Abstract
The philosophical study of the role of schooling in preparing democratic citizens has tended to presume an able-minded learner. Dominant philosophical and theoretical models of democratic education consider neither the civic preparation of individuals with perceived intellectual disabilities in particular, nor the presumptions of able-mindedness that are built into theorizing about democracy and citizenship. As a result, democratic citizenship aims are frequently conceptualized according to an unevaluated assumption that civic preparation requires a particular level and display of intellectual ability, communicative competence, social independence, and behaviour. This unevaluated assumption parallels the presumed incompetence of individuals with perceived intellectual disabilities in other areas of education, a phenomenon that has been well documented by scholars of disability studies. This chapter builds on theory and research in Disability Studies in Education (DSE) and other areas of critical educational studies to challenge this assumption. In particular, I take up what Kliewer, Biklen, and Peterson refer to as the “metaphor” of intellectual disability, the sense in which “We do not literally see mental retardation; we infer its existence” (Kliewer et al. 2015, p. 22). I argue that this metaphor emerges within the context of citizenship education in particular and troubling ways. Intellectual ability—and disability—is actively constructed by and through gendered and racialized attachments to the notion of the ideal citizen. Individuals who are perceived to manifest undesirable differences in cognition, behaviour, communication, or performance appear to threaten notions of civic well-being, of nationhood, and of social reciprocity. In this sense, intellectual disability becomes a metaphor for civic threat. Consequently, educational theorizing around democratic citizenship education advances the metaphor of intellectual disability through a process of negation: the citizen is that which the person with intellectual disability is not or intellectual disability is that which is not citizenship. We do not see intellectual disability; we infer its existence through manifestations of non-citizenship.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Certainly John Dewey is of particular noteworthiness here, as Danforth has pointed out (2001).
- 2.
The term “ableism” has been used in many different ways. Here I define ableism as the systematic privileging of those abilities considered normal within a particular social context as well as the systematic marginalizing of individuals perceived as disabled or as having undesirable ability characteristics.
- 3.
It is important here to distinguish between the self-advocacy movement as a whole and the experience of self-advocacy as institutionalized within educational and service contexts. I am decidedly not making an argument that self-advocacy work necessarily fails as a civic project.
- 4.
Eva F. Kittay has made the argument that just caring for individuals labeled with significant disabilities requires justice in (gendered) caring relations, including attention to the social, economic, and political positions of caregivers. See Kittay (2001).
References
Aspis, S. (1997). Self-advocacy for people with learning difficulties: Does it have a future? Disability & Society, 12(4), 647564.
Aspis, S. (2002). Self-advocacy: Vested interests and misunderstandings. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 3–7.
Baglieri, S., & Shapiro, A. (2012). Disability studies and the inclusive classroom: Critical practices for creating least restrictive attitudes. New York: Routledge.
Baynton, D. C. (2013). Disability and the justification of inequality in American history. In L. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (4th ed., pp. 17–33). New York: Taylor & Francis.
Biesta, G. J. J. (2006). Beyond learning: Democratic education for a human future. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Carey, A. C. (2010). On the margins of citizenship: Intellectual disability and civil rights in twentieth-century America. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Chavez, L. R. (2013). The Latin threat: Constructing immigrants, citizens, and the nation (2nd ed.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Clifford, S. (2012). Making disability public in deliberative democracy. Contemporary Political Theory, 11(2), 211–228.
Cowley, D. M., & Bacon, J. K. (2013). Self-determination in schools: Reconstructing the concept through a disability studies framework. PowerPlay, 5(1), 463–489.
Danforth, S. (2001). A Deweyan perspective on democracy and inquiry in the field of special education. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(4), 270–280.
Ellsworth, E. (1989). Why doesn’t this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of critical pedagogy. Harvard Educational Review, 59(3), 297–325.
Erevelles, N. (2002). (Im)Material citizens: Cognitive disability, race, and the politics of citizenship. Disability, Culture and Education, 1(1), 5–25.
Ferri, B. A., & Connor, D. J. (2006). Reading resistance: Discourses of exclusion in desegregation & inclusion debates. New York: Peter Lang.
