Advertisement

The Conceptual and Disciplinary Segregation of Disability: a Phenomenography of Science Education Graduate Student Learning

  • Phillip A. BodaEmail author
Article
  • 98 Downloads

Abstract

Science teacher education has long sought to educate new science teachers to more fully understand “Science-for-all” and prepare them to effectively navigate diverse contexts. To adopt this “Science-for-all” mantra, we need to address what the labeling (i.e., categorical labeling and/or mislabeling) of students with disabilities means for science teacher education. This paper provides a critical inquiry to ground the claim that disability operates subversively and unrecognized as a marker of difference similar to labels that produce exclusion in science education (e.g., race, class, and gender). Using a phenomenographic design, this research studied graduate students’ conceptualizations of disability as they progressed through the only required diversity course at a large, urban university in the American northeast. Primary data sources included in-depth, pre-/post-course interviews with supplemental data collected from biweekly course reflections. Phenomenographic data analyses addressed to what extent these graduate students embraced a disability studies perspective relative to disability—i.e., viewing disability beyond merely individual deficit. Findings suggest that the course sustained the relatively static conceptualizations about disability held by the participants related to individual deficiency rather than pushing for more critical views of disability beyond deficiency. Implications are discussed in relation to multicultural science teacher education course goals.

Keywords

Sociocultural theory Teacher cognition Phenomenography Science education Disability studies 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my dissertation sponsor, Dr. O. Roger Anderson, as well as my second reader, Dr. Felicia Moore Mensah, for their constant critique and support of my work at disciplinary and conceptual intersections not yet taken up fully in science education research.

