By Will Wheeler – Neurodivergent Mates Podcast

Introduction: Beyond “One-Size-Fits-All”

School is often presented as a one-way street: teachers deliver content, students consume it, and outcomes are measured by exams and grades. But what happens when students see no purpose in what they’re learning?

For many young people – especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds or with neurodivergent profiles – this lack of relevance leads to disengagement, resistance, or dropping out altogether.

On the Neurodivergent Mates podcast, I spoke with Grant Sciberras, a teacher turned PhD researcher, about his mission to redesign curriculum with students at the centre. His work explores how choice, relevance, and purpose can transform learning into something meaningful.

Teaching in Disadvantaged Communities

Grant began his career as an English and History teacher on a scholarship to work in low socio-economic (SES) public schools. From his earliest days, he noticed a mismatch between what the curriculum demanded and what students actually valued.

In these communities, students frequently challenged the purpose of lessons. They were open about not wanting to learn content that felt irrelevant.

“When students question why they’re learning something – like Shakespeare for the fifth year in a row – they’re not being lazy. They’re recognising the curriculum doesn’t connect to their lives or goals.” – Grant

Even working-class white Australian students, often overlooked in discussions about equity, were disengaged because the content didn’t reflect their realities.

The Problem with “Canon” Texts

As an English teacher, Grant often found himself using Shakespeare as an example. While he could personally appreciate Shakespeare, he recognised that Year 9 boys in Campbelltown often asked: “Why am I learning this?”

In New South Wales, policy requires Shakespeare only once in Years 9 or 10. Yet schools often teach it every year because the Higher School Certificate (HSC) mandates it for advanced English. The result? A “domino effect” that filters down and forces every student – regardless of goals – to study the same content repeatedly.

“Appreciation can’t be forced. We don’t need every student to value Shakespeare. What matters is whether they develop skills to engage critically with texts they care about.”

Relevance Matters: A Tale of Two Books

Grant also pointed to Lord of the Flies as another problematic text. Its bleak view of human nature has become a fixture in schools, yet real-life case studies show alternative narratives.

He cited the story of Fijian teenagers stranded on an island in the 1960s who worked together to survive peacefully – the exact opposite of Golding’s tale.

These examples highlight how much of the curriculum is shaped by tradition rather than purpose. For disengaged or neurodivergent students, being forced through irrelevant material is a recipe for alienation.

Policy Constraints: Time and Outcomes

Two major system-level barriers stood out in Grant’s research:

• Time Allocation – Schools must dedicate fixed hours to core subjects like English, maths, and science. This rigid timetable leaves little room for passion projects, work experience, or personalised learning.
• Outcomes-Driven Models – Everything in the syllabus is framed around predetermined “outcomes.” These linear, one-size-fits-all goals leave no space for student-driven exploration.

“We call them outcomes, but they’re really just goals. Why not let students set their own?”

This rigidity particularly disadvantages neurodivergent students, who often thrive when learning is connected to their special interests.

Parents, Pressure, and Pathways

Another overlooked factor is parental influence. Many students default to university because parents insist, even when it doesn’t align with their passions.

Grant shared stories of students desperate to pursue trades but forced to stay until Year 12 because of stigma around vocational pathways. Ironically, trades often offer stronger employment and income opportunities than many degrees.

“We need to challenge the stigma. A student who wants to be a mechanic shouldn’t be treated as less valuable than one who wants to be a lawyer.”

Designing for Choice and Flexibility

So how can curriculum be redesigned to prioritise student purpose? Grant drew on differentiation, a teaching approach that offers flexibility in four key areas:

• Product – Allowing students to choose how they demonstrate learning (e.g., podcast, video, essay).
• Process – Flexibility in research methods, tools, or collaborative approaches.
• Content – Students selecting topics or case studies within broader themes.
• Environment – Structuring learning spaces and supports to suit diverse needs.

By shifting assessment focus from content knowledge to skills, teachers can support choice without increasing workload. For example, university assignments often let students choose any topic, while being marked on research quality, critical analysis, and communication.

A Lightbulb Moment: Letting Students Choose

One of Grant’s most powerful experiences came when he gave Year 9 students in Campbelltown total freedom for an end-of-year project.

The only requirements:

• ~500 words equivalent,
• multiple sources,
• a bibliography,
• and a topic they genuinely cared about.

One student, disengaged all year, asked if he could research when the band Tool would release their long-awaited new album. For the next six weeks – typically a time when students switch off – he was fully engaged, producing quality work with enthusiasm.

This experience showed the transformative power of connecting learning to personal passions.

Structure + Freedom: Finding the Balance

Grant emphasised that too much freedom can overwhelm students, especially neurodivergent ones. Like scrolling Netflix, endless options create paralysis.

The solution? Provide structured choice – a balance between autonomy and guidance. For example:

• Giving a menu of topics instead of unlimited options.
• Providing templates and scaffolds for projects.
• Offering work samples or exemplars to set clear expectations.

These strategies align with Universal Design for Learning (UDL), ensuring flexibility benefits all students, not just those with diagnosed learning differences.

Building Relationships: The Real Driver of Learning

Beyond curriculum design, Grant highlighted that teaching is fundamentally relational. Students learn best when they feel seen, respected, and encouraged.

“When students choose not to learn, that’s still a choice. We need to understand why they’re making it, not just punish them for it.”

For disengaged students, a teacher who believes in them can make all the difference – turning resistance into motivation.

Looking Ahead: Student Voice in Action

Grant is now on the board of the Australian Council for Student Voice, which advocates for embedding student perspectives in education policy. He believes normalising student input is key to building purposeful learning.

Whether at classroom level through anonymous surveys, or nationally through policy, student voice must become the default – not the exception.

Conclusion: Purpose Before Policy

Grant Sciberras’s research underscores a simple but radical truth: education should serve students first.

By allowing students to set goals, pursue passions, and exercise choice within structured frameworks, schools can transform disengagement into empowerment.

For neurodivergent learners, this flexibility isn’t just helpful – it’s essential. Relevance and purpose unlock motivation, while rigid, irrelevant curricula only push them further away.

“School is for students. It’s time we designed it with them, not just for them.” – Grant

Where to Find Grant

Connect with him on LinkedIn and keep an eye out for his upcoming project Future Fundamentals, exploring new models of purposeful curriculum design.

Listen to the Full Episode

Catch the conversation with Grant Sciberras, by clicking below.