Perspective-Taking: A Key to Overcoming the Barriers and Limitations of Legal Inclusion for Students with Physical Disabilities in Physical Education

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the limitations of law interpretations and policy regulations as they pertain to inclusion and exclusion of people with physical disabilities in physical education. We believe interpretation of the law has professional implications that must be addressed. Specifically, the ideal and the reality of the laws as applied to the students with physical disabilities is not the same. We believe we have a duty to include people with physical disabilities in movement activities. To conclude the paper, we, the authors, discuss current research in perspective-taking for pre-service teachers as a solution for including people with physical disabilities in physical education, recreation, and sport.

Notes

1 Physical disability is the legal term, and experts in the field are currently using the term to describe this large specific population. This population of people with physical disabilities includes but is not limited to those who are visually impaired, blind, deaf or hard of hearing; those with cerebral palsy, spinal cord injury, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis or traumatic brain injury; and amputees.

2 We delimited our study to students with physical disabilities because we want the problem with this specific population to be better understood. The literature clearly states that students with physical disabilities are excluded most often when considering participation in physical education (Martin, 2018). We are examining the problem on a micro level, not a macro level.

3 For more information, see Shaw and Stoll (2017, 2018a, 2018b).

4 The Rehabilitation Act 1973, the Americans With Disabilities Act 1990, the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act 2004 and the directive of Section 504 include all people with different disabilities. However, the purpose of this article is to focus on a specific group within the population, which is people with physical disabilities.

5 Though school sport is not physical education, the intention of the law is to broaden all aspects of physical activity within the school environment.

6 Unfortunately, many college curricula are limited as to how many credits a preservice teacher is mandated to finish. To cover all of the required curriculum, less than three credits are directed toward inclusionary practice. The curriculum in these three-credit courses often is focused on law rather than how to include this population in active play with able-bodied students.

7 For more information, see Shaw and Stoll (2017, 2018a, 2019).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Aubrey Hope Shaw

Aubrey Hope Shaw ([email protected]) is a Research Consultant for the Center for ETHICS* in the Department of Movement Sciences, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID.

Sharon Kay Stoll

Sharon Kay Stoll is the Director of the Center for ETHICS* and Professor in the Department of Movement Sciences at the University of Idaho in Moscow, ID.