Neurodiversity: More than Just a Good Notion

Two recent articles highlight the positive dimensions of mental health conditions such as autism, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. In the journal Nature, an article by Canadian neuroscientist Laurent Mottron, emphasizes the advantages of autism (Mottron, 2011). Mottron suggests that, in addition to the well-known savant abilities of a small sub-section of autistic individuals, there are also assets in a broader segment of that population, including their ability to process large pieces of perceptual information. This results in among other things, an often-superior performance on non-verbal, highly visual assessments such as the Raven’s Progressive Matrices.
 
In New Scientist, science writer Kate Ravilious reports how the genes for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other psychiatric conditions may have given our ancestors an evolutionary advantage by providing unusual ways of thinking that helped spark the development of culture (Ravilious, 2011).

These two articles hint at a theoretical concept—neurodiversity—that has been emerging over the past decade, one that promises to revolutionize the way we think about mental illness and developmental disabilities. This new theory suggests that we should celebrate differences in brains just as we honor differences in flowers (biodiversity) and societies (cultural diversity). We don’t say that a calla lily has “petal deficit disorder,” but value it for its own intrinsic worth. Similarly, we don’t say of people from Holland that they have “altitude deprivation syndrome,” but rather we appreciate the country’s unique geographic features.
 
Neurodiversity similarly suggests that we honor differences in brains, even when those brains initially appear to be defective. Interestingly, the term neurodiversity did not originate within the scientific community as a “top down” phenomenon, but rather came from the disability community, and in particular, the autistic community. It thus represents a “bottom up” grassroots movement (Solomon, 2008).

In a seminal article for the neurodiversity movement, “Don’t Mourn for Us”, autism rights activist, Jim Sinclair, suggested that autism is not a disease or a life sentence, but rather, something positive and worthy of exploration and development (Sinclair, 1993).  The actual use of the word “neurodiversity” first occurred in a 1998 Atlantic Monthly article in which journalist Harvey Blume wrote: “Neurodiversity may be every bit as crucial for the human race as biodiversity is for life in general” (Blume, 1998). Since that time, neurodiversity has been the subject of, among others, bloggers (Seidel, 2004-2011), journalists (Harmon, 2004), essayists (Antonetta, 2007), public policy experts (Baker, 2010), educators in higher education (Pollock, 2009), and special educators (Hendrickx, 2010).

Neurodiversity as a 21st Century Challenge

This new approach to human differences strikes at the heart of the medical model, which has been the primary 20th Century discourse used to talk about people with mental health labels. Instead of focusing purely on defects and deficits, the field of neurodiversity proposes that equal attention be given to the assets, advantages, and abilities of individuals who are wired differently from those who are “neuro-typical” (Armstrong, 2011).

While the rapid growth of knowledge about the human brain in the past two decades has given us more information about the regions of the brain that are damaged or diseased in individuals with psychiatric conditions, this research also promises to reveal something about the positive dimensions of those with mental and developmental disabilities. Mottron (2011), for example, includes fMRI images depicting the perceptual regions of the brain activating more among autistics than non-autistics during a non-verbal intelligence test. Similarly, research suggests that individuals with dyslexia utilize more of their right hemisphere when reading than non-dyslexic readers (Eide, 2011). In the field of genetics, a “novelty-seeking” gene has been identified and associated with individuals diagnosed with ADHD (Hartmann, 2003).
 
This new look at the positive side of what have traditionally been seen as negative conditions does not mean that we should glorify what are in many cases very challenging disorders. But it suggests that we should complement what we already know about the difficulties and problems associated with mental health diagnoses, with a look at the strengths and capabilities of these individuals. Such a project is perfectly in line with the new field of “positive psychology” championed by Martin Seligman (2002), the “capability approach” of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum (1993), and the “strength-based approach” utilized increasingly in the fields of social work, counseling, and psychotherapy (Rudolph and Epstein, 2002).

