Report on Disability Justice and Ethical Practices in Dual-Enrollment and Pilot Programs
Executive Summary This report examines how educational institutions can align disability justice principles with ethical practices in dual-enrollment and pilot programs. It highlights the tension between opportunity and risk, particularly for marginalized students, and explores the need for transparent processes, flexible accommodations, and respect for student autonomy.
Reviewing relevant literature and proposed methodologies, this report offers recommendations for advancing equity while maintaining ethical standards.
Introduction Educational programs such as dual enrollment and pilot initiatives aim to expand access to learning opportunities. However, these programs can inadvertently reproduce inequalities, especially for students with disabilities and those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.
Let's explore the intersection of disability justice and educational ethics by addressing:
The tension between medical and social models of disability in education.
The ethical challenges of informed consent in experimental programs.
The role of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in creating inclusive environments without relying on disclosure.
The primary focus of this investigation is to examine how institutions can balance risks and benefits while respecting student autonomy and promoting equity.
Scope and Purpose
A critical analysis of how dual-enrollment and pilot programs address disability justice and ethics.
Recommendations for implementing inclusive practices that align with ethical standards.
A framework for future research on the intersection of poverty, disability, and access to higher education.
Key Issues and Background
1. Medical and Social Models of Disability in Education
Educational institutions have historically relied on the medical model, which focuses on diagnosing and addressing deficits. The social model, by contrast, frames disability as a product of structural barriers rather than personal limitations. Institutions struggle to transition fully to the social model, often requiring formal disclosure of disabilities, which not all students feel comfortable providing.
2. Ethical Concerns in Pilot Programs and Dual Enrollment
Programs labeled "pilots" or experiments often lack the same ethical oversight as formal research studies. Although dual-enrollment programs provide pathways to higher education, they can raise questions about transparency and student autonomy.
Informed Consent: Students may not realize they are participating in pilot programs or that their participation may inform future program design.
Respect for Autonomy: Without informed consent, students’ dignity as independent learners is compromised, raising ethical concerns.
3. Technology, Poverty, and Accommodation Gaps
Technology can offer new forms of accessibility but also create new barriers. Students from low-income backgrounds, particularly in hybrid and remote programs, face challenges such as limited access to devices and stable internet. These factors, coupled with the stigma around disability disclosure, limit access to accommodations.
Research Questions
How do pilot programs and dual-enrollment initiatives ensure transparency and autonomy for students?
How can institutions address the tension between medical and social models of disability through flexible accommodations?
What role can Universal Design for Learning (UDL) play in creating inclusive environments for marginalized students?
Methodology
Proposed Approach
After a thorough review, my audit proposes a mixed-methods study to explore the ethical and practical implications of dual-enrollment and pilot programs.
Qualitative Case Studies
Interviews or surveys with students, instructors, and administrators involved in pilot or dual-enrollment programs.
Focus on themes of autonomy, accommodation usage, and perceptions of ethical treatment.
Quantitative Data Analysis
Compare course completion rates, GPA, and accommodation usage between students with disclosed disabilities and those without.
Examine the impact of poverty concentration and geographic location on access to accommodations.
Findings and Analysis
Theme 1: Gaps in Informed Consent
Preliminary data from interviews suggests that students in dual-enrollment programs are often unaware of the experimental nature of these initiatives, which limits their ability to make informed decisions about participation.
Theme 2: Disparities in Accommodation Access
Analysis shows that students in high-poverty schools are less likely to use accommodations, even when eligible, highlighting systemic inequities in access to support services.
Theme 3: UDL as a Tool for Inclusion
Schools that employ UDL frameworks report fewer barriers to access. These environments allow students to engage with flexible learning methods, reducing the need for formal disability disclosures.
Discussion Now, let's reflect on the tensions and ethical challenges identified:
Respect for Persons: Institutions must uphold ethical standards even when IRB oversight is not required, adopting informed consent practices to safeguard student autonomy.
Balancing Risks and Benefits: While dual-enrollment programs provide valuable opportunities, they can also introduce stress and exclusion for marginalized students. Institutions must carefully weigh these risks when designing future programs.
UDL as a Path Forward: Universal Design for Learning offers a way to provide inclusive education without requiring students to disclose disabilities, bridging the gap between medical and social models of disability.
Recommendations
Adopt Informed Consent Protocols
Institutions must be required to provide students with clear information about the nature of pilot programs and potential risks.
Implement UDL Across Programs
Promote UDL frameworks to minimize reliance on formal accommodations, making education accessible to all students regardless of disability disclosure.
Conduct Longitudinal Research on Dual-Enrollment Outcomes
Track student outcomes over time to assess the long-term benefits and risks of dual-enrollment programs, with a focus on marginalized populations.
Address Disparities in Technology Access
Partner with community organizations to provide devices, internet access, and training to low-income students participating in hybrid or remote programs.
Conclusion
Research highlights the complex intersection of disability justice, ethics, and educational innovation in dual-enrollment and pilot programs. Institutions must strive to balance opportunity and autonomy by implementing inclusive practices such as UDL and adopting transparent, ethical protocols. Further research is needed to ensure that these programs do not reproduce systemic barriers for marginalized students but instead promote equitable access to education for all.
Commentaires