Empowering Diverse Learners: Strategies for Analytic and Gestalt Language Processors in the Upper Elementary Years
Building on yesterday’s look at lower elementary grades, we move now to the upper elementary grades … where the divide is very noticeable.
Introduction
As an autistic gestalt processor (aka, non-verbal), my journey through the educational system was marked by both challenges and triumphs. Growing up, I often felt like a square peg being forced into a round hole, as traditional teaching methods failed to align with my unique learning style. As I note in No Place for Autism? and Holistic Language Instruction, there are significant consequences for students learning in a system that is not designed with them in mind.
You see, in the classroom, students who are Analytic Language Processors (ALPs) and Gestalt Language Processors (GLPs) approach learning and language acquisition differently, but both have the capacity to excel when provided with the right environment and support. As we’ve seen in this article series, ALPs tend to process language in a sequential, step-by-step manner, breaking down information into smaller components and applying rules and patterns to generate novel expressions. They often excel in traditional educational settings that prioritise structured, systematic instruction and explicit skill-building.
Reviewing the GLP side of the room, GLPs process language in a more holistic, context-driven way, relying on pattern recognition, associations, and the overall meaning of a situation to communicate effectively. They may struggle with decontextualised language tasks and rote memorisation, but thrive when given opportunities to explore language in authentic, meaningful contexts. GLPs are highly attuned to the social and emotional aspects of communication, and often display unique strengths in areas such as creativity, problem-solving, and systems thinking.
It’s important to recognise that both ALPs and GLPs are capable of achieving academic success and developing rich, expressive language when provided with a learning environment that values and supports their individual learning styles. In the upper elementary years, this means moving beyond a one-size-fits-all approach to education and embracing a holistic curriculum that honors the entire spectrum of learning and language acquisition styles (aka, not just teaching to the centre of the room).
By recognising the unique strengths and needs of both ALPs and GLPs, and providing a range of instructional strategies, materials, and assessments that cater to different cognitive styles, educators can create a classroom culture where all students feel valued, supported, and empowered to reach their full potential. This holistic approach to education not only benefits individual learners, but also enriches the entire classroom community by fostering diversity, creativity, and a deeper understanding of the complex tapestry of human cognition and communication.
But …
Despite the clear benefits of a holistic, inclusive approach to education that supports the diverse learning needs of every student in the classroom, the reality is that most classrooms today still operate under a one-size-fits-all model that privileges a narrow set of skills and instructional methods. This ‘traditional approach’ to education often fails to recognise and value the unique strengths and abilities of students who learn and communicate differently, leading to frustration, disengagement, and missed opportunities for growth and development.
Unfortunately, recent legislative efforts in California, such as Assembly Bill 2222, threaten to further entrench this narrow view of education and limit opportunities for students who do not fit the mold of the “typical” learner. AB 2222 seeks to mandate a specific approach to reading instruction based on the so-called “science of reading” (SOR). Whilst these methods may be effective for some students, particularly those who are strong ALPs, they fail to account for the diverse learning needs of GLPs and other students who may benefit from a more holistic, context-driven approach to language acquisition.
By codifying a single, prescriptive approach to reading instruction into law, AB 2222 risks marginalising and excluding countless students whose learning styles and needs do not align with the dominant paradigm. This not only denies these students access to the educational opportunities and supports they need to thrive, but also sends a damaging message that their way of learning and communicating is somehow inferior or deficient.
Moreover, by privileging a narrow set of instructional practices and materials, AB 2222 threatens to stifle innovation and creativity in the classroom, limiting educators’ ability to adapt and respond to the diverse needs of their students. This rigid, top-down approach to education is fundamentally at odds with the principles of inclusion, equity, and student-centered learning that are essential for creating a more just and effective educational system.
If we are truly committed to supporting the academic and personal growth of all students, we must reject the false promise of one-size-fits-all solutions like AB 2222 and instead advocate for a more flexible, responsive approach to education that recognizes and values the full spectrum of human diversity. This means investing in research and professional development to support teachers in implementing holistic, differentiated instruction that meets the needs of both ALPs and GLPs, and creating assessments and accountability systems that prioritise growth, creativity, and critical thinking over narrow, skills-based measures of achievement.
