Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

What Helps Autistic University Students Develop Autistic Identity and Thrive?

Fri, April 9, 1:10 to 2:40pm EDT (1:10 to 2:40pm EDT), Virtual

Abstract

As the number of autistic university students increases, research suggests that they often exhibit academic strengths yet face difficulties with social interaction, self-advocacy, executive functioning, stigma, and mental health (Bakker et al., 2019; Jackson et al., 2018; Sturm & Kasari, 2019). In response to evidence of a mismatch between autistic students’ strengths and needs and the academically-focused accommodations provided by accessibility offices, a growing number of universities provide autism support programs. Such programs often charge fees despite insufficient evidence that they are well-aligned with students’ needs. Participatory approaches, wherein autistic people are meaningfully involved in developing, enacting, and disseminating research initiatives, improve the validity of supports by aligning them with the needs of the people they are designed to serve. In this participatory study, we explore how supports may contribute to the identity development and well-being of autistic university students. We hypothesized that strengths-based programming, involvement with the neurodiversity movement, and social support would be associated with greater autistic pride (more positive feelings about autism). We expected autistic pride to be positively associated with Quality of Life.

Methods
Six autistic and five non-autistic scholars developed an online survey. Seventy autistic university students (see Table 1) answered questions about accommodations, supports, autistic identity (assessed via a picture-based measure of positive feelings about common strengths and challenges associated with autism and by a text-based measure of identification with the autism community), camouflaging, well-being, self-esteem, belonging, and autism-specific Quality of Life (ASQoL).

Results
The degree to which students rated available supports as strengths-based was strongly associated with the degree to which they rated their campus community as understanding autism (see Table 2). Both strengths-based programming and community autism understanding were positively associated with positive feelings about common challenges associated with autism and with heightened belonging, well-being, and ASQoL. Positive feelings about common strengths, but not common weaknesses, associated with autism were associated with heightened identification with the autism community and self-esteem and with reduced camouflaging (or masking one’s autistic traits). Positive feelings about both strengths and challenges associated with autism were associated with heightened well-being and ASQoL.
Regressions predicting ASQoL and well-being from demographic characteristics, autism symptoms, support from friends and family, and strengths-based programming revealed that fewer autism symptoms and heightened support from family and friends and strengths-based programming were associated with heightened ASQoL (ps < .008). Support from family and friends and being male were associated with heightened well-being (ps < .03).

Conclusions
It is our hope that these findings will encourage universities to develop supports for autistic students that build from students’ strengths. Such work should be developed in collaboration with autistic students and scholars and guided by iterative and transparent program evaluations and efforts to increase the visibility of institutional commitment to all forms of diversity. Findings indicate that the ways autistic people interact within their university systems and within the broader autistic community impact their identity in multifaceted ways. Findings also highlight the essential contributions families, friends, and professors can make in supporting the success of autistic university students.

Authors