Resisting the Tick Box: Reflexive Use of Educational Technologies in Developing Student Identities and Challenging Higher Education Constructions of Disability Based on Notions of Conformity and Consistency

References

• Abbas, Y., & Dervin, F. (2009). Digital technologies of the self. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.
   Google Scholar
• Allan, J. (2005). Inclusion as an ethical project. In S. Tremain (Ed.), Foucault and the government of disability (pp. 281–297). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Avis, J. (1996). The enemy within: Quality and managerialism in education. In J. Avis, M. Bloomer, G. Eslon, D. Gleeson, & P. Hodkinson (Eds.), Knowledge and nationhood: Education, politics and work (pp. 105–120). New York, NY: Cassell.
   Google Scholar
• Aycock, A. (1995). Technologies of the self: Foucault and internet discourse. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1995.tb00328.x/full
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, C. (2000). A working social model? Disability, work and disability politics in the 21st century. Critical Social Policy, 20, 441–457. doi:10.1177/02610183000200040210.1177/026101830002000402
   Google Scholar
• Barton, L. (1997). The politics of special educational needs. In L. Barton & M. Oliver (Eds.), Disability studies: Past, present and future (pp. 138–159). Leeds: The Disability Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blood, R. (2002). Weblogs: A history and perspective. In J. Rodzvilla (Ed.), We’ve got blog: How weblogs are changing our culture (pp. 7–16). Cambridge: Perseus.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, V. (2012). ‘Looking okay’: Exploring constructions of fluctuating or recurring impairments in UK higher education ( Doctoral thesis). University of Stirling, UK. Retrieved from https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/handle/1893/11014
   Google Scholar
• Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this ‘we’? Levels of collective identity and self representations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 83–93.10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.83
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christie, I., & Mensah-Coker, G. (1999). An inclusive future? Disability, social change and opportunities for greater inclusion by 2010. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Creme, P. (2008). A space for academic play: Student learning journals as transitional writing. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7, 49–64. doi:10.1177/147402220708488210.1177/1474022207084882
   Google Scholar
• Deem, R. (1998). ‘New managerialism’ and higher education: The management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8, 47–70.10.1080/0962021980020014
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education and Science. (1978). Special educational needs (The Warnock report). London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Dickey, M. (2004). The impact of web-logs (blogs) on student perceptions of isolation and alienation in a web-based distance-learning environment. Open Learning, 19, 279–291.10.1080/0268051042000280138
   Google Scholar
• Eijkman, H. (2009). Using Web 2.0 to decolonise transcultural learning zones in higher education. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 26, 240–255.10.1108/10650740910967401
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, K., & Kent, M. (2011). Disability and new media. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Equality and Human Rights Commission. (2012). Students with disabilities and learners in post-16 education. Retrieved from http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/your-rights/disability/disability-in-education/disabled-students-and-learners-in-post-16-education
   Google Scholar
• Facer, K., & Selwyn, N. (2010). Social networking: Key messages from the research. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 31–42). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ferdig, R. E., & Trammell, K. D. (2004). Content delivery in the blogosphere. THE Journal, 31, 12–20.
   Google Scholar
• Finklestein, V. (1980). Attitudes and disabled people: Issues for discussion. New York, NY: World Rehabilitation Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the self. In L. H. Martin, H. Gutman, & P. H. Hutton (Eds.), Technologies of the self (pp. 16–49). Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1991). Governmentality. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87–104). London: Harvester.
   Google Scholar
• Georgakopolou, A. (2002). Narrative and identity management: Discourse and social identities in a tale of tomorrow. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35, 427–451.10.1207/S15327973RLSI3504_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gleaves, A., Walker, C., & Grey, J. (2007). Using digital and paper diaries for learning and assessment purposes in higher education: A comparative study of feasibility and reliability. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32, 631–643.
   Google Scholar
• Government Equalities Office. (2010). Equality Act 2010. Retrieved from http://www.equalities.gov.uk/equality_act_2010.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Haggis, T. (2006). Pedagogies for diversity: Retaining critical challenge amidst fears of ‘dumbing down’. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 521–535.10.1080/03075070600922709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heilferty, C. M. (2009). Toward a theory of online communication in illness: Concept analysis of illness blogs. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65, 1539–1547.10.1111/jan.2009.65.issue-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA). (2012). Students and qualifiers data tables. Retrieved from http://www.hesa.ac.uk/index.php/content/view/1973/239/
   Google Scholar
• Home Office. (2012). Equality Act 2010. Retrieved from http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/equalities/equality-act/
   Google Scholar
• Inclusion.me. (2010). Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 2005—DDA 2005 summary. Retrieved from http://www.inclusion.me.uk/blog/disability-discrimination-act-dda-2005-dda-2005-summary
   Google Scholar
• James, N. (2007). The use of email interviewing as a qualitative method of inquiry in educational research. British Educational Research Journal, 33, 963–976.10.1080/01411920701657074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamel Boulos, M. N., & Wheeler, S. (2007). The emerging Web 2.0 social software: An enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 24, 2–23.10.1111/hir.2007.24.issue-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, K. J., & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher education. Educause Quarterly, 4, 22–30.
