Fix-It Design Challenge

Fix the scaffold without lowering the thinking.

Walk through the model below, then choose your group to apply it yourself.

1

Your task today

You will diagnose a problematic AI request, redesign the scaffold so it supports students without doing the thinking for them, test your fix in Gemini, and post a before/after comparison to Padlet.

Barrier removed Thinking preserved Target unchanged

2

The OSAMR framework

Use this to evaluate any AI scaffold. The goal is not the highest level — it is the right level for the learning target.

S

Substitution

Same task. AI replaces a tool.

A

Augmentation

Same task. AI adds useful support.

M

Modification

Task is redesigned, but the target stays intact.

R

Redefinition

AI enables a new learning move students could not easily do before.

O

Overreliance

AI does the thinking, answer, evidence, or product for students.

3

Walk through the model

Here is one example, already finished, that uses the exact same six steps your group will do. Read each step and the short “What's happening” note so you know what to do when it is your turn.

Model scenario · Grade 7 ELA

What went wrong?

Students read a challenging article and identify the author’s central claim with two pieces of evidence. The AI support made the article easier, but it also did the close-reading work.

Problem AI Input

“Summarize this article for 7th graders and tell students the author’s central claim and two pieces of evidence they should use in their response.”

Protect: Students must read the article, identify the claim, select evidence, and explain the connection.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
The article is hard to read, so students struggle to find the claim and evidence on their own.
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
Students must read the article closely, identify the central claim themselves, select their own evidence, and explain how the evidence supports the claim.
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
Create an access scaffold for students reading a challenging article. Do not summarize the article, name the central claim, or choose evidence for students. Instead, create chunk headings, 5 student-friendly vocabulary supports, one focus question per chunk, and a blank evidence organizer that requires students to return to the original article and choose their own evidence.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
You are coaching teachers during an AI for Accessible Instruction design challenge. Do NOT solve the student task. Do NOT write the final answer for students. Scenario: Students read a challenging article and identify the author's central claim with two pieces of evidence. Original AI input that caused the problem: "Summarize this article for 7th graders and tell students the author's central claim and two pieces of evidence they should use in their response." Access barrier we are trying to fix: The article is hard to read, so students struggle to find the claim and evidence on their own. Student thinking that must stay with students: Students must read the article, identify the claim, select evidence, and explain the connection. Our first redesigned scaffold: Chunk headings, 5 vocabulary supports, one focus question per chunk, and a blank evidence organizer. Please give: 1. One strength of the redesign. 2. One risk where the scaffold might still do too much thinking for students. 3. One specific revision that improves access while preserving rigor. 4. A suggested OSAMR rating: Substitution, Augmentation, Modification, Redefinition, or Overreliance. Keep your feedback concise.
Gemini suggested adding a sentence-starter bank for the written response so students who struggle with academic writing can still engage with the evidence — without the sentence starters giving away which evidence to choose.
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
Create an access scaffold for students reading a challenging article. Do not summarize the article, name the central claim, or choose evidence for students. Instead, create: 1. chunk headings, 2. 5 student-friendly vocabulary supports, 3. one focus question per chunk, 4. a blank evidence organizer that requires students to return to the original article and choose their own evidence, and 5. a sentence-starter bank for the written response that does not reference specific evidence from the text.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence Students still read the original text, identify the central claim, select their own evidence, and explain the connection. AI only removed vocabulary and organization barriers.

Design rule: Ask AI for scaffolds, questions, vocabulary, structure, and checks — not the answer, claim, evidence, reasoning, model, or completed organizer.

GO

Now it is your turn

Choose your group page below. Each group has a different scenario where AI overstepped. You will follow the same 6 steps you just saw in the model.

Choose your group Open Gemini ↗ Open Padlet ↗

Group Menu

Choose your separate group page.

Each page names the exact AI input that caused the problem, then guides the redesign.

1

Group 1

Math Reasoning

AI gave the completed explanation.

Open separate group page →

2

Group 2

ELA Evidence

AI named the claim and evidence for students.

Open separate group page →

3

Group 3

Science Model

AI gave a labeled example diagram.

Open separate group page →

4

Group 4

Social Studies Claim

AI supplied the claim stem plus suggested reasons.

Open separate group page →

5

Group 5

MLL Language Access

AI oversimplified the task.

Open separate group page →

6

Group 6

Executive Function

AI completed the organizer.

Open separate group page →

Group 1 Separate Page

Math Reasoning Support

Grade 6 Math · Vocabulary barrier · AI gave full solution

Group menu Open Padlet ↗ Post Builder

Scenario page reference

What went wrong?

Students solve ratio problems and explain how they know two ratios are equivalent. The teacher wanted vocabulary support, but the AI-generated support gave away the final mathematical explanation.

Problem AI Input

“Create vocabulary support for 6th graders explaining equivalent ratios. Include an example answer for this ratio problem: Are 6:8 and 9:12 equivalent? Explain how you know.”

Protect: Students must decide equivalence and justify why.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence

Ready for Padlet

Gallery post for Group 1

Group 1 — Math Reasoning Before/After Fix Tested in Gemini

Open Padlet ↗

Group 2 Separate Page

ELA Evidence Support

Grade 7 ELA · Dense text barrier · AI named claim/evidence

Group menu Open Padlet ↗ Post Builder

Scenario page reference

What went wrong?

