Conference Program

Students with neurodivergent profiles and learning differences often struggle to find recognition and a sense of belonging within conventional educational systems (Fisher et al. 2025). Even as awareness of neurodiversity grows, many schools remain organized around implicit expectations about how students should behave, and learn (Zawidzki 2008, Lynch & Lodge, 2024). As a result, the experiences and perspectives of neurodivergent students are rarely taken seriously when educational pathways are designed. This can lead to forms of epistemic injustice, in which students’ own understandings of their learning, educational and personal needs are overlooked within public schooling contexts (Zembylas 2023).

This paper explores what an alternative educational environment looks like, by presenting a qualitative case study of democratic schools in the Netherlands that attempt to organize their educational practices around more just and inclusive principles (Bergman, van, and Meerbeek-Zwetsloot 2024). Rather than treating neurodivergence as a deviation from the norm or something that needs to be accommodated through special measures, the school approaches neurological variability as a natural and valuable aspect of human diversity (Chapman 2021). In this sense, neither neurodivergence nor neurotypicality functions as the standard against which students are measured. Instead, the school starts from the assumption that diversity of minds, interests, and ways of learning is the ordinary condition of any educational community, including teachers as well as students (Strijbos & de Bruin 2025).

The paper first describes some of the philosophical and organizational principles that shape the democratic structure of the school. Particular attention is given to its participatory governance, the emphasis placed on student agency, and the alternative ways in which evaluation and educational progress are understood (Angélique Del Rey 2018). These elements aim to create an environment where students are not primarily defined through diagnostic labels or perceived deficits, but are recognized as individuals capable of shaping their own learning paths.

The paper also reflects on how such an educational model relates to questions about future opportunities and participation in society. A common concern is that highly flexible and self-directed forms of education might make it more difficult for students to enter the labor market. However, the experience of this school suggests that when students are given meaningful agency and responsibility for their learning, they are able to develop trajectories that are both personally meaningful and compatible with later professional paths.

Students’ own accounts of their experiences at the school suggest noticeable improvements in well-being, self-confidence, and engagement with learning. These testimonies point to the possibility that educational environments grounded in democratic participation and recognition of neurocognitive diversity can foster forms of flourishing that are often difficult to achieve in more standardized systems.

The paper concludes by addressing a remaining challenge. While democratic and neurodiversity-affirming schools can offer promising alternatives to traditional education, they are often small and relatively difficult to access. An important question for future research and educational policy is therefore how similar educational principles might be implemented more broadly, and how such opportunities could become available to students from less economically privileged backgrounds.