C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and Research, The Disability Press, Leeds, 2004, 233 pp., £16.50 pbk C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), Disability Policy: Applying the Social Model, The Disability Press, Leeds, 2004, 216 pp., £16.50 pbk C. Barnes and G. Mercer (eds), The Social Model of Disability: Europe and the Majority World, The Disability Press, Leeds, 2004, 218 pp., £16.50 pbk

Byrne, Bronagh; McLaughlin, Eithne

doi:10.1017/s0047279406320545

Cited by 105 publications

(141 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

128

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It can be seen as part of a broader interest among service users in having more say and involvement in their lives and society. It originated in the disabled people's movement, which saw disability research as a part of broader structures of oppression and discrimination in society (Campbell and Oliver 1996;Barnes and Mercer 1997;Barnes 2003Barnes , 2004. One particular event gained special importance in the UK, both in the development of such research and of the disabled people's movement more generally.…”

Section: P Beresfordmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The disabled people's movement highlighted the importance of changing (and equalising) the social relations of research production so that the researched were treated equally with the researchers. Disabled people's and social care service-user organisations and movements emphasised two overlapping concerns in research and evaluation: what research is for and where control of research lies (Oliver 1992;Zarb 1992;Barnes and Mercer 1997). This is reflected in the emergence of the 'emancipatory disability research paradigm' and related interest in 'user controlled research', in which the central purpose of research is seen as supporting the empowerment of service users and the making of broader social change.…”

Section: P Beresfordmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From ‘other’ to involved: user involvement in research: an emerging paradigm

Beresford

2013

Nordic Social Work Research

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: P Beresfordmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: P Beresfordmentioning

confidence: 99%

From ‘other’ to involved: user involvement in research: an emerging paradigm

Beresford

2013

Nordic Social Work Research

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There has been considerable academic debate about the appropriate methods to research disability: emancipatory research (the perceived necessity to have a disability in order to carry out meaningful disability research) (Barnes and Mercer 1997) and participatory research (which aim to fully involve disabled people in the research process) (Zarb 1992). While these literatures have been instrumental in rethinking how research is carried out with disabled people, there has been little analysis around disabled researchers researching outside disability, or the impact of the disabled body on the research process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accessing the field: Disability and the research process

Brown

Boardman

2011

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acknowledgements:Thanks to Rona Campbell, Karen Throsby and two anonymous referees for comments on this paper. We would also like to thank those who participated in our research projects. AbstractDisability is as much a factor in interactional dynamics as ethnicity, age, gender or sexuality, and therefore its impact on the processes around qualitative research warrants much more systematic attention. Disabled researchers are not confined to disability studies research, although most accounts of the impact of disability on the research process have, thus far, been undertaken within this field. This paper moves beyond this narrow focus to consider the impact of disabled identities and the embodied experiences of impairment on studies involving, primarily, non-disabled people. By reflecting on our experiences as visibly disabled researchers, we highlight some of the practical, ethical and conceptual dilemmas we encountered. Impairments may assist rapport building with participants, but also introduce complex dilemmas concerning whether, when and how to disclose them, and the consequences of doing so. We highlight the centrality of the visibility of the disabled body in mediating these 2 dilemmas, and its part in constraining our responses to them. While we value our commitment to positive readings of disability, we demonstrate that disabled researchers nevertheless undertake research in contexts where disability is assigned meanings disabled people may not share. We argue that all researchers should attend to their own 'body signifiers' (whether in relation to ethnicity, wealth, gender, age etc.) and embodied experiences of research processes, as these are integral to research outcomes, the ethics of research, and are a means by which to address power differentials between researcher and participant. This paper addresses a gap in the literature, using our experiences of research to highlight the negotiations and dilemmas faced by visibly disabled researchers. Negotiations of identity prompted by the disabled body in the research process require consideration and should not be ignored.

show abstract

“…This narrowing of perspectives is also apparent in documents that have sought to establish educational research priorities (DfE, 2013;DfE, 2014). These documents emphasise particular ways of understanding 'what works' in teaching (DfE, 2013) and'special' education (DfE, 2014) and establish research agendas that favour large-scale quantitative experiments or randomised trials (Haynes et al, 2012); they negate methodologies concerned with the particular and reinforce the professional domination of research long resisted by disability activists such as Barnes and Mercer (1997) and described by Allan and Slee (2008). Forms of epistemic invalidation, evident in recent policy formation for SEN/D and art and design education confirm subjects as excluded and excessive if they are not 'typically' productive are explored in this paper.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Special educational needs and art and design education: plural perspectives on exclusion

Penketh

2015

Journal of Education Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Education policy proposals by the UK Coalition government appeared to be based on a process of consultation, participation and representation. However, policy formation seems to prioritise and confirm particular ways of knowing and being in the world. This paper recognises the ontological and epistemological invalidation at work in education policy by examining the shared context for policy formation in Special Educational Needs (SEN/D) and art and design education. There is value in recognising plurality, acknowledging the ways in which apparently singular policies relating to special education are understood through subject or disciplinary perspectives. The neoliberal aim to foster an economically productive 'subject' is evident in policy formation relating to art and design education as well as SEN/D.Both subjects, the disabled child and art and design education, are defined as excessive and are excluded where they do not conform to particular notions of productivity. The paper explores theoretical frameworks that are essential for recognising meaning in education when subjects cannot be put to work. The paper makes use of theoretical frameworks from disability studies in order to examine the ways in which the disabled child and art and design education are 'excessive' and therefore excluded if they do not conform to 'typical' notions of the productive subject. The paper begins by outlining recent theoretical frameworks emerging from the field of

show abstract

Cited by 105 publications

References 0 publications

From ‘other’ to involved: user involvement in research: an emerging paradigm

From ‘other’ to involved: user involvement in research: an emerging paradigm

Accessing the field: Disability and the research process

Special educational needs and art and design education: plural perspectives on exclusion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About