Dangerous Assumptions and Unspoken Limitations: A Disability Studies in Education Response to Morgan, Farkas, Hillemeier, Mattison, Maczuga, Li, and Cook (2015)

Collins, Kathleen M.; Connor, David J.; Ferri, Beth A.; Gallagher, Deborah J.; Samson, Jennifer F.

doi:10.56829/2158-396x.16.1.4

Cited by 32 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although interactional with "subjective experience," a disability cannot be construed as purely socially constructed. Some DS advocates seem to abjure identification of children as actually having disabilities and judge special education to be deficit-focused and segregationist, and they accuse special education of having eugenic implications (e.g., Collins et al, 2016;Connor, 2020). These DS advocates, somewhat erroneously, speak only of bodily inclusion, ignoring other important aspects of learning (Hornby & Kauffman, 2021;Kauffman & Hornby, 2020).…”

Section: The Era Of Inclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hard LRE Choices in the Era of Inclusion: Rights and Their Implications

Kauffman

Burke

Anastasiou

2022

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rights of students are often misunderstood. Civil rights of minorities granted by the U.S. Supreme Court are confused with human rights of individuals with disabilities granted by the U.S. Congress. Federal law applying to education of individuals with disabilities requires that difficult decisions be made by families and schools regarding how to provide four different and interrelated provisions of Public Law 94-142 of 1975 (now the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 or IDEA): (a) a free appropriate public education (FAPE), (b) an Individualized Education Program (IEP), (c) placement in the least restrictive environment (LRE), and (d) a full continuum of alternative placements (CAP). Special attention is given to LRE because the full inclusion movement and other influences related to a portion of disability studies have made it the central issue in special education. Under the law, three hard-to-answer questions must be asked in all cases involving special education: (a) What is an appropriate special education for a particular student with a disability? (b) What is the LRE in which that most appropriate education can occur for that individual student? (c) What is the CAP related to that individualized appropriate education?

show abstract

Section: The Era Of Inclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hard LRE Choices in the Era of Inclusion: Rights and Their Implications

Kauffman

Burke

Anastasiou

2022

Journal of Disability Policy Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The multidisciplinary field of Disability Studies (DS) does just that and has many insights to offer. However, there is a continued divide between knowledge from DS and other scholarly fields which upholds certain marginalization principles by using disability to argue against equality and by justifying the marginalization of all minority groups (e.g., Baynton, 2001;Collins et al, 2016). Even now, overrepresentation of different marginalized groups in referrals to 'special education' systems implies that disability serves as an over-all exclusionary mechanism; differences get labelled as deficient and on this basis students of marginalized groups are disproportionally excluded from mainstream education (e.g., Collins et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, there is a continued divide between knowledge from DS and other scholarly fields which upholds certain marginalization principles by using disability to argue against equality and by justifying the marginalization of all minority groups (e.g., Baynton, 2001;Collins et al, 2016). Even now, overrepresentation of different marginalized groups in referrals to 'special education' systems implies that disability serves as an over-all exclusionary mechanism; differences get labelled as deficient and on this basis students of marginalized groups are disproportionally excluded from mainstream education (e.g., Collins et al, 2016). As the importance of a disability lens for the process of inclusive education is often under-estimated, this paper presents empirical examples to illustrate how the lack thereof has a tangible negative impact on disabled students' lives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integration of a Disability Lens as Prerequisite for Inclusive Higher Education

