From a social justice perspective, educational institutions should provide safe and inclusive environments for interactive learning that benefit all students, regardless of their social location and systemic barriers to access and success. However, in the United States, many educational systems tend to reproduce oppressive systems from our larger society. Disability status is personal and private, and not all individuals may be comfortable addressing the concept of being disabled. Our educational institutions are still struggling to find the right balance between the pathologizing and infantilizing medical model of disability and the empowering social model of disability that acknowledges social structures as barriers to access. Some participants may have disabilities but choose not to register for accommodations at their learning institution, which could skew research findings if not formally disclosed. It is imperative to have more research and guidance on how universities and high schools across the country make accommodation decisions. The current guidance provides inconsistent recommendations for application and leaves much room for subjective input between the facilitator or accommodations and the student needing learning support services.
There needs to be a larger conversation around technology accessibility in graduate school in the academic community.
I struggle to walk the line of justice and perpetuate cycles of oppression as I attend a fully remote graduate program and teach hybrid-remote dual enrollment students. I question if the pilot program I work for is toeing another line of ethics regarding Respect for persons. As far as I know, my students are not part of a formal research investigation, but I am also aware they are test subjects in a pilot educational program. How does this program address the personal dignity and autonomy of each student? Why can corporations and Universities avoid formal informed consent for individuals participating in research programs? How is a pilot program formally excused from the IRB Code of Ethics? I cannot say I know what will happen to me for asking these difficult questions, but I consider them daily as I determine what is best for my family and my students. I am unsure that the anticipated benefits of joining college-credit-for-high schoolers programs outweigh the anticipated risks. Given the need for extensive research on the subject of disability justice in financially insecure student populations, I lean on the belief it is too soon to make that promise of beneficence. I know that was weird and wordy, but that is because my brain is genuinely chewing on the complexity and implications of the potential risks to dual-enrollment learners.
Our educational institutions are still struggling to find the right balance between the pathologizing and infantilizing medical model of disability and the empowering social model of disability that acknowledges social structures as barriers to access.
The relevant research leaves gaps and questions such as: What is the definition of high-poverty and low-poverty schools in this study’s context? Are there any other factors that affect the poverty concentration of schools based on geographic location? What is the reason for the variation in poverty concentration among different racial/ethnic groups across different locales?
To critically evaluate educational justice and disability justice research, one must look for more concrete examples to illustrate how different paradigms of educational justice influence disability education, school organization, and school reform. This would help readers better understand the concepts and see their practical implications.
Abstract Review of References
ONE
Banerjee, M., Madaus, J. W., & Gelbar, N. (2015). Applying LD documentation guidelines at the postsecondary level: Decisionmaking with sparse or missing data. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38(1), 27–39.
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework of Banerjee, Madaus, & Gelbar’s study is Disability Rights as Educational Social Justice (2015). The research article could also be considered from the conflict theory approach examining the relationship between educational resources available to non-disabled students and the fight for equally valuable and strategic resources for disabled students.
Method: Rank-order choice exercise and online survey of hypothetical learning disability decision-making scenarios.
Sample: 2500 AHEAD members who are directors or coordinators of DRC programs in higher education with ten years of experience and master’s degrees were contacted for the study. 500 responded to the study. 168 respondents participated actively and submitted the researcher surveys by the appropriate deadline (Banerjee, Madaus, & Gelbar, 2015). The final study sample of 168 Disability Resource Professionals was not a formal stratified random sample, which negates the reliability of the study.
TWO
Strimel, Francis, G. L., & Duke, J. M. (2023). “We’re not the Gods of accommodations:” Disability resource professionals and accommodation decision-making. Journal of College Student Development, 64(2), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2023.0015
Theoretical paradigm
The research takes a conflict theory approach to explore how the availability of educational resources for non-disabled student advisors/liaisons affects the struggle for equitable resources for disabled students’ advisors/liaisons. In this research, advisors/liaisons of disabled students are called Disability Resource Professionals. Some could argue this research comes from Durkheim’s structural-functionalist approach, as it focuses on one part of the body of society, the disability professional, which helps the whole social group function. One could argue that without DRPs, disabled students could not engage in the larger society. This is not my approach, but I can see how many outside the disability community may take the functionalist stance.
