Blog Post 1: Disability

May 26, 2025

—

in Uncategorised, Unit 2: Inclusive Practices

When considering inclusive practices around disability, I am inclined to approach it through the lens of the ‘social model of disability’ (Oliver, 1983), which argues that people are disabled not by their impairments, but by the societal barriers around them. These barriers are rooted in systems designed to benefit those in positions of power and privilege. This connects directly to Kimberlé Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionality, which highlights how groups’ and individuals’ identities result in unique combinations of discrimination and privilege. To explore this, I use Sylvia Duckworth’s ‘Wheel of Power and Privilege’ – a reflective tool to map how different attributes (such as race, gender, ability, class) intersect. It works well alongside frameworks like the Social GRACES to provide a fuller picture of identity and proximity to power.

Wheel of Power/Privilege by Sylvia Duckworth.

Societies built only for those near the centre of this wheel ultimately exclude everyone else. As Ade Adepitan said; “I am disabled because society has not allowed me to shine, not because of my disability.” He highlights how structural systems like transport often enforce “segregation by design,” further marginalising disabled people. The comparison in this interview to Rosa Parks bus protest further reinforces the longstanding nature of these inequitable social constructs and their intersectional ramifications.

The Social Graces by John Burnham and Alison Roper-Hall and colleagues.

This brings to mind a trans student I worked with who requested gender-neutral toilets. I contacted estates at CSM on their behalf, and asked for clarity and support in providing this facility. The proposed solution was to use the disabled toilet, which required a staff card and also doubled as a baby changing space. This example highlights how multiple marginalised identities, (eg. disabled people, trans people, mothers and birthing parents and those who hold some or all of these identities), are forced into a single, inadequate space, that is accessible only through institutional privilege. If the buildings toilets were designed to be inclusive and accessible, the entire community would benefit. With the support of my line manager and with the students consent, I pushed for more inclusive signage. Although some changes were made, it is still not enough and it is a frustrating reminder of how slowly the institutional cogs turn when it comes to meaningful change and inclusive practices.

The irony of beginning this unit in an LCC classroom only accessible by stairs reinforces this point. Who is left out of conversations on inclusivity when the space itself is inaccessible? Using the social model, buildings would include ramps, lifts, and accessible toilets throughout, not as afterthoughts, but as essentials. While this may seem costly or complex, such change is necessary for meaningful equity.

Structural change is needed, but also individual actions. Christine Sun Kim, in her TED talk, references Sara Nović’s tweet: “I can 100 percent promise that you learning sign language is easier than a deaf person learning to hear.” This highlights how resistance to stepping out of comfort zones upholds exclusion. In my micro-teaching session, I asked students to use “sign names” as an introduction, inspired by my work with Deaf theatre practitioner Jenny Sealey. Someone in the group fed back that students might find this uncomfortable as it is unusual and takes more confidence than just saying your name, but I would argue that this discomfort is crucial for those in power to confront. A hearing person can opt out; a Deaf person cannot choose to hear. Opting out contributes to exclusion.

As an educator, I strive to use my own privileges to advocate for inclusivity, and where I have less power, to communicate with those who have more to make change. As a result of this unit, I’m now implementing live captions in class to further my practice. This benefits not only Deaf students, but also the intersections of those who speak English as a second language and those have different learning styles, for example. Creating truly inclusive learning spaces requires ongoing reflection and action, and these resources are a welcome part of that development.

References

‘Christine Sun Kim in “Friends & Strangers”’ (2023) Art in the Twenty-First Century, Season 11. 20th October. Available at: https://art21.org/watch/art-in-the-twenty-first-century/s11/christine-sun-kim-in-friends-strangers/

Crenshaw, K.W., 2013. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. In The public nature of private violence (pp. 93-118). Routledge.

Duckworth, S. (2021). Figure 1. Wheel of Power, Privilege, and Marginalization, by Sylvia… [online] ResearchGate. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Wheel-of-Power-Privilege-and-Marginalization-by-Sylvia-Duckworth-Used-by-permission_fig1_364109273.

Graeae. (n.d.). Graeae | world-class theatre & training from D/deaf & disabled artists. [online] Available at: https://graeae.org/.

Partridge, K. (2019). Funded by the Department for Education PSDP-Resources and Tools: Social GGRRAAACCEEESSS and the LUUUTT model. [online] p.2. Available at: https://practice-supervisors.rip.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Social-GGRRAAACCEEESSS-and-the-LUUUTT-model.pdf.