Spaan,

Van Trigt,

Schippers

2024

EJIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE. Occidental higher education often approaches disability as a disparate issue, failing to recognize that it is part of human diversity. Such an approach hinders inclusive education because it overlooks how disability is intertwined with other identities and concepts of exclusion. The overarching aim of this paper is to enhance understanding of (intersecting) disabling processes within education policy and practice and the impact thereof on students; and to raise educators’ awareness about how integration of knowledge from Disability Studies within pedagogy and their daily interaction with students, can positively influence disabled students’ wellbeing, their study opportunities and aid the overall process of inclusion. APPROACH. This paper offers a disability lens by (1) presenting a literature overview from a Disability Studies (DS) perspective about disability and exclusionary phenomena, in particular disablism and ableism; (2) substantiating how a current focus on accessibility hinders actual inclusion; (3) analysing a case-study through the presented perspective with attention to Dutch contextual factors. For the case-study, the first author and ‘Tess’ engaged in regular conversations during a year in which Tess shared her experiences as a student of higher education. In this paper, a selection of these experiences is presented from a reflexive perspective and with application of the presented frameworks. With this, the complex impact of exclusionary processes on interactions between students, educators and on the organization of university involved (social) events is illustrated. FINDINGS. The lack of nuanced, fluid and intersectional approaches to disability within mainstream education hinders the recognition of (epistemic) injustices. Exclusionary processes and practices in higher education remain unacknowledged, although they negatively impact disabled students and block their epistemic contribution. Moreover, the continued focus on accessibility hinders implementation of the international convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and deflects attention from the fact that inclusive education requires systemic change and a multi-layered approach. KEY MESSAGE. The current trajectory of disability inclusion is counterproductive without true systemic change. Integration of the presented disability lens is imperative for truly intersectional approaches to inclusion and offers educators a way to positively influence students’ wellbeing and identity development, even when policy changes are not yet achieved. Points of interest: Knowledge and attitudes about disability in higher education systems, in policies and practice, often do not portray disability from the perspective of disabled people themselves. There is also a lack of understanding how disability is part of human diversity and is intertwined with other identity aspects. Because higher education often focusses on including disabled people in existing systems by way of individual accommodations rather than on changing the design of the system, disabled students experience various forms of exclusion, varying from opportunities to study to the way they are approached by educators, that effect their wellbeing. The usefulness of disability studies theory is illustrated by applying them to the experiences of ‘Tess’, demonstrating how her personal and professional life was influenced by them. We argue that policies need to change and that educators themselves can work on true inclusion by recognising disability as diversity and by integrating up-to-date knowledge from the perspective of disabled people themselves in their approaches.

show abstract

“…Multiple studies have found that students of color are more likely to be identified with disabilities than other students (Cruz et al, 2021; Skiba et al, 2008), particularly in more subjective disability categories such as emotional disturbances (Bal et al, 2019; Donovan & Cross, 2002). Other scholars have found that Black students may be under-identified for some disability categories when predictors like test scores or economic and health indicators are taken into account (Elder et al, 2021; Hibel et al, 2010; Morgan et al, 2015), though these conclusions have received significant pushback (Collins et al, 2016; Skiba et al, 2016). While there are ongoing debates as to which comparisons are most appropriate to understand representation in special education (Ahram et al, 2021; Cruz & Rodl, 2018), it is useful from a policy perspective to distinguish factors that contribute to special education identification.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Teacher-Student Race Match and Identification for Discretionary Educational Services

Hart,

Lindsay

2024

American Educational Research Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A host of recent literature suggests benefits to Black children of being matched to same-race teachers. We extend this literature to explore whether being matched to a Black teacher is related to Black students’ likelihood of being identified for two types of discretionary educational services in the following academic year: gifted education and special education. While we do not find that access to Black teachers affects students’ likelihood of gifted identification, Black students matched to Black teachers are less likely to be identified for special education. The results are strongest for Black boys, particularly those who are also economically disadvantaged and are strongest for disabilities with more discretion in identification.

show abstract

Dangerous Assumptions and Unspoken Limitations: A Disability Studies in Education Response to Morgan, Farkas, Hillemeier, Mattison, Maczuga, Li, and Cook (2015)

Cited by 32 publications

References 0 publications

Hard LRE Choices in the Era of Inclusion: Rights and Their Implications

Hard LRE Choices in the Era of Inclusion: Rights and Their Implications

Integration of a Disability Lens as Prerequisite for Inclusive Higher Education

Teacher-Student Race Match and Identification for Discretionary Educational Services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About