With growing awareness of and interest in neurodiversity and neurodivergence among members of the general public and within academia, there has been a surge in scholarly publications that make use of this terminology. This paper undertakes a critical review and exploration of the current uses of 'neurodiversity' and 'neurodivergence,' looking to untangle these terms and discuss their implications in research and practice. As engineering education researchers who have personal experiences with ADHD, anxiety, and/or dyslexia, we are particularly interested in the implications of language usage in relation to neurodiversity research within the STEM context. Drawing on a review of recent literature, we explore the power of language to shape understandings of neurodiversity in an emerging field of study. Specifically, we aim to unpack the ways in which neurodiversity/neurodivergence language may either challenge normative assumptions about neurocognitive function or further reinforce marginalizing and deficit-based assumptions about individuals with neurodiversity-related diagnoses. Finally, this paper explores the implications for engineering and STEM research contexts. We argue that researchers’ language usage in relation to neurodiversity has the potential to either reinforce the overarching norms embedded in STEM academic cultures by reinforcing rigid understandings of “normality,” or, alternatively, to deconstruct these norms to make way for a more inclusive understanding of cognitive diversity.
Are you a researcher? Would you like to cite this paper? Visit the ASEE document repository at peer.asee.org for more tools and easy citations.