Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
The purpose of this paper is to foreground accessibility as a necessary aspect of equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). We go about this by highlighting shared experiences of negotiating institutional ableism together, as a disabled scholar employed at a HEI in the UK, and a non-disabled, culturally and linguistically diverse individual employed to bridge inaccessible spaces. Drawing upon Wong’s (2023) conceptual framework of spatial belonging in higher education, which traverses the intersecting terrain of physical, digital, relational and structural spaces, we develop a postqualitative narrative demonstrating the limitations of narrowly defined legal protections that fall short of implementing inclusive ideals. The narrative draws attention to the ways that ‘access intimacy’, understood as shared commitments to accessibility, develops informally, which excuses HEIs from taking responsibility to institutionalise it. We contemplate accessibility as a relational concern and build an argument for learning from our experiences to inform the development of key accessibility considerations into institutional ways of working and relating to difference. The paper is significant for engaging principles from critical disability studies as conceptual means by which to consider accessibility, and the relational account provided contributes a collaborative perspective frequently experienced but not widely considered in higher education research for strengthening EDI.
The purpose of this paper is to foreground accessibility as a necessary aspect of equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). We go about this by highlighting shared experiences of negotiating institutional ableism together, as a disabled scholar employed at a HEI in the UK, and a non-disabled, culturally and linguistically diverse individual employed to bridge inaccessible spaces. Drawing upon Wong’s (2023) conceptual framework of spatial belonging in higher education, which traverses the intersecting terrain of physical, digital, relational and structural spaces, we develop a postqualitative narrative demonstrating the limitations of narrowly defined legal protections that fall short of implementing inclusive ideals. The narrative draws attention to the ways that ‘access intimacy’, understood as shared commitments to accessibility, develops informally, which excuses HEIs from taking responsibility to institutionalise it. We contemplate accessibility as a relational concern and build an argument for learning from our experiences to inform the development of key accessibility considerations into institutional ways of working and relating to difference. The paper is significant for engaging principles from critical disability studies as conceptual means by which to consider accessibility, and the relational account provided contributes a collaborative perspective frequently experienced but not widely considered in higher education research for strengthening EDI.
IntroductionDespite the widespread promotion of inclusive learning environments, students with disabilities have to exert time and effort in gaining accommodations and proving themselves as competent individuals. In following up a factorial survey experiment that found that students with disabilities are considered less likely to achieve their educational goals compared to students without, this study explored how understandings of inclusive education and disability are constructed within Norwegian higher education institutions.MethodNineteen employees across 10 universities participated in focus group interviews. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsThree themes were generated: (1) determining the role of the educator, (2) knowing how, when, and why to grant accommodations, (3) calling for action from the university.DiscussionOverall, the findings suggest that understandings of inclusion are ambiguous and characterized by juxtaposing ideals. The participants’ accounts illustrate how they are tasked with promoting inclusion while simultaneously protecting their respective professions. Thus, despite being considered a resource based on their diversity, students with disabilities are still expected to fit into an environment designed for mainstream learners. In discussing these findings in light of ableist theory, we argue that more action is needed on a systemic level to restructure how inclusive education is understood and practiced.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.