When the exam is a simulation — not a reading test disguised as a science test — dyslexia, ADHD, dyscalculia, and motor difficulties stop being barriers. The medium itself is accessible.
28 interactive STEM simulations. 7 cognitive dimensions. Minimal reading required. Your child demonstrates understanding by doing — aiming projectiles, adjusting gravity, building circuits — not by decoding passages and writing essays.
The same design that makes simulations accessible for dyslexic students makes them impossible for AI to game. Two problems. One structural solution.
Simulation: Jump into Force Field — aim, launch, observe physics. No reading required. See the cockpit experience firsthand.
Assessment: 6 interactive challenges, 32 minutes, no signup. Discover your cognitive archetype across 7 dimensions.
Every day your child uses assistive technology to learn. Text-to-speech reads their textbooks. Dictation captures their ideas. Sensory tools keep them regulated. Then exam day arrives and the platform says: “We can’t support that here.”
Text-to-speech is an accommodation. It patches a reading-based exam so that a student who struggles with decoding can access the content. But it does not fix the fundamental problem: a science test should not require fluent reading to measure science knowledge. The accommodation patches the medium. It does not change it.
When the assessment IS a physics simulation — aim, launch, observe, adjust — there is no text to decode. No passage to read. No essay to write. Your child’s trajectory accuracy IS their response. Their circuit design IS their answer. The barrier that would require an accommodation was never created.
Five learning differences. Five structural barriers in traditional assessment. Five ways the simulation medium removes them.
Traditional science and math tests are reading tests in disguise. A student who understands projectile motion perfectly may fail because they cannot decode the three-paragraph word problem describing it. The test measures reading ability, not science knowledge.
28 visual and interactive simulations. Drag, click, observe, decide. Performance IS the response — trajectory accuracy, not written explanation. The adaptive engine measures D1 Analytical, D2 Quantitative, and D4 Spatial reasoning through physical interaction with simulated systems.
They aim a projectile in Force Field. Adjust gravity in Climate Engine. Build a circuit in Circuit Mind. Tune orbital parameters in Orbit Lab. No reading required to demonstrate understanding. Their hands show what they know.
45-minute static exams are designed for sustained, passive attention — exactly what ADHD makes difficult. Rushing through multiple-choice questions penalises impulsivity. Long reading passages lose students mid-paragraph. The format measures attention span, not capability.
5–15 minute interactive missions. Visual and kinesthetic engagement holds attention because there is always something to do, observe, and respond to. Scoring rewards deliberate action and iterative improvement, not speed. The adaptive engine adjusts difficulty in real time — keeping the student in their challenge zone, never bored, never overwhelmed.
They are inside a spacecraft cockpit. There is a mission. There is a goal. There is something to DO — not something to read and regurgitate. The simulation responds to their actions in real time. Attention is held by engagement, not demanded by stillness.
Traditional math assessment presents abstract symbolic operations — equations on a page, numbers without physical meaning. For students with dyscalculia, these symbols do not connect to intuition. The test measures symbolic fluency, not mathematical reasoning.
Numbers have physical meaning. Adjust gravity from 9.8 to 4.0 and watch the ball arc change. Change temperature and see molecules speed up. D2 Quantitative and D4 Spatial are measured separately — spatial reasoners are not penalised for symbolic maths. The engine distinguishes between a student who cannot manipulate symbols and a student who cannot reason quantitatively. They are not the same thing.
They slide a gravity controller and see the projectile arc respond. They adjust a voltage dial and watch the current change. The relationship between number and effect is visible, physical, and immediate. Understanding is demonstrated through interaction, not calculation on paper.
Exam halls are sensory assault courses: fluorescent lights, ambient noise, unfamiliar seating, the pressure of a clock visible to everyone. Instructions may be ambiguous. The social performance of test-taking — sitting still, looking focused, raising a hand to ask for help — is its own obstacle. The environment measures stress tolerance, not knowledge.
Play at home, on their schedule, in their controlled environment. Every mission has explicit objectives and clear success criteria — no ambiguity about what is being asked. The cockpit interface is consistent and predictable across all 28 simulations. Visual design is clean and structured. Sensory load is controllable.
The same interface every time. The same layout. The same interaction patterns. Predictability is built into the design, not requested as an accommodation. They know exactly what to do, exactly how to respond, and exactly what success looks like — before they begin.
Classroom exams rely on verbal instructions: “Turn to page 14, you have 30 minutes, remember to show your working.” Spoken once, in a room full of noise, to a student who cannot reliably process auditory input at conversational speed. The delivery method excludes before the content is even encountered.
