Infusing Feminist Disability Studies in Our Teaching

Albanesi, Heather Powers; Ferber, Abby L.; Herrera, Andrea O'Reilly; Nusbaum, Emily A.; Ware, Linda

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-30364-2_24

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(Goggin et al, 2017 andCuthbert, 2015). Moreover, this necessarily socialized and performative curriculum demonstrates the ways in which our social reality and the socialization that we operate within goes to (re)define and reify the forms and bodies of the "dis"abled, illustrating in countless ways how the body-as a totality (beyond a mere Cartesian understanding that is separable or mitigatable)-can be manipulated as matter, socialized, naturalized, subjectivized, desubjectivized, and controlled simultaneously within the singularizable and multiplicitous space of the school only to then be called upon again and again in an ever-repeating fashion that perpetuates an everbecoming of the "ab""normal"ized deemed "ab""normal" in ever-newer and ever-more "progressivistic" realms of (dis)/non/"understanding" (Albanesi, 2016;Chapple, 2019 andDavis, 1997). Ultimately, "dis"ability is something that we teach/perform/enact/act in our classrooms; it is a socially constructed definition of existence and nonexistence that is perpetually being redefined and reenacted; it is something that we construct/act/perform/curricularize in our schools every day; it is a curricular standard made ever-important in regards to the incommensurable amount of energy and resources put into segregating, punishing, not-teaching, ignoring, etc.…”

Section: Conclusive Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability as performance/curriculum: The subversives mechanization of teaching/performing disability

Bierdz

2022

Power and Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, there is a cripped arugmentation towards and away from performance as curricular. In other words, what we are trying to more fully grapple with is how curriculum within the school and otherwise becomes and is embodied within the body as a performative action towards and away from “dis”ability as a means of essentializing, normalizing and reifying means of “dis”ability as disability—curriculum as a way of interpreting and enacting “dis”ability within the social as a continual re-performance of normed accesses and “real”ity. Moreover, this argumentation is not only about a curricular and performative connection within the realm of “dis”ability and the like, but in a more robust determination, the article is an issuance of “dis”ability itself as performance, as construction, as imposed “real”ity, rather than something that is simply empirical and taught to “others” for some sense of understanding. Further, such determinations of “dis”ability as performance and as curriculum within educational spaces and outside of them are intimately intertwined with crip theory and a constant questioning of regimentations of power that are subversive and insidious—unspoken, unseen narrativizations of “real”ity that instantiate reality in hegemonizing ways continually and differently.

show abstract