Today’s episode advocates for speech therapists to redefine research as an ethical and relational act of knowledge-making centered on lived experience rather than quantitative control. The author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, argues that traditional research models prioritise procedural ethics and measurement over the messy, human reality of practice, urging therapists to instead embrace methods like action research that are Situated, Authentic, Co-constructed, Relational, Ethical, and Dialogic (SACRED). Ultimately, she calls for a refusal of the “gold standard” hierarchy in evidence-based practice to allow for the collective generation and sharing of knowledge that honors the voice and agency of neurodivergent participants as co-interpreters of meaning.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/ethics-before-evidence-conducting

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode offers a critical analysis of B.F. Skinner’s behaviourism. The author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, positions Skinner’s work, particularly his book Beyond Freedom and Dignity, not as neutral science but as a “theology of control” that seeks to abolish human concepts like freedom and dignity in favour of engineered obedience and predictability. Dr. Hoerricks, who identifies as an AuDHD gestalt language processor (GLP), argues that this behaviourist philosophy provides the ideological foundation for modern behavioural interventions like ABA (Applied Behaviour Analysis), which is critiqued as an “empire” that enforces compliance and erases authentic, unpredictable forms of autistic meaning and communication (referred to as “noise” or “gestalts”). She contends that true scientific reform of behaviourism would require it to renounce its commitment to control and embrace transparency, complexity, and the inherent dignity of the human subject, a transformation deemed unlikely under the current paradigm.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/the-gospel-of-control-reading-beyond

Here’s a video explainer from Google’s NotebookLM.

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode presents a critical reading of B.F. Skinner’s utopian novel, Walden Two, arguing that it serves as a blueprint for control rather than a work of fiction. The author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, contends that Skinner’s vision of a perfectly managed society, achieved through behavioural engineering and reinforcement contingencies, directly informed the development of modern behavioural practices like Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) and Verbal Behaviour. Dr. Hoerricks critiques the core tenets of this approach, specifically its focus on compliance over freedom and its systemic suppression of what the author terms “noise”—the unmeasured, gestural, and resonant aspects of human existence and language, particularly for gestalt language processors (GLPs). Ultimately, she calls for a refusal of this architecture, advocating for a valuing of resistance and authentic, unconditioned expression over engineered serenity and data-driven obedience.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/blueprints-for-a-human-zoo-reading

Here’s the video explainer, courtesy of Google’s NotebookLM.

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode critiques the dominant analytic frameworks of language acquisition, particularly those rooted in Behaviorism and Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). The author of the source article, Jaime Hoerricks, PhD, argues that these frameworks systematically erase and delegitimise Gestalt Language Processing (GLP) by treating it as a “null hypothesis”—something presumed not to exist or as mere noise until proven otherwise. Dr. Hoerricks details how institutional biases, methodological rigour, and the narrow definition of evidence—often facilitated by tools like AI-enhanced search interfaces—conspire to dismiss lived experience and non-linear communication patterns like echolalia. Ultimately, she frames the struggle for the recognition of GLP not as a scientific debate but as a political and ontological fight against a system built on the control and compliance advocated by figures like B.F. Skinner, challenging the very notion of what constitutes valid human language and dignity.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/the-science-of-erasure-gestalt-processing

Here’s an ‘explainer version,’ a beta feature of Google’s NotebookLM.

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode critiques the standardisation of literacy education through legislative efforts like California’s AB 1454. The author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, argues that reforms, often framed around evidence-based instruction like phonics, have built a “fence” around literacy, reducing it from a communal, meaning-making “commons” to a technical act focused on compliance and metrics. Dr. Hoerricks suggests that this system marginalises neurodivergent and gestalt learners, but reveals an opportunity within the law’s requirement for professional development through its “equivalency” clause. She proposes using her own research-based books—Holistic Language Instruction, Decolonising Language Education, and No Place for Autism?—to occupy and repurpose the mandated training structure, thereby redefining what counts as evidence and restoring inclusive, meaning-first pedagogy. The central metaphor encourages educators to “plant along the fence,” transforming the structure of control into a scaffolding for a new, resilient ecosystem of learning.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/planting-along-the-fence-reclaiming

