View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity Collaborative: Co-Designing a Program to Enhance Educator Knowledge and Efficacy Supporting Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity Collaborative: Co-Designing a Program to Enhance Educator Knowledge and Efficacy Supporting Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities
Language: English
Authors: Kelly B. Beck (ORCID 0000-0001-8094-6362), Amy Ionadi, Timothy Wagner, Daniel Beck, Rachel Harris, Stephen Edwards, Donna Westbrooks-Martin, Jamie Upshaw, Andre Rhone, Taylor Kesich, Allie Kleinschmidt, Carla A. Mazefsky (ORCID 0000-0001-7467-0902)
Source: Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice. 2026 30(2):412-425.
Availability: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 14
Publication Date: 2026
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education
Descriptors: Neurodevelopmental Disorders, Faculty Development, Public School Teachers, Elementary Secondary Education, Training, Teacher Attitudes, Program Effectiveness, Students with Disabilities, Program Development, Self Efficacy, Knowledge Level, Program Implementation
DOI: 10.1177/13623613251388627
ISSN: 1362-3613
1461-7005
Abstract: Autistic and other neurodivergent youth face social, sensory, and environmental challenges at school that negatively impact learning and well-being. Yet, most educators are not trained in neurodevelopmental disabilities, leaving them with outdated knowledge and limited confidence about how to support neurodivergent youth at school. In a two-phase project, we sought to (1) co-design a comprehensive professional development training for school educators and (2) pilot test this training in one US public school district. First, we used community-based participatory research methods to form an interdisciplinary team of neurodivergent educators and autistic community members. We then used human-centered design methods to iteratively design the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity professional development training for US K-12 educators. In Phase 2, we demonstrated feasibility and acceptability of the resulting training in a sample of 192 educators, grades K-12. Significant improvements were noted in educator knowledge and self-efficacy in pre- to post-assessments. Together, community-based participatory research and human-centered design provided a promising community-driven approach to development, resulting in a training that was well received and conducive to implementation. Future work will test the effects of the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training on youth outcomes and explore the role of professional learning communities to support implementation and sustain change.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1494640
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFkrrNiL9O-LMAboxQaPPN9AAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDDm1TY5GuD0PAW8cBQIBEICBmitOP81EJG6gBiSuHf9ZxI98xgftYQQ1uf0MGjkJpzlCqFqwbXDtiFUTuqWj3xsZ3H73_Q8v0TEDMzf_SbFqctN6ZfgN4r-x7SyuBN8OSJIhvBdg0vClovTHjb60YkdJdiSNV-WJvjUBCKE42K41nAWQnTTng-Tn78PPAX1LWENqOsjiL7Y9KFPbqDYgnIXtTnsW9c9brlfpAh0=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0190905307;f9d01feb.26;2026Jan19.05:34;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0190905307-1">The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity Collaborative: Co-designing a program to enhance educator knowledge and efficacy supporting children with neurodevelopmental disabilities </title> <p>Autistic and other neurodivergent youth face social, sensory, and environmental challenges at school that negatively impact learning and well-being. Yet, most educators are not trained in neurodevelopmental disabilities, leaving them with outdated knowledge and limited confidence about how to support neurodivergent youth at school. In a two-phase project, we sought to (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) co-design a comprehensive professional development training for school educators and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) pilot test this training in one US public school district. First, we used community-based participatory research methods to form an interdisciplinary team of neurodivergent educators and autistic community members. We then used human-centered design methods to iteratively design the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity professional development training for US K-12 educators. In Phase 2, we demonstrated feasibility and acceptability of the resulting training in a sample of 192 educators, grades K-12. Significant improvements were noted in educator knowledge and self-efficacy in pre- to post-assessments. Together, community-based participatory research and human-centered design provided a promising community-driven approach to development, resulting in a training that was well received and conducive to implementation. Future work will test the effects of the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training on youth outcomes and explore the role of professional learning communities to support implementation and sustain change. Neurodivergent children are children who have neurodevelopmental or cognitive disabilities (e.g. autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, brain injury, dyslexia, Tourette's, and other neurological disorders). Neurodivergent children have heightened risk for mental health problems and poor learning outcomes compared to their peers. Sadly, school experiences contribute to these poor outcomes. Every day, neurodivergent children face a multitude of barriers and negative events at school that exacerbate their neurocognitive, sensory, and social communication differences, and even make them feel unsafe. Educators do not have the knowledge of how to support neurodivergent children and cannot practically provide individualized supports to each neurodivergent child in their classroom. A new approach is needed to ensure that school is a positive, enriching experience instead of the stressful, negative experience that it is for most neurodivergent students. This project aimed to transform schools for neurodivergent children by giving public school educators the knowledge they need to create a safe and inclusive school climate for all children. We developed the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training with a group of researchers, teachers, counselors, principals, administrators, and advocates all with personal connections to neurodiversity. The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training program teaches a series of practical tools to design classrooms and instruction in ways that eliminate unnecessary barriers and set neurodivergent children up for success at school. We tested the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training program in one school district with 192 educators. Results suggest that this program is agreeable to teachers and improves their knowledge and confidence in supporting their neurodivergent children. Future work will test how the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training program helps neurodivergent youth directly and if teachers can sustain these positive changes in knowledge and confidence.</p> <p>Keywords: autism; community-based participatory research; human-centered design; neurodiversity; school inclusion; teacher education</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-2">Background</hd> <p>Neurodivergent youth are children that have neurodevelopmental or cognitive disabilities (e.g. autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), brain injury, dyslexia, Tourette syndrome, other neurological conditions, and/or multiple disabilities) with unique learning needs due to differences in neurocognitive processes, social communication, and sensory processing ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref3">35</reflink>]). Current population estimates suggest that approximately 15%–20% of school-aged youth are neurodivergent ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref4">28</reflink>]). As such, schools and educators are likely to work with many neurodivergent students. Despite this, many educators have limited confidence and understanding of how to best support neurodivergent learners ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref5">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref6">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>In the United States, public school districts serve children starting in Kindergarten (K, age 5) through 12th grade (typically age 18 but can extend to 21 depending on state laws). US laws have been passed to protect and support students with disabilities and other unique learning needs. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), originally passed in 1975 and later renamed and reauthorized multiple times, is a US federal law requiring that students with a disability are entitled to a tailored education in the least restricted environment at no cost to the families ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref7">42</reflink>]). Students identified or diagnosed with a neurodivergent condition are protected by IDEA and supported by Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), which detail any unique accommodations, learning classrooms, or other educational supports needed for that student to succeed.</p> <p>US schools are run by a complex and multidisciplinary workforce with distinct professional backgrounds and expertise, including general education teachers, special education teachers, teachers with a specialized focus (e.g. early childhood, gifted education, English as a Second Language), school counselors and psychologists, and administrators (e.g. principals and superintendents) that all play a critical role in supporting children through grades K-12. In alignment with US disability protection laws and policies, US public schools employ special education teachers, a school psychologist, contract with rehabilitation professionals (e.g. occupational therapy, physical therapy, speech and language pathologists, low vision specialists), and a director of special education to oversee required disability services. However, most school personnel are general education teachers. General education teachers are trained to teach a broad range of children and abilities in a typical classroom setting, with a focus on delivering academic content with standards in subjects ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref8">42</reflink>]). General education teachers often specialize in subject areas and age groups (i.e. elementary school/primary school, middle school, high school/secondary school). In contrast, special education teachers are trained to support children with disabilities and others with unique learning needs, often with individualized interventions and learning plans ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref9">42</reflink>]). School counselors and psychologists conduct psychological and academic assessments and support students' social-emotional and behavioral needs through counseling and individualized supports. School administrators specialize in educational leadership and are responsible for establishing academic curriculum standards, managing school budgets, supervising teachers and staff, creating a school culture, and implementing school policies across teachers and students. Ultimately, the structure of US school systems is highly complex with multiple layers of professionals and significant variation across states in terms of school size, policies, and availability of specialized supports ([<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref10">42</reflink>]).