Archives

• 

  Volume 2 Number 1

  DOI: https://doi.org/10.82005/NC_02.01.00 
  
  

  Visibility and Voice in Neurodiversity Research

  This edition of NeuroConverse opens with a question that is as ethical as it is empirical, and as urgent as it is uncomfortable: what happens when the systems built to support young people instead expose their vulnerabilities? In Dr Neil Alexander-Passe’s lead article, Autism, School, and Crime: How School Can Lead Those with Autism into Crime, we are invited to look unflinchingly at the institutional pathways that can push autistic students toward criminalisation rather than inclusion. His analysis, which is both rigorous and deeply humane, asks us to reconsider how schooling structures reward conformity and punish difference. It reminds us that moral responsibility in education lies not in compliance, but in understanding. Conformity is easy. Understanding takes courage.

  The conversation then broadens with Charles Freeman’s compelling and timely contribution, If It Does Not Get Measured, It Does Not Get Done: Neurodivergence and Data. Freeman exposes the “triple invisibility” of neurodivergent people – unseen to themselves, unseen to others, and unseen in public policy – showing how without data, invisibility thrives, as an absence of consistent data can perpetuate and worsen social and economic marginalisation (an observation which surely has repercussions for Dr Passe’s lead article on Autism, School, and Crime). His call for a “neurodiversity evidence toolkit” bridges the qualitative and quantitative, advocating for an empirical visibility that respects lived experience rather than erasing it. Once again, this is an argument that resonates with Alexander-Passe’s concern about how unseen differences can become unacknowledged systemic risks.

  Finally, this issue concludes with a new section, NeuroconVerse, inaugurated by Jessica Dark’s beautifully moving and inventive Recognising Difference: A Neurodiversity-Affirming Poetic Autoethnography of Autism in Family Life. Dark’s work re-centres personal, transforming research into resonance. Through poetry, she reminds us that data and discourse are only part of the story: that difference is also felt, spoken, and even sung. In Dark’s work, difference becomes cadence.

  Across these articles runs a consistent thread of visibility and invisibility: of systems that misrecognise, of professionals, themselves often unrecognised, who strive to respond, of a lack of data that reveals, and of the emergence of art that views in a different light, and so reframes. Together, they form a dialogue between structure and self, between measurement and meaning, and between science and story. This issue powerfully reaffirms the journal’s commitment to an ethically engaged scholarship – one that listens to neurodivergent voices not as objects of study, but as co-authors of understanding. Together, the research, the struggle, and the voices become powerfully visible.

• 

  Volume 1 Number 1

  A warm welcome!

  The entire editorial team would like to share our excitement at the launch of NeuroConverse, the online neurodiversity-focused journal.

  NeuroConverse plans to be a world leader in the field of neurodiversity and neurodivergence, encouraging rigorous thought, debate, and creative thinking around issues of sensory processing disorders, developmental speech and language disorders, dyslexia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia, dysgraphia, dyslalia, ADHD, the autism spectrum, Tourette’s, neuronormative bias, and more.

  There has long been a lacuna in academic writing where discussions about neurodivergence are needed. We at NeuroConverse aim to fill that gap. We wish to occupy the space between academic writing and accessible content; between theory and practice; between objective research and lived experience. We welcome input from neurodivergent thinkers, but also from non-neurodivergent thinkers writing about neurodivergent issues. In short, we extend an inclusive invitation to all who wish to submit.

  Areas we hope to see covered may include the intersections of neurodiversity and gender, neurodiversity and ethnicity, neurodiversity and culture, and neurodiversity and disability. They may include your submissions on issues surrounding neurodiversity and sport, neurodiversity and AI, neurodiversity and education, neurodiversity and employment, or neurodiversity and mental health, among other things. They may include qualitative research, quantitative research, or hybrid research. They may be literature reviews, commentaries on current research, original research, or synthesis pieces, the hard sciences or the humanities.

  Where we position ourselves as an inclusive journal, we are likewise inclusive in what we publish. We welcome traditional academic articles, intelligent audio and video contributions, and even interactive content. We do not restrict ourselves, or our contributors, to any one single mode of content creation. Inclusivity lies at the heart of what we do.

  Our values are important to us, and we hope that they will be important to you too. We believe that each and every individual is significant, and that all voices deserve to be heard, all groups deserve to be loved, and all neurotypes deserve the understanding and visibility that intelligent and respectful publishing can afford them. But we are open and inclusive in our values too, and will incorporate the positive principles of our contributors, rather than imposing anything upon anyone. NeuroConverse is a discursive arena, and without your contributions, published in the safe space we intend this to be, these discussions would be nothing. To uphold our values of inclusivity, diversity, and respect, we model ourselves as an online symposium where everybody’s voice may be heard – but we need these voices to be listened to, and to be taken seriously. So behind it all is an academic team, a team that values rigour and research. And we hope you do too.

