Reflecting on the Mirror of Autism:
Living in a World that Doesn’t Always Makes Sense
Listen to a summary and analysis of this Blog on the Improving Education Today: The Deep Dive podcast—now on the Better Education (BE) Podcast Network.
Hosted by popular AI Educators Angela Jones and Davey Johnson, they provide enlightening perspectives on the implications of this Blog for the Education Community.
[CLICK HERE to Listen on Your Favorite Podcast Platform]
(Follow this bi-monthly Podcast to receive automatic e-mail notices with each NEW episode!)
[CLICK HERE to Set Up a Meeting with Howie]
Dear Colleagues,
Introduction: Listening Beyond the Surface
Donna Williams:
“I lived in a dreamlike state. People’s voices were like echoes bouncing off walls I couldn’t see. I copied their words, hoping they’d leave me alone. I didn’t know what they meant—I just knew they expected me to respond.”
“My body didn’t feel like mine. I watched it move, but I didn’t feel connected to it. I was labeled deaf, disturbed, insane. But I wasn’t any of those things. I was trying to survive in a world that made no sense.”
“I had multiple personalities—not because I was crazy, but because I needed them. Carol was the good girl. Willie was the rebel. They helped me cope. They helped me hide. I didn’t know who the real me was.”
“It wasn’t until I was 25 that I heard the word ‘autism.’ Suddenly, everything clicked. I wasn’t broken—I was different. And I could begin to build a bridge to the world others lived in.”
Nobody Nowhere (Williams, 1992)
Autism is not a behavior. It is not a label. It is a way of being in the world—one that often defies conventional understanding.
As an expert witness in numerous Federal Court cases involving students with autism—from ages six to 21—I've witnessed how schools struggle to interpret what they think they are observing.
And I’ve watched the students themselves struggling with their identities and their attempts to make sense of a world where many of their senses betray them.
_ _ _ _ _
Too often, educators’ goals are to “manage” the behaviors exhibited by students with autism. . . not to understand their complex inner worlds.
For many students with autism, their worlds simply don’t make much sense.
For many educators working in autism, their students don’t always make much sense either.
This article represents a call for reflection. An opportunity to look in the mirror. . . but to take a different view.
With no disrespect to my Colleagues, this article is a call to move beyond description, diagnosis, management and—most certainly—compliance, toward a re-connection of empathy and compassion.
Indeed, this is a call to understand autism through the lived experiences of those who navigate its complexities every day. . .
. . . as well as to confront and test some of our primary professional assumptions and practices.
For when I journey through Cases involving students living with autism, this is the duality that I strive for. If I cannot touch—at many levels—these students’ live and lived experiences, I cannot fully represent who they are and what they (legally) need (or have been denied).
Naoki Higashida (age 13, nonverbal at time of writing):
“When I’m not sure what I’m supposed to be doing, I feel so frustrated that I just want to scream. But even if I do scream, it’s not like anyone understands why. I want to explain, but the words don’t come out. So I end up doing something strange, and then people get angry. That makes me feel even more alone.”
“I think people with autism often have a hard time because we’re always trying to make sense of things that don’t make sense to us. Why do people say one thing and mean another? Why do they expect us to know what they’re feeling when they don’t say it? It’s like trying to read a book with half the pages missing.”
“Sometimes I feel like I’m trapped in a room with no doors. I can see people outside, laughing and talking, but I can’t get to them. I want to be part of their world, but I don’t know how. So I stay in my own world, where things make sense to me.”
“Even though I can’t speak, I still have thoughts and feelings. I still want to be understood. That’s why I wrote this book—to show people that even if we seem different, we’re still human.”
The Reason I Jump (Higashida, 2013)
Understanding the Autism Spectrum: Clinical Foundations for Educators (and Lawyers)
For the diagnostic “purists,” Autism Spectrum Disorder represents a complex neurodevelopmental condition typically characterized by persistent differences across two primary domains:
- Foundation #1. Social Communication and Interaction Challenges; and
- Foundation #2. Restricted, Repetitive Patterns of Behavior, Interests, or Activities.
