Reasonable adjustments at school

Legal status: 02.10.2026. Important: School law is state law. Rules, terms and procedures differ between federal states. This article gives orientation and uses Bavaria as an example. Legal terms are translated here for understanding; the German wording of the law is what counts.

Reasonable adjustments and grade protection – the differences

Using the Bavarian school regulations (§§ 31–36 BaySchO) as an example, three levels can be distinguished: ^{[4; 2; 3]}

Level	What changes	Note on school report
Individual support	educational and organisational measures in lessons, e.g. special work materials or individual breaks; the assessment of performance is unaffected	– (does not affect the assessment of performance)
Reasonable adjustments	The examination conditions are adapted, the requirements stay the same, e.g. extra time or written instead of oral	no
Grade protection	Certain performances are not graded, only for the impairments named in the school regulations	yes

On the note on the school report: under the Bavarian law, the type and extent of grade protection must be noted on the report. ^[1] For adapted examination conditions in which the same knowledge and skills must be demonstrated as by everyone else, the Federal Constitutional Court has held that no remark may be made on the report. ^[7] The Bavarian school regulations are more specific: reasonable adjustments are not listed on the report. For grade protection, the remark on the report names the performance not delivered or not graded; no reference to the impairment itself is made. ^[5]

And in your federal state? School law is state law. Each federal state regulates for itself which terms are used, which adjustments are possible, who decides and which documents are required. This article describes the legal situation only for Bavaria (legal status 02.10.2026) and gives no information about other states. Terms such as reasonable adjustments and grade protection may also be used or delimited differently elsewhere. So look at the school laws and school regulations of your federal state and the pages of the responsible ministry of education, and ask at the school or at an advice centre.

Which adjustments may be possible

Which adjustments are permitted is set by each state itself. For reasonable adjustments, the Bavarian school regulations explicitly name, for example: ^[2]

• extension of working time by up to a quarter, in exceptional cases up to half,
• methodological and didactic aids including structuring aids, additional reading aloud of individual tasks and differentiated tasks,
• replacing individual oral by written assessments and vice versa,
• special work materials,
• tests and examinations in separate rooms,
• additional breaks.

For autism, the Bavarian school regulations contain a specific rule on grade protection: under § 34 para. 3 BaySchO, in the case of “autism with communicative speech disorder” (“Autismus mit kommunikativer Sprachstörung”) it is permissible “to waive oral performances or parts of examinations that require speaking in all subjects”. ^[3] This applies to Bavaria and only under the conditions stated there.

Which measures fit depends on how autism affects the individual pupil. The Bavarian State Institute for School Quality and Educational Research (ISB) has its own chapter on “autism” in its handbook on individual support, reasonable adjustments and grade protection. ^[6]

The legal situation, using Bavaria as an example

In Bavaria, the basis is Art. 52 para. 5 of the Bavarian Act on Education and Teaching (BayEUG): ^[1]

• Pupils with a long-lasting significant impairment in the ability to demonstrate their existing capabilities receive, where necessary, an adaptation of the examination conditions that maintains the subject standard (reasonable adjustments).
• Grade protection is possible under certain conditions. The law explicitly names autism as one of the impairments for this.

The details are regulated by the Bavarian school regulations (§§ 31–36 BaySchO). ^{[4; 3; 5]} Among other things, the following are important: ^[2]

• Reasonable adjustments must maintain the essential performance requirements that apply to everyone and are limited to the assessment of performance.
• They can only be granted to pupils who are taught according to the curricular requirements of a general or vocational school.

In Bavaria, grade protection is granted exclusively for the impairments named in the school regulations and under the conditions of the BayEUG. ^[3] Among other things, it requires an application. The type and extent of grade protection must be noted on the report. ^[1]

Constitutional background: On 22.11.2023, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled on Bavarian school-leaving certificates from 2010. In the complainants’ cases, spelling had not been graded because of dyslexia and this was noted on the report. ^[7] The court distinguishes two kinds of measures:

