How to offer autonomy without losing control of the situation
—
Introduction: The Need for Autonomy
Children with ADHD, often more than others, need to feel that they have power over their lives. Constantly corrected, redirected, and managed, they can develop the feeling of being a puppet whose strings are pulled by adults. This perception fuels opposition: if the only way to exist as a subject is to refuse, then the child will refuse.
The technique of limited choices responds to this need for autonomy while preserving the educational framework. By offering the child the possibility of choosing between several options all acceptable to the adult, it gives them back control without compromising pedagogical objectives. The child chooses, the adult maintains control of the framework.
—
Part One: Understanding the Principle
The Psychological Mechanism
When we feel like we are choosing, we engage more in the chosen action. This principle, validated by psychology, applies particularly to children with ADHD whose need for autonomy is often exacerbated.
A child who is told “Do this exercise” may resist. The same child who is asked “Do you prefer to start with exercise A or exercise B?” engages more easily because they had a say in the matter.
Conditions for Effectiveness
For limited choices to work, several conditions must be met.
The options offered must all be acceptable to the adult. If one of the options is problematic, the child may choose it and the adult will find themselves in difficulty.
The options must be limited in number (two or three). Too many choices generate confusion and anxiety rather than relief.
The choice must be real. If the adult shows a preference for one option, the child perceives that they don’t really have a choice.
What It Is Not
Limited choices are not about being permissive. The child does not choose whether or not to work, whether or not to respect the rules. They choose how they work, in what order, with what tool.
It is also not manipulation. The child is not being deceived. They actually have a decision-making space, admittedly framed, but real.
—
Part Two: Areas of Application
Choice of Order
“Do you prefer to start with math or with language arts?” The child will do both, but they decide which one to start with. This simple choice can be enough to engage cooperation.
Choice of Location
“Do you want to work at your desk or at the back of the classroom?” The work will be done, but the child chooses where. This latitude on location can defuse resistance related to the environment.
Choice of Tool
“Do you write with a pen or pencil?” “Do you use the notebook or the slate?” These minor choices have little impact on learning but can make a difference in the child’s engagement.
Choice of Timing (Within a Framework)
“Do you want to do your reading now or after recess?” The child decides on the timing within a defined framework. The task will be done, the moment is negotiable.
Choice of Modality
“Do you prefer to answer orally or in writing?” “Do you work alone or with a classmate?” The modality can vary according to the child’s preference.
—
Part Three: How to Formulate Choices
Positive Formulation
Choices are presented in terms of what the child can do, not what they must avoid.
“Do you want to sit on the chair or on the cushion?” rather than “If you don’t sit on the chair, you’ll go on the cushion.”
Neutral Tone
Both options are presented in an equivalent manner, without the adult showing preference. Otherwise, the child perceives a biased choice that isn’t really one.
Waiting for a Response
After asking the question, the adult actually waits for an answer. They don’t answer in the child’s place, don’t push toward an option.
A short silence after the question allows time for reflection and signals that the choice is real.
Validating the Choice
When the child has chosen, the adult simply validates: “Okay, you’re starting with math.” This validation confirms that the choice is respected.
—
Part Four: Concrete Examples
Situation: The Child Refuses to Start Their Work
Without choice: “You start your work now.”
With choice: “Do you prefer to start with the first question or with the third?”
Situation: The Child Is Fidgeting in Their Chair
Without choice: “Stop moving and concentrate.”
With choice: “You need to move. Do you want the balance cushion or do you prefer to work standing up?”
Situation: The Child Refuses to Tidy Up
Without choice: “You tidy up your things right now.”
With choice: “It’s time to tidy up. Do you start with the pencils or with the notebooks?”
Situation: The Child Is in Conflict with a Classmate
Without choice: “You stop immediately.”
With choice: “There’s a problem between you. Do you want to talk about it now or at recess?”
—
Part Five: Limits and Precautions
When Not to Offer Choice
Certain situations do not allow for negotiation. Safety, fundamental rules of living together are not negotiable.
“You don’t hit” doesn’t admit an alternative. The only acceptable option is the absence of violence.
Avoiding Choice Inflation
If everything becomes negotiable, the framework dissolves. Limited choices apply to peripheral elements, not to the core requirements.
The child does not choose whether or not to learn. They can choose how they learn.
Keeping Commitments
If the child chooses an option and the adult does not respect this choice, trust collapses and the technique becomes unusable.
Before proposing options, make sure you can actually honor them all.
—
Part Six: Training Teachers
Developing the Choice Reflex
Proposing choices requires a change of habit. Training helps integrate this reflex into daily practice.
The training “ADHD Student: Advanced Strategies for Managing Impulsivity and Opposition in the Classroom” develops these behavior management techniques.
Discover the training
Training “Supporting Students with Learning Disabilities”
Training “DYS Disorders: Identifying and Adapting”
Tools That Offer Choices
The COCO THINKS and COCO MOVES program offers varied activities allowing the child to choose while remaining within a structured framework.
Discover COCO THINKS and COCO MOVES
—
Conclusion: Shared Power
Limited choices represent an intelligent sharing of power. The adult defines the framework and possible options. The child decides within this framework. This distribution respects the needs of both parties.
For students with ADHD, this technique responds to a fundamental need for autonomy that is often frustrated. It reduces opposition by eliminating part of what generates it: the feeling of powerlessness.
The teacher who masters limited choices has a simple but powerful tool to transform directives into questions, orders into proposals, resistance into commitments. Authority does not disappear, it is exercised differently.
—
Article published on the DYNSEO blog – Specialist in cognitive support and training for education professionals
Keywords: limited choices ADHD, child autonomy, behavior management, opposition, shared power, educational strategy, cooperation