Abstract
Equity for those experiencing disability is a complex real-world issue best studied by cross-disciplinary groups. However, these cross-disciplinary studies are often unsuccessful due to the different perspectives held by members of the cross-disciplinary group. Meta-perspectives have been found to help overcome the issues caused by these different perspectives. This article discusses how a meta-perspective based on a typology of paradigms of disability can be useful to map and explore different paradigms of disability, build common ground, and help facilitate cross-disciplinary understanding and collaboration when studying topics such as equity and inclusion. The article then goes on to introduce a critical realist meta-perspective that transcends the different paradigms and the individual and social divide. This critical realist meta-perspective expands the typology further and allows the disciplines and perspectives to be mapped across a matrix of levels and scales of reality. This mapping of perspectives could shed new light on the issue of developing an equitable, inclusive society for those experiencing disability.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allet, L., Burge, E., & Monnin, D. (2008). ICF: Clinical relevance for physiotherapy? A critical review. Advances in Physiotherapy, 10, 127–137. doi:10.1080/14038190802315941.
Annan, J., & Mentis, M. (2013). Shifting perspectives to shape inclusive practice. In Centre of Excellence for Research in Inclusive Education (Ed.), Inclusive education: Perspectives on professional practice (pp. 25–39). Auckland: Dunmore Publishing Ltd.
Barnes, C., & Mercer, G. (2004). Theorising and researching disability from a social model perspective. In C. Barnes & G. Mercer (Eds.), Implementing the social model of disability: Theory and research. Leeds: The Disability Press.
Barnes, M., & Ward, A. (2000). Concepts of rehabilitation. In M. Barnes & A. Wards (Eds.), Textbook of rehabilitation (pp. 3–13). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2001). Philosophy of social sciences: The philosophical foundations of social thought. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Bevan-Brown, J. (2003). The cultural self-review: Providing culturally effective, inclusive education for Māori learners. Wellington: NZCER.
Bhaskar, R. (1975). A realist theory of science. Leeds: Leeds Books Ltd.
Bromme, R. (2000). Beyond one’s own perspective: The psychology of cognitive interdisciplinarity. In P. Weingart & N. Stehr (Eds.), Practicing Interdisciplinarity (pp. 115–133). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Budd, J. M. (2014). A design-based research study to promote cross-disciplinary collaboration using a case study from the New Zealand disability field. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand).
Collier, A. (2004). Critical realism. An introduction to Roy Bhaskar’s philosophy. London: Verso.
Conklin, J. (2005). Wicked problems and social complexity. In J. Conklin (Ed.), Dialogue mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. Chichester: Wiley.
Cruickshank, J. (2003). Introduction. In J. Cruickshank (Ed.), Critical realism: The difference it makes (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.
Danermark, B. (2002). Interdisciplinary research and critical realism: The example of disability research. Journal of Critical Realism, 5(1), 56–64. Retrieved from http://www.criticalrealism.com/archive/iacr_conference_2001/bdanermark_ircr.pdf.
Dean, S., Siegert, R., & Taylor, V. (2012). Conclusion: Rethinking rehabilitation. In S. Dean, R. Siegert, & V. Taylor (Eds.), Interprofessional rehabilitation (pp. 167–183). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Dong, H. (2007). Shifting paradigms in universal design. In C. Stephanidis (Ed.), Universal access in human computer interaction. Coping with Diversity (pp. 66–74). Berlin: Springer.
Dunn, D., & Dougherty, S. (2005). Prospects for a positive psychology of rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology, 50(3), 305–311. doi:10.1037/0090-5550.50.3.305.
Geyh, S., Peter, C., Muller, R., Stucki, G., & Cieza, A. (2011). Translating topics in SCI psychology into the international classification of functioning, disability and health. The Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation, 16(3), 104–130. doi:10.1310/sci1603-104.
Gilson, S. F., & DePoy, E. (2002). Theoretical approaches to disability content in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 38(1), 153–165.
