Neuroinclusion – Fact or Fiction?
Where can learning and development professionals begin in developing neuroinclusive training?
An understanding of common misconceptions and reality is a great place to start. This blog explores three assumptions or “myths” to overcome to move from contemplation to action.
Myth 1: Neuroinclusion is too complex; it needs to be handled individually through self-identification.
Fact: Universal Design for Learning (UDL) provides a foundation for all education environments and situations, including workplace training, onboarding, and leadership development. UDL is based on principles that empower everyone, allowing educators and learners to set clear goals, anticipate environmental barriers, create meaningful options, and fully embrace human variability. UDL guidelines help educators address Engagement (the why of learning), Representation (the what of learning), and Action & Expression (the how of learning).
Myth 2: The American Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance is sufficient to ensure a neuroinclusive workplace environment; anything beyond that is costly and difficult to implement.
Fact: Compliance with ADA is a minimum standard and true neuroinclusion goes beyond legal requirements to actively support all learners. Many accessibility adjustments are low- or no-cost and can significantly improve productivity for all employees, not just neurodiverse ones. Examples applicable to learning environments include providing breaks, quiet spaces, and room for standing/movement, sending agendas and other materials in advance, allowing multiple options for active participation (e.g., chat, polling in addition to verbal responses), and minimizing audio and visual distractions.
Myth 3: AI and automation provide personalization and solve accessibility challenges.
Fact: Neurodiversity covers a broad spectrum, and what works for one person may not work for another. While AI can enhance accessibility, it’s not a substitute for human-centered design and direct input from neurodivergent individuals. In addition, AI is still rapidly evolving and requires a human touch to ensure accurate and ethical use. Neuroinclusion is still a growing area of research and implementation; therefore, relying on what can be found on the web is unlikely to be sufficient. In addition, generative AI is still prone to hallucinations and is imperfect. For example, AI transcriptions and captions are helpful; however, one word (or excluding a word) can easily throw off the intent of a piece of information.
Keeping these issues and suggested strategies in mind, the goal for accessibility is progress, not perfection.
I recall some of my thinking earlier in my career. One of my colleagues requested an office space that wasn’t where her department or supervisor was located. I thought she was being high maintenance. Now knowing the issue was to be located by a window, I think – well, perhaps she had seasonal affective disorder or some other need. Why not let her sit where she can best perform her work? I also used to think assigned work hours were to be strictly adhered to; I now have a better understanding of the diversity of individuals’ best work times. Again, as long as employees can meet their job requirements and are available to work with their team, why not let them have some flexibility to work when they can do their best thinking?
Our job as learning professionals is to set an example and constantly learn, to be an example when we have learned new information and insights, and to be able to change based on what we’ve learned.
Again, progress, not perfection; when we know better, we can do better.
Are you ready to join me in learning more? I hope so! If yes, dive into IACET’s recently published InfoBrief , where you can explore these points and more, grounded in current research and expert sources in neuroinclusion.
Register for IACET’s upcoming symposium…
About the Author
Gayle Claman, MS, CAE, is Managing Director of Education and Credentialing with the American Society of Civil Engineers, an IACET-accredited provider. A dedicated association executive focused on revenue generation and mission value, Gayle specializes in strategically managing member and customer-facing programs, products and services. In addition to her role with ASCE, she currently serves on the IACET Neuroinclusive Research Group and ASAE’s Foresight Works Advisory Group. Connect with Gayle on LinkedIn.