</p> <p>Given this complex educational system structure, ensuring that educators are equipped to support neurodivergent students is challenging for schools. Most US school educators are not prepared with the training and knowledge to support neurodivergent youth or children with disabilities ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref11">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref12">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref13">24</reflink>]). General education teachers receive two or less courses in their training on supporting children with disabilities, leaving them with outdated information about these disabilities and limited confidence in ways to support neurodivergent children ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref14">2</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref15">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref16">14</reflink>]). General educators, however, are regularly responsible for the learning and emotional needs of neurodivergent students in a general education classroom due to the IDEA requirement to teach students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment (which is a general education classroom). This knowledge gap is increasingly problematic with the rise in identification of neurodivergent children ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref17">28</reflink>]). While general educators may be open-minded and interested in supporting neurodivergent students in their classroom, these educators often do not know the details of a child's condition and operate with a paucity of appropriate instructional strategies for the needs of 15%–20% of children in their classroom ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref18">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref19">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref20">39</reflink>]). Understandably, the lack of best practice guidelines and adequate teacher training for these educators also has the potential to become evident to students and parents, further intensifying the issue ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref21">8</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref22">23</reflink>]). Ultimately, this leaves many educators underprepared, without the skills to support neurodivergent children in classrooms, and a school climate that exacerbates their differences. Educational outcomes for neurodivergent children are concerning and many have negative social experiences at school ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref23">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref24">29</reflink>]).</p> <p>Further complicating the issue, research to date has largely been siloed to specialties of each of these distinct neurodivergent conditions with work focusing on developing individualized interventions. This siloed approach, though useful to understanding unique characteristics and mechanisms of each disability, is impractical for general education classrooms. It is not feasible to solely rely on individualized interventions and specialized learning plans in a general education classroom when teachers are managing up many children and have limited training in this disability ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref25">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref26">41</reflink>]). Furthermore, there are many instances where teachers do not know specific diagnoses of neurodivergent children in their classroom, a child has not yet been identified as neurodivergent, or an IEP is not yet in place. Partnering with schools to address these knowledge gaps may lead to more effective and sustainable changes that improve the school experience for neurodivergent children.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-3">The present study</hd> <p>This development project aimed to provide educators with the knowledge and tools to improve the school environment for neurodivergent children. The idea for this research project was generated and ranked as the top priority by our established group of autistic community partners, Pittsburgh Adult Autism Research Community Collaborative (PAARCC), who proposed that addressing challenges at school will target lifelong trajectories of poor mental health and suicidality ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref27">32</reflink>]). As such, our team first used a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to co-design a professional development program, the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity (SUN) Program, for school educators (Phase 1). We selected a CBPR approach because interventions developed with limited community input often result in programs that are not sustainably implemented in the community ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref28">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref29">26</reflink>]). Co-designing with the end-users (in this case educators) and people with lived experience produces interventions that have a higher probability of sustainable implementation, especially within the complexity of a US school system ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref30">10</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref31">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref32">26</reflink>]). In Phase 2, we pilot tested this program in a US public school district. We hypothesized that educator's knowledge of neurodiversity and self-efficacy in supporting neurodivergent students would be significantly higher after completing the SUN Program. We also hypothesized that educators would report that the tools learned in the SUN Program would be feasible, acceptable, and appropriate for implementation in their school. We present methods and results of each phase in consecutive order. This study was approved by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board (STUDY23010093), and the data and materials from this study are available upon request.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-4">Phase 1 methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190905307-5">SUN Collaborative members</hd> <p>Consistent with CBPR principles ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref33">20</reflink>]), we formed an interdisciplinary collaborative of educators, neurodivergent community members, and researchers with shared decision-making in all phases of this research project. We identified SUN Collaborative members by connecting with local school district leaders for recommendations of educational leaders with personal connections to neurodiversity. The study PI met individually with each potential member to ensure that it was a good fit for lived experience, professional experience, and project goals. All nine members of the SUN Collaborative are either neurodivergent themselves or parent/family member of a neurodivergent child. Neurodivergent conditions represented in the Collaborative include autism, ADHD, brain injury, multiple sclerosis, dyslexia, intellectual disability, and other neurological conditions. Members of the SUN Collaborative identify as male (30%), female (50%), non-binary (20%), White (70%), and Black or African American (30%). SUN Collaborative members included educators employed at five school districts in Pennsylvania. Specifically, the SUN Collaborative included two building-level administrators (i.e. Principal, Assistant Principal), district administrators (i.e. assistant superintendent, director of student instruction), director of an approved private school for neurodivergent children, special education teacher, general education teacher, school counselor, two neurodivergent adult advocates, and the executive director of a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting Black autistic families. One member was also a standing board member of a statewide association for school administrators that focuses on informing legislation, policy, and development of elementary, middle, and high school principals. The nine members of the SUN Collaborative members partnered with 3 researchers (2 of which are also neurodivergent) to co-design the SUN Program (totaling 12 members and authors in this article).</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-6">Phase 1 SUN Program development</hd> <p>The Collaborative aimed to "create better schools for neurodivergent learners through a professional development program." The Collaborative addressed this goal through a series of eight team meetings, ranging from 2- to 6-h long each. Group meetings fused human-centered design (HCD) with CBPR methods to rapidly produce and refine the program and reach consensus across members (Table 1; [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref34">10</reflink>]). HCD is a proven method for leading teams to develop innovative and sustainable products with an interdisciplinary group ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref35">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref36">34</reflink>]). We further enhanced traditional CBPR and HCD methods with our own expertise in accommodating neurodivergent people with varied communication and sensory needs (e.g. detailed meeting agendas, sensory breaks, sensory rooms, intentional and predictable discussion groups, multiple modes of sharing information and communication). Table 1 details the HCD methods and steps for each activity, and further information for replication can be found in the Luma Institute HCD handbook that we utilized ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref37">25</reflink>]).</p> <p>Table 1. Human-centered design (HCD) methods to co-design the SUN Program.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Meeting</th><th align="left">HCD activity name</th><th align="left">HCD activity steps</th><th align="left">HCD activity outcome</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>What's on your radar?