These neurological differences manifest early in development—typically before age 3—and create distinct patterns of processing sensory, social, and environmental information that educators must understand to provide effective support.
But. . . as will be evident below. . . too often, educators, psychologists, and others accept the diagnostic indicators of autism without objectively validating them. This results in clinical misinterpretations that often have implications relative to quality services, supports, and interventions.
Social Communication and Interaction Challenges (Foundation #1)
The following three key autism-related areas exist (or don’t exist for some students) along a continuum that educators typically can observe:
- Key Area #1. Nonverbal Communication Integration. Students with autism often show marked differences in how they use and interpret nonverbal communication. Observable indicators could include atypical eye contact patterns (not necessarily absent, but different in timing, duration, or appropriateness), limited or unusual facial expressions, gestural communication that doesn't align with verbal content, and difficulty integrating multiple nonverbal cues simultaneously.
_ _ _ _ _
- Key Area #2. Social-Emotional Reciprocity. This Area encompasses the natural back-and-forth flow of social interaction. In a classroom, students with autism often exhibit difficulty with conversational turn-taking, reduced sharing of interests or achievements, and challenges in emotional regulation during social exchanges.
_ _ _ _ _
Challenges in the two Areas above can significantly impact students with autism’s classroom engagement, participation, and peer relationships. These students may fail to initiate interactions appropriately, respond tangentially to social overtures, or demonstrate limited understanding of social cause-and-effect relationships.
But we should not assume that these challenges pre-exist or are present because a student “is autistic.”
Clinical Insight #1. The clinical point here is that—too many times—the challenges presented by students with autism are quickly ascribed to the student who has “the condition” without objective, ecologically-valid, and causally-related assessments.
Critically, these assessments need to determine if the challenges exist because of others’ interactions or reactions to the student with autism. . . in which case, they are not part of “the condition.”
In addition, the assessments should determine whether other, non-autistic students would exhibit the same (challenging) reaction under the same circumstances.
_ _ _ _ _
Case Example. For example, we have been involved in Cases where students with autism have been traumatized by physical restraints and/or seclusions to the degree that proximity to the adults involved or the place of the seclusion would trigger a new emotional response.
While the original restraint may have been due to spectrum-related behaviors, the adults and room are now independent emotional-behavioral triggers. . . as they could be for students not on the spectrum.
Thus, these “new” emotional responses have been established by the original restraint “experience.” They are not related to the two Key Areas above. They have clear, non-spectrum root causes.
_ _ _ _ _
All of this reinforces a “theme” within this discussion: Students with autism are often living in and responding to their own idiosyncratic worlds. They only know this existence, they don’t always understand that their world is different from “our” world, and they are not always aware of or able to communicate what they are responding to.
That gives us great responsibility.
We need to look into the mirrors that they are reflecting. . . so that we can try to understand what they might be experiencing, rather than what their diagnoses “tell” us they are experiencing.
_ _ _ _ _
- Key Area #3. Relationship Development and Maintenance. The ability to develop, maintain, and understand relationships appropriate to developmental level varies significantly across the spectrum. This includes challenges with imaginative play, difficulty adjusting behavior to suit different social contexts, and problems sharing in imaginative activities with peers.
Students’ cognitive/intellectual status and skills are important to assess when they are demonstrating any learning and/or developmental, academic and/or social-behavioral challenge. And while cognitive/intellectual skill deficits may correlate or co-exist for students with autism, these deficits also may have nothing to do with the autism.
Indeed, we have seen Cases where students with autism were addicted to heroin or experienced complications at birth—factors not associated with autism.
To miss these developmental events—while assuming (actively or passively) that any cognitive deficits present are part of the autism diagnosis— would result in an inaccurate clinical understanding of the student, and could result in intervention mis-steps.
