Introduction

Academic advisers routinely meet with advisees who share similar needs and concerns, often leading to a rather uniform approach in the way advisers tend to interact with students in general. This approach might mean advisers often rely on the same models and go through the same processes during each student appointment. What happens when an adviser meets with a student who discloses a disability called Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)? Should the advising approach change?

My interest in this topic stems from my experience working with a student with ASD. The student’s disclosure of ASD originally had no impact on the way in which I approached our appointments, because I had received no formal training on serving this population. However, I soon realized my inability to reach the student affected the student’s progress toward important academic goals. This article aims to spark a conversation across campuses about the need for ongoing training regarding advising students with autism. The purpose of this article is to highlight background information on ASD, the challenges students with ASD face in higher education, the relevance of this topic in academic advising, a new model to serve this student population, and a summary of best practices for advisers to consider. As a disclaimer, I write this article as a practitioner and not as a licensed mental health professional or disability services expert.

What Advisers Need to Know about ASD

People diagnosed with ASD demonstrate unique characteristics of the disorder, but a general theme of challenges also applies. These characteristics of ASD include avoidance of eye contact, preference for repetition, social withdrawal, difficulty taking the perspective of others, difficulty picking up on nonverbal cues, extreme literal-mindedness and concrete thinking, reluctance to change, inflexibility, poor time management and organization, narrowed interests, and lack of voice intonation (Bednarchyk, 2014; Farrell, 2004; Hughes, 2009; Pillay & Bhat, 2012; Prince-Hughes, 2003; Smith, 2007; Swarthmore College, 2015). These challenges reflect this population’s need for different advising approaches. This disorder also offers positive aspects, however, which advisers must keep in mind when helping these students reach their full potential.

Hughes (2009) emphasized the potential strengths of ASD by highlighting characteristics that include above-average to superior intellect, passionate commitment to ideas, original ways of approaching problems, ability to diligently work in a routine, strong pursuit of knowledge in interest areas, serious regard for rules, loyalty to friends, broad vocabulary, visual and spatial learning qualities, long-term memory, and resistance to peer pressure. Considering these strengths, one can infer that some students with ASD thrive in higher education. The next section explains the importance of understanding ASD and those students who do face challenges due to some of the limiting aspects of the disorder.

Importance of Understanding Needs of Students with ASD

Primary and secondary education programs began addressing the needs of children with autism years ago; however, a few historical facts help identify why the issue only recently began to receive attention in higher education. Although Dr. Leo Kanner first identified ASD in 1943, the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders did not document the disorder until 1994 (Smith, 2007). Additionally, the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) passed in 1990, stating that institutions receiving federal funding cannot discriminate against a person with a documented disability (Pillay & Bhat, 2012). These facts highlight that the admission of more students with disabilities into institutions of higher education and the maturation of children diagnosed with ASD starting in 1994 to the traditional college-level age, lead to increased numbers of students with ASD on college campuses. In the general population, one in sixty-eight people have been diagnosed with ASD, proving its prevalence (Bednarchyk, 2014). Overall, staff at institutions of higher education will continue to see rising numbers of students with ASD on college campuses, which requires higher education staff readiness to effectively assist these students.

The problem surrounding effectively assisting and advising students with ASD does not stem from the significant number of people with ASD but rather the combined effect of advisers untrained to work with ASD students and the varying needs of these students. Ultimately, students with this disorder who are challenged by the rigorous college-level coursework while distracted by a college environment full of change, stimulation, and disruption often end up dropping out of college (Prince-Hughes, 2003). In addressing this problem, higher education professionals should consider the previously mentioned strengths students with autism bring to a campus. Prince-Hughes (2003) articulated the ways in which college benefits these students, describing them as “students for whom intellectual activity and a place in academe are indispensable lifelines that give them the relationships they need while providing an outlet for their unique intelligence” and “promising students with special needs, [they] are often pushed from the one place that can maximize our potential and give [their] lives meaning” (paras. 2–3). How can advisers help to make the college experience better for students with ASD? What role can academic advisers play in supporting students with ASD?

A Mixed Advising Model for Students with ASD

As mentioned, students with ASD demonstrate varying characteristics of the disorder, however one general observation is that students with autism often do not ask for help (Hughes, 2009). Because academic advisers are more likely to meet students with ASD than many other campus professionals, advising offices would benefit from establishing a model that addresses the needs of these students. One model to consider borrows elements from a number of advising approaches and can help to provide the most effective guidance.

A potentially effective advising model for students with ASD involves primarily prescriptive and proactive advising strategies and also includes a smaller portion of strengths-based advising to affirm the students’ skill sets. Using this model in student appointments begins with a strengths-based advising approach due to the need to recognize the positive aspects of ASD. Strengths assessments such as StrengthsQuest can help both student and adviser recognize the student’s talents in a way not previously considered (Clifton, Anderson, & Schreiner, 2006). The adviser’s recommendations for the student should stem from those strengths. When using the strengths-based model with ASD students, advisers should focus on identifying students’ talents, increasing awareness of strengths, and planning specific steps for students to reach identified goals (Schreiner, 2013). Advisers can work with students to facilitate the process of setting reasonably attainable goals and identifying and troubleshooting obstacles that students might face as they pursue their goals (Schreiner, 2013).

