T. Bennett on 'neurodiversity'
Do his questions raise some discomfort?
Over on Running the Room, Tom Bennett spent a page discussing the currently popular term “neurodiversity” on 5 December 2025. In “Neurofog- how useful is the term neurodiversity in education?: The dangers of ambiguous definitions, and why we desperately need evidence based approaches in this area,” the estimable Mr. Bennett, OBE, explained that “neurodivergent” is not clearly defined, is not a class of disability, and has little beneficial implications for education. Almost surely, some people in SPED World will find his points discomforting.
Here’s Mr. Bennett’s lede
Neurodiversity is a common term in education- and society. But it lacks precision both in definition and usage. And that really matters in the real world.
For a start ‘neurodiverse’ is not a clinically recognised or used term, eg in the DSM-5. It was coined by the sociologist Judy Singer in 1998, as an advocacy term for people with ASD and very closely related conditions.
‘Neurodivergent’ describes an individual whose brain functions differently from the majority. Clinically recognized examples include autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, dyslexia, dyspraxia, Tourette syndrome, and others. These are formal neurodevelopmental diagnoses.
Crucially this means people who have been born with a life-long condition. It does *not* include people with anxiety disorders, or dementia, or PTSD, or depression etc. It doesn’t mean ‘everything’.
In his post, Mr. Bennett argued that neurodivergence is a relatively new term. One can see the rise in popularity of the term by examining the history of searches for it on Google. Here’s a line graph showing the increase in the number of searches over ~20 years.
Mr. Bennett, who has provided leadership in classroom management and research in the UK and internationally, goes on to discuss the use of “neurodiversity” in advocacy and to promote clarity about the differences between the term and disorders or disabilities related to special education needs. Ultimately, he comes down to the point that many intervention strategies often mentioned for use management lack substantial or credible evidence bases.”
I encourage readers of Special Education Today (and others, too) to read his article.