Abstract
In this paper, we examine the barriers to, and possibilities of, recognizing individuals labelled intellectually disabled as producers and contributors to knowledge about their experiences. Through engaging perspectives within the fields of philosophy of education and disability studies, we examine contrasting research about the use of facilitated communication, an augmentative and alternative communication technique for teaching people with disabilities to communicate through pointing, or typing with support provided by a communication partner. We examine how researchers impose demands for the scientific validation of facilitated communication and use such demands to discredit autistic people identified with intellectual disabilities in their attempts to be recognized as knowers and producers of knowledge. Our analysis calls into question whether self-imposed limitations on contemporary knowledge production render educational research (in)capable of accepting forms of evidence that will facilitate the agency of those labelled or regarded as intellectually disabled and (in)capable of providing consumers of educational research access to knowledge that reflects the wide range of communicative, neurocognitive
,
and intellectual diversity in schools and communities.
Reference79 articles.
1. Ashby, C. (2010). The trouble with normal: The struggle for meaningful access for middle school students with developmental disabilities. Disability and Society, 25(3), 345–358.
2. Ashby, C. (2011). Whose “voice” is it anyway?: Giving voice and qualitative research involving individuals that type to communicate. Disability Studies Quarterly, 31(4).
3. Ashby, C., & Causton-Theoharis, J. (2012). “Moving quietly through the door of opportunity”: Perspectives of college students who type to communicate. Equity and Excellence in Education, 45(2), 261–282.
4. Ashby, C., Jung, E., Woodfield, C., Vroman, K., & Orsati, F. (2015). ‘Wishing to go it alone’: The complicated interplay of independence, interdependence and agency. Disability and Society, 30(10), 1,474–1,489.
5. Barmache (2019). Letter by letter. In E. Peña (Ed.), Communication alternatives in autism: Perspectives on typing and spelling approaches for the nonspeaking (pp. 95–114). Toplight.