ABSTRACT
The unjust schooling experiences of many disabled students is the impetus for this conceptual paper, which investigates the complexity involved in developing future teachers’ knowledge and commitment to putting into practice disability rights-related provisions. The paper focuses on the components of Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) (United Nations 2006. United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Accessed March 1, 2020. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/ConventionRightsPersonsWithDisabilities.aspx#24) that relate specifically to teacher education programmes. The concepts of dysconciousness (King 1991. “Dysconscious Racism: Ideology, Identity, and the Miseducation of Teachers.” Journal of Negro Education 60 (2): 133–146) and dysconscious ableism (Lalvani et al. 2015. “Teacher Education, Exclusion and the Implicit Ideology of Separate but Equal: An Invitation to a Dialogue.” Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice 10 (2): 168–183) are explored to facilitate theoretical understanding of possible reasons for injustices, including the marginalisation of many disabled students within/without the education system. Discussion then focuses on relevant research and practical strategies that may support student teachers to narrow the distance between theoretical understandings of Article 24 and its implementation in their teaching practice. In closing, the notion of dysconscious ableism is revisited in relation to its impact on teacher educators’ own thinking and practice. In order to do justice to Article 24 within teacher education, and in turn, to disabled students in schools, much is possible, and we as teacher educators, alongside our student teachers, have much to (un)learn.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 ‘The right to inclusive education encompasses a transformation in culture, policy and practice in all formal and informal educational environments to accommodate the differing requirements and identities of individual students, together with a commitment to remove the barriers that impede that possibility. It involves strengthening the capacity of the education system to reach out to all learners. It focuses on the full and effective participation, accessibility, attendance and achievement of all students, especially those who, for different reasons, are excluded or at risk of being marginalized … ’ (United Nations Citation2016, 3).
2 Please note: Recognising and respecting the intersectionality of individuals’ identities is of paramount importance (Pugach, Gomez-Najarro, and Matewos Citation2019; Slater and Chapman Citation2018). This is especially the case in a New Zealand bi-cultural context, in which Māori identities, culture and rights are increasingly valued, albeit within a context in which the injustices imposed by British colonisation continue to have a damaging impact on Māori (Berryman and Eley Citation2018). Pugach, Gomez-Najarro, and Matewos (Citation2019) however suggest it is legitimate to ‘temporarily set aside’ (214) people’s multiple identities if it is necessary to examine a particular aspect of identity for a specific purpose, as is the case with this paper’s focus on Article 24. Throughout the paper, reference to disabled students is not intended to essentialise disability as a one dimensional marker of identity; rather, a range of ‘social group identities and the intersections among them’ (Pugach, Gomez-Najarro, and Matewos Citation2019, 10), including Māori, need to be considered.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Gill Rutherford
Gill Rutherford is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Otago College of Education, Dunedin, New Zealand. A former high school teacher, Gill’s teaching and research focuses on Disability Studies, disabled students’ perspectives and experiences of school, students’ rights, inclusive schooling and teacher education, and the role of teacher aides.