The participation of autistic students in higher education has increased internationally, yet many continue to encounter structural, social, and pedagogical barriers that affect access, participation, and well-being. Previous research has documented challenges related to transition, disclosure, mental health, social connection, and access to supports (Gormley, Feeney, & McNally, 2023). However, much of this work remains deficit-focused, concentrated within US and UK contexts, and limited in the extent to which autistic perspectives shape research questions, methods, and interpretation (Gormley et al., 2023). As a result, there remains a need for research that centres on autistic students’ accounts and examines how higher education institutions themselves contribute to experiences of inclusion and exclusion (Kenny, Neilson, O'Kelly, Doyle, and McDonald, 2024).

This co-produced qualitative study explores autistic students’ experiences of transitioning to, and engaging within, an Irish higher education institution (HEI). The focus is on how students describe belonging, acceptance, and support, and on the ways institutional structures, learning environments, and social spaces shape these experiences. The study responds to a gap in the existing literature, where relatively little qualitative research has examined autistic students' lived experiences of higher education using participatory or co-produced approaches (Gormley et al., 2023). Taken together, these experiences raise broader questions about how higher education institutions conceptualise transition, inclusion, and support, and whose needs are prioritised within prevailing educational structures. In doing so, the study also speaks to broader questions about how knowledge about inclusion is produced in education research, whose perspectives are prioritised, and how such knowledge impacts institutional practice (Kenny et al., 2024).

The study is situated within the neurodiversity paradigm, which understands autism as a natural form of human variation rather than a deficit requiring remediation (Walker, 2021). From this perspective, barriers to participation are located not within individuals but within environments, systems, and dominant norms. The analysis takes an interactionist perspective on inclusion, informed by autistic-led frameworks, including work on spatial belonging and the Autistic SPACE framework (Doherty, Cowan, & Shaw, 2023). The analysis is further informed by Wong’s (2023) Framework of Spatial Belonging, which conceptualises belonging as produced through interactions between individuals and the physical, social, and organisational spaces they inhabit. This perspective supports attention to how physical, digital, relational, and structural dimensions of university life interact to shape autistic students’ experiences.

The study addressed the following research questions:

1. What challenges and supports do autistic students experience during the transition to an Irish higher education institution?
2. How do autistic students describe the supports and barriers they encounter while enrolled in higher education?
3. What changes do autistic students identify as necessary to support engagement, inclusion, and flourishing in higher education?

This study adopted a co-produced qualitative research design, with autistic and non-autistic researchers working collaboratively throughout the research process (Kenny et al., 2024). Co-produced methods were used to support autistic individuals’ participation in shaping the focus, pace, and interpretation of the research, ensuring that analytic decisions reflected students’ priorities and communicative preferences (Stark et al., 2021). Fourteen autistic students, including undergraduate and postgraduate learners, participated in the study. Participants were recruited through university support services, student networks, and neurodivergent student groups. Inclusion criteria were intentionally flexible, allowing participation by students with a formal diagnosis as well as those who self-identified as autistic, reflecting known barriers to diagnosis and disclosure. Data were generated through flexible semi-structured interviews designed to accommodate different communication preferences. Participants were offered choices regarding mode of participation, with twelve engaging in online interviews and two providing written responses to the interview framework. Interview topics included experiences of transition to higher education, academic and social engagement, sensory environments, disclosure, and access to institutional supports. This flexibility aimed to reduce participation barriers and support students’ agency within the research process. Data analysis was conducted using Reflexive Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2021). Analysis focused on identifying patterns across participants’ accounts while remaining attentive to variation in experiences across different stages of transition and study. Coding and theme development were undertaken collaboratively by a mixed-neurotype research team, with ongoing discussion used to refine interpretations and explore alternative readings of the data. Reflexivity was maintained throughout analysis, with attention to how researchers’ positionalities and experiences shaped analytic decisions. Ethical approval was granted by the relevant institutional research ethics committee, and informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Participants described a range of experiences that were diverse yet interconnected, organised across three overarching themes. Across these themes, accounts consistently highlighted a gap between institutional understandings of inclusion and the practical conditions required to enact inclusion. Transition to Higher Education: For many participants, the transition to higher education was characterised by heightened anxiety, uncertainty, and emotional strain. Limited guidance during course selection and preparation was commonly reported, with little attention paid to the social, sensory, and practical dimensions of transition. While some participants accessed structured entry routes or early orientation opportunities, others described navigating institutional systems independently, often without clear or personalised support. Inconsistent communication and limited predictability contributed to feelings of being overwhelmed and unprepared. Navigating College Life: Participants also identified multiple barriers within academic and campus environments. Sensory challenges related to lighting, noise, and crowded spaces were frequently described, alongside difficulties engaging with inflexible teaching practices. Experiences of digital learning environments varied. For some, online provision reduced sensory demands and supported flexible engagement, while for others it was experienced as isolating or poorly supported. Social participation was often described as challenging, particularly in interactions with non-autistic peers. In contrast, autistic-led student communities, including neurodivergent societies, were consistently described as supportive spaces that fostered belonging, affirmation, and peer connection. Stigma, Masking, and Disclosure: Decisions around disclosure were shaped by concerns about stigma, misunderstanding, and potential negative consequences. Several participants described masking autistic traits to avoid judgement, often at significant emotional cost. Structural barriers, including restrictive eligibility criteria for disability services and limited autism-informed knowledge among staff, further discouraged disclosure. By centring autistic students’ accounts through a co-produced, neurodiversity-affirming approach, this study illustrates how higher education environments shape experiences of belonging and exclusion, with relevance for policy and practice concerned with inclusion, equity, and student wellbeing.

Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2021) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. Sage, London. Doherty, M., McCowan, S., & Shaw, S. C. (2023). Autistic SPACE: a novel framework for meeting the needs of autistic people in healthcare settings. British Journal of Hospital Medicine, 84(4), 1-9. Gormley, L., Feeney, A., & McNally, S. (2024). A scoping review of research trends and future directions for research on the experiences of autistic students and staff in post-secondary education. European Journal of Higher Education, 14(4), 554-573. Kenny, N., Neilson, S., O'Kelly, J., Doyle, J.K. and McDonald, J. (2024), "Exploring the Paradigm of Co-Produced Research Within the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic", Rose, R. and Shevlin, M. (Ed.) Including Voices (International Perspectives on Inclusive Education, Vol. 23), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-363620240000023012 Stark, E., Ali, D., Ayre, A., Schneider, N., Parveen, S., Marais, K., ... & Pender, R. (2021). Coproduction with autistic adults: Reflections from the authentistic research collective. Autism in Adulthood, 3(2), 195-203. Walker, N. (2021), Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the Neurodiversity Paradigm, Autistic Empowerment, and Postnormal Possibilities; Autonomous Press. Wong, B. (2024). Exploring the spatial belonging of students in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 49(3), 546-558.