References

  1. Allan, J. (2010). The sociology of disability and the struggle for inclusive education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31, 603–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Annamma, S. A., Connor, D., & Ferri, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Annamma, S., Morrison, D., & Jackson, D. (2014). Disproportionality fills in the gaps: connections between achievement, discipline and special education in the school-to-prison pipeline. Berkeley Review of Education, 5(1).Google Scholar
  5. Armstrong, F., & Barton, L. (Eds.). (1999). Disability, human rights and education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Armstrong, T. (2013). Neurodiversity: discovering the extraordinary gifts of autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and other brain differences. Philadelphia, PA: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
  7. Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E. B., Trent, S. C., Osher, D., & Ortiz, A. (2010). Justifying and explaining disproportionality, 1968–2008: a critique of underlying views of culture. Exceptional Children, 76, 279–299.Google Scholar
  8. Atwater, M. M., Russell, M., & Butler, M. (2013). Multicultural science education: preparing teachers for equity and social justice. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Bargerhuff, M. E., Cowan, H., & Kirch, S. A. (2010). Working toward equitable opportunities for science students with disabilities: using professional development and technology. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 5, 125–135.Google Scholar
  10. Berge, M., & Ingerman, Å. (2017). Multiple theoretical lenses as an analytical strategy in researching group discussions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35, 42–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bianchini, J. A., & Solomon, E. M. (2003). Constructing views of science tied to issues of equity and diversity: A study of beginning science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 53–76.Google Scholar
  12. Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2015). Grounded theory: a practical guide. Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Boda, P. A. (2018). Exclusion from participation in science: confessions from an ally on the other side of the fence. In M. Koomen, S. Kahn, C. Atchison, & T. Wild (Eds.), Toward inclusion of all learners through science teacher education. Sense Publishing.Google Scholar
  14. Bodine, A. (1975). Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: singular ‘they’, sex-indefinite ‘he’, and ‘he or she’. Language in Society, 4, 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brantlinger, E. (1997). Using ideology: cases of nonrecognition of the politics of research and practice in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67, 425–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Broderick, A. (2010). Autism as enemy: metaphor and cultural politics. In Z. Leonardo (Ed.), Handbook of cultural politics and education (pp. 237–268). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Broderick, A. A., & Ne’eman, A. (2008). Autism as metaphor: narrative and counter-narrative. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12, 459–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Broderick, A., Reid, D. K., & Valle, J. W. (2006). Disability studies in education and the practical concerns of teachers. In S. Danforth & S. L. Gabel (Eds.), Vital questions facing disability studies in education (pp. 133–160). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  19. Brusca-Vega, R., Alexander, J., & Kamin, C. (2014). In support of access and inclusion: joint professional development for science and special educators. Global Education Review, 1(4), 37–52.Google Scholar
  20. Calabrese Barton, A. (2000). Crafting multicultural science education with preservice teachers through service-learning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32, 797–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Collins, K. M. (2013). Ability profiling and school failure: one child’s struggle to be seen as competent. Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Cone, N. (2012). The effects of community-based service learning on preservice teachers’ beliefs about the characteristics of effective science teachers of diverse students. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 889–907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cosier, M., & Pearson, H. (2016). Can we talk? The underdeveloped dialogue between teacher education and disability studies. SAGE Open, 6(1) 2158244015626766.Google Scholar
  25. Danforth, S., & Naraian, S. (2015). This new field of inclusive education: beginning a dialogue on conceptual foundations. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 53(1), 70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Davis, L. J. (2010). Constructing normalcy. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (3rd ed., pp. 3–16). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Davis, L. J. (2014). The end of normal: identity in a biocultural era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Emdin, C. (2010). Affiliation and alienation: hip-hop, rap, and urban science education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Erevelles, N. (2000). Educating unruly bodies: critical pedagogy, disability studies, and thepolitics of schooling. Educational Theory, 50(1), 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Erevelles, N. (2011). Disability and difference in global contexts: enabling a transformative body politic. Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Farnen, R. F., & Sunker, H. (Eds.). (2016). The politics, sociology and economics of education: interdisciplinary and comparative perspectives. Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Feng, L., & Sass, T. R. (2013). What makes special-education teachers special? Teacher training and achievement of students with disabilities. Economics of Education Review, 36, 122–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ferri, B., & Connor, D. (2005). Tools of exclusion: race, disability, and (re) segregated education. Teachers College Record, 107, 453–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Freeman, M. (2014). The hermeneutical aesthetics of thick description. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 827–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fram, S. M. (2013). The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory. Qualitative Report, 18, 1–25.Google Scholar
  36. Gomes, C. V., & Mensah, F. M. (2015). Sounding out science: using assistive technology for students with learning differences in middle school science classes. In M. J. Urban & D. A. Falvo (Eds.), Improving K-12 STEM education outcomes through technological integration (pp. 44–67). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  37. Goodley, D., & Runswick-Cole, K. (2015). Big society? Disabled people with the label of learning disabilities and the queer (y) ing of civil society. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 17(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Herndon, A. (2011). Disparate, but disabled: fat embodiment and disability studies. In K. Q. Hall (Ed.), Feminist disability studies (pp. 245–262). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Heshusius, L. (1989). The Newtonian mechanistic paradigm, special education, and contours of alternatives: an overview. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 403–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hollingsworth Koomen, M. H., Kahn, S., Atchison, C. L., & Wild, T. A. (Eds.). (2018). Towards inclusion of all learners through science teacher education. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  41. Kahn, S., & Lewis, A. R. (2014). Survey on teaching science to K-12 students with disabilities: teacher preparedness and attitudes. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 885–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. King-Sears, M. E., Brawand, A. E., Jenkins, M. C., & Preston-Smith, S. (2014). Co-teaching perspectives from secondary science co-teachers and their students with disabilities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 651–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kirch, S. A., Bargerhuff, M. E., Cowan, H., & Wheatly, M. (2007). Reflections of educators in pursuit of inclusive science classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 663–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ladson-Billings, G., & Tate, W. F. (1995). Toward a critical race theory of education. Teachers College Record, 97(1), 47–68.Google Scholar
