From Deficits to Possibilities: Reimagining Special Education Through Neurodiversity

In the hi-tech world, new terminology often brings with it shifts in beliefs, habits, and systems. Concepts such as virtual meetings, digital wallets, and AI have not only transformed workplace practices but have also reshaped socialization, skill development, legal discourse, and healthcare. Language evolves, and with it, our understanding of what is possible.

Yet in education, particularly special education, the dominant narrative has remained remarkably stable for decades. Since the 1950s, conversations about children with special needs have been framed almost exclusively through a disability discourse [1]. Rooted in the medical model, this perspective treats disabilities as pathological conditions or deficits located within the individual that require remediation to approximate “normal” functioning [5]. This approach undoubtedly helped millions of students with learning disabilities, ADHD, and autism acquire foundational academic and communication skills. But it also narrowed the lens through which we understand learner variability.

A significant shift emerged in the 1990s from outside the medical arena. In a groundbreaking 1993 article, autistic writer Jim Sinclair argued that autism should be understood in terms of societal barriers rather than symptoms. Soon after, sociologist and self-advocate Judy Singer introduced the term neurodiversity, launching a social movement that reframed disability as a natural form of human diversity [20]. Singer’s work offered a panoramic view of disabilities grounded in post-modern, social constructionist, feminist, and disability rights perspectives. Central to her view was the acceptance and celebration of human diversity. But what does this celebration look like in academic practice?

According to the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (2019), neurodiversity-aligned programs strive “to create a world in which all people can benefit from whatever supports, services, therapies, educational tools, and assistive technologies may be necessary to empower them to participate fully in society, with respect and self-determination as guiding principles.”

This means shifting from a remediation-first mindset to one that prioritizes self-advocacy, natural skill development, the discovery of strengths, and the unlocking of potential.

What Educators Have Always Known: Strengths Change Trajectories

Teachers and caregivers have long observed that tapping into students’ talents can be transformative, raising self-esteem, improving well-being, and enhancing academic performance. Special educator Thomas Armstrong shares numerous examples from more than 30 years in the classroom. In one case, a student with severe behavioral challenges succeeded when their intervention plan incorporated music, a fidget tool for self-regulation, and drawing as preparation for writing [1]. In other cases, interests in journalism, fashion, math, or art became gateways to stronger academic performance and future aspirations.

Similar success stories from individuals with disabilities helped lay the foundation for strength-based education:

• Temple Grandin described the visual strengths of autistic thinkers [9].

• Kingsley and Levitz highlighted passion for learning, communication, and theater as strengths among individuals with Down syndrome [12].

• Eide and Eide developed the MIND model to unlock the potential of the dyslexic brain [6]. 

Research continues to show that talents can be leveraged into meaningful academic and career pathways [7].

Critical Thinking as the Pathway to Self-Determination

Foundational critical thinking skills, such as analyzing information, recognizing patterns, questioning assumptions, and evaluating options, serve as the gateway to self-determination and self-advocacy. When students learn to think critically about their learning experiences, they begin to understand how they learn, what supports they need, and why certain strategies work for them. This awareness empowers them to make informed decisions, articulate their preferences, and take an active role in shaping their educational journey [13]. In this way, critical thinking is not just an academic skill; it becomes the engine that drives autonomy, confidence, and the ability to advocate effectively for oneself in school and beyond.

Over the past two decades, research has consistently indicated the importance of strategy instruction for enhancing students’ conceptual understanding, their transfer and creative use of knowledge, and their ability to reflect on their own learning processes [4,18]. Studies have also shown that successful learners use effective strategies to process information [2,11,16,17]. In fact, findings suggest that explicit instruction plays a critical role in helping all students to use metacognitive strategies to learn more easily [8,13,23].

By focusing on skill development, we enable students to engage with different curricula and intervention programs with confidence and creativity. 

How My Learning Labs Advances Neurodiversity Values

Technological advances working in special education have a unique opportunity to bring the neurodiversity paradigm to life. My Learning Labs exemplifies this shift by designing learning experiences where student interests and voices become the foundation, and not the reward, of learning.

1. Learning Begins with Student Perspective

At My Learning Labs, student interests become the lesson topic. Skills are built around curiosity, allowing learners to:

• develop ideas from their own perspective,

• discover relationships between concepts, and

• share reasoning using academic language and dialogue.

  
  

This mirrors the neurodiversity commitment to self-determination, autonomy, and authentic engagement.

