In our final CPD session of 2025, Marcela Cecilia Danowski joined us from Buenos Aires on a rainy Sunday and did something I deeply respect: she kept the focus on what teachers can actually do. Her session, “Divergent Minds, Strategies That Bind,” was not built around theory for theory’s sake. It was built around classroom decisions, small adaptations, and a clear invitation to design learning environments that support students whose brains process information, attention, language, and emotion in different ways. What real teachers do every day.
Early in the session, Marcela grounded the conversation in a reality most of us already feel in our daily work. She referenced findings she had seen from a British health association and framed it in accessible terms: roughly one in five people may be neurodivergent. Whether or not we hold formal documentation for every student, the practical implication remains the same. Our classrooms include learners who experience autism, ADHD, dyslexia, sensory processing differences, and many other forms of neurological variation, as well as learners who do not have the “official paper” but still show consistent signs of struggle. Marcela’s position was that waiting for a label before offering support delays learning and increases frustration. She was careful to clarify that teachers are not there to “fix” students, and that neurodivergent learners are not broken. The responsibility lies in adapting our teaching so that strengths are supported and barriers are reduced, starting from the beginning rather than retrofitting accommodations only after a diagnosis arrives.
Teachers are not there to “fix” students, and neurodivergent learners are not broken.
Marcela Danowski
Marcela also located inclusive education within a rights-based frame. She mentioned that inclusive education is part of global commitments such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly Goal 4, which focuses on inclusive and equitable quality education. The point was not to overwhelm teachers with policy language, but to remind us that inclusion is not a favour we offer when we have time or energy; it is part of what education is meant to guarantee. That framing matters because it helps teachers shift away from the feeling that inclusion is optional, personal, or “extra,” and toward the understanding that thoughtful adaptation is a professional responsibility that deserves institutional support.
Accessible materials and clearer classroom communication
Marcela began her practical recommendations with a category that is simple, immediate, and often underestimated: text and layout. She emphasised that accessibility can start before anyone speaks in the classroom, simply through the way we present written materials. She encouraged teachers to anticipate information in ways that reduce anxiety and improve comprehension. Rather than handing out a text and “plunging into the activity,” she recommended working through titles and images, supporting prediction, and activating prior knowledge so that students enter the task with orientation rather than overwhelm.
She then described several choices that can reduce visual noise and improve tracking. She recommended accessible fonts with clear letter shapes and noted that, while there are many “dyslexic fonts” available, much classroom material is already in Arial and can remain workable. She suggested that font size deserves more attention than it usually receives, with an ideal range of approximately 16–20 for primary materials and 12–14 for secondary, while also acknowledging that individual needs vary. She explained that left-aligned text supports tracking because each line begins consistently, whereas full justification can make it harder for some learners to follow the flow of a sentence. She advised using bold sparingly for key ideas and action words, particularly in instructions, and avoiding underlining because it can interfere with letter shapes and make processing more difficult. She also highlighted the impact of line spacing, recommending around 1.5 spacing to give “room for the eyes to breathe” and reduce the fatigue that comes from dense text.
The conversation about visuals was equally nuanced. Marcela noted that images can support comprehension, but too many visuals can create overload rather than support, especially when they are not clearly tied to meaning. She recommended selecting images carefully and placing them either at the beginning or end of materials to frame comprehension without crowding the page. She also spoke about colour use, recommending consistency and restraint. Colour coding can be helpful when it is used across the year as part of classroom routines, rather than being introduced suddenly during exams. Overuse, however, can create visual disturbance, which undermines the intention. Even practical printing considerations came up, such as the value of softer, less bright paper tones when possible, and avoiding heavy “show-through” when printing double-sided.
From there, Marcela moved into communication, with a reminder that inclusive teaching often begins with language that reduces ambiguity. She described active listening as more than hearing the students who speak the most. It involves watching posture, eye contact, speaking volume, and the non-verbal signals that often show when a learner is confused, anxious, or trying to cope silently. Her advice for teacher language was to use clear and direct expressions, avoiding idioms, sarcasm, vague phrasing, and unnecessarily complex structures when they confuse rather than support. She also recommended supporting instructions with visible steps and anchoring tasks to predictable routines, because predictability reduces anxiety and helps learners transition between activities with less cognitive strain.
Choice, structure, and multi-sensory learning without chaos
A core theme throughout the session was that inclusive teaching does not require reinventing everything. It often requires designing structured choices that help students engage through different strengths while still working toward shared outcomes. Marcela spoke about stations as one approach, not as a daily requirement but as a recurring structure that allows students to rotate through different skills and tasks. The value, in her view, is that students can select tasks that align with their preferences, pacing, and abilities, and teachers can use the structure to offer more personalised support in smaller groups. The design of stations also supports independence because students are gradually prepared for increasing complexity, and the format becomes familiar rather than stressful.
She also shared tic-tac-toe boards as another structured choice tool. In her version, the centre square contains the required task, while the surrounding choices invite students to engage through different modalities and interests. Those choices might include an interview, a poem, a song, a video, or a creative product that allows a learner to demonstrate understanding without being trapped in a single output format. What stood out is that these structures allow teachers to respect differences in processing and expression without creating entirely separate lesson plans.