Godley, D. (2011). Disability studies: An interdisciplinary introduction. London: Sage.
Hinrichs, C. (2008). Interdisciplinarity and boundary work: Challenges and opportunities for agrifood studies. Agriculture and Human Values, 25, 209–213. doi:10.1007/s10460-008-9118-0.
Holland, D. (2005). Unifying social science—a critical realist approach. Graduate Journal of Social Science, 2(2). Retrieved from http://www.gjss.nl/cgi/t/text/get-pdf?idno=m0202a02;c=gjss
Kearney, P. (2003). The international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF) and nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 46(2), 162–170. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2003.02976.x.
Kearney, A. (2009). Barriers to school inclusion: An investigation into the exclusion of disabled students from and within New Zealand Schools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand).
Klein, J. (2010). The taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LaGrow, S. (1998). The culture of rehabilitation: An international perspective. Paper presented at the 9th international mobility conference, Atlanta GA, USA.
Lequerica, A., & Korette, K. (2010). Therapeutic engagement: A proposed model of engagement in medical rehabilitation. Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 89(5), 415–422. doi:10.109/PHM.0b013e3181d8ceb2.
Lindsay, G. (2003). Inclusive education: A critical perspective. British Journal of Special Education, 30(1), 3–12. doi:10.1111/1467-8527.00275.
Linton, S. (1998). Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York: University of New York.
Meekosha, H. (1998). Body Battles: Bodies, gender and disability. The disability reader: Social science perspectives (pp. 163–181). London: Cassell.
Milner, P., & Kelly, B. (2009). Community participation and inclusion: People with disabilities defining their place. Disability and Society, 24(1), 47–62. doi:10.1080/09687590802535410.
Mitchell, D., & Snyder, S. (1997). The body and physical difference: Discourses of disability. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Morgan, H. (2012). The social model of disability as a threshold concept: Troublesome knowledge and liminal spaces in social work education. Social Work Education: The International Journal, 31(2), 215–226. doi:10.1080/02615479.2012.644964.
New Zealand Ministry of Health. (2002). He korowai oranga—Maori health strategy. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
Office for Disability Issues. (2011). First New Zealand report on implementing the United Nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Wellington: Office for Disability Issues.
Office for Disability Issues. (2015). Disability action plan 2014–2018. Wellington: Office for Disability Issues.
Oliver, M. (1990). The politics of disablement. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
Olkin, R., & Pledger, C. (2003). Can disability studies and psychology join hands? American Psychologist, 58(4), 296–304. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.58.4.296.
Priestley, M. (1998). Constructions and creations: Idealism, materialism and disability theory. Disability and Society, 13(1), 75–94. doi:10.1080/09687599826920.
Prilleltensky, O. (2009). Critical psychology and disability: Critiqing the mainstream, critiquing the critique. Critical psychology: An introduction (pp. 250–266). London: Sage.
Schmidt, J. (2010). Prospects for a philosophy of interdisciplinarity. In R. Frodeman (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (pp. 39–41). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shakespeare, T. (2006). Disability rights and wrongs. London: Routledge.
Slee, R. (2011). The irregular school: Exclusion, schooling and inclusive education. New York: Routledge.
Swain, J., & French, S. (2000). Towards an affirmation model of disability. Disability and Society, 15(4), 569–582. doi:10.1080/09687590050058189.
Threats, T. (2010). The complexity of social/cultural dimension in communication disorders. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopedica, 62, 158–165. doi:10.1159/000314031.
United Nations. (2006). United Nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Geneva: United Nations.
World Federation of Occupational Therapists. (2012). Definition of occupational therapy. Retrieved from http://www.wfot.org/aboutus/aboutoccupationaltherapy/definitionofoccupationaltherapy.aspx.
World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Budd, J. Using Meta-perspectives to Improve Equity and Inclusion. NZ J Educ Stud 51, 227–244 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-016-0060-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-016-0060-1