Clinical Insight #2. Students with autism require the same objective and comprehensive social, developmental, and medical history that is completed (a) without implicit or explicit biases or presumptions of a pre-existing medical or disability status; and (b) with the consideration of a range of possible medical or disability-based root causes.
As students’ “diagnostic profiles” emerge from the history-taking, educators and clinicians are mindful that some students with autism may have multiple, overlapping root causes for their various challenges—some that are clustered together, and some that are independent and unassociated.
Restricted and Repetitive Behaviors, Interests, or Activities (Foundation #2)
Four primary patterns with significant educational implications for students with autism are relevant here:
- Key Area #1. Stereotyped Motor Movements. These range from simple motor stereotypies (hand flapping, finger flicking, body rocking) to complex sequences. In educational settings, these behaviors often increase during periods of excitement, anxiety, or cognitive overload, and serve important regulatory functions rather than being merely "disruptive."
_ _ _ _ _
- Key Area #2. Hyper- or Hypo-Responsivity to Sensory Input. This includes adverse responses to specific sounds, textures, lights, or smells, as well as apparent indifference to pain or temperature, excessive smelling or touching of objects, and visual fascination with lights or movement. These sensory differences profoundly impact classroom functioning and require individualized accommodations.
_ _ _ _ _
Clinical Insight #3. As a neurodevelopmental condition, there is so much that we do not know about autism relative to what is actually occurring—e.g., neurologically, physiologically, biochemically, hormonally—within the brain and body, and experienced by the person.
Relative to the latter, we typically don’t know how students with autism perceive different experiences across their bodies’ eight sensory systems—Vision, Hearing, Smell, Taste, Touch, Balance and Spatial Orientation, Body Position and Movement, and Internal States (e.g., hunger, thirst, heart rate, and emotional regulation).
The clinical point here is that some of the behaviors or responses within the two Key Areas above are biologically-based and autonomic in nature. That is, they just happen. There is no function to the behavior, and there is no motivation prompting their occurrence.
Indeed, just as a student with Tourette’s Syndrome may involuntarily swear or present with motor tics, so too some students with autism present with behaviors that are biologically-triggered and resistant to change.
The Bottom Line: Many districts and schools spend hours completing Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs) for students with autism to determine the “function” or “motivation” behind their most troubling behaviors. However, if these behaviors—as above—are biologically- and not motivationally-based, then there is no function to the behavior—it just occurs.
Hence, there is no value in conducting an FBA. In fact, an FBA might be problematic and unfair. . . as it might conclude that (a) a student with autism’s challenging behavior is occurring volitionally or “on purpose;” and (b) the students’ “choice” to not eliminate the behavior is due to resistance, defiance, and an oppositional nature.
_ _ _ _ _
- Key Area #3. Insistence on Sameness and Ritualized Behaviors. This presents as extreme distress at small changes, difficulties with transitions, rigid thinking patterns, and need for specific routines. In schools, this might manifest as inability to use different routes to familiar locations, distress when substitute teachers are present, or need for specific seating arrangements or materials.
_ _ _ _ _
- Key Area #4. Highly Restricted Interests. These interests are abnormal in intensity or focus, often becoming the lens through which students process new information. While these can become educational assets when channeled appropriately, they can also interfere with curriculum engagement when students cannot shift attention away from preferred topics.
Daniel Tammet:
“Numbers were my friends. I saw them as shapes and colors. The number 9 was tall and imposing, like a skyscraper. The number 4 was shy and quiet. This synesthesia made math beautiful to me, but it also set me apart.”
“I struggled with language. I couldn’t follow conversations. I’d get lost in the rhythm of words, unable to grasp their meaning. People thought I was slow, but I was just processing differently.”
“School was a battlefield. I was bullied for being weird. I didn’t know how to defend myself. I’d retreat into my mind, where things were safe and orderly. I memorized Pi to 22,514 digits—not to impress anyone, but because it calmed me.”