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode functions as a meditation on authorship, erasure, and inherited trauma, tracing the forgotten contributions of Eileen O’Shaughnessy, the first wife of Eric Blair (George Orwell). The central argument is that O’Shaughnessy, an Oxford-educated poet and thinker, coined the year 1984 and laid the intellectual groundwork for the novel in her 1934 poem, End of the Century, 1984. The author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, contrasts O’Shaughnessy’s vision of tyranny through sedation and comfort with Orwell’s later focus on terror, framing Orwell’s success as the patenting of a woman’s prophecy. Dr. Hoerricks also connects this literary erasure to contemporary issues of patriarchal naming, institutional misgendering, and personal lineage, using O’Shaughnessy’s story as a call to remember marginalised voices across generations.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/the-woman-who-named-the-future-the

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode provides excerpts from a Substack essay that focuses on teaching Gestalt Language Processors (GLPs) in a high school mathematics setting, specifically geometry. The author, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, a special education teacher, introduces an instructional framework—Identify, Represent, Compute, Check—as a way to support students whose comprehension is holistic and intuitive but whose articulation is delayed. This framework is presented as a method and an ethical stance that slows the pace of the classroom to honor the non-sequential thinking characteristic of GLPs, such as a student named “Nico.” Dr. Hoerricks argues that many students are misidentified with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) because educational systems prioritise analytic, sequential thinking and fail to accommodate the gestalt cognitive architecture that sees the whole before the parts. Ultimately, she grounds the proposed framework in established educational research on problem-solving heuristics and cognitive load theory, connecting it to the Natural Language Acquisition (NLA) stages to advocate for a more resonant and equitable approach to teaching.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/when-proof-meets-pattern-teaching

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a fpaid subscriber.

Today’s episode discusses the exclusion of neurodivergent individuals from the social work profession in the US, arguing that the licensure exam functions as a form of gatekeeping that prioritises conformity over authentic empathy and diverse cognitive styles. The author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, cites a 2024 study that found 30% of social work exam-takers identified as neurodivergent, yet the exam is structured to reward a specific, linear style of thinking often associated with the dominant demographic, illustrating how this monocognitive standard punishes associative reasoning and embodied care. Dr. Hoerricks further contends that the exam is a form of “behavioural conditioning” that forces test-takers to mimic institutional language and suppress intuitive responses, linking this professional standardization to broader political efforts to suppress diversity and “woke” perspectives in education. Ultimately, she calls for a reimagining of licensure toward models that value multiple ways of knowing, such as peer evaluation or portfolios, to ensure the helping professions truly serve all minds.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/the-right-kind-of-mind-neurodivergence

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode offers an extensive overview of a Gestalt-informed lineage in language study, which stands in opposition to positivism and behaviorism by prioritising meaning, wholeness, and relational context over measurement and segmented analysis. The core argument centers on the work of Ann Peters and her 1977 challenge to the idea that language learning is the sum of its parts, asserting instead that children begin with holistic gestalts (whole-before-parts). This tradition connects Peters to earlier Gestalt psychologists (Wertheimer, Köhler, Koffka) and later scholars like Michael Halliday, Roger Brown, Barry Prizant, and Marge Blanc, who continued to study language and communication as inherently coherent and embodied. Ultimately, the source article, authored by Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, advocates for an ethical and relational epistemology that views the refusal to use rigid, controlling methods—like randomised controlled trials—as an act of moral clarity in the human sciences.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/before-the-parts-had-names-revisiting

Let me know what you think.

The AutSide is a reader-supported publication. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Today’s episode argues that safety and regulation, which the author of the source article, Dr. Jaime Hoerricks, terms “softness” or “felt safety,” are absolute preconditions for language development, particularly for gestalt language processors (GLPs). Dr. Hoerricks contrasts this relational approach with the prevalent methods of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) and Verbal Behaviour (ABA-VB), which are critiqued for focusing on compliance, technique, and control rather than physiological well-being. Referencing the work of Mona Delahooke and Barry Prizant, she posits that behaviourist models impose epistemic violence by demanding speech before attunement and dismissing non-quantifiable elements like resonance and trust. Ultimately, she advocates for an ethical pedagogy rooted in listening and co-regulation that allows language to emerge naturally when the nervous system feels secure.

Here’s the link to the source article: https://open.substack.com/pub/autside/p/softness-before-speech-on-safety

Let me know what you think.