The myth of the ‘normal child’

There is an increasingly neurodiverse pupil population (DfE, 2021; Russell et al, 2014), with children described as neurodivergent accounting for up to 10 per cent of all children in England (NICE, 2019). Neurodiversity is a natural and valuable form of human diversity which should be accepted and valued, in the same way that we accept and value differences in race, sexuality, gender and culture (Walker, 2014). However, special education has historically often been framed in terms of theories of 'core deficits', with the associated practice of labelling, and restoration to normalcy.

Diagnostic categories often provide the foundations for research and conceptual thinking, and the use of banded levels of need proposed in the recent government green paper 'SEND review: Right support, Right Place, Right time' (DfE, 2022) indicates continued reliance on core elements of diagnostic categories. These processes risk overlooking the unique challenges and strengths of each student (Baglieri et al., 2011), under-recognising heterogeneity and the common co-occurrence of conditions (Joshi et al., 2017).

While diagnosis is beneficial, particularly when it enables access to additional support and resources, existing limitations within the education system frequently result in needs being overlooked or unaddressed (Boesley & Crane, 2018). Specialist support is often provided only after a specific diagnosis. This is problematic, not only due to socioeconomic inequality in diagnosis (Baird et al., 2006; Kelly et al, 2019), but also the reliance on school-based interventions derived from diagnostic criteria (e.g. social skills training) that impose pupil conformity to normative expectations (Bottema-Beutel & Kim, 2018) and can sometimes lead to damaging consequences for their mental health (Botha & Frost, 2020; Humphrey & Lewis, 2008). Furthermore, children who do not fit the normative 'ideal child' (Monk, 2002), are disproportionately likely to be permanently excluded from school (DfE, 2018; Ferguson, 2021): three to six times more likely for neurodivergent young people (Aitken & Wang, 2019).

Teacher conceptualisations of neurodiversity

There is general agreement among teachers that inclusion is important for reasons of social justice (Artiles et al., 2006; Polat, 2011). However, the term 'neurodiverse' is sometimes used interchangeably with the term 'neurodivergent', with neurodivergence often perceived as analogous to deficit. A reductive conceptualisation of neurodiversity, together with a deficit narrative, can lead mainstream teachers to show less capacity or willingness to adapt their teaching to cater for all (Brady & Woolfson, 2008; Gillborn, 2015; Orsati & Causton-Theoharis, 2013; Woolfson et al, 2007).

This common misunderstanding of neurodiversity as a synonym for SEND, and the assignment of discrete diagnostic categories, compromises the potential of the concept of neurodiversity, fails to facilitate behaviour change and perpetuates stigma (Chapman, 2021a). A further misrepresentation of neurodiversity is that it is equivalent to a strengths-based model, where diagnostic groups are reconceptualised solely according to abilities rather than challenges. This undermines the potential of a paradigm shift since it retains the underlying notion of value only being applied to ability, and risks neglecting the needs of neurodivergent individuals. The real strength of neurodiversity is that it values differences between people and accepts and supports individuals without judgement or normalisation (Chapman, 2021b; Fletcher-Watson, 2022).

In the field of inclusive pedagogy, it is therefore a priority for research to explore teacher conceptualisations (including misinterpretations) of neurodiversity and its relationship to inclusive practice. Pressures to compete with other schools, offer student choice, publish examination results, and achieve high academic standards lead to marginalisation of certain student groups. Even teachers with a commitment to social justice can inadvertently contribute to inequity of outcomes.

This can be particularly disconcerting for early career teachers (ECTs) when they transition from teacher training to their first teaching role. Difficulties translating inclusive principles into pedagogical practice within complex school systems, together with lack of confidence in how neurodivergent children might be supported, leads to what has been termed 'reality shock' (Mintz et al, 2020).

Theoretical perspectives on diversity do not develop through simple exposure to knowledge or a desire for social justice. Teachers need to be given capacity to develop and critically reflect on specialist theoretical resources that enable them to act in theoretically informed ways in the real school context (Seltzer-Kelly et al, 2011; Gilham & Tompkins, 2016; Naraian, 2014; Philpott, 2014). There remains great variability in teacher education programmes in the treatment of theoretical perspectives on inclusive principles and practice (Hick et al., 2019) and questions over the nature of this knowledge and how it should be embedded in teacher education programmes (Florian & Camedda, 2019). Principles and practice of working with diverse learners should be weaved in through teacher education, rather than being addressed as an afterthought (NASEN).

