Authors: Pamela Crooke, PhD, CCC-SLP and Michelle Garcia Winner, MA, CCC-SLP

Neurodiversity is important. Navigating the social world is important, too. We believe both are important, have value, and are worthy of a deeper discussion.

First, we all need to be on the same page in the ways in which we define each. Neurodiversity, in most cases, refers to the idea that differences in human brain function should be recognized and respected. So, individuals who may have a diagnosis of, for example, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or autism spectrum, do not have a disorder but instead learn differently. In other words, brain and learning differences are just that—brain and learning differences. Proponents would argue that these differences in learning styles result from differences in brain wiring, and that all learning styles are acceptable and should be respected as such.

Neurodiversity and multiple intelligences

The Neurodiversity movement is complementary to the principles of multiple intelligences (MI). MI proposes a broader view of intelligence as multi-dimensional, rather than a limited view of intelligence based on standardized IQ testing (Gardner, 1983). Gardner proposed varying types of intelligences which became a catalyst for a wider recognition of several types of intelligences. He noted that an athlete or artist can have intelligence that doesn’t show up on standardized testing but is equally important to nurture. He also proposed that by understanding a person’s profile of intelligences, we can identify strength-based channels, which might encourage learning in a manner that may not be as accessible through a weaker channel. Many schools today have adopted the principles of MI as they consider differing types of learners.

Few would argue that children come to school with a wide range of innate abilities in their mathematical, linguistic, spatial/artistic, naturalistic, and athletic intelligences. And our role, as parents and educators, is to help them grow, improve, and expand to the best of their abilities based on their individual starting points. We still teach math to children, even though some may be wired with stronger mathematical abilities. We don’t question why we teach history and science in the curriculum, but what about interpersonal and intrapersonal instruction (two types of intelligences that have been shown to be among the most critical for adult success)? In fact, social emotional competencies are integral to working in a group, understanding perspectives in reading fiction, writing for different audiences, and interacting with others. In some ways, inter/intrapersonal intelligence intersects and touches every part of the home and school day.

To take this example a little further, we are all clearly diverse in our bodily-kinesthetic and visual-spatial intelligences. Some of us are neurologically gifted in our coordination and creativity, while others of us must work to just do the basics.