The invisible minority: why do textbook authors avoid people with disabilities in their books?

References

• Andreassen, R., and M. Reichenberg. 2018. “Svenske og norske læreres forventninger om å mestre elevtilpasset leseopplæring: Betydningen av lærernes praksiserfaring og andre lærer- og skolerelaterte variabler." [Swedish and Norwegian Teachers' Self-efficacy for Differentiated Reading Instruction: The Importance of Practice and other Teacher and School-related Variables]. Nordic Studies in Education 38 (3): 232–251. doi:10.18261/issn.1891-5949-2018-03-04.
   Google Scholar
• Bachmann, K. E. 2004. “Læreboken i reformtider – et verktøy for endring?” [The Textbook in Times of Reform – a Tool for Change?] In Det ustyrlige klasserommet. Om styring, samarbeid og læringsmiljø i grunnskolen, edited by I. G. Imsen, 119–143. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Bachmann, K. E. 2005. “Læreplanens differens. Formidling av læreplanen til skolepraksis.” [Distinctions in the Curriculum. Dissemination of the Curriculum for School Practice]. Trondheim, doktoravhandling, NTNU, Fakultet for samfunnsvitenskap og teknologiledelse, Pedagogisk institutt.
   Google Scholar
• Barneombudet [Ombudsman for Children]. 2017. Uten mål og mening? Fagrapport [Without Purpose and Meaning? Professional Report]. http://barneombudet.no/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Bo_rapport_enkeltsider.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Beckett, A., et al. 2010. “Away with the Fairies? Disability Within Primary-age Children’s Literature.” Disability & Society 25: 373–386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhaskar, R. 1975. A Realist Theory of Science. Leeds: Leeds Books.
   Google Scholar
• Bhaskar, R., and B. Danermark. 2006. “Metatheory, Interdisciplinarity and Disability Research: A Critical Realist Perspective.” Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 8: 278–297.
   Google Scholar
• Blaska, J. K. 2003. Using Children’s Literature to Learn About Disabilities and Illness. 2nd ed. New York: Educator’s International Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blikstad-Balas, M. 2014. “Lærebokas hegemoni – et avsluttet kapittel?” [The Hegemony of the Textbook - a Closed Chapter?]. In Alle tiders norskdidaktiker. Festskrift til Frøydis Hertzberg på 70-årsdagen den 18, edited by R. Hvistendahl and A. Roe, 325–348. Oslo: Novus forlag.
   Google Scholar
• Bratholm, B. 2001. “Godkjenningsordningen for lærebøker 1889–2001, en historisk gjennomgang.” [The Approval Scheme for Textbooks 1889 -2001, a Historical Review]. I Fokus på pedagogiske tekster. Høgskolen i Vestfold, Notat 5/2001. http://www-bib.hive.no/tekster/hveskrift/notat/2001-05/not5-2001-02.html.
   Google Scholar
• Bueie, A. A. 2002. “Lærebokvalg, en formalisert og systematisk prosess? En studie av valg av lærebøker for norskfaget i den videregående skolen.” [Textbook Selection, a Formalized and Systematic Process? A study of the Choice of Textbooks for the Norwegian Subject in Upper Secondary School]. Skriftserien ved Høgskolen I Vestfold. Rapport 11.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng, K. K. Y., and A. B. Beigi. 2011. “Addressing Students with Disabilities in School Textbooks.” Disability & Society 26: 239–242. doi:10.1080/09687599.2011.544063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., and J. D. Creswell. 2018. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Danermark, B., and L. C. Gellerstedt. 2004. “Social Justice: Redistribution and Recognition—A non-Reductionist Perspective on Disability.” Disability and Society 19: 339–353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, L. J. 1995. Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness and the Body. London: Verso
   Google Scholar
• Davis, L. J. 2006. “Introduction.” In The Disability Studies Reader, edited by L. J. Davis, 2nd ed., xv–xviii. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. 1966. Purity and Danger. An Analysis of Concept of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Education Act. 1998. “Act Relating to Primary and Secondary Education and Training.” https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/1998-07-17-61.
   Google Scholar
• Favazza, P. C., et al. 2017. “Limited Representation of Individuals with Disabilities in Early Childhood Classes: Alarming or Status quo?” International Journal of Inclusive Education 21: 650–666. doi:10.1080/13603116.1243738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Florian, L. 2013. “Reimagining Special Education: Why New Approaches Are Needed.” In The Sage Handbook of Special Education, edited by L. Florian, 2nd ed., 9–22. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Funksjonshemmedes fellesorganisasjon. 2020. “The Norwegian Federation of Organisations of Disabled People.” Om FFO. https://ffo.no/Organisasjonen/About-FFO/.
   Google Scholar
• Hardin, B., and M. Hardin. 2004. “Distorted Pictures: Images of Disability in Physical Education Textbooks.” Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 21: 399–413.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodkinson, A. 2012. “Inclusive Education and the Cultural Representation of Disability and Disabled People Within the English Education System: The Influence of Electronic Media in the Primary School.” Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 12: 252–262. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01208.
