This week marks the annual Neurodiversity Celebration Week, which seeks to “recognise and celebrate the neurodiverse community”, including in schools.

Doing this for pupils has been something the profession has got a lot better at in recent years - and with the schools White Paper including a clear focus on trying to further improve inclusion, it remains a core area of focus.

But when we turn to the teaching profession itself, a more uncomfortable picture emerges. In a recent Tes article that prompted significant engagement, many educators described their experiences of being neurodivergent in education as far from positive.

Against this backdrop - and during Neurodiversity Celebration Week - it is worth asking what education can learn from other regulated professions about how neurodivergent individuals are supported, valued and retained.

How other professions support neurodivergent staff

For example, in fields such as medicine, law and policing, professional bodies now formally recognise neurodivergence not just in those they serve, but within their own workforce.

Guidance from the General Medical Council, the Law Society, the Bar Council of England and Wales and the College of Policing reveal that professionals may think, communicate and process information differently, and that training and assessment systems may need to reflect that.

Crucially, this is not about lowering standards. In these professions, expectations remain high. But there is growing recognition that there can be flexibility in how those standards are demonstrated and evidenced.

In medicine, for example, guidance is now within medical education frameworks, explicitly supporting neurodivergent doctors in training and recognising that competence can be demonstrated in different ways when support is in place.

In law and policing, professional bodies have guidance, resources and professional conversations that extend beyond compliance, addressing workplace culture, training environments and leadership approaches for neurodivergent professionals.

While this work is still evolving, it is now visible within professional guidance and workforce discussions.

Education slow to recognise neurodiversity

Teaching, by contrast, has been much slower to develop this conversation.

The teachers’ standards remain central to initial teacher training, appraisal and career progression - yet they contain little explicit recognition that teachers may be neurodivergent.

More importantly, the way those standards are assessed often relies on particular forms of evidence: lesson observations, written reflections, professional portfolios and verbal articulation of practice.

These approaches are familiar and well established. But they can also unintentionally privilege certain ways of thinking, communicating and processing information.

In other professions, there is an increasing separation between the standard itself and how it is evidenced.

In teaching, those two things are often closely intertwined - much as they are for pupils, where assessment often favours particular ways of thinking, communicating and processing information in ways that are less reflective of real life. That distinction matters.

How can teaching become more inclusive?

It raises the question of whether the profession has fully considered how its systems might be experienced by those who do not fit a typical cognitive profile - even as schools are increasingly expected to recognise and support neurodivergence in pupils.

Across other regulated professions, neurodiversity is now being addressed not only through legal compliance, but through professional development, workplace culture and talent retention.

In teaching, however, the response still sits largely within the boundaries of compliance - focused on legal obligations and HR processes, rather than a broader professional recognition of neurodivergent educators.

Teaching has an opportunity to move beyond this. That could include:

• Recognising neurodivergence more explicitly within professional frameworks.
• Reviewing how competence is assessed and evidenced.
• Ensuring training environments are designed with cognitive diversity in mind.
• Developing guidance that supports schools not just in meeting legal obligations, but in building inclusive professional cultures.

None of this requires lowering expectations. But it does require a shift in how the profession understands and supports the people within it. This is vital not only for current teachers and leaders, but for the future of the profession, too.

After all, the next generation will be making career choices at a time when neurodivergence is better understood and more openly discussed across many professions.

The question is whether education will evolve alongside this - or continue to lag behind.

Chris Benson is a former headteacher who has led schools in the UK and internationally