Ultimately, the fight for a more equitable and inclusive education system is not just about pedagogy or politics - it is about the fundamental right of every student to have access to a learning environment that recognises and nurtures their unique strengths, abilities, and ways of being in the world. As educators, advocates, and policymakers, we have a moral obligation to work towards this vision and to resist efforts, like AB 2222, that would seek to narrow and constrain the possibilities of education. Only by embracing the full diversity of human learning and communication can we hope to create a more just, compassionate, and thriving society for all.
ALPs at ages 8-9 - upper elementary grades
In the upper elementary years, students who are ALPs often demonstrate a high level of proficiency in reading, writing, and language comprehension. These students have typically benefited from the traditional approach to literacy instruction that has dominated California’s educational landscape for the past half-century.
ALPs at this age exhibit fluency and automaticity in decoding and encoding text, allowing them to focus their cognitive resources on higher-level comprehension and analysis tasks. They are able to read and understand increasingly complex texts, drawing inferences, making connections, and engaging in critical thinking about the material they encounter. In writing, ALPs produce well-structured, cohesive pieces that demonstrate a strong grasp of language conventions, organisation, and style.
Because the instructional strategies and materials commonly used in California’s classrooms are already well-suited to the learning needs of ALPs, these students often excel academically without the need for significant additional support or intervention. Teachers are generally well-equipped to provide ALPs with opportunities for in-depth discussion and analysis through literature circles and book clubs, and to engage them in writing projects that span various genres and purposes. Explicit instruction in advanced comprehension strategies and literary devices further hones ALPs’ literacy skills and prepares them for the demands of secondary and post-secondary education.
In the classroom, ALPs stand out for their advanced reading and writing abilities, often serving as models and leaders in group discussions and collaborative projects. A teacher might observe an ALP student eagerly volunteering to read a challenging passage aloud, or offering insightful comments during a debate about a text’s themes and motifs. In writing, an ALP student’s work might be showcased as an exemplar of clear, well-organised prose that effectively communicates complex ideas and arguments.
It’s important to acknowledge that the success of ALPs in California’s schools is not simply a matter of innate ability or individual effort, but rather a reflection of an educational system that has been tailored to their specific learning needs and strengths. For decades, state policies, funding priorities, and instructional practices have prioritised the systematic, skills-based approach to literacy that aligns with the cognitive style of ALPs, to the exclusion, it should be said, of other learning styles and needs.
Whilst this emphasis on supporting ALPs has undoubtedly benefited many students, it has also created significant gaps and inequities in educational outcomes for those who do not fit the mold of the “typical” learner. GLPs and other students with diverse learning needs have often been left behind by a system that fails to recognise and value their unique strengths and abilities.
GLPs at Stage 4 - upper elementary grades
For GLPs in the upper elementary years, the experience of navigating an educational system designed primarily for ALPs can be fraught with challenges and frustrations. GLPs at Stage 4 of language development exhibit unique characteristics and learning needs that are often misunderstood or overlooked in traditional classroom settings.
At this stage, GLPs are beginning to use novel utterances and experiment with basic grammar, combining words and phrases in creative and unconventional ways. However, they may still rely heavily on scripted language and echolalia in social interactions, which can be misinterpreted as a lack of originality or a behavioural issue rather than a natural stage in their language development. GLPs at Stage 4 are also developing their ability to understand and express language in context, using their strong associative memory and pattern recognition skills to make meaning of the world around them.
Despite these strengths, GLPs often face significant challenges in the upper elementary classroom, where the emphasis on complex language structures, abstract concepts, and decontextualised learning tasks can leave them struggling to keep pace with their ALP peers. GLPs may have difficulty comprehending and producing the intricate sentence forms and figurative language that are increasingly prevalent in academic content, leading to frustration and disengagement. They may also struggle with the social and pragmatic aspects of language, such as interpreting nonverbal cues, understanding sarcasm or idiomatic expressions, and participating in the rapid back-and-forth of group discussions.
Tragically, rather than recognising these challenges as a mismatch between the GLPs’ unique learning style and the dominant instructional paradigm, schools often pathologise and label these students as having a Specific Learning Disability (SLD). The IEP process, whilst intended to provide support and accommodations, can actually serve to reinforce the notion that GLPs are somehow deficient or “learning disabled,” rather than acknowledging that it is the system itself that disables them by failing to adapt to their language acquisition and processing style.