“I’ve learned to navigate the neurotypical world, but it’s still a challenge. I have to consciously decode social cues, rehearse interactions, and manage sensory overload. It’s a daily effort, but it’s worth it to connect.”
Born on a Blue Day (Tammet, 2006)
Clinical Insight #4. Some students with autism are teased, taunted, bullied, harassed, or experience physical aggression at the hands of their peers (and, sometimes, their adults). Some adults point to their “lack of social skills” as the root cause, and “blame the victim” by recommending social skills interventions to change the antisocial interactions.
While we all could use additional social skills training in our lives, this is not the problem, nor the solution.
The antisocial interactions must be owned by the antagonists. They must be held accountable, and they must learn, understand, and change.
This must be unilateral. And it should be non-negotiable.
The Three-Level Support Framework
The DSM-5-TR describes a three-level classification system that provides additional guidance for determining the intensity of educational and social-behavioral supports and interventions for students with autism.
However, educators must understand that these levels are not fixed, and they are not diagnostic. Rather, they are descriptions of a student’s current need for supports that can change over time, across locations, and in different life and living contexts.
- Level 1 (Requiring Support). Students demonstrate noticeable deficits in social communication that cause significant impairment even with supports in place. Without supports, these deficits would limit functioning across multiple contexts. Inflexibility of behavior causes significant interference with functioning in one or more contexts, and difficulty switching between activities impacts independence.
_ _ _ _ _
- Level 2 (Requiring Substantial Support). Marked deficits in social communication skills are apparent even with supports. Social interactions are limited to narrow special interests, and the student has significant difficulty with nonverbal communication. Inflexibility of behavior and difficulty coping with change occur frequently enough to be obvious to casual observers and interfere with functioning across various contexts.
_ _ _ _ _
- Level 3 (Requiring Very Substantial Support). Severe deficits in social communication cause severe impairments in functioning. Very limited initiation of social interactions and minimal response to social overtures from others characterize this level. Inflexibility of behavior, extreme difficulty coping with change, and restricted/repetitive behaviors markedly interfere with functioning in all spheres.
_ _ _ _ _
Below, to magnify the differences, we contrast a series of Level 1 versus Level 3 characteristics.
David Finch:
“I kept a notebook of rules: make eye contact, ask questions, don’t interrupt. I treated marriage like a science experiment. I wanted to be a good husband, but I didn’t know how.”
“I didn’t understand emotions—not mine, not hers. I’d say something logical, and she’d cry. I’d try to fix things, and she’d say I wasn’t listening. I was listening—I just didn’t know what she needed.”
“Being diagnosed with Asperger’s was like finding the missing piece of a puzzle I didn’t know I was building. It didn’t solve everything, but it gave me a starting point.”
“I still struggle. I still rehearse conversations. I still get overwhelmed. But I’m learning. I’m trying. And that’s enough.”
The Journal of Best Practices (Finch, 2012)
Level 1 Autism: The Deceptive Complexity of "Apparent Competence"
Students with Level 1 autism present a particularly complex challenge for educational teams because their competencies often mask significant underlying difficulties. These students typically demonstrate fluent verbal language, average to above-average cognitive abilities, and can often complete academic tasks independently. However, this surface-level functionality obscures profound challenges that require sophisticated understanding and targeted intervention.
Social Communication Profile
Level 1 students demonstrate subtle but persistent deficits in social-emotional reciprocity that become apparent during extended observation.
In classroom settings, you may observe:
- Conversational Difficulties. While these students can engage in conversation, their interactions often lack natural reciprocity. They may dominate conversations with preferred topics, fail to pick up on conversational cues that indicate listener disinterest, or provide too much or too little detail without gauging the listener's needs.
_ _ _ _ _
- Pragmatic Language Challenges. These students often interpret language literally, missing implied meanings, sarcasm, or social subtleties. They may struggle with perspective-taking, failing to adjust their communication style based on the listener's age, relationship, or context.