Future research directions

There is a growing need for research to challenge prevailing misconceptions about neurodiversity in education. By challenging societal assumptions of 'normalcy', future research should provide conceptual and pedagogical tools to advance understanding of the barriers to inclusive teaching in schools and increase teachers' capacity to adopt a more inclusive approach.

Existing literature focusing on teaching for diversity tends to relate to teachers' knowledge of facts and pedagogical strategies (Broomhead, 2013; Kang & Martin, 2018; Rowan et al., 2021) rather than exploring broader socio-critical perspectives on how teachers conceptualise diversity through engagement with theories relating to justice, difference, and identity. Further research should advance theoretical understanding of anti-essentialist perspectives (e.g., rejection of the concept of 'normalcy') of teachers.

In response to this need, and supported by funding from the ESRC, a research team from the University of Surrey will explore the relationship between ECTs' conceptualisations of neurodiversity and belief in their capacity for inclusive practice. Findings will advance understanding of potential barriers to inclusive pedagogy and lead to the design of a resource that will advance ECTs' understanding of neurodiversity and increase self-efficacy for inclusive practice. Its contribution aims to challenge the prevailing assumptions of normalcy in education, and the perception of difference as deficit that may be causing unwillingness by teachers to adapt their teaching in a way that could lead to systematic change.

- Dr Anna Cook (she/her) is a Developmental Psychologist and Future Fellow at the University of Surrey, specialising in neurodiversity and the improvement of access to education for all children and young people. Her current projects explore factors impacting the effectiveness of schools to meet the needs of neurodivergent pupils and the capacity of teachers to adopt inclusive approaches in complex learning environments.

[email protected]

References

Aitken & Wang, (2019), Learning Difficulties and Exclusion from School, Salvesen Mindroom Research Briefing, number 1.

Allan, J. (2006). The repetition of exclusion, International Journal of Inclusive Education, 10:2-3, 121-133.

Artiles, A. J., Harris-Murri, N., & Rostenberg, D. (2021). Inclusion as social justice: Critical notes on discourses, assumptions, and the road ahead. In Theory into practice (pp. 260-268). Routledge.

Baglieri, S., Bejoian, L. M., Broderick, A. A., Connor, D. J., & Valle, J. (2011). [Re]claiming "inclusive education" toward cohesion in educational reform: Disability studies unravels the myth of the normal child. Teachers College Record, 113(10), 2122-2154.

Baird, G, Simonoff, E, Pickles, A. (2006) Prevalence of disorders of the autism spectrum in a population cohort of children in South Thames: the Special Needs and Autism Project (SNAP). The Lancet 368(9531), 210–215.

Botha, M., & Frost, D. M. (2020). Extending the minority stress model to understand mental health problems experienced by the autistic population. Society and mental health, 10(1), 20-34.

Bottema-Beutel, K., Park, H., & Kim, S. Y. (2018). Commentary on social skills training curricula for individuals with ASD: Social interaction, authenticity, and stigma. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 48(3), 953-964.

Brady, K., & Woolfson, L. (2008). What teacher factors influence their attributions for children's difficulties in learning?. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(4), 527-544.

Broomhead, K. E. (2013). 'You cannot learn this from a book'; pre-service teachers developing empathy towards parents of children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) via parent stories. European Journal of Special Needs Education,28(2), 173-186.

Chapman, R. (2021a). Neurodiversity and the social ecology of mental functions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(6), 1360-1372.

Chapman, R. (2021b). Negotiating the neurodiversity concept: Towards epistemic justice in conceptualising health. Neurodiverse Age.

Department for Education (2018). Creating opportunity for all: Our vision for alternative provision. 

Department for Education (2022). Send Review: right support, right place, right time.

Department for Education (2021). Special educational needs in England: June 2021. 

DfE and Office for National Statistics. 2017. Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions in England: 2015 to 2016

Fletcher‐Watson, S. (2022). Transdiagnostic research and the neurodiversity paradigm: commentary on the transdiagnostic revolution in neurodevelopmental disorders by Astle et al. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 63(4) 418-420.

