Introduction

This paper reports my Doctoral research exploring British South Asian maternal preferences regarding school placement settings for children with Special Education Needs and/or Disabilities (SEND). Current research provides an insight into parental expectations of educational settings; for instance, Runswick-Cole (2007) suggests parents who supported mainstream placement valued integration, whereas parents choosing special schools valued one-to-one support. Similarly, Lindsay and Dockrell (2004) found parents chose mainstream because it positively impacted their child’s social skills. My Doctoral research probes deeper into maternal expectations of schools including their notions of the ‘perfect school’.

Research Aims and Questions

This research explores South Asian maternal preferences for special or mainstream placements for their disabled children, and the experiences, roles and attitudes of South Asian mothers towards inclusive education. The following research questions are addressed:

• What are the views and expectations of South Asian mothers (of children with SEND) of their own roles in their child’s education?
• What are the views and expectations of these South Asian mothers with regards to the school’s role in their child’s life?
• How do broader influences (culture, religion, gender, and immigrant history) affect their experiences of supporting their child in the UK?
• What factors influence South Asian mothers’ preferences for deciding on special or mainstream placement for their children with SEND?

The first two research questions are crucial to address. Mothering skills coaching has historically been provided by health, education and welfare services through child-rearing pamphlets or workshops, and Griffith and Smith (2005) argue that ‘good mothering’ is gauged by how well women perform against benchmarks set by these institutions. Therefore, understanding broader familial experiences of inclusive education necessitates examining the multiplicity of maternal roles.

The third research question necessarily links broader discourses on religion, culture, immigration and gender to the participants’ everyday experiences (Sayad, 2004). Exploring their level of mainstream integration measures their belongingness to society, and their polarised or hybrid identities. This question also explores whether gendered attitudes to education affect parental placement decisions. Examining broader discourses highlights how participants identify with each factor, shaping participants’ interactions with SEN provisions.

The fourth question asks how parental placement preferences are determined, how informed parents’ decisions were, and the relationship between inclusion and placement choices. This question examines external factors influencing decisions, and how professional ‘expertise’ interacts with parental concerns and knowledge.

Theoretical Framework

Including maternal voices within academic work without a critical objective would be essentialist, unless it addresses the plurality of maternal experiences and “intragroup differences” (Crenshaw, 1991, pg.1242). In proposing Intersectionality, Crenshaw (1991) posited women’s experiences were shaped by multiple identities, and that understanding social inequalities could address social injustice for women with hybrid identities. However, Crenshaw (1991) conceded the intersectional framework was only a starting point to considering a woman’s identity.

Intersectionality became synonymous with minorities living outside mainstream experiences. Feminist academics (Yuval-Davis, 2007; Meekosha, 2005; Weber, 2001) adapted Intersectionality to explain the inequalities women experienced through multiple social divisions. Björnsdóttir and Traustadóttir(2010) also utilised Intersectionality within disability studies. The conceptual flexibility of Intersectionality allows researchers to specifically consider factors relevant to their research, without diminishing the importance of other social divisions. Postcolonial feminist researchers used Intersectionality to challenge essentialist perspectives like  ‘rescuing’ Muslim women from oppression or terrorism post-9/11, scrutinising their ethnic, political and religious identities without engaging with them (Brah and Phoenix, 2004).

Weber (2001) adapted Intersectionality as a theoretical lens to draw-out common themes that characterise social divisions. I want to understand South Asian maternal perspectives about their children’s SEND whilst recognising that their fluid identities developed through intersecting social divisions outside the mainstream.

Bagnoli, A. (2009). Beyond the standard interview: The use of graphic elicitation and arts-based methods. Qualitative research, 9(5), 547-570. Barter, C., & Renold, E. (1999). The use of vignettes in qualitative research. Social research update, 25(9), 1-6. Bjornsdottir, K. and Traustadottir, R. (2010). Stuck in the land of disability? The intersection of learning difficulties, class, gender and religion. Disability & Society, 25(1), 49-62 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford law review, 1241-1299. Gasteiger-Klicpera, B., Klicpera, C., Gebhardt, M., & Schwab, S. (2013). Attitudes and experiences of parents regarding inclusive and special school education for children with learning and intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(7), 663-681. Griffith, A.I., & Smith, D.E. (2005). Mothering for schooling. Oxon: Routledge Hughes, R., & Huby, M. (2004). The construction and interpretation of vignettes in social research. Social Work & Social Sciences Review 11(1) 2004 pp.36-51 Kozleski, E. B., Engelbrecht, P., Hess, R., Swart, E., Eloff, I., Oswald, M., ... & Jain, S. (2008). Where Differences Matter A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Family Voice in Special Education. The Journal of Special Education, 42(1), 26-35. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage. Lindsay, G., & Dockrell, J. E. (2004). Whose job is it? Parents' concerns about the needs of their children with language problems. The Journal of Special Education, 37(4), 225-235. Meekosha, H. (2005). A feminist/gendered critique of the intersections of race and disability: the Australian experience. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, 23. Runswick-Cole, K. (2007). Between a rock and a hard place: parents’attitudes to the inclusion of children with special educational needs in mainstream and special schools. British Journal of Special Education, 35(3), 173-180 Schoenberg, N. E., & Ravdal, H. (2000). Using vignettes in awareness and attitudinal research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(1), 63-74. Sheridan, J., Chamberlain, K., & Dupuis, A. (2011). Timelining: visualizing experience. Qualitative Research, 11(5), 552-569. Spalding, N. J., & Phillips, T. (2007). Exploring the use of vignettes: From validity to trustworthiness. Qualitative health research, 17(7), 954-962. Weber, L. (2001). Understanding race, class, gender and sexuality: A conceptual framework. Boston: McGraw Hill Yuval‐Davis, N. (2007). Intersectionality, citizenship and contemporary politics of belonging. Critical review of international social and political philosophy, 10(4), 561-574.