Mapping socio-spatial constructions of normalcy: whiteness and ability in teacher candidates’ educational trajectories

ABSTRACT

In this paper I present a qualitative study in which I investigated how socio-spatial dimensions of schooling influenced the ways four, white, nondisabled teacher candidates made meaning of whiteness and ability throughout their educational journeys. Drawing on literature exploring the socio-spatial dimensions of power and whiteness and ability as property, I employed qualitative mapping to analyse how white, nondisabled teacher candidates appropriated conceptions of normalcy. Data reveal how whiteness and ability were constructed, normalised, and deployed as resources throughout teacher candidates’ P-12 schooling and teacher preparation programmes. I assert that such an analysis can inform teacher education programs in dismantling these intersecting ideologies.

KEYWORDS:

• Whiteness
• Dis/ability critical race theory
• mapping

Acknowledgments

I would like to take the time to thank each of the readers who has offered support in the development of this paper. A special thanks to Greg Cheatham, Subini Annamma, Molly Siuty, and Emily Machado, whose expertise and feedback strengthened this paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Following Annamma, Connor, and Ferri (2013), I use a slash to highlight how dis/ability is socially constructed through language, re-inscribing ‘ability’ as normative and desirable.

2. Following Gotanda (1991), instead of privileging ‘white’ and ‘whiteness’ (and the history of racial domination they represent) with a capital letter, I leave these terms in lower case. I follow Kohli’s (2018) lead in capitalising students/peers/teachers of Colour (in reference to racially minoritised peoples of the United States, which includes people who identify as Black, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern), as these terms signify a history of racial subordination as well as social and political liberation.

3. I use the term ‘nondisabled’ to discursively centre dis/ability as normative.

4. Following Stewart and Nicolazzo 2018) I define white supremacy as, ‘the belief in white racial purity and eugenic superiority’ (p. 134), driven by ableism, racism, and other intersecting oppression.

5. I was cautious about adapting Education Journey Mapping and sought to avoid appropriating this method in ways that upheld white, nondisabled subjectivities. Adaptations were made with the guidance and support of Dr. Subini Annamma.