(Figure 1)</td><td>• 5-min individual rapid generation of ideas across six areas• Rank ideas of importance• Add ideas to group radar</td><td>Idea generation for key domains of the SUN program</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Rose, thorn, bud</td><td>• 15-min presentation on latest science• Identify positive, negative, and areas for improvement in the science</td><td>Shared understanding of latest research</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Affinity clustering</td><td>• Two small groups to identify themes and patterns in research reflections• Group similar reflections together to identify themes across members</td><td>Shared understanding of latest research</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Vote</td><td>• Voting on top 3 domains for the SUN program• Tally votes and group consensus discussion</td><td>Consensus on four key domains of the SUN program</td></tr><tr><td>2–4</td><td>Concept mapping</td><td>• Generate ideas• Sort ideas• Rank ideas• Identify clusters of ideas and relationships between clusters</td><td>Initial set of ideas for SUN tools</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Creative matrix</td><td>• Determine key question: "how might we foster safe relationships with neurodivergent children at school?"• Create 5 × 5 grid with columns of solution domains (e.g. build on personal interests and talents; classroom arrangement) and rows detailing context (e.g. classroom, hallway)• Refine ideas and organize into the set grid</td><td>Specific ideas based on school context</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Importance difficulty matrix(Figure 2)</td><td>• Plot ideas onto graph by importance (x-axis) and difficulty (y-axis).• Categorize ideas based on plotting location• Quick wins = low difficulty, low importance• Save for later = high difficulty, low importance• Needs strategy = high difficulty, high importance• High value = low difficulty, high importance</td><td>Prioritized final set of SUN tools for each of the four program domains</td></tr><tr><td>5 and 6</td><td>Storyboarding</td><td>• Form three small groups (i.e. elementary, middle, high)• Use low-cost materials (e.g. papers, markers, sticky notes, computer) to draft story lines and characters for learning activity of SUN tools• Present storyboards to larger team for feedback</td><td>Initial model for SUN materials and learning activities</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Rapid prototyping (multiple times)</td><td>• Use low-cost materials (e.g. papers, markers, sticky notes, computer) to create prototype of SUN materials• Present initial prototypes to larger team for feedback and edits</td><td>Initial prototypes of SUN learning videos, materials, and activities</td></tr><tr><td>7 and 8</td><td>Vote</td><td>• Final review of SUN program, SUN tools, and SUN materials• Tally votes and group consensus discussion</td><td>Final SUN Program materials and activities</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0190905307-7">Meeting 1</hd> <p>We first set group rules and processes for working together and reaching consensus. The Collaborative identified four group rules: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref38">1</reflink>) respectful engagement (e.g. supportive, language matters, agree to disagree); (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref39">2</reflink>) enable participation (e.g. clear instructions, transparent norms, and provide the right tools); (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref40">3</reflink>) trust; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref41">4</reflink>) play (e.g. have fun with creative ideas).</p> <p>We then used a series of HCD activity protocols, designed by the LUMA Institute ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref42">15</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref43">25</reflink>]) to identify the key components of what would comprise the SUN Program (see Table 1 for an explanation of the goal and process of each HCD activity). In the first "What's on your Radar" activity, collaborative members independently generated ideas of topics and skills that educators needed to learn to improve schools for neurodivergent children ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref44">25</reflink>]). Collaborative members generated ideas across six areas (i.e. school environment, self-advocacy, emotional distress, student to student interactions, instruction, and miscellaneous) and ranked the importance of their ideas onto a group radar, which we used to organize the ideas (Figure 1 and Supplemental Table).</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Human-centered design "What's on your radar?" activity.</p> <p>Following this activity, researchers presented a literature review of the latest research on instruction, school culture, sensory barriers at school, inclusivity training, and life outcomes among neurodivergent people ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref45">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref46">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref47">7</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref48">9</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref49">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref50">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref51">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref52">19</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref53">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref54">36</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref55">37</reflink>]). SUN team members used the "rose-thorn-bud" HCD activity, which is uses a color-coding system to positives (rose), negatives (thorn), and opportunities for growth (bud), to synthesize the literature presented ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref56">15</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref57">25</reflink>]). Using this, Collaborative members generated the following themes from the research to integrate into ideas: importance of understanding models of disability, key role of teacher–student relationships, need for safe sensory spaces, and lack of teacher training in disability. These concepts were integrated together with the radar to form a full set of ideas of topics for an educator training on neurodiversity.</p> <p>Collaborative members then considered the ideas and voted on their top topics that should be included in a professional development program ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref58">25</reflink>]). These four highest ranked domains became the core models of the SUN Program. Between meetings 1 and 2, SUN Collaborative members sought feedback from other teachers and neurodivergent students on these domains through informal interviews.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-8">Meetings 2–4</hd> <p>The Collaborative members used a series of HCD activities, including "concept mapping," "creative matrix," "importance difficulty matrix," and "storyboarding" to iteratively generate and refine specific ideas and tools for each of the four domains. First, we used concept mapping (see Table 1) to create a diverse set of ideas for each of the four key domains ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref59">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref60">25</reflink>]). Concept mapping is a systematic process to first generate and rank ideas and then identify relationships between different ideas ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref61">16</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref62">25</reflink>]). Next, we created creative matrixes for each of the four domains. Creative matrixes are a way to visually organize and refine ideas by considering how to operationalize and implement each idea in a variety of contexts (e.g. in classroom, hallway, extracurricular). The matrixes ensured that each idea was practical for teachers to use in a variety of school contexts. For example, for domain three environments, we refined the initial idea of "improve learning activities and classroom arrangement" into several specific tools based on school context (e.g. seating guidelines for classrooms; sensory room guidelines for each building). This activity resulted in specific tools that were practical in various school contexts.</p> <p>We then used the "importance difficulty matrix" to select and prioritize a final set of ideas for the SUN Tools (Figure 2; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref63">25</reflink>]). The "importance difficulty matrix" involves plotted ideas onto a graph organized by importance (x-axis) and difficulty (y-axis). The graph is then be interpreted by four quadrants, including low difficulty/low importance (quick wins), high difficulty/low importance (save for later), high difficulty/high importance (needs strategy), and low difficulty/high importance (high value). See Figure 2 for an example matrix with a set of ideas generated in our development process. For example, we determined that "using predictable, assigned learning groups" was low difficulty for teachers and high impact in supporting neurodivergent learners. On the other hand, "matching neurodivergent students with preferred teachers" was determined to be likely high impact but high difficulty for a school to implement. SUN Collaborative members conducted informal interviews with a total of 27 teachers and neurodivergent children between meetings to refine aspects of the professional development program based on interview feedback. Consistent with HCD, these interviews were not formal research or qualitative interviews. The team conducted brief interviews with educators to gather feedback on the selected training domains and ideas from Meeting 1. Specifically, SUN Collaborative members asked the following questions in interviews: "What are ways to be responsive to emotional distress in a neurodivergent learner?" "What can teachers do to connect with neurodivergent students," and "What does 'safe' look like in the classroom?" Interviews with neurodivergent learners repeatedly highlighted the importance of educators listening and providing opportunities to connect on interests. A few themes emerged among educator interviews, including lack in confidence in basic knowledge on disability, unsure how to build a relationship with neurodivergent student, unsure if a behavior is intentionally "disruptive" or not, unsure if they should be teaching basic social skills and eye contact to neurodivergent students. The SUN Collaborative team used these themes to improve the didactic content on disability, added content on the harms of masking, created training videos on emotion dysregulation and how it is often misperceived as intentional disruption, and created a lesson planning activity to help educators find time to listen and form relationships with neurodivergent learners.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. Importance difficulty matrix to prioritize final set of SUN Program Tools.