Disability Studies in Education and Dis/ability Critical Race Studies

Disability Studies in Education:
The Need for a Plurality of Perspectives on Disability

Written by Susan Baglieri, Jan W. Valle, David J. Connor, and Deborah J. Gallagher

Baglieri, Valle, Connor and Gallagher argue that the traditional definition of disability in special education has hindered method, practice and the overall way we educate our students. Since the passage of the Pl 94-142 and the growth of the Disability Rights Movement, the meaning of “disability” has evolved, however, special education methods have not all changed to reflect this. Public Law 94-142 (the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975) introduced a piece of legislation that drastically improved the way students with disabilities were treated in school settings.

The authors  identified a divide between two groups who have differing ideas on the concept of disability.  The Instrumentalists, who conceptualized special education as simply requiring the “incremental improvement of a basically sound system” and the Reconceptualists, who saw special education as needing the “substantial reconceptualization of a fundamentally broken system”.

The incrementalists:

1.  assume that a deficit exists within an individual
2. believe that the purpose of special education is to change the individual through performance enhancing interventions
3. believe special education prepares students to adapt for the postschool world
4. believe the course taken by the special education field is set and the practices are promising

The reconceptualists:

1. frame disability as a social construction
2. focus on changing environmental limitations
3. seeks creation of caring society that accepts human differences without labels
4. Claim special education knowledge base is limited and inadequate

As DSE scholars and former teachers of students engaged with special education, we acknowledge that individual differences may have neurological, biological, cognitive or psychological referents.  

Different disciplines, cultures, and individuals do not agree about what "disabilities" are and how to explain them. All educators should understand that one's  way of thinking about "differences," results in distinct responses to disabilities. Three ways of thinking about disability (deficit, cultural, sociological) typically guide people's thinking about the term. The meaning of disability  is no longer attributed to the deficit-based medical model.For students with disabilities, this approach contributes to the tendency to think about them as deficient, or somehow less than their classmates without disabilities.

Different cultures often hold different perspectives about the concept of disabilities. As educators we need to do more to change the perspectives on the nature of disability.  We will all benefit from acknowledging broader understandings of disability. Teachers today have increased education and awareness about disabilities. Increased visibility has also led to more acceptance. Today’s changing attitudes try to dissolve stereotypes to treat all students with dignity. However, at times the labels or names themselves can be the obstacles.However, many labels today still stigmatize students before they even set foot in a classroom. Regardless of the name or diagnosis, whether it is mental retardation, intellectual disability, cognitive challenge, or a developmental disability, the needs of these students remain the same. The utmost necessity is for students with disabilities to be treated with respect by adults, students, and peers in school, community, and home settings. Relating learning to students’ lives is important for those whose measured aptitudes may seem limited or deficient, but are in fact capable of achieving strides in different ways. If the goal is to have students lead productive, independent lives, then all role models must treat the student, not the label.

Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit):

theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability

Written by Subini Ancy Annamma, David Connor, and Beth Ferri

In this article,Annamma, Connor and Ferri, combine aspects of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Disability Studies (DS) to propose a new theoretical structure that combines a dual analysis of race and ability: Dis/ability Critical Race Theory and Disabilities Studies (DisCrit).  

The goal of DisCrit is to push CRT and DS to merge the common practices of both theories (academic and practical) to encourage growth instead of separation. There is a strong link between race and ability that needs to be acknowledged in education. Connor and Ferri have used the term "dis/ability," as a way "to counter the emphasis on having a whole person be represented by what a person cannot do, rather than what he or she can, and disrupts the notion of the unchanging and permanency of the concept of disability, seeking rather to analyze the entire context in which a person functions"

Despite the change in definition, "African Americans continue to be 3x as likely to be labelled mentally retarded, 2x s likely to be labeled ED, compared to their white peers." The authors noted observing black and other minority/marginalized groups’ over-represented among those diagnosed with disability—e.g., emotional disorders, behavioral vices, learning challenges—in educational environments.

Using DisCrit, the authors look to communicate the "structural power of ableism and racism" by acknowledging the historical, social, political and economic interests of restricting access to educational equity to students of color with dis/abilities on both "macro and micro" levels.

For DisCrit to be useful, these are their 7 tenets:

1. 1. focuses on ways that the forces of racism and ableism circulate interdependently, often in neutralized and invisible ways, to uphold notions of normality.
   2. Values multidimensional identities and troubles singular notions of identity such as race or dis/ability or class or gender or sexuality.
   3. Emphasizes the social constructions of race and ability and yet recognizes the material and psychological impacts of being labeled as raced or dis/abled, which sets one outside of the western cultural norms.
   4. Privileges voices of marginalized populations, traditionally not acknowledged within research.
   5. Considers legal and historical aspects of dis/ability and race and how both have been used separately and together to deny the rights of some citizens.
   6. Recognizes Whiteness and Ability as Property and that gains for people labeled with dis/abilities have largely been made as the result of interest convergence of White, middle-class citizens.
   7. Requires activism and supports all forms of resistance.