Practical Applications

The practical implications of neurodiversity are considerable, in that a positive approach to mental health provides an opportunity for researching the optimal conditions for growth that can promote the well being of individuals with autism, dyslexia, ADHD, schizophrenia, and other conditions. Since neurodiversity is basically an ecological conception, I’ve used the evolutionary term “niche construction” (e.g. a spider spinning a web, a beaver building a dam etc.) to designate the process of building environmental supports to help negatively labeled individuals lead full lives (including the use of key learning strategies, assistive technologies, environmental modifications, and human resources).

One excellent example of niche construction can be found in Denmark at a computer software firm called Specialisterne, which hires 75% of its employees from individuals on the autistic spectrum (Austen, 2008). These individuals are particularly adept at computer programming, enjoy detailed work, get to work alone, and are being rewarded according to their strengths rather than penalized or patronized because of their disabilities.
 
Educators who wish to help individuals flourish who are beset with mental health labels would do well to investigate this emerging field of neurodiversity, and work to design programs and environments in schools that will assist such students in reaching their fullest potential. The use of iPads for children with autism, rubber ball chairs for students with ADHD, speech to text software for students with dyslexia, and self-monitoring devices for students with emotional and behavioral disorders, are just a few of the many strategies that can be used to build positive and nurturing environments for those whose brains are “differently wired” (Armstrong, forthcoming).

Resources and Further Reading 

Antonetta, S. (2007). A Mind Apart: Travels in a Neurodiverse World. New York: Tarcher.

Armstrong, T. (2011) The Power of Neurodiversity: Unleashing the Advantages of Your Differently Wired Brain, Cambridge, MA: DeCapo, (published in hardcover as: Neurodiversity: Discovering the Extraordinary Gifts of Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia and Other Brain Differences). Reviewed from Information Age Education Newsletter: http://i-a-e.org/newsletters/IAE-Newsletter-2011-63.html

Armstrong, T. (forthcoming) Neurodiversity in the Classroom: A Strength-Based Approach to Teaching Students with Special Needs. 

Austin, R., Wareham, J., and Busquets, X. (2008) Specialisterne: Sense and Details, HBS case study 9-608-109, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School. 

Baker, D.L. (2010). The Politics of Neurodiversity: Why Public Policy Matters, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. 

Blume, H. (September, 1998) “Neurodiversity: On the Neurological Underpinnings of Geekdom,” Atlantic Monthly. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/09/neurodiversity/5909/. The article contains an incorrect link to the Institute for the Study of Neurologically Typical. The correct link is http://isnt.autistics.org/

Eide, B and F. (2011), The Dyslexic Advantage: Unlocking the Hidden Potential of the Dyslexic Brain, New York: Hudson Street Press/Penguin. 

Epstein, R. and M. (2002) “Empowering Children and Families Through Strength-Based Assessment,” Reclaiming Children and Youth, 8(4): 207-209. 

Harmon, A. (May 9, 2009). “Neurodiversity Forever: The Disability Movement Turns to Brains,” The New York Times. 

Hartmann, T. (2003) The Edison Gene: ADHD and the Gift of the Hunter Child, Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press. 

Hendrickx, S. (2010). The Adolescent and Adult Neuro-Diversity Handbook: Asperger’s Syndrome, ADHD, Dyslexia, Dyspraxia, and Related Conditions. London: Jessica Kinsley Pub.

Mottron, L. (November 2, 2011) “The Power of Autism,” Nature, vol. 479, pp. 33-35. Online: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7371/full/479033a.html 

Pollock, D. (2009). Neurodiversity in Higher Education: Positive Responses to Specific Learning Differences. New York: John Wiley. 

Ravilious, K. (Novembr 7, 2011) “Misfit Minds: Mental Problems Gave Early Humans an Edge,” New Scientist. No., 2837. 

Seidel, K. (2004-2011), www.neurodiversity.com

Seligman, M. (2002). Authentic Happiness: Using the New Positive Psychology to Realize Your Potential for Lasting Fulfillment. New York: Free Press. 