Students read a challenging article and identify the author’s central claim with two pieces of evidence. The AI support made the article easier, but it also did the close-reading work.

Problem AI Input

“Summarize this article for 7th graders and tell students the author’s central claim and two pieces of evidence they should use in their response.”

Protect: Students must identify the claim, select evidence, and explain the connection.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence

Ready for Padlet

Gallery post for Group 2

Group 2 — ELA Evidence Before/After Fix Tested in Gemini

Open Padlet ↗

Group 3 Separate Page

Science Model Support

Grade 7 Science · Language access barrier · AI labeled the model

Group menu Open Padlet ↗ Post Builder

Scenario page reference

What went wrong?

Multilingual learners need support understanding directions for a water-cycle diagram. The AI-generated support helped with language access, but the labeled example showed the expected scientific model.

Problem AI Input

“Translate these water-cycle diagram directions for multilingual learners and include a labeled example diagram showing evaporation, condensation, and precipitation.”

Protect: Students must identify processes and label the model.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence

Ready for Padlet

Gallery post for Group 3

Group 3 — Science Model Before/After Fix Tested in Gemini

Open Padlet ↗

Group 4 Separate Page

Social Studies Claim Support

Grade 8 Social Studies · Writing structure barrier · AI gave claim/reasons

Group menu Open Padlet ↗ Post Builder

Scenario page reference

What went wrong?

Students evaluate whether a historical decision was justified. The teacher wanted writing support, but the AI-generated support moved into claim-making and interpretation.

Problem AI Input

“Give students sentence starters for this historical argument prompt and include possible reasons from the source set that they could use.”

Protect: Students must make the judgment, choose reasons, and interpret sources.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence

Ready for Padlet

Gallery post for Group 4

Group 4 — Social Studies Claim Before/After Fix Tested in Gemini

Open Padlet ↗

Group 5 Separate Page

MLL Language Access Support

MLL · Complex directions barrier · AI changed the task

Group menu Open Padlet ↗ Post Builder

Scenario page reference

What went wrong?

Students must compare two representations of the same relationship: a table and a graph. The teacher wanted newcomer-friendly directions, but the AI changed the task target.

Problem AI Input

“Rewrite these directions for newcomers: Compare the table and graph to explain the relationship. Make the task very simple and easy to understand.”

Protect: Students must compare both representations and explain the relationship.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence

Ready for Padlet

Gallery post for Group 5

Group 5 — MLL Language Access Before/After Fix Tested in Gemini

Open Padlet ↗

Group 6 Separate Page

Executive Function Support

SPED / Accessibility · Planning barrier · AI filled organizer

Group menu Open Padlet ↗ Post Builder

Scenario page reference

What went wrong?

Students plan a constructed response. The teacher wanted planning support, but the AI completed the response structure and evidence choices for students.

Problem AI Input

“Create a graphic organizer for this constructed response and fill in a sample topic sentence, evidence, and explanation so students know what to write.”

Protect: Students must choose evidence and explain how it supports the response.

SSame task, tech swap

ASame task, useful improvement

MTask redesigned for stronger access

RNew learning move not otherwise possible

OAI takes over the thinking

1
Name the access barrier

What issue are you fixing without lowering the task?
2
Protect the student thinking

What must students still do on their own?
3
Draft the fix before Gemini

Write the scaffold you would try first. Do not use AI to complete the student task.
4
Use Gemini as a coach

Copy the coach prompt, open Gemini, paste it, then revise your scaffold based on useful feedback.

Open Gemini ↗

Preview the Gemini coach prompt
5
Final after-Gemini version

Revise the scaffold only if the learning target and student thinking stay intact.
6
Prove rigor stayed intact

OSAMR level Rigor evidence

Ready for Padlet

Gallery post for Group 6

Group 6 — Executive Function Before/After Fix Tested in Gemini

Open Padlet ↗

Padlet Post Builder

Copy your final fix into Padlet.

Use the after-Gemini version, OSAMR rating, evidence sentence, and suggested Padlet labels.

Open Padlet ↗

Padlet link

Click here to open the shared Padlet, then paste your copied group post.

Open Padlet ↗

Fix the scaffold without lowering the thinking.

Your task today

The OSAMR framework

Substitution

Augmentation

Modification

Redefinition

Overreliance

Walk through the model

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Now it is your turn

Choose your separate group page.

Math Reasoning

ELA Evidence

Science Model

Social Studies Claim

MLL Language Access

Executive Function

Math Reasoning Support

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Gallery post for Group 1

ELA Evidence Support

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Gallery post for Group 2

Science Model Support

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Gallery post for Group 3

Social Studies Claim Support

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Gallery post for Group 4

MLL Language Access Support

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Gallery post for Group 5

Executive Function Support

Name the access barrier

Protect the student thinking

Draft the fix before Gemini

Use Gemini as a coach

Final after-Gemini version

Prove rigor stayed intact

Gallery post for Group 6

Copy your final fix into Padlet.

Padlet link