  We are truly thrilled to offer the opportunity to read or publish in an ethical journal. Wherever your interests lie, our interests lie. And we invite new thinkers as well as established scholars. We welcome contributions that can make a difference to people’s lives. We wish to publish work that is innovative, meaningful, humanist, morally focused, and above all impactful! We want to amplify your expertise. In short, we aim to stand at the forefront of thought leadership in this area.

  We hope you enjoy NeuroConverse. We certainly hope to enjoy engaging with your submissions.

  Dr Martin Bloomfield, Editor-in-chief

• 

  Volume 3 Number 1

  DOI: 10.82005/NC_03.01.00
  
  This edition of NeuroConverse asks us to consider a deceptively simple, and yet globally inescapable, question: the intercultural nature of neurodiversity. Can neurodiversity ever be understood apart from culture? While neurodivergence is often discussed as a matter of cognition, diagnosis, legal status, social positioning, or educational practice, the contributions in this issue remind us that every neurodivergent experience is lived within communities, languages, traditions, institutions, tensions, and relationships. Neurodiversity does not exist in a vacuum: it is always cultural.

  We begin with Dr Helen Ross's reflective opinion piece, Reflections on a Churchill Fellowship: Perspectives on the (Lack of) Choices We Afford Our Children and Young People. Drawing on insights gathered through international research and dialogue, Ross introduces the theme of understanding across borders and contemplates how different educational systems approach literacy, assistive technology, and learner support. Her reflections return repeatedly to the importance of agency and choice, reminding us that meaningful inclusion requires more than just providing support; it requires listening carefully to the diverse ways in which young people themselves wish to learn, participate, and flourish, wherever they come from.

  Then we encounter Learning With One Another: Storytelling, Community, and the Co-Creation of Neuroaffirming Educational Practice, a thoughtful and innovative exploration of narrative as both method and pedagogy. Drawing together educators from Australia and the United Kingdom, the authors argue that storytelling can transcend geographical and institutional boundaries, creating spaces where lived experience becomes a legitimate source of knowledge. Their work challenges conventional professional development models that privilege expertise over experience (and, consequently, privilege “the elite” and often economically more wealthy over those whose lives are impacted and who do not have the advantages of wealth and social status), instead proposing a form of intercultural dialogue grounded in reciprocity, vulnerability, and shared meaning-making. The stories presented are not merely accounts of neurodivergence; they are encounters across differences of discipline, geography, and personal history. Through narrative, the authors open a discursive space and show how understanding emerges not from instruction alone, but from relationship.

  The conversation then expands considerably in AI and Inclusive Education in the African Context: Navigating Digital Divide Gaps, Building Equitable Futures. Here, the focus broadens from interpersonal encounters to global systems, asking how emerging technologies can support neurodivergent and disabled learners in contexts too often overlooked by dominant educational narratives. The authors offer a powerful challenge to the narrative that technological innovation is inherently inclusive. Instead, they demonstrate how AI systems frequently carry the cultural, linguistic, and economic assumptions (as well as the aims and purposes) of their creators, often reflecting priorities rooted in the Global North. The result is a sobering reminder that accessibility without cultural awareness is only partial inclusion. Whether considering local languages, community knowledge, disability stigma, or infrastructural realities, the paper argues persuasively that equitable education requires solutions designed, not alongside but within, communities. We should get away from the comfort of “knowing what is good for people, and imposing it upon them”.

  Taken together, these contributions show that neurodiversity and neurodifference cannot be separated from cultural context. They show how understanding grows through stories shared across borders, how educational technologies must be shaped by the communities they serve, and how international exchange can challenge assumptions about support, participation, and choice. All three challenge universalising and monolithic approaches that assume one model of inclusion can fit all contexts. Instead, they advocate for approaches that are relational, participatory, and culturally responsive.

  Running through these contributions is a common commitment to epistemic humility: the recognition – especially in a time when both the UK (through an academic study associated with SASC, the SpLD Assessment Standards Committee) and the US-based International Dyslexia Association have updated their own definitions of dyslexia to fit their own groups’ aims and purposes – that no single institution, discipline, culture, or technology possesses a monopoly on knowledge. Whether through the exchange of stories between educators, the development of locally grounded AI systems, or international reflection on educational practice, inclusion emerges when diverse voices are not merely accommodated, but actively enabled and empowered to shape the conversation itself.

  In this sense, the theme of this issue is not simply neurodiversity, but neurodiversity both in and as dialogue: dialogue between individuals, between cultures, between communities, between histories, between local and global perspectives, and between different ways of knowing – indeed, potentially, different forms of rationality. It reminds us that the future of neuroaffirming practice depends not only on understanding difference, but on understanding the cultural worlds in which difference is understood, positioned, and lived.