Sen, A. (1993) “Capability and Well-Being,” in Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen, (eds.), The Quality of Life. New York: Oxford Clarendon Press. 

Sinclair, J. (1993) “Don’t Mourn for Us,” http://www.autreat.com/dont_mourn.html

Solomon, A. (May 25, 2008)“The Autism Rights Movement,” New York Magazine.

This article is reprinted from the Information Age Education Newsletter, December, 2011, Issue #79.  http://i-a-e.org/newsletters/IAE-Newsletter-2011-79.html

Posted in autism, mood disorders, Neurodiversity, neuroscience, schizophrenia, Special Education | Leave a comment

Seeing the Best in Every Child: The Importance of Neurodiversity

  Imagine that all of the people in the world have been magically transformed into flowers. Some of us are petunias.  Others are begonias.  Still others are tulips.  Now, let’s say for the sake of argument that the psychiatrists in this culture are the roses. I want you to imagine the rose psychiatrist beginning his work day and seeing a child who happens to be a sunflower.  The rose subjects the sunflower to a thorough examination (including measuring its height), and at the end of the exam, the psychiatrist offers his diagnosis:  “I’m sorry, but you have hugism.  It’s usually treatable if caught in time, but I’m afraid in your case we didn’t catch it early enough.”  The sunflower leaves the room with its head drooping.  The next child to see the doctor is a tiny bluet.  The psychiatrist spends some time examining the bluet, and eventually comes to this conclusion:  “My informed diagnosis, bluet, is that you have a growing disability.  We believe it’s genetic.  But with appropriate identification and treatment, you can learn to live a successful and productive life in a plot of sandy loam somewhere.”  The bluet leaves the office feeling even smaller than when it came in.  Finally, a cally lily enters the psychiatrist’s office.  The doctor doesn’t even need to do a formal assessment to make a diagnosis:  “You, my friend, have petal deficit disorder.  It’s a tricky syndrome, but there are medications out there that can help.  In fact, a herbicide representative left some free samples with me, in case you like to try some.”  

            This little imagination game may sound a bit silly.  But, in fact, psychiatrists are doing this all the time when they label children as having “autism,” “learning disabilities,” “attention deficit disorder,” and a wide range of other mental health labels.  We have become a culture of disabilities.  Back in the early 1960’s, with the publication of the first Diagnostic and Statistical Manual  (AKA the psychiatrist’s bible) there were about 100 mental disorders.  In the current edition, this number has tripled, and the version slated to come out in 2013, threatens to have even more disabilities, including psychosis risk syndrome, temper dysfunctional disorder, and hoarding disorder.  An article in the Archives of General Psychiatry reports that over the course of their lifetime, roughly one half of all adults in the United States will suffer some form of mental disorder.  One Harvard psychiatrist says that in addition to diagnosable psychiatric conditions, there are also “sub-clinical” disorders that he calls “shadow syndromes” that afflict even more Americans.  Ultimately, we’re getting to the point where virtually everyone will have some kind of psychiatric disorder.  At this point, it is no longer meaningful to talk about disorders.  Instead, we need to shift paradigms and speak, instead, of diversities, and specifically, of neurodiversity. 

            The term “neurodiversity” was first used in an Atlantic magazine article about ten years ago and has been embraced by the autism rights movement and other disability organizations as a positive way of discussing what have been up to this point identified as “disorders.”  It serves as a more helpful paradigm than the current disease-based medical model when talking about a broad range of brain differences from bipolar disorder and schizophrenia to ADHD and dyslexia. Many of these conditions, previously seen as entirely negative, in fact have specific advantages and abilities associated with them.  Research indicates that dyslexics, for example, often possess particularly strong spatial skills. (Many of the poor readers in my special education programs were great doodlers, drawers, and Lego® experts).  People with autism often have a special knack for understanding logical and detailed systems, from machines and train schedules to computers and mathematics. A Stanford study revealed that children with bipolar disorder (or at risk for bipolar disorder) had higher creativity scores than more typically developing children.  And kids with ADHD may be more likely to have what’s called a “novelty-seeking” or “curiosity-seeking” gene.  There is interesting and compelling research from the field of evolutionary psychology suggesting that each of these “disorders” may have had specific advantages for our ancestors, explaining why the genes for these conditions are still part of the gene pool.  The autistic individual’s penchant for details and systemizing, for example, may have come in handy when designing a spear or classifying healing and poisonous plants.  The ADHD person’s hyperactivity may have been just what was required for hunting wild game. (In fact, one writer has characterized people with ADHD as “hunters in a farmer’s world”).  The bipolar individual may have been graced with extra dynamism in the manic phase of their mood cycle to provide the energy for hunting, or for the sexual or aggressive drives needed to procreate and pass on one’s genes. 