   Google Scholar
• Lane, J. E., & Stenlund, H. (1983). Bureaucratisation of a system of higher education. Comparative Education, 19, 305–323.10.1080/0305006830190306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langer, A. M. (2002). Reflecting on practice: Using learning journals in higher and continuing education. Teaching in Higher Education, 7, 337–351.10.1080/13562510220144824
   Google Scholar
• Lather, P., & Smithies, C. (1997). Troubling the angels: Women living with HIV/AIDS. Denver, CO: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lawler, S. (2008). Identity: Sociological perspectives. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lightman, E., Vick, A., Herd, D., & Mitchell, A. (2009). ‘Not disabled enough’: Episodic disabilities and the Ontario disability support programme. Disability Studies Quarterly, 29. Retrieved from http://www.dsq-sds.org/article/view/932/1108
   Google Scholar
• Lingsom, S. (2008). Invisible impairments: Dilemmas of concealment and disclosure. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 10, 2–16.10.1080/15017410701391567
   Google Scholar
• MacLure, M. (2003). Discourse in educational and social research. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mann, C., & Stewart, F. (2000). Internet communication and qualitative research: A handbook for researching online. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Markham, A. N. (2004). Internet communication as a tool for qualitative research. In D. Silverman (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (2nd ed., pp. 95–124). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Marks, G. (1994). “Armed now with hope.”: The construction of the subjectivity of students within integration. Disability & Society, 9, 71–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markula, P. (2004). ‘Tuning into one’s self’: Foucault’s technologies of the self and mindful fitness. Sociology of Sport Journal, 21, 302–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matthews, N. (2009). Teaching the ‘invisible’ students with disabilities in the classroom: Disclosure, inclusion and the social model of disability. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 229–239.10.1080/13562510902898809
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. W. (2007). Social software and participatory learning: Pedagogical choices with technology affordances in the Web 2.0 era. Proceedings of the 2007 Ascilite conference, Singapore. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/mcloughlin.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Moon, J. (1999). Learning journals: A handbook for academics, students and professional development. London: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. (1996). Understanding disability: From theory to practice. New York, NY: St Martin’s Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pachler, N., & Daly, C. (2009). Narrative and learning with Web 2.0 technologies: Towards a research agenda. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 6–18.10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00303.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsell, M. (2008). Pernicious virtual communities: Identity, polarisation and the Web 2.0. Ethics and Information Technology, 10, 41–56.10.1007/s10676-008-9153-y
   Google Scholar
• Riddell, S., Wilson, A., Adler, M., & Mordaunt, E. (2005). Parents, professionals and special educational needs policy frameworks in England and Scotland. In J. Rix, K. Simmons, M. Nind, & K. Sheehy (Eds.), Policy and power in inclusive education: Values into practice (pp. 72–84). Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sabat, S. R., & Harre, R. (1992). The construction and deconstruction of self in Alzheimer’s disease. Ageing and Society, 12, 443–461.10.1017/S0144686X00005262
   Google Scholar
• Savin-Baden, M., & Tombs, C. (2010). Provisionality, play and pluralism in liminal space. In R. Sharpe, H. Beetham, & S. De Freitas (Eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences (pp. 72–82). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shore, C. (2008). Audit culture and illiberal governance: Universities and the politics of accountability. Anthropological Theory, 8, 278–298.10.1177/1463499608093815
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shore, C., & Wright, S. (1999). Audit culture and anthropology: Neo-liberalism in British higher education. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 5, 557–575.10.2307/2661148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slee, R., & Allan, J. (2001). Excluding the included: A reconsideration of inclusive education. International Studies in Sociology of Education, 11, 173–192.10.1080/09620210100200073
   Google Scholar
• Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). (2012). Students with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.ucas.ac.uk/students/wheretostart/disabledstudents
   Google Scholar
• Valeras, A. B. (2010). ‘We don’t have a box’: Understanding hidden disability identity utilizing narrative research methodology. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30. Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1267/1297
   Google Scholar
• Watson, N. (2002). Well, I know this is going to sound very strange to you, but I don’t see myself as a disabled person: Identity and disability. Disability & Society, 17, 509–527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Working Group on CFS/ME. (2002). A report of the CFS/ME working group. Retrieved from http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/Browsable/DH_4095249
   Google Scholar