Method: Interview and semi-constructed surveys
Sample: Convenience sampling by sharing flyers on the AHEAD list serve. This is a fee-based organization of approximately 5,000 disability higher education resource professionals. 53 participants responded.
Future Research
Strimel, Francis, & and Duke’s work relates directly to disabled students; it is critical to understand the accommodation process from their perspective better and use this as the primary tool to inform future practice (2023).
Ethical Considerations
The Disability Resource professionals must protect students’ identities, accommodations, and disabilities according to FERPA and ADA AA laws designed to protect students. It uses an outdated medical model of disability, which the Disability Justice community has formally rejected. Additionally, the Disability Rights slogan “nothing about us without us” was ignored as there are no clear representatives of the disability community providing data for either research set.
Limitations: More research and guidance are needed on how universities and high schools nationwide make accommodation decisions. The most recent guidance provides inconsistent recommendations for application and varies on a case-by-case basis, with much room for subjective input between the facilitator or accommodations and the student in need of learning support services (Strimel, Francis, & Duke, 2023)
THREE
Gregg, N. (2012). Increasing access to learning for adult basic education learner with learning disabilities: Evidence-based accommodation research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219411426855
Theoretical Paradigm: Educational Justice, Neoliberalism, Structural Functionalism, and Conflict Theory were present in the coded literature.
Method: Qualitative Research investigation of over 2000 coded words in literature to examine what learning accommodations are available and necessary for Adult Basic Education (ABE) learners with Learning Disabilities (LD).
Sample: The article by Gregg, Ph.D., focuses on the adult primary education (ABE) learner (2012). A comprehensive, evidence-based literature that accommodates testing or instructional settings is unavailable for this population. To fill the gaps in current research, this literature review includes empirical research focused on transitioning adolescents (ninth grade or older) and college students with learning disabilities (LD). “Only adolescents and adults with LD [learning disabilities] were included in our investigation to control for the influence of disability on outcomes” (Gregg, 2012).
Limitations: Providing evidence from research or personal experience would make the argument more persuasive and influential. What actions can be taken as a response to this research investigation? What is a call to action for fellow researchers?
FOUR
4. Elder, Figlio, D., Imberman, S., & Persico, C. (2021). Segregation and racial gaps in special education: New evidence on the debate over disproportionality. Education Next, 21(2), 62-68.
Purpose of Study/Framework: Conflict theory and symbolic interactions.
Method (including setting & sample): Quantitative measurements of white students identified as disabled with low socioeconomic status compared to all Hispanic and Black non-white students of similar SES (Elder, Figlio, Imberman, & Persico, 2021). The authors used the birth records and special education status of Floridians born from 1992 to 2002 (Elder, Figlio, Imberman, & Persico, 2021). In this analysis, our primary interest lies in assessing the extent to which racial differences in classification for special education can be “explained” by differences in students’ economic, social, and health characteristics at birth.
Key Findings & Implications: Disability justice is dependent on breaking cycles of systemic oppression and disproportionality regarding identifying students in need who belong to multiple marginalized communities compared to their white/white-passing peers. The American education system must find a way to catch these students before they fall through the cracks of miseducation and are ultimately “left behind.”
Study limitations: I would prefer school records to birth records; congenital disabilities are not the primary measurement of disability. Most students are not diagnosed as disabled at birth but rather throughout the life course.
Additional notes about gaps/contributions: The study excluded BIPOC students who fall outside of the birth certificate disclosure of Black or Hispanic; this removes sampled participants who are also non-white and may leave questions about accommodations available to white-passing and other BIPOC groups.
FIVE
5. Acevedo, Brown, L. X. Z., & Cowing, J. L. (2023). Visioning alternatives to segregated education: A disability justice and access-centered pedagogy approach. Critical Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/08969205231188737
Paradigm: Educational Justice, Disability Justice, Symbolic interactions
Purpose of Study/Framework: “First, we examine the correlation among normative whiteness, racialized exploitation, and the depiction of disabled Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) as disposable others. Second, we employ a joint biopolitical and settler colonial analysis to re-examine US special education drawing on our experiences as disabled, critical disability studies scholars—two of whom are negatively racialized and two of whom are queer” (Acevedo, Brown, & Cowing, 2023).