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-9">Meetings 5 and 6</hd> <p>Collaborative members created materials and applied learning activities for each of the four SUN Program domains, with attention to each level at school (i.e. elementary, middle, high school). We then used rapid prototyping and storyboarding to design the SUN Tool materials, which are methods to produce step-by-step visuals of a problem or product for iterative feedback and refinement ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref64">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref65">21</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref66">25</reflink>]). We also partnered directly with neurodivergent high school students to create SUN Program materials that incorporate the student perspective. Specifically, we filmed a series of student voice videos with five neurodivergent students and two neurodivergent adults. We also worked with high school students to program an interactive game that demonstrates the impact of cognitive load for neurodivergent students (Domain 1: Neuroscience of neurodiversity).</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-10">Meetings 7 and 8</hd> <p>Between sessions 7 and 8, we delivered the prototyped program content and materials with 20 general education teachers to elicit feedback and any necessary iterative changes. In the final meetings, the group reviewed the full SUN Training Program. This included the educator training schedule, SUN Tools, program materials, and the applied learning activities. The group discussed and voted to reach final consensus on each aspect of the training.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-11">Phase 1 results</hd> <p>All SUN Collaborative members reported to be "extremely satisfied" with the development process. The final SUN Program is a 6-h professional development training for public school educators (K-12). It is designed to be implemented to an entire school district or school building to create a collective understanding across the school system for widespread changes. Thus, the SUN Program is designed for general education teachers, special education teachers, support staff, paraprofessionals, principals, and central administrators (e.g. school psychologist, director of student services, superintendents). Program materials are tailored to each level in school (i.e. elementary, middle, high) within the context of the United States education system.</p> <p>The SUN Program has four distinct modules based on the selected content domains: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref67">1</reflink>) Scientific advances and neuroscience of neurodiversity; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref68">2</reflink>) Supporting safe relationships at school; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref69">3</reflink>) Creating an inclusive environment; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref70">4</reflink>) Preventing and responding to emotional distress. Each module has an objective and a specific set of recommended best practices. Table 2 details the modules, objectives, best practices, and materials for each module.</p> <p>Table 2. Key elements and strategies of the SUN Program.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Module</th><th align="left">Objective</th><th align="left">Recommended best practice</th><th align="left">Tool or strategy</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Neurodiversity, neuroscience and advances in research</td><td>The educator will explain neurodiversity and ways neurodivergent brains process information.</td><td>Multi-modal instruction</td><td>Checklist for instructional design (unit and lesson)</td></tr><tr><td>Classroom environment</td><td>The educator will identify ways to intentionally design the classroom and instruction for neurodivergent students.</td><td>Clear, visible expectations for student engagement, movement, participation, and asking for helpAdapting classroom environment for sensory needs</td><td>Sensory checklist and example PBIS system</td></tr><tr><td>Fostering safe relationships</td><td>The educator will identify specific ways to be clearly communicate and support neurodivergent students.</td><td>Personal acknowledgment of all students in a class periodClear and pre-established learning group (based on social, emotional, and academic needs)</td><td>Example lesson plan with these skills</td></tr><tr><td>Preventing and responding to emotional distress</td><td>The educator will identify specific steps to prevent and respond to emotional distress among neurodivergent students.</td><td>Consistent positive reinforcementShared language and visuals for emotions across schoolCheck-ins with students (self-assessment on cognitive and emotional needs) Intentional area of classroom for regulation</td><td>Provided communication cards, self-assessments, tools to assess emotional intensity, and plans for designing a classroom area to support regulation</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>The modules are taught by SUN trainers using multi modal instruction, including (a) a brief didactic presentation to introduce new background information and SUN Tools, (b) review of the information and Tools using multimedia, and (c) an applied group learning activity. The SUN Program provides educators with a workbook that includes a variety of educational materials and tools for implementation. The workbook includes infographics on sensory processing, emotion regulation, and environmental barriers to learning. The SUN workbook also includes sensory checklists, communication cards for students to use when in distress, storyboards depicting common challenges and solutions that occur across a school day. The SUN materials also include many high-quality training videos detailing the differences in cognitive and sensory processing in neurodivergent learners as well as videos detailing emotion regulation needs and recommended supports. All the best practices and materials were designed during the HCD process to have a high impact and practical to implement across school contexts (e.g. classroom, hallway, lunchroom).</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-12">Phase 2 methods</hd> <p>In phase 2, we conducted a single-arm trial of the SUN Program in one school district serving ~4000 students (K-12). District superintendents worked with our team to dedicate one in-service professional development day to the SUN Program.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-13">Participants</hd> <p>Participants were (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref71">1</reflink>) 18 years of age or older; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref72">2</reflink>) educators and other personnel employed by the participating district (e.g. teacher, special education teacher, school psychologist, school administrator, paraprofessional, school counselor, support staff); (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref73">3</reflink>) willing to complete data collection.</p> <p>A total of 204 educators participated in the study. Educators from three elementary schools, two middle schools, and one high school received the developed training and provided pre- and post-assessments. Data from 12 participating educators were excluded from the final analyses: a small set of participants (<emph>n</emph> = 9) did not complete post-surveys, and a few participants (<emph>n</emph> = 3) used the wrong participant ID at post-assessment, preventing our ability to use in <emph>t</emph>-test analyses. A final sample of 192 educators was analyzed and data are available upon request. Table 3 details the educator roles and grade-level assignment of participating educators.</p> <p>Table 3. Participating educator role and grade-level assignment.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Educator role</th><th align="left"><italic>n</italic> (%)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Building administrator (i.e. principal, vice principal)</td><td>3 (1.6)</td></tr><tr><td>District-wide administrator (e.g. assistant superintendent, director of student support services)</td><td>3 (1.6)</td></tr><tr><td>School counselor</td><td>9 (4.7)</td></tr><tr><td>General education teacher</td><td>113 (59)</td></tr><tr><td>K-12 Special education teacher</td><td>21 (11)</td></tr><tr><td>K-12 Support staff/aide</td><td>41 (21.4)</td></tr><tr><td><bold>General education teacher grade level</bold></td><td><italic>n</italic><bold>(% of</bold><italic>N</italic><bold>=</bold><bold>113)</bold></td></tr><tr><td>Mixed across buildings</td><td>3 (2.6)</td></tr><tr><td>Middle school</td><td>56 (49.6)</td></tr><tr><td>High school</td><td>54 (47.8)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Participating educators identified as female (71%), male (28%), and transgender (1%). The sample predominantly identified as White (91%) and non-Hispanic (97%), with few participants identifying as Black (1%), Asian (1.5%), American indigenous (.5%), and other (5.5%). The mean age of participating educators was 44 (SD = 9.7). Notably, 33% of the sample identified as neurodivergent and/or as the primary caregiver (i.e. biological parent, foster parent, grandparent) of a neurodivergent child (see Table 4). The most common neurodivergent diagnoses included autism and/or ADHD, with most neurodivergent children of participating educators younger than 21 (see Table 4).</p> <p>Table 4. Participating educator relationship to neurodiversity.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left">Relationship to neurodiversity</th><th align="left"><italic>n</italic> (% of total sample)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Self neurodivergent only</td><td>2 (1)</td></tr><tr><td>Both self neurodivergent and family member</td><td>7 (4)</td></tr><tr><td>Family member neurodivergent</td><td>54 (28)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Neurodivergent diagnoses—self</bold></td></tr><tr><td>Autism</td><td>1 (0.5)</td></tr><tr><td>Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder</td><td>6 (3)</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>2 (1)</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><bold>Neurodivergent diagnoses—family member</bold></td></tr><tr><td>Autism</td><td>23 (12)</td></tr><tr><td>Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder</td><td>41 (21.3)</td></tr><tr><td>Dyslexia</td><td>7 (3.6)</td></tr><tr><td>Brain injury</td><td>6 (3)</td></tr><tr><td>Tourette's</td><td>6 (3)</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>7 (3.6)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <emph>Recruitment and Procedures</emph>: We recruited participants through the partnering school district. Research staff distributed the pre-surveys and post-surveys electronically. Pre-surveys were distributed 3 days prior to the scheduled SUN Program and were required to be completed before the training began. Post-surveys were made available at the completion of the training and had to be completed within 2 weeks of completing the SUN Program, with most participants having completed them immediately after the program. Participants were compensated $15 for completing both surveys.