  45. LaScotte, D. K. (2016). Singular they: an empirical study of generic pronoun use. American Speech, 91(1), 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Developing character and values for global citizens: analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 925–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Leonardo, Z., & Broderick, A. (2011). Smartness as property: a critical exploration of intersections between whiteness and disability studies. Teachers College Record, 113, 2206–2232.Google Scholar
  48. Linton, S. (1998). Claiming disability: knowledge and identity. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  49. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography—describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2008). The idea of phenomenography and the pedagogy of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 533–559). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Mastropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E., Norland, J. J., Berkeley, S., McDuffie, K., Tornquist, E. H., & Connors, N. (2006). Differentiated curriculum enhancement in inclusive middle school science effects on classroom and high-stakes tests. The Journal of Special Education, 40, 130–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McDaniel, P., Devi, B., Crockett, D., & Atwater, M. M. (1995). Secondary preservice science teachers ideas about culture, ethnicity, and learning of marginalized students. ED 417950.Google Scholar
  53. McDermott, R., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as disability. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 26, 324–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. McGinnis, J. R. (2013). Teaching science to learners with special needs. Theory Into Practice, 52, 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mensah, F. M. (2011). A case for culturally relevant teaching in science education and lessons learned for teacher education. The Journal of Negro Education, 80, 296–309.Google Scholar
  56. Miller, P. (2016). ‘White sanction’, institutional, group and individual interaction in the promotion and progression of black and minority ethnic academics and teachers in England. Power and Education, 8, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Moin, L. J., Magiera, K., & Zigmond, N. (2009). Instructional activities and group work in the US inclusive high school co-taught science class. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 677–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  59. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  60. Nielsen, K. E. (2012). A disability history of the United States (Vol. 2). Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  61. Nunes, T. (1995). Cultural practices and the conception of individual differences: theoretical and empirical considerations. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1995, 91–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Patton, J. M. (1998). The disproportionate representation of African Americans in special education: looking behind the curtain for understanding and solutions. The Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Preston-Smith, S. (2015). A comparison of perceptions from high school students with and without disabilities about their science co-teaching experiences (Doctoral dissertation, George Mason University). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 10031794).Google Scholar
  64. Pringle, R. M., & McLaughlin, C. A. (2014). Preparing science teachers for diversity: integrating the contributions of scientists from underrepresented groups in the middle school science curriculum. In M. Atwater, M. Russell, & M. B. Butler (Eds.), Multicultural science education (pp. 193–208). Amsterdam: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Reid, D. K., & Knight, M. G. (2006). Disability justifies exclusion of minority students: a critical history grounded in disability studies. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Rieser, R. (2012a). The struggle for disability equality. In M. Cole (Ed.), Education, equality and human rights: issues of gender, ‘race,’ sexuality, disability and social class (pp. 159–189). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Rieser, R. (2012b). Inclusive education: a human right. In M. Cole (Ed.), Education, equality and human rights: issues of gender, ‘race,’ sexuality, disability and social class (pp. 190–216). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  68. Rivera Maulucci, M. S. (2013). Emotions and positional identity in becoming a social justice science teacher: Nicole’s story. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 453–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rivera Maulucci, M. S., & Mensah, F. M. (2015). Naming ourselves and others. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rudolph, J. L. (2014). Dewey’s “science as method” a century later: reviving science education for civic ends. American Educational Research Journal, 51, 1056–1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Seiler, G. (2013). New metaphors about culture: implications for research in science teacher preparation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 104–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Shakespeare, T. (2013). Disability rights and wrongs revisited. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  73. Slee, R. (2010). The irregular school: exclusion, schooling and inclusive education. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  74. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: procedures and techniques for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  75. Suriel, R. L., & Atwater, M. M. (2012). From the contribution to the action approach: white teachers’ experiences influencing the development of multicultural science curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 1271–1295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Therrien, W. J., Taylor, J. C., Hosp, J. L., Kaldenberg, E. R., & Gorsh, J. (2011). Science instruction for students with learning disabilities: a meta-analysis. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 188–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tight, M. (2016). Phenomenography: The development and application of an innovative research design in higher education research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19, 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Tight, M. (2018). Higher education research: The developing field. Bloomsbury PublishingGoogle Scholar
  79. Titchkosky, T. (2011). The question of access: disability, space, meaning. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  80. Waitoller, F. R., & Artiles, A. J. (2013). A decade of professional development research for inclusive education: a critical review and notes for a research program. Review of Educational Research, 83, 319–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Waitoller, F. R., & King Thorius, K. A. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86, 366–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wan, Z. H., Wong, S. L., & Zhan, Y. (2013). Teaching nature of science to preservice science teachers: a phenomenographic study of Chinese teacher educators’ conceptions. Science & Education, 22, 2593–2619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Woodcock, S., & Hardy, I. (2017). Probing and problematizing teacher professional development for inclusion. International Journal of Educational Research, 83, 43–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. World Health Organization. (2011). World report on disability. Retrieved from: http://library.bsl .org.au/jspui/handle/1/2587.
  85. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: a research- based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89, 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Stanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations