Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Neurodiversity in Computing Education Research: A Systematic Literature Review

Cynthia Zastudil, David H. Smith, Yusef Tohamy, Rayhona Nasimova, Gavin Montross, Stephen MacNeil

TL;DR

This systematic literature review evaluates neurodiversity in post-secondary computing education by analyzing 14 papers identified from 1,943 references. It reveals a nascent field dominated by interviews and position papers, with many curricular recommendations lacking empirical validation. The study classifies contributions into empirical, opinion, and survey types, and highlights inconsistencies in reporting study details. It emphasizes two key directions: assessing the impact of active learning on neurodivergent students and increasing awareness, while advocating for neurodivergent student co-design in pedagogical materials and CE research. The authors call for more rigorous, participatory research to develop evidence-based, inclusive CE practices.

Abstract

Ensuring equitable access to computing education for all students-including those with autism, dyslexia, or ADHD-is essential to developing a diverse and inclusive workforce. To understand the state of disability research in computing education, we conducted a systematic literature review of research on neurodiversity in computing education. Our search resulted in 1,943 total papers, which we filtered to 14 papers based on our inclusion criteria. Our mixed-methods approach analyzed research methods, participants, contribution types, and findings. The three main contribution types included empirical contributions based on user studies (57.1%), opinion contributions and position papers (50%), and survey contributions (21.4%). Interviews were the most common methodology (75% of empirical contributions). There were often inconsistencies in how research methods were described (e.g., number of participants and interview and survey materials). Our work shows that research on neurodivergence in computing education is still very preliminary. Most papers provided curricular recommendations that lacked empirical evidence to support those recommendations. Three areas of future work include investigating the impacts of active learning, increasing awareness and knowledge about neurodiverse students' experiences, and engaging neurodivergent students in the design of pedagogical materials and computing education research.

Neurodiversity in Computing Education Research: A Systematic Literature Review

TL;DR

This systematic literature review evaluates neurodiversity in post-secondary computing education by analyzing 14 papers identified from 1,943 references. It reveals a nascent field dominated by interviews and position papers, with many curricular recommendations lacking empirical validation. The study classifies contributions into empirical, opinion, and survey types, and highlights inconsistencies in reporting study details. It emphasizes two key directions: assessing the impact of active learning on neurodivergent students and increasing awareness, while advocating for neurodivergent student co-design in pedagogical materials and CE research. The authors call for more rigorous, participatory research to develop evidence-based, inclusive CE practices.

Abstract

Ensuring equitable access to computing education for all students-including those with autism, dyslexia, or ADHD-is essential to developing a diverse and inclusive workforce. To understand the state of disability research in computing education, we conducted a systematic literature review of research on neurodiversity in computing education. Our search resulted in 1,943 total papers, which we filtered to 14 papers based on our inclusion criteria. Our mixed-methods approach analyzed research methods, participants, contribution types, and findings. The three main contribution types included empirical contributions based on user studies (57.1%), opinion contributions and position papers (50%), and survey contributions (21.4%). Interviews were the most common methodology (75% of empirical contributions). There were often inconsistencies in how research methods were described (e.g., number of participants and interview and survey materials). Our work shows that research on neurodivergence in computing education is still very preliminary. Most papers provided curricular recommendations that lacked empirical evidence to support those recommendations. Three areas of future work include investigating the impacts of active learning, increasing awareness and knowledge about neurodiverse students' experiences, and engaging neurodivergent students in the design of pedagogical materials and computing education research.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 24 sections, 3 figures, 2 tables.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Methodology
  3. Exclusion & Inclusion Criteria
  4. Search & Selection Process
  5. Identification Phase
  6. Screening Phase
  7. Eligibility Phase
  8. Data Analysis
  9. Results
  10. RQ1: Methods and Contribution Types
  11. Research Methods
  12. Contribution Types
  13. Pedagogical Techniques Studied
  14. Community of Focus & User Study Participants
  15. RQ2: Research Findings & Outcomes
  16. ...and 9 more sections

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: PRISMA diagram detailing our identification, screening, and assessment of eligibility of papers for inclusion.
  • Figure 2: Paper counts by year of publication.
  • Figure 3: The research methodologies mack2021we, contribution types wobbrock2016research, and communities of focus of the papers mack2021we we analyzed. Papers can contain more than one type of research methodology, contribution type, and community of focus.