All instructions are visual, on-screen, and self-paced. No auditory dependency. Every instruction can be re-read. Nothing is spoken once and lost. Mission objectives are displayed permanently. Progress indicators are visual. Feedback is immediate and on-screen.
They read the mission brief at their own pace. They look at it again mid-mission if they need to. Information persists on screen until they are ready to proceed. No reliance on auditory memory. No penalty for processing speed.
Every feature below is a toggle in the simulation cockpit. No paperwork. No approval. No waiting for someone to decide your child deserves access.
Full interface and AI tutor in 8 languages: English, Spanish, Mandarin, Hindi, Arabic, French, Portuguese, and Tagalog. Spanish is the primary second language with native-quality support, not machine translation. Simulations are visual and interactive — language supports the experience but is never the gate to demonstrating understanding.
OpenDyslexic font, large text, high contrast, extended timers, simplified UI
Simplified UI, reduced motion, extended timers, step-by-step mode
Large touch targets, sticky keys, extended timers, keyboard navigation
The difference between patching barriers and not creating them.
| Traditional Exam | QLM Simulation | |
|---|---|---|
| Reading required? | Yes — passages, questions, answer choices, all text-based | No — visual + interactive. Performance IS the response. |
| Dyslexia accommodation? | Required — text-to-speech, extra time (can be denied by platform) | Not needed — the medium does not create the barrier |
| Timer flexibility? | Requires formal accommodation request, documentation, approval | Built-in toggle. One click. No paperwork. |
| Sensory environment? | Controlled by school — fluorescent lights, noise, unfamiliar room | Student’s own space, own pace, own sensory setup |
| Response format? | Written answers, bubble sheets, typed essays | Drag, click, adjust, observe. Physical interaction. |
| What is measured? | Reading + recall + writing speed + test-taking compliance | Reasoning + decision-making + problem-solving across 7 dimensions |
| Ambiguous instructions? | Common — “explain your reasoning,” “show your work” | Explicit objectives. Clear success criteria. No interpretation needed. |
| Attention model? | 45–90 min sustained passive attention | 5–15 min active missions. Engagement through interaction. |
Research insight (SciVQR, 2026): A benchmark across 54 science subfields found AI models score 20% lower on visual-spatial questions than text-based ones. When the assessment is visual and interactive, there is no text for AI to process — making simulation-based assessment structurally harder to game and structurally fairer for students whose thinking outpaces their reading.
This is the structural advantage of simulation-based assessment: it measures reasoning process, not reading speed. Students who struggle with text-heavy exams — those with dyslexia, ADHD, or language processing differences — can demonstrate their true understanding through action rather than written explanation.
Source: SciVQR (2026), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CASIA). Benchmark of visual-spatial science reasoning across 54 subfields.
Request received
Pilot schools accepted on a rolling basis
We will reach out within 48 hours.
Dear [Principal / SENCO / Head of Inclusion],
I’d like to introduce you to QLM (Quantum Learning Machines), an educational platform with 28 interactive STEM simulations that are structurally accessible for students with learning differences.
Unlike traditional assessments that require accommodations — text-to-speech, extra time, modified papers, which can be denied by exam platforms — QLM’s simulations measure how students think through visual, interactive challenges. There are no reading-heavy tests and no written responses required. Students demonstrate understanding by doing: aiming projectiles, adjusting variables, building circuits.
The platform includes built-in accessibility features (high contrast, dyslexia-friendly font, extended timers, simplified UI, keyboard navigation) that students can toggle themselves — no formal accommodation request needed.
They are accepting pilot schools and offering early partners priority access. Could we discuss this for [child’s name]’s class?
More information: quantumlearningmachines.com/accessibility
Thank you,
[Your name]
We have no formal accessibility audit yet. WCAG 2.1 AA compliance is in progress but not certified.
The accessibility features described on this page are built into the platform but have not been tested with formal assistive technology certification. We have not yet tested with screen readers or formal assistive technology. Keyboard-only navigation is implemented but not formally audited.
We are seeking schools with SEN departments to co-test and improve. If your child’s school has a special educational needs coordinator who would be willing to evaluate the platform with students, we will provide full access at no cost and incorporate every piece of feedback.
Our claim is not that we have solved accessibility. Our claim is that simulation-based assessment creates fewer barriers than reading-based assessment by design. A physics simulation that requires no reading to demonstrate physics understanding is structurally more accessible than a physics exam that requires fluent reading. That is not a technology claim. It is a design principle.
We are building in public, improving in public, and being honest about where we are. If something on this page does not match your child’s experience, we want to know: hello@quantumlearningmachines.com.