_ _ _ _ _
- Peer Relationship Difficulties. While they may desire friendships, these students often struggle to initiate, maintain, or deepen peer relationships. They may appear socially awkward, miss social cues, or engage in ways that peers find overwhelming or inappropriate.
_ _ _ _ _
Nonverbal Communication Analysis
Level 1 students typically show more subtle nonverbal communication differences:
- Eye Contact Patterns. Rather than avoiding eye contact entirely, these students may demonstrate atypical patterns—staring too intensely, making eye contact at inappropriate times, or failing to use eye contact to regulate social interaction.
_ _ _ _ _
- Facial Expression and Gesture Integration. Their facial expressions may not match their emotional state or the social context, and gestural communication often appears rehearsed or disconnected from verbal content.
_ _ _ _ _
- Personal Space and Social Proximity. These students may struggle with appropriate social distancing, standing too close or too far, or failing to read others' comfort levels with physical proximity.
_ _ _ _ _
Academic and Behavioral Manifestations
Executive Functioning Challenges. Despite good cognitive abilities, Level 1 students often struggle with:
- Flexible thinking and problem-solving when faced with novel situations
- Organization and planning, particularly for multi-step assignments
- Time management and prioritization of tasks
- Transitioning between activities or adjusting when plans change
_ _ _ _ _
Anxiety and Emotional Regulation. The constant effort required to navigate social demands often results in:
- Heightened anxiety, particularly in unstructured social situations
- Emotional meltdowns that seem disproportionate to triggers
- Perfectionism and fear of making mistakes
- Difficulty recovering from perceived social failures
_ _ _ _ _
Sensory Processing Considerations. Level 1 students may experience:
- Subtle sensory sensitivities that others dismiss as preferences
- Sensory-seeking behaviors that help with self-regulation
- Difficulty filtering background noise during instruction
- Sensitivity to lighting, textures, or environmental changes that impact concentration
_ _ _ _ _
Masking and Camouflaging Behaviors. Many Level 1 students, particularly females, develop sophisticated masking strategies that can delay identification and appropriate support.
- Social Mimicry. Consciously copying peer behaviors, speech patterns, or interests
- Scripted Responses. Relying on rehearsed phrases or behaviors in social situations
- Suppression of Stimming. Hiding self-regulatory behaviors that might appear different
- Academic Compliance. Following rules rigidly to avoid standing out, even when struggling
_ _ _ _ _
Educational Implications and Support Strategies
Traditional assessments may miss Level 1 students because their difficulties are context-dependent and may not emerge in structured, one-on-one testing situations.
Comprehensive evaluation should include: (a) Extended classroom observations across multiple settings and times; (b) Peer interaction analysis during unstructured activities: (c) Assessment of executive functioning in natural environments; (d) Evaluation of emotional regulation strategies and effectiveness; and (e) Comprehensive sensory profile including subtle sensitivities.
Effective intervention supports requires a multi-modal approach that includes (a) social skills Instruction; (b) executive function supports (e.g., visual schedules, organizational systems, and explicit instruction in planning and problem-solving strategies; (c) anxiety management, cognitive-behavioral strategies, and environmental modifications to reduce anxiety triggers; and (d) sensory accommodations such as preferential seating, movement breaks, or sensory tools.
John Elder Robison:
“As a kid, I didn’t understand why people laughed at jokes. I didn’t get the punchlines. I thought people were just being silly. So I’d laugh when they laughed, hoping to fit in. But inside, I felt like I was faking it.”
“I remember being told to ‘look people in the eye.’ But when I did, it felt like staring into the sun. It was too intense. I couldn’t concentrate on what they were saying. So I’d look away, and they’d think I was rude or dishonest.”
“I built machines because they made sense. Wires and circuits didn’t lie. They didn’t play games. I could understand them. People, on the other hand, were unpredictable. They said one thing and meant another. They smiled when they were angry. It was exhausting.”