2. Strength-Based Skill Building

When instruction is built around strengths, learning becomes systematic, powerful, and transferable. A student who discovers that visual tools enhance comprehension can later apply that strategy to content-heavy units. In the same vein, summarizing facts and thoughts about students' video games increases overall participation. With proper guidance, these practices improve stamina, analytical thinking, organization, and strategic problem-solving.

3. Empowerment Through Conversation and Cognitive Tools

Drawing from Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory [21], My Learning Labs structures sessions as conversations that:

• strengthen analytical thinking,

• build critical reasoning,

• foster self-reflection, and

• promote autonomy.

This aligns with contemporary research on empowerment-oriented interventions, even for learners with severe disabilities [3].

4. Self-Advocacy as a Core Learning Outcome

The neurodiversity paradigm elevates self-advocacy to an essential component of learning and assessment [5]. My Learning Labs supports students in analyzing instructions, identifying patterns, and shaping learning environments that set them up for success. As students understand how they learn best, they gain the skills to advocate for themselves in classrooms and beyond.

A New Paradigm for Educators and Schools

Neurodiversity asks educators and administrators to rethink long-standing assumptions. Instead of viewing differences as deficits to fix, we can recognize them as variations in the human experience - variations that come with unique strengths, needs, and potentials.

My Learning Labs plays a crucial role in this transition. By designing learning environments that cultivate strengths, promote autonomy, and build authentic skills, they help move education from a deficit model to a possibility model.

The question is no longer How do we fix students? The question is How do we create systems where every learner can grow?

Neurodiversity offers the framework. Educators and technology innovators together can build the future.

References

1. Armstrong, T. (2012). Neurodiversity in the classroom: Strength-based strategies to help students with special needs succeed in school and life. ASCD.

2. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1986). Psychological theory and the study of learning disabilities. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1059–1068. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.10.1059

3. Cohn, E. G., & Harrison, M. J. (2025). From principle to practice: Creating neurodiversity-affirming learning environments for students with echolalia. Research in Autism, 126, 202628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reia.2025.202628

4. Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., & Lenz, B. K. (1984). Academic and cognitive interventions for LD adolescents: Part I. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948401700211

5. Dwyer, P. (2022). The neurodiversity approach(es): What are they and what do they mean for researchers? Human Development, 66(2), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1159/000523723

6. Eide, B. L., & Eide, F. F. (2023). The dyslexic advantage (revised and updated): Unlocking the hidden potential of the dyslexic brain. Hay House.

7. Fung, L. K. (2021). Neurodiversity: From phenomenology to neurobiology and enhancing technologies (1st ed.). Academic Press.

8. Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 323–344). The Guilford Press.

9. Grandin, T. (2022). Visual thinking: The hidden gifts of people who think in pictures, patterns, and abstractions. Riverhead Books.

10. Hartman, H. J. (2001). Developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and skills. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction (Neuropsychology and Cognition, Vol. 19). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2243-8_3

11. Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1992). Self-regulated strategy development: A part of the writing process. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 277–309). Academic Press.

12. Kingsley, J., & Levitz, M. (2007). Count us in: Growing up with Down syndrome. Harvest Book.

13. Meltzer, L. (Ed.). (2010). Promoting executive function in the classroom (What works for special-needs learners). Guilford Press.

14. Meltzer, L., & Krishnan, K. (2007). Executive function difficulties and learning disabilities. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive function in education: From theory to practice. The Guilford Press.

15. Meltzer, L., & Reid, D. K. (1994). New directions in the assessment of students with special needs: The shift toward a constructivist perspective. The Journal of Special Education, 28(3), 338–355.https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699402800308

16. Palincsar, A. S., Winn, J., David, Y., Snyder, B., & Stevens, D. (1993). Approaches to strategic reading instruction reflecting different assumptions regarding teaching and learning. In L. J. Meltzer (Ed.), Strategy assessment and instruction for students with learning disabilities (pp. 247–270). PRO-ED.

17. Pressley, M., Goodchild, F., Fleet, J., Zajchowski, R., & Evans, E. D. (1989). The challenges of classroom strategy instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 89(3), 301–342. https://doi.org/10.1086/461578

18. Pressley, M., & Woloshyn, V. (1995). Cognitive strategy instruction that really improves children’s academic performance. Brookline Books.

19. Sinclair, J. (1993). Don’t mourn for us. Our Voice: Autism Network International Newsletter, 1(3). https://www.autreat.com/dont_mourn.html

20. Singer, J. (2017). NeuroDiversity: The birth of an idea. CreateSpace.

21. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press.

22. Winn, J. A., & Palincsar, A. S. (n.d.). Reading instruction in childhood and adolescence (Chapter 7, pp. 137–162).

23. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.