The second element of the model utilizes principles of prescriptive advising that inform advisers working with students as they develop goals using strengths-based strategies. Prescriptive advising fits well when guiding students who require concrete, literal, and step-by-step instructions. An adviser might use prescriptive techniques when helping students register for classes by breaking down the registration process in a timeline that includes who to meet, where to meet them, which courses they can consider, where to go for other related tasks, how to register, and how to make changes (Bridges, 2011). Advisers may be able to recommend professors with structured classrooms or explain exactly what a class might look like so students can prepare for the changes they might face when switching classes (Bridges, 2011).

In addition to the strengths-based and prescriptive elements of this model, proactive advising strategies support students who especially need help advocating for their needs. Some students with ASD find it difficult to keep track of their academic performance and might face surprising grades at the end of the semester (Dillon, 2007). Advisers might also encourage students to program important dates into their phone calendars while in advising meetings to ensure these dates stay on the students’ radar (Dillon, 2007). Utilizing proactive advising techniques allows advisers to check in with faculty about student progress and helps to hold students accountable for established action steps. A three-pronged model that includes an emphasis of strengths-based, prescriptive, and proactive advising provides an effective framework for advising students with ASD. Within this model, advisers can also incorporate some additional best practices when working with students with ASD.

Best Practices

To spark advising conversations about how to serve students with ASD, this section summarizes some best practices that can support students in initial and ongoing appointments when they disclose that they have ASD. At the initial appointment, an adviser should ask the student what kind of assistance would be helpful (K. Munson, personal communication, October, 2015). As previously stated, students with ASD exhibit varying behaviors associated with the disorder, and students can help by sharing the challenging areas with which they need additional support. Advisers should also establish early on the most effective means of communicating with ASD advisees, as some students might prefer email versus face-to-face conversations (Bednarchyk, 2014). Additionally, an adviser can help a student recognize and discuss limitations as well as strengths to help with course selection. For example, based on the areas in which a student struggles, an adviser might suggest a lighter course load or recommend classes that don’t require group projects (Bednarchyk, 2014; Prince-Hughes, 2003). Students with ASD also benefit when advisers provide clear expectations about advising appointments, avoid communicating with facial expressions, and help discuss appropriate behaviors and social norms they might not normally perceive (Bednarchyk, 2014; Bridges, 2011; Hughes, 2009; Swarthmore College, 2015). If the adviser and student discuss expectations at the outset of the advising relationship, the adviser can hold the student accountable. For example, an adviser might ask if the student would like measures in place to help with accountability (K. Munson, personal communication, October, 2015). Advisers can provide this kind of concrete language once they have discussed appointment expectations with the student. Finally, at the initial appointment an adviser should discuss support networks with students and help to connect them to additional resources that will support their higher education journey (Bednarchyk, 2014; Bridges, 2011; Dillon, 2007; Hughes, 2009). Beyond the initial appointment, advisers can practice ongoing strategies when working with students with ASD.

If advisers follow these best practices, they will establish trusting relationships with their advisees and set the stage for ongoing successful meetings. Following the prescriptive approach, an adviser should give very specific instructions and deadlines when creating action plans and hold the student to those deadlines. One strategy for effective prescriptive communication includes sending students detailed summaries of the appointment with action steps outlined (Bednarchyk, 2014; Hughes, 2009). Also, directive language can help when a student becomes off-task or overstimulated (Bridges, 2011; Farrell, 2004; Pillay & Bhat, 2012; Swarthmore College, 2015). An example of a direct conversation might involve telling the student he or she seems unfocused and ask if perhaps the appointment should be rescheduled for a day when the student can focus better. Another possible conversation might involve the adviser explaining to a student who wishes to be more efficient that every sidebar conversation dwindles the efficiency of the advising appointment (K. Munson, personal communication, October, 2015). Finally, since students with ASD often find it difficult to consider other peoples’ perspectives, advisers should provide strong rationale for all recommendations given to the student (Hughes, 2009; Pillay & Bhat, 2012). One example of an adviser rationalizing course registration might include acknowledging that the student does not want to take a particular class but recognizing the student believes he or she shouldn’t have to take the course and explaining, however, that curriculum policy requires it (K. Munson, personal communication, October, 2015). These best practices provide strategies advisers can utilize in appointments with students with ASD. The language used in these conversations will change depending on the types of challenges the students face, but the direct approach remains consistent.

Research Limitations

A number of limitations exist in the above discussion regarding serving students with ASD. First, as stated at the outset, I have no professional training serving students with ASD, which may limit the formal use of this article. Research as well as hands-on experience support the best practices presented here, but advisers should use caution in using these strategies without discussing them with their on-campus disability resources office, advising colleagues, and/or supervisor prior to applying them. Second, this research does not address how to ensure students with ASD receive training related to development in areas of self-advocacy and how the model presented here prepares them for or inhibits them from succeeding outside of college. Finally, students with ASD often suffer from other mental disorders, such as depression and anxiety, so some recommendations might change depending on the characteristics of those disorders (Smith, 2007). These limitations reveal gaps that warrant more research regarding advising students with ASD.

Conclusion

Altogether, no standard model or all-inclusive list of best practices exists for serving students with ASD. This article brings attention to the problem that students with ASD might receive more effective academic advising if advisers use approaches that more fully address the needs of students with ASD. By identifying the challenges these students may face in higher education, advisers can play a significant role in diminishing the impact of some of these challenges. Discussing with colleagues this article’s proposed mixed model for advising students with ASD and some possible best practices might encourage advising professionals to address this issue and develop more enhanced training as well as a standard model to serve this student population.