“It wasn’t until I was diagnosed with Asperger’s in my 40s that things started to click. Suddenly, my whole life made sense. I wasn’t broken—I was different. And that difference had value.”
Look Me in the Eye (Robison, 2007)
Level 3 Autism: The Deceptive Complexity of "Apparent Incompetence"
Students with Level 3 autism require very substantial support across all domains of functioning, yet their complex inner lives and genuine competencies are often overlooked due to significant communication barriers and behavioral presentations that challenge traditional educational approaches. Understanding these students requires moving beyond surface-level behavioral analysis to recognize the neurological complexity underlying their presentation.
Communication Profile Analysis
Expressive Communication Patterns. Level 3 students may present with minimal to no functional speech, but their communication attempts take multiple forms that educators must learn to recognize and interpret.
- Behavioral Communication. Self-injurious behavior, aggression, or withdrawal often represents attempts to communicate pain, frustration, overstimulation, or unmet needs. These behaviors require functional communication training rather than purely behavioral interventions.
_ _ _ _ _
- Nonverbal Communication Systems. Many students communicate through gestures, leading behaviors (taking someone to desired items), or idiosyncratic signals that families and consistent caregivers learn to interpret.
_ _ _ _ _
- Emerging Augmented and Alternative Communication Use. With appropriate support, many Level 3 students can learn to use picture exchange systems, communication devices, or sign language, though progress may be slow and require intensive instruction.
_ _ _ _ _
Receptive Communication Complexity. Receptive language abilities often exceed expressive capabilities, but processing differences create unique patterns:
- Delayed Processing. Students may require extended time to process and respond to verbal instructions, with optimal wait time often being 10 to 30 seconds or longer.
- Single-Channel Processing. Many students process information best when it's presented through one sensory channel at a time (visual or auditory, but not both simultaneously).
- Context-Dependent Understanding. Comprehension may vary dramatically based on environmental factors, emotional state, and sensory input levels.
_ _ _ _ _
Social Interaction Patterns
Social Initiation and Response. Level 3 students demonstrate severe limitations in social initiation but often show more social awareness than initially apparent:
- Proximity-Seeking. Students may seek social connection through physical proximity rather than conventional social interaction
_ _ _ _ _
- Parallel Engagement. Participation in activities alongside others, even without direct interaction, may represent meaningful social engagement
_ _ _ _ _
- Selective Social Responsiveness. Students may respond differently to familiar versus unfamiliar people, requiring relationship-building time
_ _ _ _ _
Social-Emotional Awareness. Despite limited expression, many Level 3 students demonstrate remarkable emotional sensitivity:
- Emotional Contagion. Students often mirror the emotional states of those around them, becoming dysregulated when caregivers are stressed
_ _ _ _ _
- Empathetic Responses. Many students show genuine concern for others' distress, even when they cannot verbally express this concern
_ _ _ _ _
- Social Memory. Students often remember social interactions and may show preferences for specific interaction partners
_ _ _ _ _
Behavioral Presentation and Function
Repetitive and Restricted Behaviors. Level 3 students typically display more pronounced repetitive behaviors that serve multiple functions:
- Self-Regulation. Repetitive movements (hand-flapping, rocking, vocalizations) often help students manage sensory input and emotional states
_ _ _ _ _
- Communication. Some repetitive behaviors may be attempts to request attention, escape, or access preferred items
_ _ _ _ _
- Cognitive Processing. Repetitive behaviors may facilitate thinking and learning for some students
_ _ _ _ _
- Expression of Joy or Interest. Stimming often increases during preferred activities and may indicate engagement rather than inattention
_ _ _ _ _
Sensory Processing Manifestations. Sensory processing differences in Level 3 students are typically more extreme and impact all areas of functioning:
- Hyper-responsivity. Extreme reactions to sounds, lights, textures, or smells that can trigger fight-or-flight responses
- Hypo-responsivity. Apparent lack of response to pain, temperature, or loud sounds that can create safety concerns
