Disabled  and  academic: A collaborative autoethnography on ableism and cruel optimism within Australian higher education

Share Disabled  and  academic: A collaborative autoethnography on ableism and cruel optimism within Australian higher education on Facebook Share Disabled  and  academic: A collaborative autoethnography on ableism and cruel optimism within Australian higher education on Twitter Share Disabled  and  academic: A collaborative autoethnography on ableism and cruel optimism within Australian higher education on Linkedin Email Disabled  and  academic: A collaborative autoethnography on ableism and cruel optimism within Australian higher education link

First published online 05 February 2026.


Why this study was done

This study was done because the authors, all academics who identify as disabled, thought that universities often talk about quality, fairness, and inclusive workplaces but may not always provide a safe, supportive environment for disabled staff. Despite having policy that says they are providing fairness, disabled academics can face discrimination, barriers, and pressures when at work. The researchers felt that current discussions about wellbeing often ignore the specific experiences of academics with disabilities. By sharing their own stories and reflections, they wanted to highlight these hidden issues and create more honest conversations, shared awareness, and change.

What the study did

The authors used a method called collaborative autoethnography. This means they reflected on and looked at their own lived experiences as researchers and university staff. This meant that they shared personal stories of working in higher education, looked for common themes, and studied how university policies and culture affected disabled academics. They used ideas such as ableism (discrimination and bias against disability) and cruel optimism (holding onto hope in a system that continues to cause harm) to understand their experiences.

What the study found

The authors found that:

Ableism is rooted in university culture

Universities often value constant productivity, competition, long hours, and “resilience.” These expectations can disadvantage disabled academics whose bodies or minds do not align with these norms.

Inclusion policies don’t always translate into practice

Although universities may support diversity and equal treatment, workload, promotion criteria, and performance expectations can still exclude or exhaust disabled staff. Universities need to fix the system, not expect disabled people to keep adapting to it.

Emotional labour and self-advocacy are exhausting

Disabled academics often have to repeatedly explain, justify, or negotiate their needs. This ongoing effort can be draining and lonely.

“Cruel optimism” keeps people invested

Many disabled academics continue to believe in the hope that universities can become inclusive and supportive, even when their experiences show otherwise. This creates a tension between hopefulness and truth.

What this means

This study suggests that improving inclusion in higher education requires more than words on paper. The researchers say there needs to be changes to workload, promotion, and performance expectations. The universities should know that ableism is not just an individual problem and needs genuine company responsibility. Universities often say they care about fairness and inclusion, but saying it is not enough. The researchers believe universities need to make real changes, not just write policies or make public statements. Disabled academics should not have to keep proving that they belong, explaining their needs over and over, or fighting to be treated as capable professionals.

This study was conducted by:

Associate Professor Peta Cook, Dr. Ryan Thorneycroft, Dr. Elizabeth Humphrys, Adjunct Professor Nicole Asquith, Dr. Lisa Stafford, Dr. Melanie Thomson, Professor Karen Soldatic, and Mr. Randos Korobacz.

To read the full article, visit the journal.

For other accessible formats, please see the column to the right.

Disclaimer: The QDRN has utilised generative AI to refine the wording of this plain language summary. All content has been checked for accuracy, appropriate tone, and clarity.

First published online 05 February 2026.


Why this study was done

This study was done because the authors, all academics who identify as disabled, thought that universities often talk about quality, fairness, and inclusive workplaces but may not always provide a safe, supportive environment for disabled staff. Despite having policy that says they are providing fairness, disabled academics can face discrimination, barriers, and pressures when at work. The researchers felt that current discussions about wellbeing often ignore the specific experiences of academics with disabilities. By sharing their own stories and reflections, they wanted to highlight these hidden issues and create more honest conversations, shared awareness, and change.

What the study did

The authors used a method called collaborative autoethnography. This means they reflected on and looked at their own lived experiences as researchers and university staff. This meant that they shared personal stories of working in higher education, looked for common themes, and studied how university policies and culture affected disabled academics. They used ideas such as ableism (discrimination and bias against disability) and cruel optimism (holding onto hope in a system that continues to cause harm) to understand their experiences.

What the study found

The authors found that:

Ableism is rooted in university culture

Universities often value constant productivity, competition, long hours, and “resilience.” These expectations can disadvantage disabled academics whose bodies or minds do not align with these norms.

Inclusion policies don’t always translate into practice

Although universities may support diversity and equal treatment, workload, promotion criteria, and performance expectations can still exclude or exhaust disabled staff. Universities need to fix the system, not expect disabled people to keep adapting to it.

Emotional labour and self-advocacy are exhausting

Disabled academics often have to repeatedly explain, justify, or negotiate their needs. This ongoing effort can be draining and lonely.

“Cruel optimism” keeps people invested

Many disabled academics continue to believe in the hope that universities can become inclusive and supportive, even when their experiences show otherwise. This creates a tension between hopefulness and truth.

What this means

This study suggests that improving inclusion in higher education requires more than words on paper. The researchers say there needs to be changes to workload, promotion, and performance expectations. The universities should know that ableism is not just an individual problem and needs genuine company responsibility. Universities often say they care about fairness and inclusion, but saying it is not enough. The researchers believe universities need to make real changes, not just write policies or make public statements. Disabled academics should not have to keep proving that they belong, explaining their needs over and over, or fighting to be treated as capable professionals.

This study was conducted by:

Associate Professor Peta Cook, Dr. Ryan Thorneycroft, Dr. Elizabeth Humphrys, Adjunct Professor Nicole Asquith, Dr. Lisa Stafford, Dr. Melanie Thomson, Professor Karen Soldatic, and Mr. Randos Korobacz.

To read the full article, visit the journal.

For other accessible formats, please see the column to the right.

Disclaimer: The QDRN has utilised generative AI to refine the wording of this plain language summary. All content has been checked for accuracy, appropriate tone, and clarity.