From the voice of a ‘socratic gadfly’: a call for more academic activism in the researching of disability in postsecondary education

Abstract

In this article I use the lens of voices and silences to frame my review of research in the field of disability and postsecondary education. I argue that we need to view research in this field as a necessarily political act that seeks to turn voices of silence into voices of change. Researchers therefore need to rethink their role in order to understand how they can use and direct their political voices. In order to persuade researchers to heed my call for more academic activism I draw on the arguments of Allan (2010) and adopt the role of a 'socratic gadfly' to identify six political areas of research where I argue that voices and silences need more critical examination. In discussing these six areas I hope to illuminate the implications for 'genuinely investigative' research in the future.

Inclusive Higher Education in Spain: Students With Disabilities Speak Out

“…In general, some of the investigation reviewed concludes that when it comes to the inclusion of people with disabilities, it appears on paper, but in practice, it is rarely applied (Moswela & Mukhopadhyay, 2011;Riddell et al, 2005). Most studies recommend that institutions anticipate any barrier that might hinder the advancement of students with disabilities and eliminate the barriers before they become a real problem (Hong, 2015;Riddell et al, 2005;Seale, 2017;Thomas, 2016). Konur (2006) or Moswela and Mukhopadhyay (2011) stated that this group of students faces additional barriers and more challenges than the rest of the student body.…”

UK higher education lecturers’ perspectives of dyslexia, dyslexic students and related disability provision

“…The research field has long warned about the difference between a diagnosis of dyslexia and eligibility for disability services (Emerson Dickman, ). Despite critical recognition that in the context of higher education ‘disabled student’ is an amorphous term (Seale, ), and that from a measurement and resource perspective disability is a moving target (Snowling, ), HESA officially recognises self‐identified dyslexia, in the categorical sense, as one of the disability criteria for the purposes of collecting and recording of disability data. Additionally, most UK higher education institutions still accept a formal diagnosis of dyslexia, regardless of severity or individual contextual difficulties, as a blanket passport to disability eligibility for common statutory reasonable adjustments like extra time in examinations.…”

‘Dreaming in colour’: disabled higher education students’ perspectives on improving design practices that would enable them to benefit from their use of technologies

“…In a review of research and practice literature (Seale 2014(Seale , 2017 noted that a large amount of space was given to advocating the merits of UD and providing descriptions of UD informed practices. Seale however argued that the authors of this literature were rather too uncritical and should be demanding more concrete evidence that adopting this design practice actually produces the intended benefits for disabled students.…”

“…In addition to arguing for the adoption of UD; proponents of UD also argue that faculty need to be trained how to apply UD in practice. However, there are few studies that have sought to rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of UD training (Seale 2014:Seale 2017. One rare example is that reported by Baldiris Navarro et al (2016) who present an evaluation of a professional development program in relation to developing teachers' competences towards designing inclusive learning experiences.…”