Find here an overview of all blog posts, in reversed order of publication.
Continue reading →Call for Abstracts
Deadline extended to 28 Oct >> Call for Abstracts: for the WORKSHOP (and Special Issue) : ‘Critical and Intersectional ADHD Thought: ADHDers Think Back’
The survey is live!
Th survey (phase 1) of the the intersectional and sociological research project ‘ADHD Women: Resisting a Neuronormative World’ is live now (it will stay online 17 Jan – 14 Oct 2022).
Check the links to learn more:
- ADHD Women: Invite for Participation
- Can I participate?
- Participant Information Sheet: Phase 1
- Survey
- I have a question…
- Can I receive updates about the project?
If you want to go to the survey immediately, click here: https://roehamptonuniversity.onlinesurveys.ac.uk/adhd-women-survey-phase-1
What are ‘neuronormativity’ and ‘neurodiversity’?
The way I use ‘neurodiversity’ in the project ADHD Women: Resisting Neuronormativity is as…
“a(n analytical) social category that refers to, on the one hand, ‘neurodivergent’ people – e.g. people with Tourettes, ADHDers, autistics – and, on the other hand, ‘neurotypical’ people. To emphasise, the ‘neuro’ here refers to a social categorical ‘neuro-difference’, which neither alludes to an affirmation of a biomedical qualification, nor to a neutral social difference” (Huijg, 2020, pp.214-215; emphases not in original).
Neuronormativity, to simplify for now, refers to
barriers, norms, values, ideas etc. generated by the hegemony of ‘neurotypicality’ and ‘neuro-ableism’.
Mind, neither neurodiversity, neuronormativity and neuro-ableism, nor neurodiversity studies suffice. The project focusses intersectionally on neuronormativity in the form of anti-ADHD ableism and anti-ADHD injustices and inequalities.
I’ll write more about my approach to ‘neuronormativity’ and ‘neurodiversity’ in the future.
Reference:
Huijg, D.D. (2020). “Neuronormativity in theorising agency: An argument for a critical neurodiversity approach.” In: Hanna Bertilsdotter-Rosqvist, Nick Chown & Anna Stenning (Eds), Neurodiversity studies: A new critical paradigm (pp.213-217): Routledge. [Invited book chapter] [Open access version]
ADHD Whiteness: An Exploration of the (Absent) Role of Race in Adult ADHD Research
SUMMARY: This is the blog post for the flipped webinar Intersectional Approaches to Disability and Race, which was held on 9 July 2021. This blog post explores how the field of ADHD research is grounded in majority white research populations or ignores race altogether; arguably, it produces white knowledge about (adult) ADHD. UK Government data suggests raced and gendered ADHD disparities, but argues that these do not exist. Critical race and feminist questions emerge about ADHD and ADHD lives, experiences and perspectives, but remain unanswered. Medical research is not sufficient. We need a field of Critical ADHD Studies, which is ADHD-affirmative, intersectional, and produced by ADHDers themselves.
Continue reading →‘Tools, Tips and Tricks’: An Analysis of Gendered Neuronormativity in Self-Help Literature About and For ADHD Women
On 29 January 2021 I participated in the webinar Feminist Perspectives on Neurodiversity and Neuronormativity. My presentation was called “‘Tools, Tips and Tricks’: An Analysis of Gendered Neuronormativity in Self-Help Literature About and For ADHD Women.”
Continue reading →The Problem with Accessibility Checklists
SUMMARY: Accessibility checklists are increasingly becoming offered as ways to improve inclusivity in Higher Education. However, they rely on the presumption that those delivering education and thus using them have no accessibility needs of their own. Moreover, in seeking to codify what counts as inclusivity, many students’ requirements get overlooked. In this post, Dr Kelsie Acton and Dr Dieuwertje Dyi Huijg outline the problems with accessibility checklists and propose a praxis of ‘relaxed pedagogy’ in their place.
Continue reading →Relaxed Pedagogy: Relaxing Teaching and Learning in the University
This blog post, by Dr Dyi Dieuwertje Huijg and Dr Kelsie Action, was originally published for the flipped conference ‘Building the Post-Pandemic University’ (published 10 Sep 2020, panel on 18 Sep 2020)
Digital and distance learning in the pandemic university has created access to higher education teaching (HET) for disabled[1] students – and staff, to some extent – where this was not offered before by Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). Despite disabled learners’ need for proper digital access, HEIs insisted for years that digital learning was impossible. When faced with the pandemic, they rapidly pivoted; within weeks they transitioned to digital and distance learning. After years of debates about mobile phones and computers in the classroom, all of a sudden students were ‘allowed’ to always use their digital device; and, at least hypothetically, learning and teaching while lying down became an option. At the same time, disabled students and staff, as well as disability practitioners, have addressed the access gap in the pandemic university, which nevertheless seems to have low priority in policy. Unsurprisingly, there are concerns how this will develop in the post-lockdown university.
Continue reading →