Florian, L. & Camedda, D. (2020). Enhancing teacher education for inclusion, European Journal of Teacher Education, 43:1, 4-8.

Ferguson, L. (2021). Vulnerable children's right to education, school exclusion, and pandemic law-making. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 26(1), 101-115.

Gilham, C. M., & Tompkins, J. (2016). Inclusion reconceptualized: Pre-service teacher education and disability studies in education. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l'éducation, 39(4), 1-25.

Gillborn, D. 2015. "Intersectionality, Critical Race Theory, and the Primacy of Racism: Race, Class, Gender, and Disability in Education." Qualitative Inquiry 21(3), 277-287.

Hick, P., Matziari, A., Mintz, J., Ó Murchú, F., Cahill, K., Hall, K., Curtin, C. & Solomon, Y. (2019). Initial teacher education for inclusion: Final report to the National Council for Special Education.

Humphrey, N., & Lewis, S. (2008). Make me normal' The views and experiences of pupils on the autistic spectrum in mainstream secondary schools. Autism, 12(1), 23-46.

Joshi, G., Faraone, S.V., Wozniak, J., Tarko, L., Fried, R., Galdo, M., … & Biederman, J. (2017). Symptom profile of ADHD in youth with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder: A comparative study in psychiatrically referred populations. Journal of Attention Disorders, 21, 846–855.

Kang, D. Y., & Martin, S. N. (2018). Improving learning opportunities for special education needs (SEN) students by engaging pre-service science teachers in an informal experiential learning course. ASIA pacific Journal of education,38(3), 319-347.

Kelly, B., Williams, S., Collins, S., Mushtaq, F., Mon-Williams, M., Wright, B., ... & Wright, J. (2019). The association between socioeconomic status and autism diagnosis in the United Kingdom for children aged 5–8 years of age: Findings from the Born in Bradford cohort. Autism, 23(1), 131-140.

Mintz, J., Hick, P., Solomon, Y., Matziari, A., Ó'Murchú, F., Hall, K., Cahill, K., Curtin, C., Anders, J. & Margariti, D. (2020). The reality of reality shock for inclusion: How does teacher attitude, perceived knowledge and self-efficacy in relation to effective inclusion in the classroom change from the pre-service to novice teacher year?. Teaching and Teacher Education, 91, 103042.

Monk, D. (2002), Children's rights in education – making sense of contradictions. Child & Family Law Quarterly 45 (unpaginated).

Naraian, S. (2014). Agency in real time? Situating teachers' efforts toward inclusion in the context of local and enduring struggles. Teachers College Record, 116(6), 1-38.

National Association of Special Educational Needs (NASEN). 

NICE (2019)

Orsati, F. T., & Causton-Theoharis, J. (2013). Challenging control: Inclusive teachers' and teaching assistants' discourse on students with challenging behaviour. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(5), 507-525.

Philpott, C. (2014). Socioculturally situated narratives as co-authors of student teachers' learning from experience. Teaching Education, 25(4), 391-409.

Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 50-58.

Rowan, L., Bourke, T., L'Estrange, L., Lunn Brownlee, J., Ryan, M., Walker, S., & Churchward, P. (2021). How does initial teacher education research frame the challenge of preparing future teachers for student diversity in schools? A systematic review of literature. Review of Educational Research, 91(1), 112-158.

Russell, G., Rodgers, L. R., Ukoumunne, O. C., & Ford, T. (2014). Prevalence of parent-reported ASD and ADHD in the UK: findings from the Millennium Cohort Study. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 44(1), 31-40.

Seltzer-Kelly, D. L., Cinnamon-Morrison, S., Cunningham, C. A., Gurland, S. T., Jones, K., & Toth, S. L. (2011). (Re) imagining teacher preparation for conjoint democratic inquiry in complex classroom ecologies. Complicity: An international journal of complexity and education, 8(1).

Walker, N. (2014). Neurodiversity: Some basic terms & definitions. Neurocosmopolitanism. September, 27. 

Woolfson, L., Grant, E., & Campbell, L. (2007). A comparison of special, general and support teachers' controllability and stability attributions for children's difficulties in learning. Educational Psychology, 27, 295-306.