• Adapted examination conditions, for example special work materials, special rooms or written instead of oral parts of an examination. If pupils with a disability must demonstrate the same examination-relevant knowledge and skills as everyone else, such measures are required under the Basic Law, and a remark on the report must not be made. ^[7]
• Waiving the grading of certain performances, that is, a different examination standard. It is permitted under the Basic Law, but not necessarily required. Remarks on the leaving certificate about such non-grading carried out on application are in principle justified if they are made so comprehensively that the certificates as a whole are sufficiently transparent. On school-leaving certificates (Abitur) they are required in principle. ^[7]

In the case decided, the court nevertheless ruled in the complainants’ favour. Among other things, under the practice at the time such a remark was only made for dyslexia, but not for pupils with other disabilities whose performances were likewise not graded. This unequal treatment was not justified. The judgments of the Federal Administrative Court of 29.07.2015, which had denied an entitlement to grade protection without documentation on the report, were therefore set aside. ^{[7; 8]} The court also notes that since 1 July 2016 Bavaria has created a normative basis with Art. 52 para. 5 BayEUG and §§ 31–36 BaySchO. ^[7]

The case decided concerned dyslexia. The court has not decided a case about autism; what follows from it for autism and for the rules of the individual states must be checked in each individual case. No statements for other federal states can be derived from Bavarian state law.

How to proceed

1. Seek a conversation with the school: class teacher, counselling teacher or school psychology.
2. Apply according to the rules of the federal state. Medical or psychological statements are often required. In Bavaria, for example, an application in text form and a specialist medical certificate are needed; alternatively, among other things, a severe disability card with the underlying notices, integration assistance notices or special-education assessments are sufficient if they show the type, extent and duration of the impairment. ^[5]
3. Describe concretely in which situations your child cannot show their performance because of autism and which adjustment would help.
4. Ask for a written decision and check at intervals whether the measures still fit.

What reasonable adjustments are not

• They do not lower the subject requirements. ^[1]
• They are not a social benefit. A school support worker, by contrast, is applied for via the youth welfare office or integration assistance, see Applying for a school support worker.
• They do not replace special-needs education, see Special educational needs.

Sources and literature

1. Art. 52 Abs. 5 BayEUG (Nachteilsausgleich, Notenschutz); BayEUG zuletzt geändert durch G v. 28.07.2026 (GVBl. S. 379), Abs. 5 davon unberührt (gesetze-bayern.de, eingesehen 02.10.2026). – State law (in German)
2. § 33 BaySchO – Nachteilsausgleich, Text gilt ab 01.08.2026 (gesetze-bayern.de, erneut eingesehen 02.10.2026). – State law (in German)
3. § 34 BaySchO – Notenschutz, Text gilt ab 01.08.2026 (gesetze-bayern.de, erneut eingesehen 02.10.2026). – State law (in German)
4. §§ 31–32 BaySchO (Grundsatz, individuelle Unterstützung), Text gilt ab 01.08.2026 (gesetze-bayern.de, eingesehen 02.10.2026). – State law (in German)
5. §§ 35–36 BaySchO (Zuständigkeit, Verfahren), Text gilt ab 01.08.2026 (gesetze-bayern.de, eingesehen 02.10.2026). – State law (in German)
6. Staatsinstitut für Schulqualität und Bildungsforschung (ISB): Individuelle Unterstützung – Nachteilsausgleich – Notenschutz. München, August 2026 (Kap. 3.5 Autismus, S. 39). https://www.isb.bayern.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Grundsatzabteilung/Individuelle_Foerderung/Individuelle_Unterstuetzung/Handbuch_Individuelle_Unterstuetzung_Nachteilsausgleich_Notenschutz_202608.pdf – Authority (in German) (bisher zitierte Ausgabe 2024 nicht mehr abrufbar)
7. Bundesverfassungsgericht, Urteil vom 22.11.2023 – 1 BvR 2577/15, 1 BvR 2578/15, 1 BvR 2579/15 (Zeugnisbemerkungen). https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2023/11/rs20231122_1bvr257715.html – Case law (in German)
8. Bundesverwaltungsgericht, Urteil vom 29.07.2015 – BVerwG 6 C 33.14 (Legasthenie; Nachteilsausgleich/Notenschutz), aufgehoben durch BVerfG, Urteil vom 22.11.2023 – 1 BvR 2577/15 u. a. https://www.bverwg.de/290715U6C33.14.0 – Case law (in German)