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-14">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0190905307-15">Demographics</hd> <p>Participating educators filled out a questionnaire pre-training that included information about their role in school and grade level, age, gender identity, ethnicity, and race. Demographic surveys also included questions about self-reported neurodivergent diagnoses and diagnoses of any neurodivergent family members.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-16">Knowledge</hd> <p> <emph>The SUN Knowledge Survey</emph> was completed pre- and post-training. It is a 10-item survey developed for this study to assess educator's knowledge about the specific educational skills taught during the SUN Training Program. Two items were derived from each of the domains of the program (i.e. scientific advances and neuroscience of neurodiversity, supporting safe relationships at school, creating a supportive environment, preventing and responding to emotional distress). The items were developed by a subset of the Collaborative members with the research team. The final two items focused on communication with neurodivergent children given that communication was embedded throughout all four modules. Each item used a 5-point Likert-type response scale. Scores range from 10 to 50, with higher scores reflecting greater knowledge in how to support neurodivergent children in school. Internal consistency for the SUN Knowledge Survey was high across items (α = 0.965).</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-17">Self-efficacy</hd> <p> <emph>The AASPIRE Adult Autism Healthcare Provider Self-Efficacy Scale</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref74">33</reflink>]) was completed pre- and post-training. It was adapted for this study to assess educator's self-efficacy in teaching neurodivergent students. The original scale includes six items on provider's self-efficacy in providing care to autistic people, including the following domains: communication, examination procedures, diagnosing and treating, helping autistic patients stay calm, identifying accommodations, and implementing accommodations. The scale uses a 5-point Likert-type response scale. The scale also has two items on level of difficulty and reward treating autistic patients, with a response scale of 1–10. We chose this scale to adapt for this study given that many of the items included topics covered in SUN Program. We adapted the scale to state "neurodivergent students" instead of "autistic patients." We also adapted the two medical items on the scale by replacing the "diagnosing and treating" item with "identifying your neurodivergent students," and by replacing the "examination procedures" item with "structuring learning for neurodivergent students." Finally, at the suggestion of our Collaborative, we added two items on a culture of safety, which include "creating a safe environment for your neurodivergent students" and "modeling that differences are welcome in your classroom." We retained the original 5-point Likert-type response scale and retained the original difficulty and rewarding items. The final scale included eight items, with scores ranging from 8 to 40, with higher scores reflecting greater self-efficacy in supporting neurodivergent children in school. Internal consistency for this adapted Educator Self-Efficacy Scale was high across items (α = 0.958).</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-18">Feasibility and acceptability of implementation</hd> <p>Participants completed the Acceptability of the Intervention Measures (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measures (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measures (FIM) ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref75">40</reflink>]) at post-training. These are widely used four-item implementation scales developed to use with practitioners learning a new intervention. Two optional questions on implementation supports were added to the scale. The first, "what supports would help you successfully use the SUN training tools and suggestions?" had select options: follow-up training, digital reminders, aligning evaluation standards to SUN Tools, peer groups to share ideas, successes, and challenges using SUN Tools, and teams at school focused on supporting change in SUN domains. The second question asked, "if applicable, how would you like to receive any consultation or coaching" with virtual and in person response items. One open-ended question on implementation supports (i.e. What supports, if any, would you want to successfully use the tools?) was included to identify future implementation supports,</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-19">Analyses</hd> <p>Descriptive statistics were computed on demographic questionnaires to characterize the sample (means, standard deviations, frequency counts, percentages). Primary outcomes of self-efficacy and knowledge were first characterized with descriptive statistics (mean, standard error with confidence intervals). Paired sample <emph>t</emph>-tests and Cohen's <emph>d</emph> effect sizes were computed to determine changes between pre- and post-outcome surveys. Subsequently, we conducted a mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) to assess for any differences between neurotypical participants and participants personally connected to neurodiversity (i.e. parent of neurodivergent child, self-identified as neurodivergent) over time. Feasibility and acceptability of implementation measures were characterized with descriptive statistics.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-20">Phase 2 results</hd> <p>Pre-surveys indicated that educators had low knowledge (M = 24.8, SD = 9.97; highest score possible = 50) and self-efficacy (M = 24.3, SD = 7.44; highest score possible = 40) prior to the SUN training, with no educators beginning the program at the ceiling of either measure. On the self-efficacy survey, educators reported that neurodivergent children are both difficult to teach (M = 6.24, SD = 2.14) and rewarding to teach (M = 7.65, SD = 2.38), with responses of 10 being the most difficult and most rewarding. The subgroup of participants personally connected to neurodiversity (i.e. parents, self) had significantly higher (<emph>p</emph> < 0.05) baseline knowledge (M = 27.56) compared to the subgroup of neurotypical participants (M = 23.57), though there were no significant differences between groups at post-assessments.</p> <p>Both knowledge (M = 43.4, SD = 5.95) and self-efficacy (M = 34.8, SD = 4.63) improved following the training. Specifically, <emph>t</emph>-tests indicated statistically significant and large effect size changes in improved educator knowledge (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib191" id="ref76">191</reflink>) = −27.7, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001; <emph>d</emph> = 9.54) and self-efficacy (<emph>t</emph>(<reflink idref="bib191" id="ref77">191</reflink>) = −20.7, <emph>p</emph> < 0.001; <emph>d</emph> = 7.02). Feasibility and acceptability of implementation was high, with educators reporting that the SUN Tools were acceptable (M = 4.2, SD = 0.71; 86% agreed or strongly agreed), appropriate (M = 4.35, SD = 0.63; 92% agreed or strongly agreed) and feasible (M = 4.29, SD = 0.59; 93% agreed or strongly agreed) to implement in their classrooms and school.</p> <p>In the implementation supports questions, two responses stood out as key ongoing implementation support needs. Educators indicated that "peer groups to share ideas, successes, and challenges" would be helpful implementation supports, which was endorsed by 97 participants (47.5%). Similarly, "teams at school focused on supporting change in SUN Program domains" was also endorsed by 97 participants (47.5%). A smaller group of participants suggested that follow-up trainings to practice the SUN Tools would be helpful (<emph>n</emph> = 55; 27%). The other responses, which were suggested by 20% or less of the sample included digital reminders, on call support or coaching, and aligning supervisor evaluations with use of SUN Tools.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-21">Discussion</hd> <p>This project was driven by community priorities since its inception. The idea of the SUN Program came directly from another CBPR group of autistic adults with a mission to improve mental health in autistic and other neurodivergent communities. We acted on that idea by fusing CBPR and HCD methods together to create a teacher training program that targets educator knowledge and self-efficacy in supporting neurodivergent children. Our community-driven approach produced a high-quality program that was well-received by educators in one US public school district, significantly improved educator knowledge and self-efficacy, and perceived as feasible, appropriate, and acceptable for implementation by participating educators.</p> <p>Our CBPR approach ultimately enhanced our science and resulted in a program that has a higher probability for successful implementation. The traditional intervention development process where researchers develop interventions with limited community input or in a consultation capacity often results in interventions that are a poor fit for real-life contexts, in this case schools ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref78">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref79">27</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref80">26</reflink>]). Our SUN Collaborative team had diverse representation, including people from varied neurodivergent populations (e.g. autism, ADHD, brain injury, dyslexia, Tourette syndrome), professions (e.g. neuroscience, speech language pathology, rehabilitation science, general education, special education, rehabilitation counseling), roles in education (e.g. district administrators, general education teacher, special education teacher, assistant principal, principal, school counselor, parents), and those identifying with multiple, intersecting marginalized groups (e.g. persons with disability, Black community, sexual and/or gender minority). The diversity of perspectives in our Collaborative team was intentional and was essential to the success of the project, as our collective ideas were more creative, novel, and representative of many communities that are often excluded from science.