This fundamental misunderstanding of GLPs’ needs and abilities can have devastating consequences for their academic and social-emotional development. As they fall further behind their ALP classmates and struggle to meet the narrow expectations of a system that devalues their cognitive style, GLPs may develop challenging behaviours as a way of coping with their frustration and anxiety. They may become withdrawn or disruptive, or even refuse to engage in learning activities altogether.
To truly support GLPs at Stage 4, educators must move beyond the deficit-based paradigm of the SLD label and instead recognize the unique strengths and learning needs of these students. This means incorporating visual supports and graphic organisers to help GLPs understand and express complex language structures, as well as using social stories and role-play activities to explicitly teach the hidden rules of social interaction. Providing opportunities for structured verbal expression, such as through oral presentations or storytelling activities, can help GLPs develop their expressive language skills in a supportive, low-stakes environment.
However, these individual “accommodations,” whilst important, are ultimately insufficient to address the systemic barriers that GLPs face in a school system that privileges a narrow set of linguistic and cognitive skills. California’s AB 2222, with its emphasis on explicit, systematic phonics instruction and standardised assessment, only serves to further entrench the marginalisation of GLPs and other learners who do not fit the mold of the “typical” student.
To truly create an equitable and inclusive educational landscape, we must fundamentally reimagine our approach to language and literacy instruction, moving beyond a one-size-fits-all model to one that recognises and values the full spectrum of human diversity. This means investing in the professional development to support teachers in implementing differentiated, multimodal instruction that builds on the strengths of all learners, as well as advocating for policies and practices that prioritise creativity, critical thinking, and social-emotional learning over narrow, skills-based measures of achievement.
Ultimately, the challenges faced by GLPs in the upper elementary years are not a reflection of their individual deficits, but rather a symptom of a broken educational system that fails to recognise and nurture the unique talents and ways of being of all students. By embracing a more holistic, strengths-based approach to language and literacy instruction, we can create a future in which every learner, regardless of their cognitive style or background, has the opportunity to thrive and reach their full potential. It is a future that we must fight for, not only for the sake of our GLP students, but for the well-being and success of our entire society.
Empowering diverse learners: inclusive practices and accommodations
To truly create an inclusive and equitable learning environment for all students, including both ALPs and GLPs, educators must embrace a strengths-based approach that recognises and values the unique contributions of each individual learner. By shifting away from a deficit-based paradigm that views differences as deficits to be remediated, we can foster a classroom culture of acceptance, collaboration, and mutual respect.
At the heart of this approach is a commitment to differentiated instruction and universal design for learning (UDL), which seeks to provide multiple means of representation, expression, and engagement to meet the diverse needs of all learners. This means presenting information in a variety of formats, such as visual, auditory, and tactile, to ensure that every student has access to the content in a way that aligns with their learning style. It also means providing a range of options for students to demonstrate their understanding, from written reports and oral presentations to multimedia projects and hands-on demonstrations.
However, implementing truly effective UDL requires more than just a set of strategies or tools; it requires a deep understanding and appreciation of each student’s unique strengths, needs, and ways of learning. For GLPs in particular, this means taking the time to get to know them as individuals, to understand their interests, motivations, and challenges, and to tailor instruction and support to their specific needs.
Unfortunately, in many traditional classroom settings, GLPs are not seen or valued for who they are as learners. Their unique cognitive style and language processing abilities may be misinterpreted as deficits or behavioural issues, leading to a cycle of frustration, disengagement, and underachievement. Teachers may struggle to connect with and support these students, not because they lack compassion or dedication, but because they have not been provided with the knowledge, skills, and resources to effectively meet their needs.
To address this challenge, it is essential that educators and school leaders prioritise ongoing collaboration and professional development focused on supporting language diversity in the classroom. This means creating opportunities for regular communication and partnership between general education teachers, special education specialists, speech-language pathologists, and other support staff to ensure that all students receive the individualised attention and support they need to succeed.
It also means providing targeted professional development and training to help teachers understand and appreciate the unique characteristics and needs of GLPs and other diverse learners. This should include not only strategies and techniques for differentiated instruction and UDL, but also a deeper exploration of the cognitive, linguistic, and social-emotional factors that shape language development and learning.