Method (including setting & sample):
Key Findings & Implications: Othering BIPOC students is a form of segregation and education injustice (Acevedo, Brown, & Cowing, 2023)..
Study limitations: While the text discusses the critical issue of racial segregation and its impact on disabled students’ education, it would benefit from a more explicit and accessible statement of the central argument. What is a model of disability do the researchers employ?
Additional notes about gaps/contributions: What are the different paradigms of educational justice that influence disability education, school organization, and school reform?
SIX
6. Fine, Greene, and Sanchez (2017). “Wicked problems,” “flying monkeys,” and pre(car)ious lives: A matter of time? Just Research in Contentious Times, Teachers College Press, 2017.
Purpose of Study/Framework: Education Justice, Equity, Conflict Theory, Post-neoliberalism
Method (including setting & sample): Content analysis and interviews of students and teachers displaced by school turnover, constant school schedule changes, and inaccessibility. Critical Participatory Research; Participatory Action Research.
Key Findings & Implications: This research addresses racial segregation and its impact on democracy and fair education for America's youth. How can we provide equitable solutions to chronic miseducation in marginalized communities? The key lies in implementing anti-racism messages in schools and equipping students with the necessary tools for an engaging and beneficial education. Public schools should not merely act as a means of control and assessment but aim to provide students with a well-rounded education that fosters their growth and development (Fine, Greene, & Sanchez, 2018).
Study limitations: To explore solutions for racial segregation, one must have a clear definition of segregation relevant to the specific time and context of the research study. The study looks at a 12-year time frame that ended a decade ago. What has changed since 2012?
Additional notes about gaps/contributions: What specific anti-racism messages should schools focus on?
SEVEN
7. Gillis, & Krull, L. M. (2020). COVID-19 remote learning transition in spring 2020: Class structures, student perceptions, and inequality in college courses. Teaching Sociology, 48(4), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X20954263
Purpose of Study/Framework: To explore the impact of switching from face-to-face traditional learning to remote learning in the spring of 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Method (including setting & sample): A convenience sample of two professors’ college classes as they adjusted from in-person to remote learning.
Key Findings & Implications: For financially insecure students, inconsistent access to technology or not having a quiet workplace may be barriers to success that reduce engagement and enjoyment (Gillis & Krull, 2020)
Study limitations: Small sample size specific to one school and two professors during a specific time and context in society, i.e., early pandemic times.
Additional notes about gaps/contributions: The relevant research leaves gaps and questions such as: What is the definition of high-poverty and low-poverty schools in this study’s context? Are there other factors that affect the accessibility of internet technology based on each student’s geographic location? What is the reason for the variation in poverty concentration among male versus female students? What would the data show for non-binary students? A longitudinal study shows the changes in access to virtual education following the 2020 pandemic jump to remote learning, compared to those who attended online classes from 2020-2023 and even further into the future. What does the data say for those students who participated in Online learning before the pandemic? What changes can we expect? What strategies can professors and scholars learn from veteran remote learners?
This profoundly reflects the ethical, structural, and social challenges in creating equitable education, especially within hybrid, remote, and pilot programs. Below are some key themes, critical insights, and questions that emerge from my analysis, which may help clarify your questions after reading my Research Investigation:
1. Balancing Medical and Social Models of Disability
Medical Model: Focuses on diagnosing and treating disabilities, which often results in pathologizing and infantilizing individuals.
Social Model: This model views societal structures, policies, and inaccessible environments as barriers, emphasizing empowerment and autonomy.
The tension between these models reflects a persistent struggle in educational spaces. The complexity you noted is crucial because, without the right approach, institutions risk either denying needed services or patronizing those they aim to support.
Reflection: How can educational institutions shift toward the empowering aspects of the social model without losing the individualized benefits that accommodations grounded in the medical model provide?
Comments