary-school learners with special educational needs and disabilities, results show heterogeneous individual responses—some learners benefit from segmentation and pictograms while others show signs of increased coordination costs when visual scaffolds are added.
  • Experience ratings show only limited differences across modalities, and open-ended feedback frequently requests simpler wording and additional visual supports, indicating design needs beyond a one-size-fits-all approach.
  • The findings emphasize calibrated, adjustable scaffolding and suggest implications for human–AI co-regulation in supervised inclusive reading systems.

Abstract

Neurodiverse learners often require reading supports, yet increasing scaffold richness can sometimes overload attention and working memory rather than improve comprehension. Grounded in the Construction-Integration model and a contingent scaffolding perspective, we examine how structural versus semantic scaffolds shape comprehension and reading experience in a supervised inclusive context. Using an adapted reading interface, we compared four modalities: unmodified text, sentence-segmented text, segmented text with pictograms, and segmented text with pictograms plus keyword labels. In a within-subject pilot with 14 primary-school learners with special educational needs and disabilities, we measured reading comprehension using standardized questions and collected brief child- and therapist-reported experience measures alongside open-ended feedback. Results highlight heterogeneous responses as some learners showed patterns consistent with benefits from segmentation and pictograms, while others showed patterns consistent with increased coordination costs when visual scaffolds were introduced. Experience ratings showed limited differences between modalities, with some apparent effects linked to clinical complexity, particularly for perceived ease of understanding. Open-ended feedback of the learners frequently requested simpler wording and additional visual supports. These findings suggest that no single scaffold is universally optimal, reinforcing the need for calibrated, adjustable scaffolding and provide design implications for human-AI co-regulation in supervised inclusive reading contexts.