Hello Amanda. Thanks.
I guess there is a intrinsic inter locking devise in the social model
perspectives. Post modernist views have a appoint in saying that the
dichotomic separation between 'Impaired and 'not impaired' also perpetuates
the asymmetric power relations between them (at a cultural, paradigmatic
level). What is this? Well categorisation, which is what we DOS may do while
counting, 'assessing' and 'supporting' 'them'.
Some postmodernist suggest to decentralise the subject as a technique to
unlock the power relations that would perpetuate 'disablism' by shifting the
gaze to 'the normal'. By that act we would instantly realise that the
emperor is a rather mediocre being.
How can we do that? Is it possible? feasible? I doubt anyone would suggest
to say that in a committee meeting but there must be some other subtle ways
this process could start. Creativity is something DOs have been
demonstrating in the last 10 years.
Best, Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: Number of Dyslexic students in HEI?
Dear Andy,
I very much like to see your critical statements made on purpose. While i
understand that the counting of heads is in some way is necessary in order
to provide services and plan for the future, i see that the labelling and
categorising process can reveal assumptions about people that are
questionable. It is important that those doing the labelling and those
labelled question their own assumptions and also try to understand each
others position. That way leads to respect for difference and (one always
hopes) human rights. The social model makes a distinction between
impairment and disability and I think it is important to write about that
distinction as a means of thinking through to the future that you suggest -
ie to a time when it is assumed that the environment may disable anyone
and any stage of their life, and it is normal to lead life using a range
of tools and strategies that assist with adaptation to the environment.
Best wishes
Amanda
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 14:23:37 -0000, A Velarde <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Perhaps it is not totally bad (or wrong) that we do not know exactly how
>many people have a disability. I am making a critical statement, on
purpose.
>Perhaps it would be better to define and count people who 'are' normal.
Yes,
>categorise them.
>
>Perhaps if we do that writing about the 'social model' would not be
>necessary.
>
>Best,
>
>Andy
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Amanda Kent" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 1:43 PM
>Subject: Re: Number of Dyslexic students in HEI?
>
>
>The difficulty with establishing definitions/criteria and reliable stats
>in relation to disabled students in HE generally [not just for dyslexia]
>is acknowledged in the DFES DES 'Action
>plan':http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/des/index.shtml
>
>The HE section includes the following-
>
>
>"What are the gaps in our evidence?
>
>We do not know what proportion of disabled people go on to HE and doubt
>whether that could be established at the present, given there are
>different definitions of disability used by different data sources.
>
>Previous studies have shown that a major problem with data in the HE
>sector is that there is no generally recognised definition of disability
>and also no general taxonomy of subsets of disability."
>Amanda Kent
>DSA Assessor
>=========================================================================
|