Neurodivergence in the ELT classroom: think differently

Sometimes, a learner might give an unexpected, off-beat answer to a question or they approach an activity in a way that feels slightly out of step with the rest of the group. Perhaps, instead, they seem disengaged or unwilling to participate in group tasks. It is very easy, in these moments, to interpret what we are seeing through the familiar lenses of language proficiency or behaviour. However, these are not always the most helpful explanations. For some learners, it may simply be that they learn and process information in ways that aren’t always best supported in the classroom.

In this article, we’ll focus on three ideas from contemporary neurodiversity research that can help us interpret potential learner challenges differently. These ideas move us away from more traditional, deficit-based assumptions about neurodivergent learner abilities and towards a more flexible understanding of how neurodivergent learners may engage with language, helping us to build more inclusive, neurodiversity-affirming classrooms.

A brief note on neurodiversity

‘Neurodiversity’ is the term that describes the many and varied ways that humans process information, experience the social and sensory worlds around them, think and communicate. Those who are ‘neurodivergent’ experience differences in these domains – differences which were historically thought of as rare and categorised as impairments.

Current figures now suggest that around 20% of people are neurodivergent in some way. However, this is likely an underestimation, due to diagnostic barriers for certain (often already minoritised) groups of people, cultural differences in how we think about neurodivergence and ‘masking’ behaviours – where people hide or ‘mask’ their neurodivergent traits. In practice, this means that most teachers are already working with neurodivergent learners, whether or not this is formally identified or learners themselves are aware of it.

A central idea within the neurodiversity paradigm is that cognitive differences are both natural and valuable – as well as being experienced as disabling in certain contexts. Just as biodiversity strengthens ecosystems, a diversity of minds contributes to healthy, functioning societies. From this perspective, different ways of thinking and communicating are understood as valid differences that deserve support to thrive.

These labels (e.g. neurodivergent; neurotypical) help us talk about the differences described above, but they aren’t as fixed as they might seem. What we think of as ‘typical’ is shaped by social and cultural expectations. For teachers working in international contexts, this is particularly important. Expectations about communication, behaviour and learning vary across cultures, and so do perceptions of difference.

Rethinking how learners ‘do language’

As language teachers, whether we realise it or not, we often guide learners to communicate in ways that fit within a sometimes quite narrow set of norms. Often these reflect first language speaker norms, but they are also shaped by neurotypical expectations about how interaction should look: how quickly to respond, how to show engagement, how to take turns or how to build rapport. Because these expectations are so familiar to many of us, they can become almost invisible. However, there is more than one way to communicate well.

The concept of ‘languaging’ offers a helpful way to reframe how we think about language use. Originally suggested by Merrill Swain (2007), the term invites us to think of language as an active process of making meaning, shaping knowledge and negotiating understanding with others. Meaningful communication takes place within the interaction between two individuals, not in the perfect execution of grammar or vocabulary. Seen in this way, it becomes easier to recognise that there may be many different ways of engaging in this process. Some learners may ‘do language’ in slightly different ways to their peers, but this doesn’t mean that those ways are less valid.

The three ideas below offer different perspectives on how this might play out in practice.

The double empathy problem

Communication between neurodivergent and neurotypical people can sometimes go awry. Usually, in these circumstances, the blame is often placed on the neurodivergent communicator, with misunderstandings thought to be a result of their communicative ‘failures’ or an assumed lack of social understanding.

The double empathy problem, originally proposed by Damian Milton (2012), offers an alternative explanation. It suggests that communication difficulties arise from a mismatch between two people who experience and interpret the world in different ways. In other words, communication breakdown is not a one-sided neurodivergent impairment, but a two-way misalignment.

There has been a lot of research now – mostly focused on interactions between neurotypical and autistic people – that supports the double empathy problem. This has shown how neurotypical people have difficulty reading autistic people’s emotional states, how neurotypical people have a tendency to form negative first impressions about autistic people that affect their willingness to interact with them, and how autistic people experience high levels of mutual understanding when interacting with other autistic individuals.

Having an awareness of the double empathy problem in the classroom really matters, because if a learner seems disengaged, gives an unexpected response or doesn’t follow the ‘normal’ interaction pattern, it might not be a language problem. For example, a student might respond to a discussion question in a way that seems tangential, but which makes sense within their own line of reasoning. Another might avoid eye contact or small talk, not out of disinterest, but because these forms of interaction feel uncomfortable or unnecessary. Recognising this doesn’t mean abandoning expectations altogether, but it does encourage a more cautious approach to interpretation. It can be helpful to pause before drawing conclusions and to consider what else might be going on.

