The neurodiversity paradigm challenges pathologising accounts of neurodevelopmental differences, including autism, attention deficit disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, developmental language disorder (DLD) and others. From a neurodiversity perspective, these differences in the way people perceive, learn about and interact with the world are conceptualised as naturally occurring cognitive variation, akin to biodiversity in the natural environment, which may bring unique strengths and challenges for individuals. An implication of this approach is that interventions designed to create contexts in which neurodivergent people can thrive are needed, in addition to those that seek to ameliorate individual-level difficulties. In this conceptual review, we consider how higher education can offer a context in which cognitive diversity can be noticed, welcomed and accepted with warmth. In universities, neurodiversity is one dimension of difference within an increasingly diverse student population, which overlaps – but is not synonymous – with disability. We argue that improving experience and outcomes for neurodivergent students should be a priority for universities aiming to produce graduates equipped to tackle the complex problems of contemporary society. Drawing on the foundational principles of compassion-focused psychological therapies, we consider how compassion can be enacted within interpersonal interaction, curriculum design, and leadership culture in universities. We apply the insights of double empathy theory to the problem of overcoming barriers of difference in the classroom. Finally, we make recommendations for Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and strengths-based pedagogical approaches, which create a fit-for-purpose educational environment for the widest possible range of learners. This realignment with the neurodiversity paradigm offers an antidote to bolt-on provisions for students who differ from the neuro-normative, and might enable neurodivergent thinkers to flourish within and beyond higher education.

The home literacy environment (HLE) predicts language and reading development in typically developing children; relatively little is known about its association with literacy development in children at family-risk of dyslexia. We assessed the HLE at age 4 years, precursor literacy skills at age 5, and literacy outcomes at age 6, in a sample of children at family-risk of dyslexia (n = 116) and children with no known risk (n = 72). Developmental relationships between the HLE and literacy were comparable between the groups; an additional effect of storybook exposure on phoneme awareness was observed in the family-risk group only. The effects of socioeconomic status on literacy were partially mediated by variations in the HLE; in turn, effects of the HLE on literacy were mediated by precursor skills (oral language, phoneme awareness, and emergent decoding) in both groups. Findings are discussed in terms of possible gene–environment correlation mechanisms underpinning atypical literacy development.

The home literacy environment is a well-established predictor of children’s language and literacy development. We investigated whether formal, informal, and indirect measures of the home literacy environment predict children’s reading and language skills once maternal language abilities are taken into account. Data come from a longitudinal study of children at high risk of dyslexia (N = 251) followed from preschool years. Latent factors describing maternal language were significant predictors of storybook exposure but not of direct literacy instruction. Maternal language and phonological skills respectively predicted children’s language and reading/spelling skills. However, after accounting for variations in maternal language, storybook exposure was not a significant predictor of children’s outcomes. In contrast, direct literacy instruction remained a predictor of children’s reading/spelling skills. We argue that the relationship between early informal home literacy activities and children’s language and reading skills is largely accounted for by maternal skills and may reflect genetic influences.

We investigate the role of distal, proximal, and child risk factors as predictors of reading readiness and attention and behavior in children at risk of dyslexia. The parents of a longitudinal sample of 251 preschool children, including children at family risk of dyslexia and children with preschool language difficulties, provided measures of socioeconomic status, home literacy environment, family stresses, and child health via interviews and questionnaires. Assessments of children's reading-related skills, behavior, and attention were used to define their readiness for learning at school entry. Children at family risk of dyslexia and children with preschool language difficulties experienced more environmental adversities and health risks than controls. The risks associated with family risk of dyslexia and with language status were additive. Both home literacy environment and child health predicted reading readiness while home literacy environment and family stresses predicted attention and behavior. Family risk of dyslexia did not predict readiness to learn once other risks were controlled and so seems likely to be best conceptualized as representing gene–environment correlations. Pooling across risks defined a cumulative risk index, which was a significant predictor of reading readiness and, together with nonverbal ability, accounted for 31% of the variance between children.

Lockdowns at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic led to extended school closures globally, and in many countries school attendance has not recovered to pre-pandemic levels. In England, education leaders have expressed concern both about increased anxiety among pupils and chronic absenteeism post-pandemic, against a backdrop of over a decade of increasing mental health need among children and young people. This article presents a narrative review with the aims of (a) conceptualising emotionally based school avoidance (EBSA), and (b) identifying strategies for supporting children and young people experiencing psychological barriers to attending school. The underlying reasons for school being experienced as a hostile environment by a minority of pupils are explored, with research findings specifically relating to the school experiences of neurodivergent pupils in mainstream settings included as an illustrative example. The psychological constructs of belongingness and agency are discussed as potential mechanisms of change. Finally, psychologically informed strategies to address EBSA are reviewed, drawing on the framework of multiple systems of support. To reduce absenteeism in pupils experiencing EBSA, and thus avoid exacerbating educational inequalities in disadvantaged groups, it is essential to understand psychological barriers to school attendance and to work collaboratively and compassionately with pupils and families towards solutions.

The use of creative qualitative research methods in psychology and other disciplines has increased over recent decades to address power imbalances within research and to centre the voices of participants. These considerations are particularly salient when conducting research with historically marginalized groups, including neurodivergent people. However, research foregrounding the first‐person perspectives of neurodivergent children is still limited. In this paper, we discuss the application of creative qualitative research methods when conducting research with neurodivergent children with a range of communication and wider skill profiles. The benefits and challenges of each method are considered, drawing on examples from the first phase of an ongoing longitudinal study. Additional considerations for working ethically and respectfully with neurodivergent children are discussed. Readers are encouraged to consider how best to adapt their research protocols when working with neurodivergent children, in order to minimize research hierarchies, build positive relationships, and produce rich and meaningful data.