SCOPE (2024). Social Model of Disability | Disability Charity Scope UK. [online] Scope. Available at: https://www.scope.org.uk/social-model-of-disability.

www.youtube.com. (2021). Ade Adepitan gives amazing explanation of systemic racism. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAsxndpgagU.

www.youtube.com. (2024). Intersectionality in Focus: Empowering Voices during UK Disability History Month 2023. [online] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yID8_s5tjc

Comments

One response to “Blog Post 1: Disability”

Antonella Nonnis

27th May 2025

Thank you, Chuck, for this great post.

Applying the social model of disability (Oliver, 2013) alongside intersectional frameworks like the Social GRACES and Duckworth’s Wheel makes sense (I did not know this wheel, and although I find it a bit reductive at points (i.e. What is significant neurodivergence? Also, one could be mostly stable but also vulnerable, in my opinion) and I liked how you tie these ideas to real institutional practices. However, while the social model provides a strong foundation for this critique, some neurodivergent scholars, such as Lindy Le (2023), have called for a more nuanced understanding. Although I’m with you, Le argues that many conflate the neurodiversity movement’s rejection of a “cure” narrative with a denial of biology or medical insight (Kapp, 2020; Le 2023), and I thought it offers us an interesting provocation/reflection.

The toilet example is particularly striking: a single, poorly designed space expected to serve multiple marginalised identities is more than an access issue – it’s a spatial metaphor for institutional failure. As you suggest, it’s not just about inclusion after exclusion has been experienced, but about proactively designing systems where diverse bodies and identities are assumed from the start. The fact that this was framed as a “solution” only reinforces how deeply ableist and cisnormative defaults shape campus infrastructure. They reflect and reproduce assumptions about who the “default” user is. Historically, this user has been white, male, cisgender, and nondisabled (Butler, 1990).

This critique echoes in more applied domains. For example, Sara Ahmed (2012) describes how institutional spaces are built for certain bodies to move comfortably, while others are forced to navigate around “brick walls.” In architecture, Aimi Hamraie (2017) shows how even ostensibly inclusive features, like ramps or “accessible” toilets, are often bolted onto environments as afterthoughts, revealing how able-bodiedness is embedded into the design logic of space. She calls this “retrofit access,” a practice that reinscribes rather than challenges exclusion.

The Christine Sun Kim quote, “learning sign language is easier than a Deaf person learning to hear,” is a fantastic example. It encapsulates so much of what’s wrong with the expectation that inclusion should always be comfortable for the dominant group. In my own teaching, I’ve seen how quickly “comfort” becomes a proxy for normativity. Your sign name activity pushes against that, and I loved it! Asking students not just to witness differences but to participate in shifting the baseline is a great and stimulating provocation. I also try to stretch my students’ communication by signing simple one-word phrases such as toilet, thank you, yes, good morning, etc, to them so that they do not necessarily have to use their voices to speak up. But it is more of a playful activity than a proper commitment to using sign language to support their communication.

I also appreciate how your changes, like introducing live captions, are framed not as accommodations but as enhancements that support a wider range of learners. I was aiming to do that too, but my class has no facilities for it. I recently learned that one could do that using PowerPoint, but I haven’t had the time to look into it properly yet. How have you gone about it? That aligns with principles in UDL and inclusive HCI (my broader field of research/practice), where we know these shifts benefit not just disabled users, but multilingual, neurodivergent, and non-linear thinkers…and I have many students with language barriers this year.

This blog is an excellent reminder that inclusion is not a gesture; it’s a human right. Like all good design problems, it needs iteration, critique, and, above all, accountability. Ultimately, I liked how you acted intentionally to make changes.

References:

Ahmed, S., 2012. On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. In On being included. Duke University Press.

Butler, J., 1990. Gender Trouble New York and London. Routledge.(1993) Bodies that Matter, New York and London: Routledge.(1994)“Gender as Performance: An Interview with Judith Butler,” Radical Philosophy, 67, pp.32-9.

Hamraie, A., 2017. Building access: Universal design and the politics of disability. U of Minnesota Press.

Kapp, S.K., 2020. Autistic community and the neurodiversity movement: Stories from the frontline (p. 330). Springer Nature.

Le, L., 2024, October. ” I Am Human, Just Like You”: What Intersectional, Neurodivergent Lived Experiences Bring to Accessibility Research. In Proceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (pp. 1-20).

Oliver, M., 2013. The social model of disability: Thirty years on. Disability & society, 28(7), pp.1024-1026.

Reply

Blog Post 1: Disability

Comments

One response to “Blog Post 1: Disability”

Leave a Reply to Antonella Nonnis Cancel reply