Crucially, this professional development must be inclusive and accessible to all educators, including those who may themselves be GLPs (like me) or have other diverse learning needs. By creating PD spaces that model the principles of UDL and differentiation, we can ensure that every educator has the opportunity to learn and grow in a way that aligns with their unique strengths and challenges.
Ultimately, empowering diverse learners requires a fundamental shift in the way we think about and approach education. It means recognizing that diversity is not a problem to be solved, but a strength to be celebrated and nurtured. It means creating learning environments that are flexible, responsive, and inclusive, where every student feels valued, supported, and challenged to reach their full potential.
Final thoughts …
As we have explored throughout this article, recognising and empowering diverse language processors in the upper elementary years is not just a matter of pedagogical best practice, but a fundamental issue of equity and justice. For too long, our educational system has privileged a narrow set of linguistic and cognitive skills, marginalising and excluding countless students whose unique strengths and ways of learning do not fit the dominant paradigm.
The research and insights that support a more inclusive and differentiated approach to language and literacy instruction are not new; they have been developed and refined by scholars and educators for decades. However, these ideas have often been relegated to the realm of “special education,” seen as a kind of specialised knowledge relevant only to a small subset of “atypical” learners. This artificial divide between “general” and “special” education has served to reinforce the notion that there is a single, “normal” way of learning and processing language, and that those who deviate from this norm are somehow deficient or in need of remediation.
In reality, as we have seen, the diversity of human cognition and language development is not a bug, but a feature of our species. Gestalt Language Processors, who make up an estimated 40% of the human population, are not an anomaly or a problem to be solved, but a vital part of the rich tapestry of human neurodiversity. When provided with appropriate strategies that align with their unique learning style, GLPs have just as much potential to thrive academically and socially as their Analytic Language Processor peers.
Unfortunately, the recent push for legislation like California’s AB 2222, with its emphasis on explicit, systematic phonics instruction and standardised assessment, represents a doubling down on the outdated and exclusionary practices that have long privileged ALPs at the expense of other learners. By mandating a narrow, one-size-fits-all approach to reading instruction, this bill threatens to further entrench the marginalization of GLPs and other diverse learners, denying them access to the educational opportunities and support they need to succeed.
Even more troublingly, the corporate interests behind this legislation stand to profit handsomely from the perpetuation of a system that values conformity over creativity, compliance over critical thinking. By forever locking out the 40% of students who do not fit the mold of the “ideal” learner, they can continue to peddle their narrow vision of education as a commodity to be bought and sold, rather than a fundamental human right to be nurtured and protected.
But we do not have to accept this bleak future as inevitable. As educators, administrators, policymakers, and advocates, we have the power and the responsibility to fight for a more just and equitable educational system that celebrates and nurtures the strengths of all learners, regardless of their cognitive style or background. This means prioritising inclusive practices and differentiated instruction that provide multiple means of representation, expression, and engagement, and that empower every student to learn and grow in a way that aligns with their unique needs and abilities.
It means investing in ongoing professional development and collaboration to ensure that every educator has the knowledge, skills, and resources they need to effectively support diverse learners, and that every school and district is equipped to create a culture of belonging and inclusion for all students.
And it means advocating for policies and practices that value and promote the full spectrum of human diversity, rather than seeking to standardise and homogenise the educational experience in the service of narrow, corporate interests.
As someone who has experienced firsthand the transformative power of an educational approach that recognises and nurtures the unique strengths of GLPs and other diverse learners, I know that this vision is not only possible, but essential. It is a vision that requires hard work, dedication, and a willingness to challenge the status quo, but it is one that we cannot afford to abandon.
So let us come together as a community of educators, learners, and advocates to build a future in which every student, no matter their cognitive style or background, has the opportunity to thrive and reach their full potential. Let us reject the false promises of conformity and standardisation, and instead embrace the rich diversity of human learning and language as the very foundation of a more just, equitable, and vibrant society.
The time for action is now, and the stakes could not be higher. Together, we can create a world in which no child is left behind, and in which every learner is valued, supported, and empowered to be their best self. It is a world that is within our reach, if only we have the courage and the conviction to fight for it.