Warwick, accessibility, and neurodiversity: creating opportunities for change

There is no singular ‘neurodivergent experience’ at university. Not only do many labels fall under this umbrella term, but all neurodivergent conditions are experienced uniquely by the individual, and our relationship to aspects of university life is far from equivalent. Though ‘neurodivergent’ implies deviation from some abstract notion of ‘normality,’ there is no ‘norm’ within our community either. Despite this, there are similarities between the challenges we often face – the simple fact of having a hidden disability can lead to feelings of not being ‘disabled enough’ to warrant the support we truly need, and the stigma and misinformation surrounding neurodiversity continues to impact others’ expectations and perceptions of us. At university, many of our uniquely experienced challenges are most evident when confronted with the reality of juggling an academically rigorous course, maintaining and managing a social life, and simply keeping ourselves alive and healthy on a day-to-day basis.

The challenges go far beyond this – aside from individual struggles, the structural issues and attitudes of the university itself, often hidden from the student body, significantly shape the experiences of neurodivergent students in higher education. At the University of Warwick, the fight for more accessibility and inclusion is far from over, and it is becoming increasingly clear that structural change is needed to break down barriers and ensure all students can make the most of higher education.

Until policies are managed on a university-wide basis, ensuring that departments are held accountable for the access requirements they are encouraged to implement, disabled and neurodivergent students are heavily disadvantaged.

In my view, Warwick suffers from its lack of standardised inclusive policies across departments; allowing departments to dictate deadline extensions, required assessment types, and lecture recordings, which disproportionately impact disabled students. Currently, the university’s lecture capture use is ‘opt-in,’ permitting departments to decide independently whether or not to implement lecture recordings. By leaving the decision to departments, the need for recordings is not entrenched as a necessary accessibility requirement, enabling resistance as departments push back against learning new technology and re-configuring how lectures are conducted. Despite the recording of lectures being advocated for as a necessary policy to improve inclusivity, the lack of standardisation of the policy creates the impression that the implementation of lecture capture would be overly complex, even though a large number of teaching spaces are set up to record with ease. Until policies are managed on a university-wide basis, ensuring that departments are held accountable for the access requirements they are encouraged to implement, disabled and neurodivergent students are heavily disadvantaged.

Lectures are invaluable for students to understand how to prioritise content. In English, for example, where lecture recordings are not made, a text can be read from several angles, and lectures allow students to understand the relevance of what they are studying. Disabled students, including neurodivergent students, are more likely to miss lectures for a plethora of reasons, whether it be due to the increased rigour of engaging with lectures, a lack of time or capacity to prepare, or the impact of additional pressures. The reasons are infinite and change according to the individual student’s needs. Missed lectures can lead to students feeling as though they are falling behind. When the content of the lecture is entirely inaccessible, the lack of attendance can have a knock-on effect, impacting the attendance of seminars and tutorials, often causing an immense amount of guilt as a result.

[A] one-size-fits-all approach extends to many aspects of teaching and learning, and accounts such as this are all too common.

The ability to work through material at one’s own pace, engaging with it to suit your needs, is invaluable, and departments must be aware of how teaching cannot operate on a one-size-fits-all basis. And yet, students are frequently faced with this homogenous approach, with the same advice given to both neurodivergent and neurotypical students. During my first year, I missed a lecture due to illness. Upon submitting my request for a recording or script, I was given the same advice as all students — regardless of accessibility needs — to read a recommended secondary text. Though my illness had nothing to do with my disability, I knew that gaining access to the direct content of the lecture was the only way that my neurodivergent brain would be properly able to absorb the specific material. When the lecturer treats secondary reading as a substitute for the lecture, it’s hard to see exactly what my tuition fees are paying for and how much consideration lecturers give to the diverse needs of differently-abled students. This one-size-fits-all approach extends to many aspects of teaching and learning, and accounts such as this are all too common.

Some societies have taken a fresh look at the inclusivity of Warwick student culture and are re-evaluating how many of the university’s social traditions do not feel approachable to the student body.

However, greater discussion about creating an inclusive environment demonstrates how Warwick students are leading the charge in the university’s non-academic sphere. This academic year has seen a huge increase in society efforts to champion neurodivergent and disability awareness, creating accessible spaces for discussion and education to take place. Warwick’s Disability Liberation Society, a new organisation championing the radical liberation of disabled people in conjunction with wider social justice, host a range of events where disability rights are discussed.

Some societies have taken a fresh look at the inclusivity of Warwick student culture and are re-evaluating how many of the university’s social traditions do not feel approachable to the student body. In January, Warwick ADHD Society, Autism at Warwick, and Warwick Enable collaborated to host an ‘accessible circle’, which sought to combat the non-inclusive aspects of Warwick’s most notorious society ritual by explaining game rules, omitting any forced drinking or punishment, circling in a private space to eliminate background noise, and avoiding all shouting completely. Though some may say this completely misses the ‘point’ of circling, establishing spaces for those who feel largely excluded from such a central part of Warwick’s culture is undeniably a vital way to avoid isolating or alienating students. Sofia Scordo, events officer for Warwick ADHD Society, said of the event: “Across the night, there was a very light-hearted attitude towards the games. I felt less uncomfortable uncertainty, and so I found it more funny to make mistakes! I would really encourage students to join in the future.” Though it may be a long time until the inclusivity strategies of these societies expand to the rest of the university, particularly to sports societies whose initiation rituals make membership often feel highly exclusive, the initial, necessary steps are being made.

Though currently being reviewed, personal tutors, for example, are not required to undergo any form of neurodivergence awareness training before they take on the role, meaning that students are more likely to be misunderstood.

Faculties and departments need to take note. More education is required, and staff awareness of the realities of neurodivergent conditions is essential to ensure that students feel understood and listened to. Though currently being reviewed, personal tutors, for example, are not required to undergo any form of neurodivergence awareness training before they take on the role, meaning that students are more likely to be misunderstood. A study conducted by the Warwick International Higher Education Academy (WIHEA) in 2021 found that many students believe their personal tutors are lacking in awareness, with reports of PTs stating things such as “well you don’t seem dyslexic” or “have you always been dyspraxic or is this a new thing?” – ignorant responses that people with hidden disabilities are typically all too familiar with. Though tutors are encouraged to sign up for any of the numerous training courses that staff from the university have put together, these are often dismissed due to tutors lacking the time. Until training courses are made mandatory, significant misunderstanding and oversight will persist.

The university has a commitment to listen to the needs of students. The task of lobbying for more accessibility is a daunting one and can often feel like a dead end when met with significant resistance. After over a year of pushing for inclusivity and dismantling barriers within my department’s Student Staff Liaison Committee (SSLC), I am only just starting to see proposed changes becoming reality. Improvements can only be made when departments are held accountable. Until structural change is made, it is our job to call out inaccessibility where we find it.