Marcela also introduced visual thinking tools, including mind maps, thinking routines, and hexagonal thinking. She challenged the assumption that neurodivergent students cannot engage in complexity or critical thinking by explaining that routines and visual structures can make thinking easier to organise and express. Mind maps help learners see connections between concepts, and thinking routines can be introduced in simple forms, such as KWL charts or colour-symbol-image routines, before becoming more complex. Hexagonal thinking adds a spatial and tactile element, allowing learners to physically move concepts around, create relationships, and then explain those connections. This approach not only supports visual learners but also benefits students who need movement and hands-on engagement to stay connected to the work.
The session also expanded beyond the page and into the physical classroom. Marcela discussed classroom layout as a flexible tool rather than a fixed backdrop, and she described how students can be involved in designing their learning environment at the beginning of the year through design thinking approaches. The intention is to honour different needs by allowing spaces for teamwork while also creating areas for students who concentrate better independently. She noted that teachers can also use spaces beyond the classroom walls, such as corridors or playground areas, to support movement, reset attention, and reduce the constraint of a single environment.
Assessment as a process, and the role of AI as a practical assistant
Marcela’s assessment section was one of the strongest parts of the session because it addressed a common pain point: traditional assessment often rewards memorisation and penalises processing differences, rather than capturing genuine learning. She emphasised the importance of breaking tasks into smaller activities so that students are not overwhelmed by pages of work, and so that they can experience progress and small successes that build momentum. She also mentioned that many neurodivergent learners require additional time, and she referenced the idea of roughly 25% extra time not only for assessments but for activities more broadly, because processing speed and working memory affect performance far beyond test conditions.
She encouraged flexibility in response formats, pointing out that understanding can be expressed through drawings, gestures, collages, or audio, depending on the task and age group. She also recommended keeping instructions short and clear, and checking understanding by asking students to explain tasks in their own words, because that process supports comprehension and reveals where clarification is needed. Alongside this, she highlighted the value of personalised feedback throughout the process rather than only at the end, which helps students adjust while learning is still happening.
Marcela also spoke about assessment as a process rather than a judgement, and she encouraged teachers to rethink the messages embedded in classroom reward systems. She noted that certificates and praise often focus on neat handwriting, strong spelling, tidy notebooks, or “best reader” achievements, and asked what happens to students who struggle with those skills due to neurological differences. She invited teachers to broaden reinforcement so that effort, growth, collaboration, and resilience are also celebrated. She also mentioned the “power of yet,” encouraging teachers to normalise developmental progress rather than internalised failure when students talk harshly about themselves.
On the technology side, Marcela did not present AI as a replacement for teaching, but as an assistant that can reduce teacher workload when used intentionally. She spoke about AI as a way to create differentiated material more efficiently and mentioned Diffit and TTS Maker specifically, while also naming other tools that were harder to verify from the transcript spelling. To remain accurate, the takeaway here is that AI can support rapid material adaptation and help teachers reach students with less effort, especially when we need variations of a task, simplified text versions, or audio supports. She also highlighted the usefulness of rubric creation tools and suggested involving students in building rubrics so expectations become clearer and feedback becomes more meaningful.
The discussion also touched on stress regulation strategies such as music, yoga, and what she referred to as binaural beats (sometimes also labelled as “8D music” online), which she described as helpful for reducing stress and supporting focus during demanding tasks. While teachers should always consider classroom context and school policy, the broader point was that regulation and emotion are not add-ons to learning; they are prerequisites for learning.
What the live discussion revealed, and where CPD goes next
After the presentation, the conversation moved into the practical realities many teachers face, including the tension between classroom accommodations and external assessment systems. Participants discussed experiences with exam accommodations, including the variability across centres and the realities of how formal processes can help some students but still leave gaps. Marcela’s responses remained careful and non-inflammatory. She acknowledged that large examination systems may be adapting slowly, and she explained that accommodations often depend on documentation and specialist recommendations submitted during registration. She also noted that other exam options exist, and that progress is happening even if it feels too slow from where teachers stand.
Another important part of the discussion centred on how teachers communicate concerns to families when they notice difficulties, particularly when parents may resist or feel threatened by the idea of diagnosis. Marcela was clear that teachers do not diagnose, but that teachers can describe what they observe and notify families of patterns that affect learning. She emphasised empathy, acknowledging that family processing takes time, while also reinforcing that classroom support should not be paused until a diagnosis appears. The student is in front of us now, and teachers are often the first to see consistent struggle, which makes responsiveness essential.
As I closed the session, I shared something I continue to believe strongly: we often talk about differentiation and adaptation, yet teachers in the trenches rarely receive enough practical formation to handle the complexity that shows up in real classrooms. That is precisely why CPD has been evolving. Since 2023, I have been delivering and hosting professional development sessions each month, offline and online, and what I’ve learned is that teachers do not need more lengthy presentations to consume. They need spaces that help them implement, experiment, reflect, and return with questions.
CPD 2026 is built around that shift: implementation over information. We are meeting live to apply what we learn, not simply to collect more ideas and leave them untouched. The structure includes four expert sessions and four panel discussions designed around global interest topics, with more active participation from the live audience. The membership is €10 per month, includes a two-week trial period, and your subscription directly contributes to paying our speakers, because teacher expertise deserves to be funded rather than exploited.
If this session resonated with you, and if you want training that respects your time and supports your actual classroom reality, you can join CPD here: CPD2026
Before you close this page, I’ll leave you with one practical prompt to carry into your next lesson planning moment: choose one small adaptation you can make this week that reduces friction for learners without changing your learning objective. When those small shifts become consistent, classrooms begin to feel more supportive, more human, and more workable for everyone involved.
