In this paper we focus on access to education for persons with intellectual disability or. The articles puzzle is the mismatch between proclaimed intent to include all through education and provide long life learning for all citizens as stated in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UN, 2008).

In 1994 the UNESCO adopted the Salamanca declaration, which states that every child has a right to education and that the education system should be designed, and educational programmes implemented, to meet the diversities among children, and that students with special need must have access to regular schools and adapted education (Shakespeare, 2018, p. 110). Education is critical to most citizens but in particularly for persons with disability because having formal qualifications can make the difference between being included or excluded in employment and society (Shakespeare, 2018). In higher education, students need to navigate many disabling barriers (Magnus & Tøssebro, 2014).

Since 2021, VID Specialized University has planned and carried out a pilot program of 30 ECTS funded by the foundation DAM called “Higher education in human rights for students with intellectual disabilities”. The courses taught were: Human rights and everyday life, Worldview, values and professional relations, and o-research. The courses have been carried out partly for this group of students as a segregated provision and partly with students in the master program in citizenship and co-operation, a hybrid form of provision. This pilot program is the case providing the empirical material for the paper.

The main objective is Disability as an exclusionary factor in EducationThe obstacles and possibilities for granting persons belonging to these groups access to, and meaningful participation in higher education, lifelong learning and knowledge production. We operationalize this in two research questions:

• What obstacles or possibilities can be identified for granting these groups access to, and successful participation in higher education, lifelong learning?
• What obstacles or possibilities can be identified for granting these groups access to, and successful participation in knowledge production?

According to the World Bank and WHO report on disability (2011), 15% of the population lives with disability, thus disability is highly relevant for education at all levels. However, disability is to a little degree explored as an exclusionary factor in the system of education. In the Norwegian system of education all persons have equal right to education, and yet persons with disabilities are more vulnerable to dropping out of education at high school and have less access to higher education than their peers. A proper system of education is an important key for combating social inequality and for creating a just society for all inhabitants. According to CRPD article 24, state parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to education and “shall ensure that persons with disabilities are able to access general tertiary education, vocational training, adult education and lifelong learning without discrimination and on an equal basis with other” (UN, 2008). Also the UN Sustainability Development Goals, 4 focuses on inclusive education.

The overarching theoretical perspective is Citizenship and the importance of the educational system for supporting citizenship for persons with disabilities (Nussbaum, 2007). This theoretical perspective is promising for understanding the role of education for individual and society, and even the role of education in the welfare state. Those excluded from education often are also excluded from citizenship. Education supports citizenship and democracy (Nussbaum, 2010). The capabilities approach, offers a conception of the states responsibilities supporting every persons right to be recognized as equal citizens with rights and duties and to live lives according to human dignity.

The methodology is based on participatory approaches (Banks et al 2013; Lid, 2021) After two and more decades of knowledge production as social practice (Nowotny et al., 2003), we are moving towards a new mode: knowledge production as social practice together with new, and still unrecognized, subjects of knowledge. In research internationally, there is a shift from the traditional understanding of experts approaching research objects to researchers and participants both being conceptualised as subjects of knowledge. Including persons from vulnerable groups in knowledge production rises research ethical challenges. The Helsinki declaration (Association, 1964), originally established in medical research, is concerned with informed consent and protection of vulnerable persons because they are patients in care of the researchers. This concern has been adopted as a concern for research integrity as such (NESH, European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity), excluding groups of vulnerable persons from knowledge production. It has also resulted in heavy regulation of data protection (GDPR) and research ethics (Law on organisation of research-ethical work) in Norway. There are several reasons for applying co-production in knowledge production. First, there are moral reasons: recognising persons and their rights, including their human rights to meaningful participation in all aspects of human lives. This reason furthers into a democratic reason – that citizenship and participation for all is a precondition for a democratic society, where also knowledge production is essentially democratic (Jasanoff, 2010). Furthermore, there are epistemological reasons – that the quality of the knowledge produced is essential to provide a correct or rich enough knowledge base for our social practices, such as professional practice. More specific we have conducted group interviews interviews with students and with four administrative groups in the pilot program, the admission office, administration at the VID specialized university, employees at the school faculty and students support system and workplaces. This material will be analyzed in light of CRPD and national legislation on universal design and individual accommodation in higher education.

Challenges universities face when establishing university education for persons with intellectual disabilities concerns the inclusion of the new target group, funding, how their education is organized administratively and educationally, and how they are supported as students in their student role (Brian & Bonati, 2018). We will discuss findings from the pilot project in light of strategies for Universal design and individual accommodation in higher education according to the CRPD examining what is done to follow up law and policy in Norway and what are the limits of UD in higher education. We are interested in studying this both from an individual and institutional perspective. Preliminary findings indicate that there are barriers at the institutional levels, both at the scale of the university and the state. There are also strong indications that this is a much wanted opportunity for taking part in higher education according to students experiences. In order to secure and mainstream the education, institutional support is necessary together with individual accommodation supporting students learning processes.

Association, W. M. (1964). WMA Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical principes for medical researhc involving human subjects. https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects/ Banks, S., Armstrong, A., Carter, K., Graham, H., Hayward, P., Henry, A., Holland, T., Haraway, D. (1991). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. In Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London: Free Association Books, 183-201. Holmes, C., Lee, A., McNulty, A., Moore, N., Nayling, N., Stokoe, A., & Strachan, A. (2013). Everyday ethics in community-based participatory research. Contemporary Social Science, 8(3), 263-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2013.769618 Jasanoff, S. (2010). A new climate for society. Theory, culture & society, 27(2-3), 233-253. Lid. (2021). Integrating Participatory Approaches in Research: Power, Dilemmas and Potentials. Diaconia, 12(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.13109/diac.2021.12.1.41 Magnus, E., & Tøssebro, J. (2014). Negotiating individual accommodation in higher education. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 16(4), 316–332. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1080/15017419.2012.761156 Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). INTRODUCTION: 'Mode 2' Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge. Minerva, 41(3), 179-194. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41821245 Nussbaum, M. C. (2007). Frontiers of justice: disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. O’Brien, P. & Bonatti, M. L. (2018). From institutionalisation to inclusion. In P. O’Brien, M.L. Bonatti, F. Gadow., & R. Slee (eds.). People with People with intellectual disability experiencing university life : theoretical underpinnings, evidence and lived experience (2018) (s. 3-19). Brill Shakespeare, T. (2018). Disability. The basics. Routledge https://www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017.pdf United Nations, (2008). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities