THE ARCHITECTURE OF BELONGING
“ No single creature has a monopoly on reality. Neurodivergent students don’ t have‘ disordered’ versions of a‘ typical’ brain; they occupy a different Umwelt.”
fraction of reality. Dogs experience the world through their noses. Insects taste with their legs and feet. Birds see colors humans cannot imagine. Because our Umwelt“ is all that we know,” Yong writes,“ we easily mistake it for all there is to know.”
Consider the family dog: on a walk, our dog notices a complex array of scents that we cannot detect. If we constantly pull our dogs away from their“ sniff walk” to keep pace with our“ human walk,” we are inadvertently dismissing their primary way of knowing the world. But Yong’ s research doesn’ t just decenter the idea that the universe’ s creatures experience the world in the same way; it also celebrates that diversity as a source of joy.
This makes Yong’ s thesis a beautiful metaphor for our classrooms. No single creature has a monopoly on reality. Neurodivergent students don’ t have“ disordered” versions of a“ typical” brain; they occupy a different Umwelt. Belonging begins when we stop asking students to suppress their sensory worlds to fit ours and instead design classroom communities that honor multiple ways of perceiving and engaging.
Below are eight strategies that educators can practice to create a greater sense of belonging for neurodivergent students. The bonus: these strategies support all learners.
1. Use Language Intentionally
Creating a culture of belonging starts with the words we use. One of the debates in education is about whether to use personfirst language( e. g. student with autism) or identify-first language( e. g. autistic student).
In Neurodiversity Affirming Schools, Emily Kircher-Morris and Amanda Morin make a compelling case for identify-first language. As neurodivergent individuals themselves, they argue that many neurodivergent people see their neurodivergence as an inseparable part of their identity. They also point out a revealing double standard: we never say“ a child with a gift”; we say a“ gifted child.” Kircher-Morris asks,“ Why is it okay to refer to a gifted child but insist that the correct term is a child with autism? Because language conveys values.” Because our society“ embraces” the first and“ stigmatizes” the second, she says.
As educators, we need to be careful not to make assumptions about how students would like us to refer to them. We should always defer to students’ personal preferences. Regardless of their preferences, it is important for us to be comfortable with terms like dyslexic or autistic, as doing so signals to students that their identity should not be a secret, but a facet of their personhood to be acknowledged.
Continues on page 14
CSEE Connections Summer 2026 Page 13