- Sensory-Seeking. Intense seeking of specific sensory input through mouthing objects, seeking pressure, or visual stimulation
- Sensory Integration Challenges. Difficulty processing multiple sensory inputs simultaneously, leading to overwhelm in typical classroom environments
_ _ _ _ _
Cognitive Assessment Considerations
Traditional cognitive assessments often underestimate the abilities of Level 3 students due to:
- Motor Planning Difficulties. Students may understand tasks but struggle with the motor execution required to demonstrate knowledge
- Communication Barriers. Inability to verbally respond doesn't indicate lack of understanding
- Processing Speed Differences. Students may require significantly more time to formulate and execute responses
- Test Anxiety and Environmental Sensitivity. Novel testing situations may not reflect true capabilities
_ _ _ _ _
Advanced Educational Programming Strategies
Clinical Insight #5. Students with Level 3 needs benefit from highly structured and predictable (for them) teaching approaches and learning environments, but they must be tailored to each student’s strengths, weaknesses, preferences, triggers, cognitive, communication, and sensory characteristics (as above).
In short: Know Thy Student! (Because, they are all different!)
And the best way to do this—especially at Level 3—involves conducting series of “controlled experiments” to determine what works best relative to each student’s motivation, engagement, learning, and behavior. . . so that—over time—these “best practices” can be clustered and stacked.
For example, “sensory-seeking” students with autism will most likely benefit from multi-modal communication training approaches that integrate gestures (or signing), pictures (or communication boards), and modeling and prompting. . . but this hypothesis still needs to be validated.
In contrast, multi-modal approaches may be counterproductive for hyper-responsive students, because the multi-sensory stimulation may be over-stimulating.
Indeed: Every student with autism holds a different mirror. We need to travel behind each reflection, in order to be certain that we are moving in the right direction.
And once the right direction—for each student—is determined. . . the individualized blueprint must be consistently implemented by every staff person working with each individual student with autism.
But even then. . . students with autism are predictably unpredictable.
While a student’s blueprint may work “most of the time,” it is unlikely to work “all of the time.” Educators working with students on the spectrum know to “expect the unexpected” as every day holds new adventures.
Temple Grandin:
"I had never been able to trust my senses... The ground I walked on, the air around me, never felt quite real. Other people seemed to know something I didn't, some secret that made everything make sense for them but not for me."
“As a child, I didn’t speak until I was nearly four. My mother refused to believe I was mentally retarded, even though doctors told her I’d never amount to anything. She pushed me to communicate, and eventually I did—but not in the way most kids did.”
“I think in pictures. Words are like a second language to me. When someone says ‘dog,’ I don’t hear the word—I see a specific image of a dog I’ve known. That’s how my brain works. It’s visual, detailed, and literal.”
“Social interactions were a mystery. I didn’t understand facial expressions or tone of voice. I had to learn them like a scientist studying animal behavior. I’d watch people and try to decode their signals. It was hard work, but I wanted to understand.”
“Autism gave me a unique perspective. It helped me see things others missed. That’s how I revolutionized livestock handling—by thinking like the animals. My autism isn’t a limitation. It’s a different way of seeing the world.”
Thinking in Pictures (Grandin, 1996)
Summary and a Compassionate Call to Understanding
Living “in a world that doesn’t always make sense” requires fundamental shifts in how educational teams conceptualize autism, assess student needs, and design interventions.
This transformation demands that we:
- Move beyond deficit-based models toward strength-based approaches that honor the neurological differences inherent in autism while providing the substantial supports many students require.
- View challenging behaviors not as problems to eliminate, but as behavioral communication patterns that need therapeutic responses.
- Minimize instruction whose goal is to make autistic students appear neurotypical, and instead embrace their behavioral individuality, focusing our efforts on providing accommodations and supports that allow them to learn and participate authentically.