   Google Scholar
• Hodkinson, A. 2016. “School Textbooks and the Avoidance of Disability: Emptied of Representation.” In Disability, Avoidance and the Academy: Challenging Resistance, edited by D. Bolt and C. Penkenth, 57–67. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kunnskapsdepartementet. 2006. Lærerplanverket for Kunnskapsløftet (LK06) [The Norwegian National Curriculum]. https://www.udir.no/lk20/overordnet-del/.
   Google Scholar
• Martinez-Bello, V. E., and D. A. Martinez-Bello. 2016. “Depictions of Human Bodies in the Illustrations of Early Childhood Textbooks.” Early Childhood Education Journal 44: 181–190. doi:10.1007/s10643-015-0701.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, D. T., and S. L. Snyder. 2000. Narrative Prosthesis: Disability and the Dependencies of Discourse. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• Molden, T. H., and J. Tøssebro. 2009. “Definisjoner av funksjonshemming i empirisk forskning [Definitions of Disability in Empirical Research].” In Funksjonshemming – politikk, hverdagsliv og arbeidsliv, edited by J. Tøssebro, 38–70. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Nordahl, T., et al. 2018. Inkluderende fellesskap for barn og unge [Inclusive Communities for Children and Youth]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Oates, T. 2014. Why Textbooks Count. A Policy Paper. University of Cambridge: Cambridge Assessment. https://www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/Images/181744-why-textbooks-count-tim-oates.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrosky, M. M., et al. 2015. “Pick a Book, Any Book: Using Children’s Books to Support Positive Attitudes Toward Peers with Disabilities.” Young Exceptional Children 18: 30–43.
   Google Scholar
• Powell, J. J. W. 2013. “Comparative and International Perspectives on Special Education.” In Florian , L. (ed.) The Sage Handbook of Special Education 2nd ed.(pp 335–349), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Price, C. L., et al. 2016. “Exploring Representations of Characters with Disabilities in Library Books.” Early Childhood Education Journal 44: 563–572. doi:10.1007/s10643-015-0740-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reichenberg, M. 2017. “The Representations of Type of Disability, Ethnicity and Age and How These Are Associated with Participation in Textbooks.” Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation 18: 72–90.
   Google Scholar
• Reichenberg, M., and R. Andreassen. 2018. “Comparing Swedish and Norwegian Teachers’ Professional Development: How Human Capital and Social Capital Factor Into Teachers’ Reading Habits.” Reading Psychology 39: 442–467. doi:10.1080/02702711.2018.1464530.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schreier, M. 2014. “Qualitative Content Analysis.” In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis (170-183), edited by U. Flick. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Shakespeare, T. 2014. Disability Rights and Wrongs Revisited. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Skjelbred, D. 2003. "Valg, vurdering og kvalitetsutvikling av lærebøker og andre læremidler: Sluttrapport." Rapport. [Choice, Evaluation, and Quality Development of Textbooks and other Leaning Resources: Final Report]. Tønsberg: Høgskolen i Vestfold.
   Google Scholar
• Skjelbred, D., et al. 2017. Norsk lærebokhistorie: Allmueskolen – folkeskolen – grunnskolen 1739–2013. [Norwegian Textbook History]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
   Google Scholar
• Stylianou, A. 2017. “Absenting the Absence(s) in the Education of Poor Minority Ethnic Students: A Critical Realist Framework.” International Journal of Inclusive Education 21: 975–990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson, R. G. 1997. Extraordinary Bodies. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thomson, R. G. 2017. “Building a World with Disability in It.” In Culture – Theory – Disability, edited by A. Waldschmidt, H. Berressem, and M. Ingwersen, 51–63. Bielefeld: Transcript.
   Google Scholar
• UNCRPD. 2006. The UN Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilities. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html.
   Google Scholar
• UNESCO. 1994. The Salamanca Statement and the Framework for Action on Special Needs Education. Paris: UNESCO.
   Google Scholar
• UNESCO. 2015. The Right to Education for Persons with Disabilities: Towards Inclusion. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232592/PDF/232592eng.pdf.multi.
   Google Scholar
• UNICEF. 2013. The State of the World’s Children 2013: Children with Disabilities. https://www.unicef.org/publications/index_69379.html.
   Google Scholar
• Varughese, S. J., and J. Luty. 2010. “Stigmatised Attitudes Towards Intellectual Disability: A Randomised Crossover Trial.” The Psychiatrist 34: 318–322. doi:10.1192/pb.bp.109.027789.
   Google Scholar
• Vidal-Albelda, B., and V. E. Martinez-Bello. 2017. “Representation of Bodies with and Without Disabilities in Secondary School Physical Education Textbooks.” Sport in Society: Cultures, Commerce, Media, Politics 20: 957–968.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, M. L. N. 2014. “The Concept of the Absent Curriculum: The Case of the Muslim Contribution and the English National Curriculum for History.” Journal of Curriculum Studies 46: 419–440.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. 2011. World Report on Disability. http://www.who.int/disabilities/world_report/2011/report.pdf.
   Google Scholar