The MALAT virtual symposium featured a wide range of presentations that encourage cirtical reflection on contemporary issues in learning. Among these, Mary Burgess’s session “Rethinking Participation: Neurodiversity and Inclusion in Digital Learning Communities” (2026), was particularly impactful. Burgess reflected on their professional journey of redesigning courses to better support neurodivergent learners through inclusive practices. As someone who was diagnosed with AuDHD later in life, I found her insights both validating and encouraging, as they signal a growing commitment within educational institutions to prioritize inclusive design in learning environments.

One of the most surprising aspects of the presentation was the emphasis on proactively designing courses to reduce student cognitive load, rather than relying on reactive accommodations. Burgess (2026) highlighted the importance of simplifying assignment instructions and structuring content in ways that are clear and consistent. This stood out to me because, in my own academic experience, complexity in instructions is often normalized rather than questioned. The idea of clarity as a form of accessibility challenges traditional assumptions about academic excellence. Supporting this, Le Cunff et al. (2024) explain that neurodivergent individuals experience differences in attention, planning, and memory, suggesting that breaking information into smaller more manageable components can significantly improve learner outcomes.

Another idea that stood out was the importance of creating environments where students feel safe to request support (Burgess, 2026). This is particularly compelling because it reframes accessibility as a shared responsibility rather than an individual burden. Prior to this session, I have rarely encountered educational spaces that actively encourage this level of openness. Burgess’s perspective suggests a shift toward fostering psychological safety as a foundation for meaningful participation. This is especially important in reducing the need for neurodivergent students to mask, which can contribute to students experiencing “exhaustion and burnout, disconnections from one’s identity, and psychological distress” (Hamilton & Petty, 2023, p.2).

Burgess’s advocacy for proactive course design is grounded in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) pedagogy. Philosophically, it aligns with principles of equity and inclusion by recognizing diverse learner needs. Research by Hamilton and Petty (2023) and Durgungoz and Durgungoz (2025) supports the effectiveness of UDL approaches, demonstrating increased cognitive and emotional engagement, particularly among neurodiverse learners. This reinforces the argument that inclusive design allows all students to thrive, not just those who identify as neurodivergent (Hamiltion & Petty, 2023; Durgungoz & Durgungoz, 2025).

Overall, the presentation highlighted how inclusive design is not an optional enhancement but a fundamental aspect of effective teaching and learning. The ideas presented by Burgess (2026) invite ongoing reflection on how educational practices can better support diverse learners in meaningful and sustainable ways.

References

Burgess, M. (2026, April 7). Neurodiversity and Inclusion in Digital Learning Communities. [Conference Presentation]. MALAT Virtual Symposium, Victoria, Canada. https://bit.ly/VS2026Burgess

Durgungoz, F. C., & Durgungoz, A. (2025). “Interactive lessons are great, but too much is too much”: Hearing out neurodivergent students, Universal Design for Learning and the case for integrating more anonymous technology in higher education. Higher Education : The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01389-6

Hamilton, L. G., & Petty, S. (2023). Compassionate pedagogy for neurodiversity in higher education: A conceptual analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1093290. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1093290

Le Cunff, A.-L., Giampietro, V., & Dommett, E. (2024). Neurodiversity and cognitive load in online learning: A systematic review with narrative synthesis. Educational Research Review, 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100604