- Move beyond labeling students as "non-compliant" or "low-functioning" toward examining how educational environments can be modified to better support their diverse neurological processing styles.
- Understand the neurobiological basis of each student’s “brand” of autism, so that informed, compassionate, evidence-based intervention strategies follow.
- Create policies that prioritize student dignity, communication access, and sensory accommodation over behavioral compliance.
The ultimate goal is not to make autistic students indistinguishable from their neurotypical peers, but to create educational communities where every form of human neurodiversity is welcomed, understood, and celebrated. In doing so, we don't just serve autistic students—we create richer, more compassionate educational environments that benefit everyone.
This is our Call-to-Action: to listen more deeply, understand more fully, and accept more inclusively. Our autistic students are not waiting to be fixed—they are waiting for us to learn their languages, honor their ways of being, and create spaces where they can flourish as their authentic selves.
Samantha Craft:
“I studied people like a scientist. I watched how they laughed, how they paused, how they touched each other. I copied them. I became a master of mimicry. But inside, I was exhausted.”
“I didn’t know how to be me. I only knew how to be what others expected. I wore a mask so long I forgot what my real face looked like. I felt like a ghost in my own life.”
“Social interactions were like math problems with no formula. I’d replay conversations in my head, analyzing every word, every gesture. Did I say the wrong thing? Did I smile too much?
Did I not smile enough?”
“Even now, I struggle to connect. I feel deeply, but I don’t always know how to show it. I want to be understood, but I’m afraid of being seen.”
Everyday Aspergers (Craft, 2013)
Our Improving Education Today Podcast is Part of the Better Education (BE) Network of Top Education Podcasts in the U.S.
Remember that our Podcast . . .
Improving Education Today: The Deep Dive
with popular AI Educators, Davey Johnson and Angela Jones. . . is a full member of the Better Education (BE) Network of the top podcasts in education in the country!
This means that our Podcast is now available not just on Spotify and Apple, but also on Overcast, Pocket Casts, Amazon Music, Castro, Goodpods, Castbox, Podcast Addict, Player FM, Deezer, and YouTube.
Here's how you can sign up to automatically receive each new episode:
LINK HERE: Improving Education Today: The Deep Dive | Podcast on Spotify
LINK HERE: Improving Education Today: The Deep Dive | Podcast on Apple Podcasts
LINK HERE for All Other BE Education Network Platforms: Improving Education Today: The Deep Dive | Podcast on ELEVEN More Podcasts
Twice per month, Davey and Angela summarize and analyze the “real world” implications of our Project ACHIEVE bi-monthly Blog messages—adding their unique perspectives and applications on their relevance to you and our mission to: Improve Education Today.
These Podcasts address such topics as: (a) Changing our Thinking in School Improvement; (b) How to Choose Effective School-Wide Programs and Practices; (c) Students’ Engagement, Behavioral Interactions, and Mental Health; and (d) Improving Multi-Tiered and Special Education Services.
Davey and Angela have also created a Podcast Archive for all of our 2024 Blogs (Volume 2), and the most important 2023 Blogs (Volume 2).
They will continue to add a new Podcast each time a new Project ACHIEVE Blog is published.
Many districts and schools are using the Podcasts in their Leadership Teams and/or PLCs to keep everyone abreast of new issues and research in education, and to stimulate important discussions and decisions regarding the best ways to enhance student, staff, and school outcomes.
If you would like to follow up on today’s Blog or Podcast, contact me to schedule a free one-hour consultation with me and your team.
[CLICK HERE to Set Up a Meeting with Howie]
I hope to hear from you soon.
Best,
Howie
[CLICK HERE to Set Up a Meeting with Howie]
[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]
[To listen to a synopsis and analysis of this Blog on the “Improving Education Today: The Deep Dive” podcast on the BE Education Network: CLICK HERE]
