Different minds, better engineering: what we’re learning from neurodiverse YOUNG PEOPLE

In our workshops and summer camps, we keep noticing the same thing. Many SEND children—especially neurodivergent young people—seem to live in “engineering mode” by default.

They reframe questions, think in relationships and systems, and spot the odd bolt, wire, or line of code that doesn’t quite belong. Meanwhile, plenty of neurotypical peers arrive primed for right/wrong answers. They’re brilliant too, but often trained to ask “What’s the answer?” before “How might we find it?”

This is exactly where the Engineering Habits of Mind (EHoM) come in: systems thinking, problem‑finding, visualising, creative problem‑solving, improving, and adapting. We use radio‑controlled cars as our lab on wheels. When a car drifts wide, the “right answer” mindset looks for a single fix. The habit‑driven mindset maps the whole system: tyres, weight distribution, gear mesh, track surface, even driver rhythm. It hunts for the real problem, tries ideas, measures, iterates, and adjusts. You can watch confidence grow as the loop repeats and the lap time drops. Students sketch airflow over shells, test tyre compounds, and log telemetry, turning hunches into evidence within minutes.

Why does this matter? Because the future of STEM won’t reward recall nearly as much as it rewards reasoning. Automation is eating routine tasks. What’s left—and growing—are roles that require sense‑making, creativity, and iteration: systems engineers, robotics technicians, data quality analysts, reliability testers, and human‑in‑the‑loop AI trainers. These roles are built on habits, not just facts. If some neurodivergent learners are already practising those habits, our job is to make the environment fit them, rather than forcing them to fit a narrow way of teaching. Careers will value people who can diagnose ambiguity, communicate trade‑offs, and improve under constraints while collaborating across disciplines.

That means changing the brief. Instead of marking a single solution, we set a clear goal and constraints—lap time, energy budget, safety—and invite multiple valid approaches. We assess process, reasoning, and improvement over time. We make thinking visible with sketches, jigs, photos, and quick tests. We use checklists to reduce working‑memory load, and we celebrate thoughtful failures as progress, not mistakes. The result? Neurodivergent strengths shine, and everyone gains permission to think like engineers.

For employers, this is a talent strategy, not just an inclusion statement. Teams built around EHoM think better together: the meticulous problem‑finder, the big‑picture system‑mapper, the visual prototyper, the fast diverger, the patient optimiser, the adaptive pragmatist. When recruitment focuses only on exams and interviews, we miss these complementary strengths. When assessment includes practical challenges, structured collaboration, and iterative portfolios, hidden engineers appear—and stay.

Over the coming months we’ll share evidence behind these observations and trial practical tools that help young people identify their strongest habits and map them to future‑facing careers. We will also publish simple facilitation guides for clubs and classrooms, so more practitioners can build habit‑rich projects without starting from scratch. If you’re a teacher, employer, or parent who recognises this pattern, we’d love to compare notes. Together, we can grow a generation ready for the work that really matters. Join us.

Keywords
neurodiversity, engineering habits of mind, EHoM, STEM careers, systems thinking, problem‑finding, creative problem‑solving, iteration, adapting, autism, ADHD, dyslexia, inclusive engineering education, universal design for learning, RC racing STEM, UK schools