Socio-material practices in classrooms that lead to the social participation or social isolation of disabled pupils

Abstract

Classrooms are comprised of people, relationships, tools, and technologies, which together constitute the socio-material practices of the classroom. This paper investigates how such socio-material practices influence disabled pupils' opportunities for participation in classroom activities. The paper draws on a qualitative observation study with 14 disabled pupils aged 11-15 years. An actor-network theory perspective was employed in this paper, and the analytical process was inspired by an interpretive content analysis approach. The paper's findings highlight the significance of how education is organized for disabled pupils and how disability and assistive technologies (AT) are perceived. Thoughts and beliefs underlying these phenomena were found to be displayed through (1) location in the classroom, (2) teaching strategies, and (3) implementation of AT. The paper concludes that classroom socio-material practices place disabled pupils in a constant flow into and out of social participation and social isolation.

“He is not crying for real”: severe, multiple disabilities and embodied constraint in two special-needs education units

“…Most of the existing research about children with disabilities and the use of assistive equipment is embedded in a dichotomy of disabled-not disabled and an individual deviation approach (Lancioni et al, 2004;Logan et al, 2001;Mulholland & McNeill, 1989). Findings in disability studies based on social and relational models of disability, technology, or education (Östlund, 2015;Söderström, 2016;Söderström & Ytterhus, 2010) identify students using assistive technical devices as competent, attentive, and responsive, and are thus partly in line with our study. However, these studies do not include students with severe disabilities and do not give special attention to bodily expressions and existential dimensions to the same extent that we do and Moser (2006) and Shakespeare (2006) recommend.…”

“…Through qualitative interviews, Söderström and Ytterhus (2010) investigated how students with visual impairments/blindness experienced assistive technical devices as representing competence, belonging and independence as well as restriction, difference, and dependency. Söderström (2016) undertook an observational study including conversational interviews. She found that socio-material practices presented double-edged swords, where students moved between social participation and social isolation.…”

“…Assistive devices are understood as adaptions supplementary to those securing general accessibility in society through universal design. Where universal design involves students' physical accessibility as well as accessibility to curriculums, information, teaching approaches and assessments, assistive devices are individualized items, equipment, or products applied to support students' possibilities to participate and learn in school (Söderström, 2016). In this paper, we turn to a machine 1 that leads the bodies of persons who are not able to walk independently into a walking pattern.…”

Whose Voices Matter? Use, Misuse and Non-Use of Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) Among Severely Disabled Children in Small Group Homes

“…The number of studies conducting research on severely disabled children and their communicative challenges has increased in recent years. These studies have found that severely disabled children are able to communicate when adults and peers offer them an opportunity to be heard through their use of alternative and augmentative communication (Söderström, 2016;Evensen, Standal & Ytterhus, 2017;Østvik, Balandin & Ytterhus, 2018;Doak, 2018;Iacono, 2019;Ytterhus & Åmot, 2019). None of these studies have been carried out in small group homes, but rather in educational settings and schools.…”

Modes of ordering disability: students living with visual disabilities in the Sultanate of Oman

“…Olaussen (2010) has studied the experience of hard of hearing and its relation to disability, technologies, practices, and politics. Another inspiration for us is work by Söderström (2009aSöderström ( , 2009bSöderström ( , 2016 who, in different ways, has traced children/youths with different disabilities/without disabilities relations to technologies (mobile phones, ICT, assistive technologies, etc.). These scholars share a mutual interest of how disability is enacted as part of relations among others: bodies, technologies, working practices, and policy documents.…”