Dyscalculia: a poor mark in maths is not enough to fail

The Genoa Regional Administrative Court (judgement 1243/2026) has clarified that ‘dyscalculia’ cannot be ignored when deciding to fail a pupil: if the only failing mark is in mathematics and the pupil has a certified diagnosis of this condition, the school must provide specific reasons as to why they would be unable to make up for it later. No justification, no failing mark: the decision is unlawful and must be annulled.

A girl with dyscalculia – that is, with a certified difficulty in handling numbers and calculations – receives a single failing mark. In maths, of course. At the end of August, the class council fails her. Her parents appeal, and the judge, taking her overall performance into account, admits her subject to conditions. The school complies, then sends her to sit the resit exams and fails her again.

The Ligurian Regional Administrative Court has set the record straight with a simple yet uncomfortable question: why her, and why now? The paradox is glaringly obvious. Punishing her with a low mark in the very subject in which her condition manifests itself means penalising the girl for her condition, not for a lack of effort. Dyscalculia is not laziness, nor is it a lack of motivation; it cannot be cured by spending more hours revising: it is a different way of learning that schools have a duty to recognise, through a personalised learning plan and tailored assessment. A ‘four’ on the report card, therefore, cannot be treated in the same way as for everyone else. What, then, must those who wish to fail a pupil do? They must demonstrate that the gaps in her knowledge are genuinely serious and that they will not be bridged in the next stage of her education. Or they must point to other concrete, specific and verifiable obstacles. An arithmetic average is not enough; a mark written in red is not enough. An explanation is needed that would stand up in court – and, even before that, to the pupil’s family.

For teachers, the message is clear: when dealing with a pupil with a certified learning difficulty, the motivation is not bureaucracy, but the assurance that someone has looked at the person as a whole, not just their marks. A cursory assessment that ignores the personalised learning plan will result in the result being annulled. And, above all, it costs a student a year.