The impact of social and political disability discourses on the experience of physical disability in Portugal in education and work

Author(s):

Ema LojaIsabel Menezes Emília Costa

Conference:

ECER 2008

Network:

4. Inclusive Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

04 SES 08C, Identity and Difference

Paper Session

Time:

2008-09-12

08:30-10:00

Room:

AK2 138

Chair:

Anne-Lise Arnesen

Contribution

This study aims to understand the impact of social and political disability’ discourses on the experience of difference of people with physical disabilities, namely on their quality of life, that includes educational and job opportunities, participation and community integration, independency and empowerment. Conceptual or theoretical framework Empowerment theory integrates perceptions of control, a proactive approach to life, and a critical understanding of the sociopolitical environment (Zimmerman & Warschausky, 1998). Empowerment is a critical element of independent living that has implications for both individual and community quality of life (Zimmerman & Warschausky, 1998), and it seems to be an important factor to minimize ableism, which prevents full integration of people with disabilities in their communities (White, 2005). State of art The concept of “difference” has been a central topic of discussion in education, political theory, and cultural studies (Rice, 2002). Inclusive education has been one of the answers for “different” students and it is defined as “development of an appropriate and high quality education for students with special needs in a regular school” (Hegarty, 1994). Regardless of the educational system’ concerns about special education or inclusive education, research suggests that how a student is classified in regard to their difference have profound implications for his or her schooling, education, and life experiences more broadly (Rice, 2002). Judgements about difference might have consequences that can lead to inequality and even exclusion (Rodrigues, 2001). Disability has co-existed with poverty, limitations of human rights, discrimination, exclusion (Gilson & DePoy, 2002). Attitudinal handicaps are referred as more devastating than structural handicaps or the physical condition’ experience (Dalal, 2006; Huang & Brittain, 2006). Ableism and economic disadvantages have been considered social keys factors on lives of persons with disabilities (Vernon, 1999). Research in this area have demonstrated that regular schools are not able to meet the psychological and social needs of students with disabilities and that mainstream education is discriminatory, because it does not offer the protection and benefits necessary to support the health and psychological well-being of students with disabilities (Llewellyn, 2000), and it doesn’t eliminate the experienced barriers to their participation in classroom due to physical and social environments (Hemmingson & Borell, 2002). Literature reveals that, in order to realise the goal of inclusion, schools, professionals and educational system need to try to understand the perspectives of persons with disabilities (Giangreco, Edelman, Broer & Doyle, 2001; Curtin & Clarke, 2005; Rodrigues, 2001). Diversity and difference should be seen as positive values and important factors for progress (Rodrigues, 2001).

Method

Exploratory interviews with leaders of disability associations in Portugal, including issues such as social and political discourses about disability; their impact on lives of persons with physical disabilities, namely on personal, educational and professional domains; ableistic practices, politics and attitudes; responsiveness of organizations for the needs of persons with physical disabilities; empowerment, social participation and quality of life of persons with disabilities. These findings will be triangulated with results from a quantitative study with a sample of adults with physical disabilities, using an adapted version of Quality of Life Questionnaire (Schalock & Keith, 1993) that includes the following dimensions: satisfaction, competence/productivity, empowerment/ independence and social belonging/community integration.

Expected Outcomes

Results will expand our understanding of the main challenges faced by people with physical disabilities in the educational and professional domains, exploring the factors that obstruct and promote their empowerment and social participation. We expect that the findings can be relevant for specifying guidelines for future developments in the promotion of integration of students with physical disabilities.

References

Curtin, M. & Clarke, G. (2005). Listening to young people with physical disabilities’ experiences of education. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 52(3), 195–214. Dalal, A. (2006). Social interventions to moderate discriminatory attitudes: the case of the physically challenged in India. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 11(3), 374-382. Giangreco, M.; Edelman, S.; Broer, S.; & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children, 68(1), 45–63. Gilson, S. & DePoy, E. (2002). Theoretical approaches to disability content in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(1): 153-165. Hegarty (1994). Integration and the teacher. In C.W.Meijer, S.J.Pijl and S. Hegarty (eds), New Perspectives in Special Education: a Six Country Study of Integration. London: Routledge. Hemmingson, H. & Borell, L. (2002). Environmental barriers in mainstream schools. Child: Care, Health and Development, 28(1), 57–63. Huang, C. & Brittain, I. (2006). Negotiating identities through disability sport. Sociology of Sport Journal, 23, 352-375. Llewellyn, A. (2000). Perceptions of mainstreaming: A systems approach. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 42, 106–115. Rice, S. (2002). The social construction of “disabilities”: the role of law. Educational studies, 33(2), 169-180. Rodrigues, D. (2001). Educação e diferença: valores e práticas para uma educação inclusiva. Porto: Porto Editora. Vernon, A. (1999). The dialectics of multiple identities and the disabled people’s movement. Disability & Society, 14(3): 385-398. White, G. (2005). Ableism. In Nelson, G. & Prilleltensky, I. (Eds), Community psychology: in pursuit of liberation and well-being. New York: Paalgrave MacMillan. Zimmerman, M. & Warschausky, S. (1998). Empowerment theory for rehabilitation research: conceptual and methodological issues. Rehabilitation Psychology, 43 (1), 3-16.

Author Information

Ema Loja

University of Porto

Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences

Porto

174

Isabel Menezes

Faculty od Psycholoy and Educational Sciences, University of Porto, Portugal

Emília Costa

Faculty od Psycholoy and Educational Sciences, University of Porto, Portugal

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER.

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.