19441
Conceptualizing an Effective Mentorship Program for University Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder
University students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) face unique challenges that negatively impact their social and academic adjustment to university (White et al., 2011). Indeed, a longitudinal study from the National Center for Special Education Research in 2010 found that less than 20% of students with ASD enrolled at a four-year university between 2001 and 2009 completed or were on track to finish their degree. As enrolment rates for students with ASD continue to increase, a stark lack of research and services for these students remains (Gelbar et al., 2014). The approach of mentoring students with an ASD has gained popularity during the last three decades, however, few studies have examined in-depth how the experiences of mentoring participants can inform and refine existing frameworks for effective mentoring (Nora & Crisp, 2007). Importantly, the components that comprise the mentoring experiences of students with ASD and their mentors have not been identified.
Objectives:
To explore the stories of the participants involved in the Autism Mentorship Initiative (AMI) at Simon Fraser University (SFU) concerning the successes and challenges of students with ASD in navigating university life, and how participation in AMI has impacted those successes and challenges.
Methods:
Participants: Ten AMI mentors (a senior undergraduate or graduate student) and Ten AMI mentees (a student with a diagnosis of ASD) have been recruited for the 2014-2015 academic year. Design: Semi-structured 1:1 interviews will be conducted throughout the year to obtain participants’ perspectives and experiences of AMI (preliminary data is presented for 4 mentor interviews). A grounded theory approach will be used to generate themes, identify trends, and construct theories based on the interview data.
Results:
Initial Interviews. Preliminary themes emerged from the four mentor interviews. Overall, mentors expressed positive feedback about the program itself and about their experiences as mentors. An overarching theme of normalization (offering personal experiences or examples of others facing the same problems in university) emerged as a potential core concept. Other themes include comfortability (creating a secure and trusting environment), need for a social learning club (involving group workshops and more social events so that both mentees and mentors could socialize and learn together), sharing of information in a group setting (collaborative meetings with mentors, mentees, and the AMI supervisors), shared control (of topics during discussions in meetings between mentees and mentors), and learning about ASD in adulthood (mentors expressed their interests in learning about ASD in adulthood). Collection of quantitative data assessing social and academic adjustment to university is currently in progress, yielding a mixed-methods approach.
Conclusions:
These findings are expected to enhance our understanding of the kinds of supports needed to ensure the success of students with ASD in post-secondary contexts. Initial data suggest that mentors perceive AMI to be an effective program that assesses the needs and goals of the mentees and benefits mentors simultaneously. A further exploration of common themes and categories, generated from the experiences of AMI participants, will guide the formation of a theoretical framework for mentorship of students with ASD.