</p> <p>While HCD methods are most often used in the development of digital tools and technology, HCD was an ideal approach for this study. Both CBPR and HCD research methods prioritize the needs, experiences, and voices of people who are directly impacted by the research outcome ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref81">10</reflink>]). HCD allowed our team to quickly develop, iteratively refine, and prioritize ideas collectively across a diverse team. This process was useful to reach consensus across members quickly and offered a flexible approach to iteratively create the SUN Program and materials. While CBPR often takes several years, HCD typically occurs quickly over a shorter period of time (months) ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref82">10</reflink>]). The entire SUN Program was developed in less than 6 months. This was ideal for our project given that public school educators have limited availability during the academic year, and we were able to co-create this program over their summer breaks. This rapid development ultimately allowed us to dedicate more time to navigate logistical challenges in facilitating a district-wide implementation of the SUN Program for our pilot test (e.g. adhering to federal and state standards for professional districts, scheduling the training within their constrained schedule; space constraints for training all faculty and staff). Ultimately, our partnering approach allowed us to navigate these complex logistics in a reasonable timeframe while also designing a program primed for implementation, which may serve as a promising model for other school-based intervention development studies.</p> <p>Furthermore, our CBPR and HCD approach resulted in a high-quality program that directly addresses long-standing challenges faced by neurodivergent youth. Extant literature highlights the multitude of learning and environmental barriers at school for neurodivergent learners ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref83">22</reflink>]). For example, loud, unstructured, and cluttered classrooms make it difficult for neurodivergent children to learn new information and successfully collaborate with their peers ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref84">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref85">30</reflink>]). The school day can be full of unpredictable challenges and, in many cases, there are few sensory-friendly spaces ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref86">12</reflink>]). Recent work suggests that unaccommodating sensory environments and adverse social experiences at school led to emotion dysregulation with serious consequences, such as exclusionary discipline (e.g. suspension, alternative placements), school refusal, and involvement of school police, all of which are risk factors for mental health disorders and suicidality ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref87">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref88">38</reflink>]). The SUN Program provides knowledge and tools to reduce these challenges while increasing success in establishing relationships with adults and peers at school, which is a well-established as a protective factor for students ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref89">31</reflink>]). The SUN Program takes a macro approach to train <emph>all employees of a school district</emph> (e.g. general education teachers, special education teachers, counselors and psychologists, support staff, administrators) in best practices to support neurodivergent learners and systemic changes to remove environmental barriers at school. This systemic approach has the potential to shift long-term negative trajectories among neurodivergent people and change the school culture to be more accepting and inclusive of students with differences. Future work will measure the impact of the SUN Program on child outcomes and overall school culture.</p> <p>The SUN Program is a feasible and acceptable program that provides useful and practical information to educators in how to better support neurodivergent children. Educators had low confidence and knowledge of how to support neurodivergent students in pre-surveys. This low baseline knowledge may be because existing teacher training programs and curriculums lack adequate coursework to prepare educators to work with neurodivergent learners. For some SUN Program participants, this training was their first interaction with content related to neurodiversity. The SUN Program improved participant's knowledge to a substantial degree. This is promising given that professional development for teachers has long focused on curriculum, instruction, and assessment, but lacked a focus on development or advances in special education. The SUN Program fills these gaps and demonstrated significant changes in educator's confidence supporting neurodivergent children.</p> <p>An unexpected result of our study was the number of participating educators with personal connections to neurodiversity. Over 30% of the educators who engaged in the SUN Program were either neurodivergent themselves or parents of neurodivergent children, which is consistent with current population estimates of neurodivergent children ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref90">28</reflink>]). Interestingly, participants connected to neurodiversity had significantly higher knowledge scores at baseline, but there were no group differences following the training. This suggests that the SUN Program is helpful for those with and without connections to neurodiversity. Following the training, we received many consultation requests for mental health resources, advice on school accommodations, and recommendations for their children. This occurred despite being in a resource-rich area near several large healthcare systems. This highlighted the lack of support for families of neurodivergent children and the shared confusion among families in how to navigate the complexity of structural systems designed to support families and children with disabilities.</p> <p>Several methodological limitations should be considered when interpreting these findings. This was a community-engaged development study and not a clinical trial. We conducted the Phase 2 pilot study in a US suburban school district with limited racial and ethnic diversity among both the student body and school personnel, thus limiting the generalizability of our findings. It is unclear how well this program would translate to other international contexts, though we anticipate that the topics and strategies taught in the SUN Program are universal across contexts. Researchers and educators interested in taking a similar macro-level approach to changing schools might consider using our CBPR and HCD method as a model for partnering with schools to implement this program in a different context. Our pilot trial methods were limited to pre and post self-report measures from educators and other school personnel, without objective assessment of implementation, fidelity, or sustainable implementation. It is also unclear whether improving educator knowledge, skill, and self-efficacy would impact learning, social, and mental health outcomes for neurodivergent children, which was not measured in this study. Given that our initial partners group advised this would be important for mental health trajectories, we plan to explore the effect of the program on child outcomes in future trials. Furthermore, we were not powered in this study to analyze for subgroup differences (i.e. grade level) across educators. Future work will test educator knowledge, self-efficacy, and fidelity of implementation over a school year and with a larger sample to explore differences across subgroups.</p> <p>In conclusion, CBPR and HCD offer a promising approach to designing effective programs that are conducive to implementation, which may serve as an ideal intervention development model for autism research. Our SUN Program demonstrated strong feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness among a large sample of public school educators. Most importantly, research related to the future well-being of autistic and neurodivergent children—if they are not supported appropriately in schools—has troubling implications. Applying the practical and usable information taught in the SUN Training Program is a way that educators can effectively attend to the healthy development of their students, a critical charge that well-informed educators take seriously. Future work will test the impact on neurodivergent children's outcomes and test implementation supports to promote sustained use of the SUN Program.</p> <hd id="AN0190905307-22">Supplemental Material</hd> <p>Graph: Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-aut-10.1177_13623613251388627 for The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity Collaborative: Co-designing a program to enhance educator knowledge and efficacy supporting children with neurodevelopmental disabilities by Kelly B Beck, Amy Ionadi, Timothy Wagner, Daniel Beck, Rachel Harris, Stephen Edwards, Donna Westbrooks-Martin, Jamie Upshaw, Andre Rhone, Taylor Kesich, Allie Kleinschmidt and Carla A Mazefsky in Autism</p> <p>We are grateful to all our research participants. We thank our community partners in the Pittsburgh Adult Autism Research Community Collaborative (PAARCC) who ranked this project as a top priority for improving the lives of neurodivergent students. We thank Ian Dvorin for designing an interactive game that demonstrates the impact of cognitive load for neurodivergent students. We thank Eli Kurs-Lasky, Sam Jaglowski, Michael Pollett, Aaron Gerster, and Eugene Johnson for sharing their lived experiences and filming a series of student voice videos for the SUN Program.</p> <ref id="AN0190905307-23"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alcorn A. M., McGeown S., Mandy W., Zahir R., Aitken D., Murray F., Peacock L. J. J., Fletcher-Watson S. (2022, October 9). A school-based evaluation study of a teacher-delivered, whole-class neurodiversity teaching programme (LEANS) to promote accepting and inclusive environments. Autism Europe. https://<ulink href="http://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/a-school-based-evaluation-study-of-a-teacher-delivered-whole-clas">www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/a-school-based-evaluation-study-of-a-teacher-delivered-whole-clas</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anderson C., Wood C. I., Franklin L., Iampieri A., Sarsony C. (2024). "Getting autism": Educators, parents, and autistic adults and teens reflect on the importance of teachers who understand. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-024-06353-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref5" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Anglim J., Prendeville P., Kinsella W. (2018). The self-efficacy of primary teachers in supporting the inclusion of children with autism spectrum disorder. Educational Psychology in Practice, 34(1), 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2017.1391750</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref41" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Beck K. B., MacKenzie K. T., Kumar T., Breitenfeldt K. E., Chang J., Conner C. M., Mandell D. S., White S. W., Mazefsky C. A. (2024). "The world's really not set up for the neurodivergent person": Understanding emotion dysregulation from the perspective of autistic adults. Autism in Adulthood.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref46" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Beheshti A., Chavanon M.-L., Christiansen H. (2020). Emotion dysregulation in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis. BMC Psychiatry, 20(1), 120. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-2442-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref28" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Beidas R. S., Saldana L., Shelton R. C. (2023). Testing psychosocial interventions in the contexts they are meant to be delivered. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000797</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref47" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Biederman J., Faraone S. V. (2006). The effects of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder on employment and household income. Medscape General Medicine, 8(3), 12.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref21" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bottema-Beutel K., Cuda J., Kim S. Y., Crowley S., Scanlon D. (2020). High school experiences and support recommendations of autistic youth. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 50(9), 3397–3412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-019-04261-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref48" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Brede J., Remington A., Kenny L., Warren K., Pellicano E. (2017). Excluded from school: Autistic students' experiences of school exclusion and subsequent re-integration into school. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 2, 2396941517737511. https://doi.org/10.1177/2396941517737511</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen E., Leos C., Kowitt S. D., Moracco K. E. (2020). Enhancing community-based participatory research through human-centered design strategies. Health Promotion Practice, 21(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839919850557</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen E., Neta G., Roberts M. C. (2021). Complementary approaches to problem solving in healthcare and public health: Implementation science and human-centered design. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 11(5), 1115–1121. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaa079</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Clément M.-A., Lee K., Park M., Sinn A., Miyake N. (2022). The need for sensory-friendly "zones": Learning from youth on the autism spectrum, their families, and autistic mentors using a participatory approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 883331. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.883331</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cook A. (2024). Conceptualisations of neurodiversity and barriers to inclusive pedagogy in schools: A perspective article. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12656</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cook A., Ogden J. (2022). Challenges, strategies and self-efficacy of teachers supporting autistic pupils in contrasting school settings: A qualitative study. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 37(3), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2021.1878659</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Coulter R. W. S., Mitchell S., Prangley K., Smallwood S., Bonanno L., Foster E. N., Wilson A., Miller E., Chugani C. D. (2021). Generating intervention concepts for reducing adolescent relationship abuse inequities among sexual and gender minority youth: Protocol for a web-based, longitudinal, human-centered design study. JMIR Research Protocols, 10(4), e26554. https://doi.org/10.2196/26554</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dopp A. R., Narcisse M.-R., Mundey P., Silovsky J. F., Smith A. B., Mandell D., Funderburk B. W., Powell B. J., Schmidt S., Edwards D., Luke D., Mendel P. (2020). A scoping review of strategies for financing the implementation of evidence-based practices in behavioral health systems: State of the literature and future directions. Implementation Research and Practice, 1, 2633489520939980. https://doi.org/10.1177/2633489520939980</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hirvikoski T., Mittendorfer-Rutz E., Boman M., Larsson H., Lichtenstein P., Bölte S. (2016). Premature mortality in autism spectrum disorder. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 208(3), 232–238.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Howlin P., Magiati I. (2017). Autism spectrum disorder: Outcomes in adulthood. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 30(2), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0000000000000308</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huntjens A., Landlust A., Wissenburg S., Van Der Gaag M. (2023). The prevalence of suicidal behavior in autism spectrum disorder: A meta-analysis. Crisis. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000922</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Israel B. A., Coombe C. M., Cheezum R. R., Schulz A. J., McGranaghan R. J., Lichtenstein R., Reyes A. G., Clement J., Burris A. (2010). Community-based participatory research: A capacity-building approach for policy advocacy aimed at eliminating health disparities. American Journal of Public Health, 100(11), 2094–2102. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2009.170506</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kia-Keating M., Capous D., Liu S., Adams J. (2017). Using community based participatory research and human centered design to address violence-related health disparities among Latino/a youth. Family & Community Health, 40(2), 160. https://doi.org/10.1097/FCH.0000000000000145</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kurowski M., Černý M., Trapl F. (2022). A review study of research articles on the barriers to inclusive education in primary schools. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 15(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2022.150206</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leifler E., Borg A., Bölte S. (2022). A multi-perspective study of perceived inclusive education for students with neurodevelopmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 54(4), 1611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-022-05643-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lindsay S., Proulx M., Thomson N., Scott H. (2013). Educators' challenges of including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 60(4), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2013.846470</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luma Institute. (2012). Innovating for people: Handbook of human-centered design methods.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lyon A. R., Koerner K. (2016). User-centered design for psychosocial intervention development and implementation. Clinical Psychology: A Publication of the Division of Clinical Psychology of the American Psychological Association, 23(2), 180–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12154</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lyon A. R., Koerner K., Chung J. (2020). Usability Evaluation for Evidence-Based Psychosocial Interventions (USE-EBPI): A methodology for assessing complex intervention implementability. Implementation Research and Practice, 1, 2633489520932924. https://doi.org/10.1177/2633489520932924</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maciver D., Rutherford M., Johnston L., Roy A. S. (2023). Prevalence of neurodevelopmental differences and autism in Scottish primary schools 2018–2022. Autism Research, 16(12), 2403–2414. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.3063</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maïano C., Normand C. L., Salvas M.-C., Moullec G., Aimé A. (2016). Prevalence of school bullying among youth with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research, 9(6), 601–615. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1568</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mallory C., Keehn B. (2021). Implications of sensory processing and attentional differences associated with autism in academic settings: An integrative review. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 695825. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.695825</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marraccini M. E., Brier Z. M. F. (2017). School connectedness and suicidal thoughts and behaviors: A systematic meta-analysis. School Psychology Quarterly, 32, 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000192</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mazefsky C. A., Conner C. M., Siegle G., Scott L. N., Bylsma L. M., Beck K. B., Cohen A., Borue X., Handen B. (2025). Advancing research on suicide and mental health in autistic adults through a research domain criteria (RDoC)-inspired framework. Autism in Adulthood. Advance Online publication.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicolaidis C., Schnider G., Lee J., Raymaker D. M., Kapp S. K., Croen L. A., Urbanowicz A., Maslak J. (2021). Development and psychometric testing of the AASPIRE Adult Autism Healthcare Provider Self-Efficacy Scale. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 25(3), 767–773. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320949734</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Norman M. K., Hamm M. E., Schenker Y., Mayowski C. A., Hierholzer W., Rubio D. M., Reis S. E. (2021). Assessing the application of human-centered design to translational research. Journal of Clinical and Translational Science, 5(1), e130. https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2021.794</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pellicano E., den Houting J. (2022). Annual research review: Shifting from "normal science" to neurodiversity in autism science. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 63(4), 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13534</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pellicano L., Bölte S., Stahmer A. (2018). The current illusion of educational inclusion. Autism, 22(4), 386–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361318766166</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schwartzman J. M., Mcmorris C. A., Williams Z. J., Brown C. M., Trollor J. N., Uljarević M., Stokes M. A., Hedley D. (2024). Elevated suicidal thoughts and behaviors and self-injury in autism across the lifespan: A multinational study. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11256.66568</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> So M., Freese R. L., Barnes A. J. (2024). Pushed out and drawn in: Exclusionary discipline, mental health, and protective factors among youth in public schools. Journal of School Health, 94(2), 128–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.13405</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tiwari A. (2024). Urban educator preparation program: Assessing preservice teachers' preparedness for inclusive education. Education and Urban Society, 56(7), 830–846. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245231220899</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weiner B. J., Lewis C. C., Stanick C., Powell B. J., Dorsey C. N., Clary A. S., Boynton M. H., Halko H. (2017). Psychometric assessment of three newly developed implementation outcome measures. Implementation Science, 12(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0635-3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson C., Green C. N., Toye M. K., Ballantyne C. (2024). Teachers' perceptions and practices towards inclusive education for children with ADHD in Scotland: A qualitative investigation. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 71(7), 1061–1075. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2023.2266374</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zigmond N. P., Kloo A. (2017). General and special education are (and should be) different. In Handbook of special education (2nd ed.). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0190905307-24"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> Kelly B Beck</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8094-6362 Carla A Mazefsky</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7467-0902</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kelly B Beck: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Project administration; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing.Amy Ionadi: Conceptualization; Formal analysis; Methodology; Project administration; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing.Timothy Wagner: Conceptualization; Investigation; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing.Daniel Beck: Conceptualization; Data curation; Investigation; Project administration; Writing—review & editing.Rachel Harris: Project administration; Writing—review & editing.Stephen Edwards: Conceptualization; Writing—review & editing.Donna Westbrooks-Martin: Conceptualization; Writing—review & editing.Jamie Upshaw: Conceptualization; Writing—review & editing.Andre Rhone: Conceptualization; Writing - review & editing.Taylor Kesich: Conceptualization; Writing—review & editing.Allie Kleinschmidt: Conceptualization; Writing—review & editing.Carla A Mazefsky: Conceptualization; Funding acquisition; Methodology; Resources; Writing—review & editing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This project was supported by the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services under Award Number 4100092055. The manuscript was also supported by NICHD under Award Number L30HD109969 (Author: K.B.B.) and NIMH under Award Numbers 5P50MH130957-03 (Author K.B.B.). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. Author K.B.B. was also supported by the Supporting Our Scientists program funded by the University of Pittsburgh and Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (2021382-OF).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Several co-authors of this manuscript received an honorarium payment to be instructors of the SUN Program in the pilot study (T.W., D.W-M., S.E., J.U., A.R., T.K., A.K.). This is consistent with our participatory approach to involve community members as paid team members of this project. There are no additional financial disclosures to report.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Supplemental material for this article is available online.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Kelly B Beck; Amy Ionadi; Timothy Wagner; Daniel Beck; Rachel Harris; Stephen Edwards; Donna Westbrooks-Martin; Jamie Upshaw; Andre Rhone; Taylor Kesich; Allie Kleinschmidt and Carla A Mazefsky</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib191" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref89"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1494640
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity Collaborative: Co-Designing a Program to Enhance Educator Knowledge and Efficacy Supporting Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kelly+B%2E+Beck%22">Kelly B. Beck</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8094-6362">0000-0001-8094-6362</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Amy+Ionadi%22">Amy Ionadi</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Timothy+Wagner%22">Timothy Wagner</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Daniel+Beck%22">Daniel Beck</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rachel+Harris%22">Rachel Harris</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stephen+Edwards%22">Stephen Edwards</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Donna+Westbrooks-Martin%22">Donna Westbrooks-Martin</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jamie+Upshaw%22">Jamie Upshaw</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Andre+Rhone%22">Andre Rhone</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Taylor+Kesich%22">Taylor Kesich</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Allie+Kleinschmidt%22">Allie Kleinschmidt</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Carla+A%2E+Mazefsky%22">Carla A. Mazefsky</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7467-0902">0000-0001-7467-0902</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Autism%3A+The+International+Journal+of+Research+and+Practice%22"><i>Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice</i></searchLink>. 2026 30(2):412-425.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 14
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Neurodevelopmental+Disorders%22">Neurodevelopmental Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty+Development%22">Faculty Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+School+Teachers%22">Public School Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Training%22">Training</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Effectiveness%22">Program Effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Development%22">Program Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Efficacy%22">Self Efficacy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Knowledge+Level%22">Knowledge Level</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Implementation%22">Program Implementation</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/13623613251388627
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1362-3613<br />1461-7005
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Autistic and other neurodivergent youth face social, sensory, and environmental challenges at school that negatively impact learning and well-being. Yet, most educators are not trained in neurodevelopmental disabilities, leaving them with outdated knowledge and limited confidence about how to support neurodivergent youth at school. In a two-phase project, we sought to (1) co-design a comprehensive professional development training for school educators and (2) pilot test this training in one US public school district. First, we used community-based participatory research methods to form an interdisciplinary team of neurodivergent educators and autistic community members. We then used human-centered design methods to iteratively design the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity professional development training for US K-12 educators. In Phase 2, we demonstrated feasibility and acceptability of the resulting training in a sample of 192 educators, grades K-12. Significant improvements were noted in educator knowledge and self-efficacy in pre- to post-assessments. Together, community-based participatory research and human-centered design provided a promising community-driven approach to development, resulting in a training that was well received and conducive to implementation. Future work will test the effects of the Schools Unified in Neurodiversity training on youth outcomes and explore the role of professional learning communities to support implementation and sustain change.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1494640
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1494640
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/13623613251388627
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 14
        StartPage: 412
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Neurodevelopmental Disorders
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Faculty Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Public School Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary Secondary Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Training
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Efficacy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Knowledge Level
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Implementation
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Schools Unified in Neurodiversity Collaborative: Co-Designing a Program to Enhance Educator Knowledge and Efficacy Supporting Children with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kelly B. Beck
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Amy Ionadi
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Timothy Wagner
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Daniel Beck
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rachel Harris
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Stephen Edwards
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Donna Westbrooks-Martin
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Jamie Upshaw
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Andre Rhone
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Taylor Kesich
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Allie Kleinschmidt
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Carla A. Mazefsky
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 02
              Type: published
              Y: 2026
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1362-3613
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1461-7005
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 30
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice
              Type: main
ResultId 1