            The practical implication of all this for parents and educators, is that we need to celebrate diversity among our children’s brains as much as we honor biodiversity and cultural diversity. Specifically, we should craft environments or ecologies that fit the unique contours of our children’s specific advantages.  I’ve called this process “niche construction.”  This is what animals do all the time to survive in the wild:  from a spider spinning a web and a beaver building a dam to a group of bees building a hive or ants building an ant hill.  Each of these species is modifying the surrounding environment to make it hospitable to the unique features of that species.  In the same way, we need to help each neurodiverse child find their unique niche so they can flourish.  Typically, we don’t think of modifying the surrounding environment to fit the child. Rather, we expect the child to fit the environment, which is like making the square peg fit into the round hole.  This task is made even more difficult when we approach the child with negative expectations, beginning with the pejorative labels we use to identify these kids (LD, ADHD, MR, ED, bipolar etc.), and extending to our diminished expectations of them. Neurodiversity challenges us to see the very best in every child, and to seek ways to maximize their strengths and minimize their difficulties in a way that allows them to succeed in life. 

            There are a number of components in constructing positive niches for neurodiverse kids.  These include:

Strength awareness:  we should learn all we can about the strengths, talents, abilities, capacities, and interests of neurodiverse children, and communicate our understanding of these strengths to these kids, so that they grow up with a positive sense of who they are. We should also become familiar with the scientific literature that supports the presence of strengths in particular mental health conditions. The Power of Neurodiversity offers a comprehensive survey of the literature; 

Positive role models:  we need to let our children know about famous people (as well as successful people from our communities) who struggled with mental health conditions like depression (Abraham Lincoln), ADHD (Thomas Edison), dyslexia (Richard Branson), bipolar disorder (Florence Nightingale), and autism (Temple Grandin), and overcame their obstacles to achieve success in life;

Assistive technologies:  we ought to become familiar with a wide range of technologies that can make life for our neurodiverse children easier and more productive, including speech to text software for dyslexics, augmentative and alternative communication software for autism and children with intellectual disabilities, and self-monitoring devices for children with emotional or behavioral difficulties; 

Key learning strategies:  we need to acquaint ourselves with the kinds of learning methods out there that are tailored to the needs and strengths of our neurodiverse children, including highly physical learning for ADHD kids, intensive reading remediation software programs for dyslexics, and the Floortime Model for autistic children; 

Human resources:  we should know how to create a rich network of human relationships that supports and nourishes the lives of our neurodiverse children, from teachers and psychotherapists to peers and coaches; 

Positive career aspirations: we need to hold images of positive careers for our neurodiverse children so that when they reach adulthood they will find work that is meaningful and satisfying to them. We should be familiar with how certain jobs are particularly well suited to specific mental health conditions, including computer programming for higher functioning autistic individuals, graphic art for dyslexics, and firefighting for kids with ADHD; 

Environmental modifications: we must familiarize ourselves with how the outer environment can be tweaked to make it more livable for our neurodiverse children, from sound-control for autistic kids with auditory sensitivities, to highly graphic direction signs for children with intellectual disabilities, to safe and predictable facilities for kids with emotional and behavioral difficulties. 

