Improving Autistic Students' Experiences in Higher Education: Developing a Community Framework for Individual Autistic Student and Autistic Community Flourishing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: As the fastest growing cohort of disabled student populations, autistic students are often let down by inherently ableist institutions of higher education (HE). Traditionally, institutions of HE have sought to support autistic students through an individualized approach, placing the responsibility on the autistic student to seek out and advocate for academic and nonacademic support. However, there remain opportunities for the broader community to foster autistic individual and community well-being. This conceptual analysis evaluates the current environment and approaches in HE for supporting autistic academic success and well-being and describes a community framework based on a collective combined effort that invites individual autistic students and autistic community flourishing. It contributes an alternative approach to supporting autistic students, making autistic individual and community well-being the responsibility of peers, support staff, instructors and faculty, and the institution, identifying a need to restructure institutions into ones that work to promote autistic culture and provide autonomous supports and accommodations. Abstract: Right now, there are a lot of different ways in which institutions of Higher Education (HE; i.e., colleges and universities) do and do not support autistic students. Abstract: There are opportunities for peers, instructors and faculty, support staff, and institutions to get involved in supporting autistic students. Abstract: However, institutions of HE do not have a clear framework to make the wellbeing of autistic students a community responsibility. Abstract: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the current ways in which institutions of HE support the academic success and wellbeing of autistic students and to describe a framework for a collective effort to promote individual autistic student and community flourishing. Abstract: Our evaluation demonstrates that non-acceptance of autism, stigma, and oppression may impact an autistic students' experiences, making the transition to HE, academic success, and wellbeing more difficult. Abstract: Traditional approaches to supporting autistic students, including formal academic supports, informal academic supports, and non-academic supports, may not be accessible to all autistic students. Abstract: Our framework uses a critical understanding of learning and autism, valuing autistic experience. Abstract: The goal is to support autistic academic success and wellbeing and to reduce the need for autistic students to mask, change, or seek out support to 'fit in' to HE. Abstract: The framework centers individual autistic students and the autistic community, placing the responsibility of academic success and student wellbeing on the larger HE collective. Abstract: Peers, instructors and faculty, support staff, and institutions are shown as having influence on the academic success and wellbeing of autistic students. Abstract: These key players can promote autistic culture by being open to autistic students' decisions around disclosure; applying a Universal Design for Learning (UDL); recognizing neurodiversity as an important diversity, equity, and inclusion initiative; offering and engaging in neurodiversity trainings; developing and enhancing disability cultural centers; and featuring autistic culture in the academe; autistic culture can be promoted. Abstract: Furthermore, they can support autistic student agency by honouring autistic students' autonomy, building comprehensive and connected services; normalizing academic accommodations; and offering non-academic supports. Abstract: The authors hope that this article helps to create a system-wide change through a collective, combined effort to promote individual autistic student and autistic community flourishing in HE.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".