Addressing Ableism and Exclusion in Research Communication

What is it about?

The article explains how UK universities, despite talking a lot about equality and inclusion, still operate in ways that exclude disabled staff, people with chronic illnesses, and neurodivergent researchers. Disclosure rates for disability in higher education are far lower than in the general working population, and many academics report stigma or being told they do not belong. Ableism, meaning systems and attitudes that treat nondisabled people as the norm, shows up through expectations of overwork, travel, rigid performance metrics, and academic cultures that make it difficult for many researchers to participate fully. The authors argue that research managers and administrators can play a powerful role in challenging these norms. Practical decisions that seem small, like meeting locations, conference design, funding assumptions, or how research outputs are formatted, often create unnecessary barriers. By questioning default practices, building accessibility into systems, and encouraging inclusive approaches to research design, communication, and events, research managers can help shift the culture. They give examples from the University of Kent, where changes such as accessible documents, inclusive conference planning, and support for different kinds of research outputs have made participation easier for a wider range of people. Ultimately, the paper calls for consistent, proactive action rather than one off fixes. Creating accessible environments helps everyone, not just disabled staff, and allows more researchers to stay and thrive in academia. While individual managers cannot control funding bodies or institutional budgets, they can influence everyday practices and challenge ableist assumptions. The authors emphasise that inclusion requires ongoing reflection, active bystander behaviour, and a willingness to redesign systems so that accessibility is the default, not an extra burden placed on already marginalised individuals.

Featured Image

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash

Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash

Why is it important?

This work is important because it exposes how university systems and everyday academic practices can unintentionally exclude disabled people, those with chronic illnesses, and neurodivergent researchers. Many do not feel safe to disclose their conditions, and as a result universities risk losing valuable talent. It also shows that small, practical choices made by research managers can either create barriers or remove them. By planning accessible meetings, events, documents, and funding processes, they can make research environments fairer and more supportive for everyone. Most importantly, the work highlights that inclusion must be built into the system, not left to individuals to fight for. When universities design accessible practices as standard, more researchers can thrive and contribute, leading to a more diverse and creative academic community