Greene, M. (2009). Teaching as possibility: A light in dark times. In S. L. Macrine (Ed.), Critical pedagogy in uncertain times: Hope and possibilities (pp. 135–149). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hehir, T. (2002). Eliminating ableism in education. Harvard Educational Review, 72(1), 1–32.
Introduction to Supported Decision-Making [Transcript]. (2014, April 30). The Jenny Hatch project. Retrieved from http://jennyhatchjusticeproject.org/sites/default/files/043014_transcript.pdf
Jones, A. (1999). The limits of cross-cultural dialogue: Pedagogy, desire, and absolution in the classroom. Educational Theory, 49(3), 299–316.
Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist, queer, crip. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Kittay, E. F. (2001). When caring is just and justice is caring: Justice and mental retardation. Public Culture, 13(3), 557–579.
Kliewer, C., Fitzgerald, L. M., Meyer-Mork, J., Hartman, P., English-Sand, P., & Raschke, D. (2004). Citizenship for all in the literate community: An ethnography of young children with significant disabilities in inclusive early childhood settings. Harvard Educational Review, 74, 373–403.
Kliewer, C., Biklen, D., & Peterson, A. J. (2015). At the end of intellectual disability. Harvard Educational Review, 85(1), 1–28.
Leake, D. W. (2014). Self-determination requires social capital, not just skills and knowledge. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 8(1), 34–43.
Levinson, M. (2003). Challenging deliberation. Theory and Research in Education, 1(1), 23–49.
Levinson, M. (2012). No citizen left behind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
McGregor, C. (2004). Care(full) deliberation: A pedagogy for citizenship. Journal of Transformative Education, 2(2), 90–106.
Minow, M. (2013). Universal design in education: Remaking all the difference. In A. S. Kanter & B. A. Ferri (Eds.), Righting educational wrongs: Disability studies in law and education (pp. 38–57). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Pan, D. (2012, November 5). Protecting the voting rights of people with mental disabilities. Mother Jones. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/voting-rights-mental-disabilities.
Peterson, A. J. (2009). Shana’s story: The struggles, quandaries and pitfalls surrounding self-determination. Disability Studies Quarterly, 29(2).
Popenoe, P. & Johnson, R. H. (1920 [1918]). Applied eugenics. New York: The MacMillan Company.
Powers, L. E. (2005). Self-determination by individuals with severe disabilities: Limitations or excuses? Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(3), 168–172.
Rood, C. E., Kanter, A., & Causton, J. (2015). Presumption of incompetence: The systematic assignment of guardianship within the transition process. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(4), 319–328.
Rubin, S., Biklen, D., Kasa-Hendrickson, C., Kluth, P., Cardinal, D. N., & Broderick, A. (2001). Independence, participation, and the meaning of intellectual ability. Disability & Society, 16(3), 415–429.
Schalock, R. L. (2011). The evolving understanding of the construct of intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4), 227–237.
Schweik, S. (2011). Disability and the normal body of the (native) citizen. Social Research, 78(2), 417–442.
Taylor, K. (2015, March 6). Posters on teenage pregnancy draw fire. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/nyregion/city-campaign-targeting-teenage-pregnancy-draws-criticism.html?_r=0
Terzi, L. (2010). Justice and Equality in Education: A Capability Perspective on Disability and Special Educational Needs. London: Continuum.
Trent, J. W., Jr. (1994). Inventing the feeble mind: A history of mental retardation in the United States. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Vargas, T. (2013, August 2). Woman with Down syndrome prevails over parents in guardianship case. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/woman-with-down-syndrome-prevails-over-parents-in-guardianship-case/2013/08/02/4aec4692-fae3-11e2-9bde-7ddaa186b751_story.html.
Wolbring, G. (2012). Citizenship education through ability expectation and “ableism” lens: The challenge of science and technology and disabled people. Educational Sciences, 2, 151–164.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Taylor, A. (2020). The Metaphor of Civic Threat: Intellectual Disability and Education for Citizenship. In: Ware, L. (eds) Critical Readings in Interdisciplinary Disability Studies. Critical Studies of Education, vol 12. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35309-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35309-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35307-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35309-4
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)