            Constructing appropriate niches makes all the difference in the world for neurodiverse children, giving them a chance to flourish.  All too often, parents and educators construct negative niches for children that suck them into spirals of failure and defeat.  Imagine, for example, an autistic child without the technology to communicate having to learn in a classroom with scraping chalk and school bells ringing every forty minutes, and having her special interest in dinosaurs being taken away from her because of misbehavior.  That same child using an iPad to communicate, wearing headphones to block out unwanted noise, and sharing her special dinosaur interests with the class, will have a much greater opportunity to achieve success in learning and in life.  It’s time that we said goodbye to negative, deficit-oriented approaches to helping children with special needs.  The concept of neurodiversity promises to revolutionize the way we think about kids who are “differently wired.”

Published at Funderstanding website (click here)

Posted in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), autism, dyslexia, Neurodiversity, Special Education | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Human Odyssey Featured on New Dimensions Radio This Week

This week’s edition of New Dimensions Radio features an interview with Michael Toms on my book The Human Odyssey, which was released in 2008.  In the book I take the reader on an experiential journey through the human life span from pre-birth to death and beyond.  Using material from fields as disparate as brain research, mysticism, mythology, anthropology, and world art and literature, I attempt to construct a picture of each of 12 stages of life:  prebirth, birth, infancy, early childhood, middle childhood, late childhood, adolescence, early adulthood, midlife, mature adulthood, late adulthood, and death.  One of the key tenets of the book is that each of these stages has its own unique gift to give to humanity.  They are, as follows:

  • Prebirth – Potential
  • Birth – Hope
  • Infancy – Vitality
  • Early Childhood – Playfulness
  • Middle Childhood – Imagination
  • Late Childhood – Ingenuity
  • Adolescence – Passion
  • Early Adulthood – Enterprise
  • Midlife – Contemplation
  • Mature Adulthood – Benevolence
  • Late Adulthood – Wisdom
  • Death – Life

We need to support each stage of life, within ourselves (for we carry each stage of life inside of ourselves as inner forces), with our family and friends who are at different stages than our own, and with the broader community.  We need to keep in mind that as we go about our day, we encounter individuals at different stages of life, who have different needs, agendas, desires, hopes, and goals.  The infant needs to be held and loved, the adolescent needs to be initiated into adulthood, the elder needs someone to tell his life story to.  We need to do what we can to fight child abuse, elder abuse, adolescent suicide, and other lifespan problems.  Most of all, we need to recognize that each stage of the journey is precious and needs to be considered as an integral part of the whole spectrum of human development.

To order the book, click here.

Posted in human development | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Thomas Armstrong To Lecture in Brazil

This next week I travel to Brazil to present at two conferences, one in Sao Paulo (May 19), and one in Sao Luis (May 26).  I’ll be speaking about ADHD and neurodiversity.  For my ADHD presentation, I’ll be lecturing on the growing medicalization of our schools, where children are routinely medicated for not fitting into the “worksheet wasteland” in our classrooms.  I’ll also be talking about neurodiversity, a concept that emerged from the autism community in the late 1990′s, which suggests that people with psychiatric labels be seen as “different” not “disabled.”  Neurodiversity provides a way of talking about the strengths of people with autism, ADHD, dyslexia and other brain differences.  People with autism, for example, have enhanced perceptual functioning.  They’re great at focusing on details, not the big picture.  They’re systematizers not empathizers.  Taking this perspective allows us to generate new solutions to help them achieve their full potential.   If you’d like more information about the lectures I’ll be giving, click here.   When I get back, I’ll share my experience of visiting Brazil!

Posted in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Education, Neurodiversity | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

21st Century Learning: What Is It Really?

I’ve noticed a new buzz word hovering around educational circles these days.  It’s called 21st century learning.  My first reaction to this is:  aren’t we living in the 21st century?  And doesn’t that mean that any kind of learning we engage in is 21st century learning?  Well, I suppose that’s unfair.  What the people behind this term really mean, I think, is that there are a host of new abilities and skills that are required to be successful  in this particular century, and they don’t include jousting tournaments (11th century), Aristotelian logic (13th century), madrigal singing (16th century), or laying down railroad tracks (19th century). 

