Neurodiversity in Computing Education Research: A Systematic Literature Review

The perspectives and needs of neurodivergent people receive less sustained attention in discourse and practice than physical disabilities and technical standards.

“Discourse and practice often focus on physical disabilities and compliance with technical standards, while the perspectives and needs of neurodivergent people receive less sustained attention [1, 28, 40].”

Many digital systems and learning environments remain tuned to neurotypical norms due to limited adaptation in technical and educational systems.

“Many digital systems and learning environments remain tuned to neurotypical norms, not because of neurodivergence per se but due to limited adaptation in technical and educational systems [4, 36, 40].”

True participatory co-creation is still rarely realized in practice; many institutional initiatives remain reactive or evaluative rather than proactively co-creative.

“However, as Baillargeon et al. [1] and Borsotti et al. [4] note, true participatory co-creation—consistent with the disability-rights principle 'Nothing about us without us' [5], is still rarely realized in practice; many institutional initiatives remain reactive or evaluative rather than proactively co-creative [3, 27, 40].”

Technology disciplines are still rarely tailored to the learning needs of neurodivergent students, reflected in higher dropout rates, reduced self-efficacy, and frequent invisible access labor.

“Empirical studies confirm that technology disciplines are still rarely tailored to the learning needs of neurodivergent students, which is reflected in higher dropout rates, reduced self-efficacy, and frequent invisible access labor to secure participation [6, 17, 36, 40].”

In much existing provision, neurodivergent students are positioned primarily as recipients of accommodations instead of equal partners in shaping technology and pedagogy.

“In much existing provision, neurodivergent students are positioned primarily as recipients of accommodations instead of equal partners in shaping technology and pedagogy [1, 16, 40].”

Proactive, predictable structures benefit all learners.

“The choice of modality was a context-specific design decision, not a general claim about autistic communication preferences; the broader point is to provide proactive, predictable structures that benefit all learners [17, 40].”

Systematic studies that explicitly integrate the voices and perspectives of neurodivergent people and multi-perspective evaluations are still rare.

“Despite these positive findings, important research gaps remain: systematic studies that explicitly integrate the voices and perspectives of neurodivergent people and multi-perspective evaluations are still rare [1, 6, 26, 40].”