Practical considerations:

• Remember the double empathy problem can affect teacher–student communication – you may need to rethink how you explain a language point or deliver instructions. Your way of understanding something may not necessarily match that of your learners.
• Try to avoid making negative assumptions about behaviour based on neurotypical norms – what looks on the surface like disinterest might in fact be intense focus, sensory dysregulation or overwhelm; what feels like warmth to one speaker might read as overfamiliarity to someone else.
• Allow flexible language use – make space for variation, especially in functional or social language. Small talk might be incredibly uncomfortable for some students and they might approach building rapport differently.
• Model and practise speaker and listener repair strategies – learners benefit from developing strategies to repair communication when things go wrong, and from becoming more aware of how meaning is shaped by context. These are valuable skills in any communicative setting, especially in a world where English is used across diverse groups of speakers.

Monotropism and attention

A second idea that can help us better understand some of our neurodivergent learners is one that relates to attention. Monotropism describes a pattern often associated with neurodivergence (usually autism or ADHD) in which attention is focused deeply on one area at a time, rather than distributed across multiple inputs. A useful metaphor is to think of (neuro)typical attention as an overhead light that illuminates a whole room, while monotropic attention is more like a torch – narrow, but very bright.

This kind of attentional focus can be a significant strength. When learners are able to sustain attention, they may enter a state of deep engagement or ‘flow’, where they are fully absorbed in what they are doing. In these moments, learning can feel productive and enjoyable. At the same time, this pattern of attention can make certain classroom demands more challenging. Tasks that require rapid shifts in focus, multitasking or frequent interruptions can be difficult, not because of a lack of willingness, but because attention is already fully engaged elsewhere.

In the classroom, this may be visible in different ways. A learner might become very absorbed in a task and find it difficult to stop when the activity changes. Another might struggle to listen and write at the same time, or to follow instructions while processing other information.

Small adjustments in classroom practice can make a noticeable difference here. Allowing learners time to stay with a task when they are fully engaged can support deeper learning. Where transitions are necessary, giving advance warning or using clear signals can help learners shift attention more comfortably.

It can also be useful to think about how tasks are structured. Activities that require multiple things to happen at once can be broken into stages, reducing cognitive load. In some cases, allowing learners to work independently or at their own pace may support more effective engagement.

For younger learners and teenagers in particular, interest plays an important role in sustaining attention. Where possible, connecting tasks to topics that learners find engaging can help maintain focus and motivation. This does not require a complete redesign of the curriculum, but small elements of choice or personalisation can make a difference.

Practical considerations:

• Allowing flow time – when a student is ‘in the zone’, try to give them uninterrupted time to explore a task.
• Supporting attention shifts – help students manage transitions between tasks or topics, using clear cues, timely warning and gentle scaffolding.
• Valuing depth over breadth – provide opportunities for and celebrate detailed exploration, not just speed or coverage of multiple tasks.
• Considering alone time – monotropic learners might prefer to work by themselves for certain activities or need additional time on tasks.

Gestalt language processing

The third useful concept relates to how language may be acquired and used differently by some neurodivergent learners.

Gestalt language processing describes a tendency, reported by some neurodivergent individuals, to acquire language in chunks (such as large phrases or scripts) rather than building it word by word. These chunks are then gradually broken down and recombined over time. This may include the use of repeated or echoed language (sometimes called ‘echolalia’), which is now increasingly understood as meaningful and communicative. What may appear to be simple repetition can, in fact, serve a clear purpose for the speaker.

Although gestalt language processing has more often been discussed in terms of first language acquisition, this top-down (rather than bottom-up) method of language learning aligns closely with a potentially familiar teaching methodology in ELT, namely the ‘lexical approach’ (Lewis, 1993). The lexical approach is a language teaching methodology that emphasises lexical chunks (collocations, fixed phrases, idioms and other commonly co-occurring word combinations) as the primary building blocks of language, rather than focusing solely on individual words or grammar rules. Thinking about language as a collection of meaningful chunks can help us understand how some neurodivergent second language learners may prefer to encounter new language in the classroom.

Practical considerations

• Incorporate the lexical approach into activities or the curriculum – encourage learners to identify and record lexical chunks and fixed phrases in texts they read or when listening to new language.
• Provide repeated exposure to multiword phrases in different contexts to support internalisation and recall.
• Explore chunk recycling – invite learners to reuse familiar phrases or scripts from earlier lessons or favourite media and encourage them to explore ways in which they might be adapted or extended for new communicative contexts.

Bringing it all together

Together, these ideas – the double empathy problem, monotropism and gestalt language processing – encourage a more flexible understanding of communicative and learning differences in the classroom. Learners will not all engage in the same ways, and difference should not be automatically treated as a problem.

With English now functioning as a global language, used across diverse cultures, contexts and communicative styles, learners benefit from classrooms that allow greater flexibility in how communication and participation are understood and supported. By approaching difference with curiosity rather than judgement, teachers can create learning environments where more learners feel able to participate, communicate and thrive.

References