So, what are these new skills?  I went online and checked out the number one Google site for this term and discovered The Partnership for 21st Century Skills.  They have a graphic that details what seems to encompass this term.  It includes:  4 C’s:  critical thinking, collaboration, communication, and creativity.  It also includes the 3 R’s (reading, writing, and arithmetic) (I thought these were 19th or 20th century skills!).  Let me get back to creativity.  It seems to me that creativity has been useful in just about every century since recorded time.  But it has also seemed to me that the schools are generally quite antagonistic to creativity.  I’m reminded of a quote from the anthropologist Jules Henry, who wrote “The schools have never been places for the stimulation of young minds.  If all through school the young were provoked to question the Ten Commandments, the sanctity of revealed religion, the foundations of patriotism, the profit motive, the two-party system, monogamy, the laws of incest, and so on, we would have more creativity than we could handle. ”  Oh yes, we’ll allow them a little token creativity (“think of as many uses for a paperclip as you can”), that is, if there’s time after the standardized tests (which are a great stifler of creativity), but if we really committed ourselves to creativity in the schools, then those tests would have to go, along with grades, textbooks, worksheets, and most of the other pablum that is doled out to students on a regular basis.  

Moving along to the rest of the 4 C’s, communication and collaboration don’t seem to be unique to the 21st century – we’ve needed those skills since the Stone Age.  And criticial thinking – well, this was very big in the 1980′s, especially in the form of Socratic questioning (which makes them 5th century B.C. skills).  But again, if we really engage students in thinking critically about everything, then we’re back to creativity and its threatening aspects to school bureaucratic structure.   

There are some other 21st century skills listed, including Information, Media, and Technology skills.  Now, here, we’re talking something genuinely 21st centuryish.  But is this something we need to teach students, or are they already up to their eyebrows in technology?  I’m afraid there’s a little bit of the Luddite in me coming to the fore when I say that part of living in the 21st century involves keeping technology (blogging, tweating, posting, texting etc.) at bay so that we can continue to experience ourselves as whole human beings.  Back in the 1980′s (why do I keep going back there?) I knew a guy named Craig Brod who wrote a book called Technostress.  The book didn’t do very well.  They didn’t even do a paperback edition of it.  But I’ve noticed the term surfacing from time to time on the internet.  And it seems to me to be a neglected concept.  I think 21st century skills should include the ability to cope effectively with Technostress, and keep it from fragmenting the soul, or whatever is left of it. 

Perhaps 21st century skills should involve the process of staying human, even as forces around us seek to dehumanize ourselves.  This might mean retreating into a good 19th century novel from time to time, or keeping a 20th century perspective on humanity (we’re retreating in time from the Holocaust and the World Wars and I fear perhaps forgetting what we must never forget).  Of course, we’ve got a whole new bunch of problems.  Perhaps 21st century skills should include radiation management (e.g. what to do if your nuclear power plant blows up), or Terrorism 101 (to understand and prevent it, of course!).  Speaking of terrorism, it seems one of the problems with that, is there are a group of people still living in the middle ages who are being dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century, and they don’t like it. 

At any rate, I think this term 21st century skills, is, overall, a bit silly.  Can’t we just say that our kids need a quality education, without having to dress it up in 21st century guise?  Of course, educators love to throw around buzz words.  I’m still throwing around “multiple intelligences” as a buzz term, even though many would argue that it’s “so 1990′s”!  So I understand the penchant for dressing up education concepts in a pretty bow (no, that metaphor sounds a little too 18th century!).  But can’t we just stand back a little and say that what we really want for our kids is to be passionate about learning, kind to others, and thoughtful in their actions?  I suppose there is much more to it than this but I think these skills would pass muster in just about any century.  What do you think?

Posted in Education | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment