3. PARTICIPANTS
Inter viewee 1
White, female, traditional age college student, full time status at a 4 year
institution, mid to low mid SES, small town/rural context
Physical impairment- utilizes a manual wheel chair for mobility
Inter viewee 2
White, female, just above traditional college age, non -student, mid to low SES,
small town/rural context
Intellectual impairment- sub average intellectual ability/intelligence level for
same age peers without disabilities
Inter viewee 3
White, female, traditional age college student, part time status at a 2
year/technical institution, small town/rural context
Physical impairment- utilizes a manual wheel chair for mobility
Inter viewee 4*
White, male, traditional age college student, full time status at a 4 year
institution, mid to high mid SES?, small town context?
Traumatic brain injury - difficulty learning mathematics, sub average executive
functioning skills & sub average executive functioning level for same age peers
4. Abelism- “pervasive system
of discrimination and
exclusion that oppresses
people [with]…disabilities
on…individual, institutional,
and societal/cultural levels”
(Evans, N. J.,
Fo r n ey, D . S . ,
G u i d o , F. M . ,
P a t to n , L . D . , &
Re n n , K . A . ,
2 01 0 , p . 1 9 8 )
5. OVERALL THEMES
Keen awareness of themselves as different, to come extent
Social acceptability of attribution of “less than”
Acceptable rationale for discrimination still, broadly speaking
“I was told that the only way to go into forensics was to go into law
enforcement and be a detective, and I can‟t do the physical requirements of
that because…‟what if somebody gets killed on a mountain?‟” (Interviewee 1)
“The advisor was pretty straight with me…she pretty much told me she didn‟t
think the state would let me take my certification exam… The only place that
will hire me is camp. I tell people that I am in a wheelchair because it is very
important to me…Its like oh, we can‟t help you, click .” (interviewee 3)
Limited experience with others who share their social identity at
even the broadest level
“For the longest time I thought I was the only person out there with a
disability. Camp changed that…it was confusing for me” (Interviewee 3)
I was the only person in my environment like me
6. OVERALL THEMES
Treatment as undesirable, inconvenience, child -like, or
inspiration frequently interchangeably
[When I first started using the chair]”…people used to ask me if they
could help me…push me over there or do things for me…it was like an
every day thing” (Interviewee 1)
“People see me do things and they tell me I‟m an inspiration… I don‟t
even have time to shave my legs in the winter, I don‟t have time to be an
inspiration.” (Interviewee 1)
“My upper body is more adult…my legs are smaller…I am short, but I am
clearly an adult…Parents often assume I am a camper, even in a staff
shirt” (Interviewee 3)
I don‟t like it when he tells me what to do…he‟s so bossy…I am a good
player (Interviewee 2)
7. APPLICATION TO THEORY:
ASSIGNED READINGS
The “Simultaneity” of Identities ( H o l v i n o , 2 01 2 )
Multiple, mutually influencing, simultaneously experienced
identities.
Interviewee 1- Multiple identities are present, none primary
Interviewee 3- Some people “Let their disability run their life. They should
run their life because its their life .”
Disabled Students in Higher Education; Negotiating Identity
(Riddell, Tinklin, and Wilson, 2005)
Stigma associated with social identity
Avoidance/non-acceptance of the label despite selfidentification.
Interviewee 3- does not identity with most others who have disabilities
Interviewee 2- identifies with her friends, wants to be treated as „normal‟
8. APPLICATION TO THEORY:
OTHER MODELS
LGBT identity theories
Not typically a group that is born into a family that shares identity
D‟Augelli‟s Model of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Development (1994)
Exiting heterosexual identity
Developing a personal lesbian/gay/bisexual identity
Developing a lesbian/gay/bisexual social identity
Becoming a lesbian/gay/bisexual offspring?
Developing a lesbian/gay/bisexual intimacy status
Developing a lesbian/gay/bisexual community?
9. APPLICATION TO THEORY:
OTHER MODELS
Latino/a identity theory
View relationship to identity group as non-hierarchical and related to
individual needs/survival
Latina and Latino Ethnoracial Identity Orientation (Ferdman and
Gallegos, 2012)
Latino-integrated
Latino-identified
Sub-group-identified
Latino as other
Undifferentiated/denial
White-identified
10. POINTS TO CONSIDER
Broad umbrella social identity
Vast, vast different in the characteristics that „place you‟ in this group
Unique status of social identity
My own realization of the indoctrination I still harbor
12. CLOSING THOUGHTS
What does the pervasiveness of negative representations of
this identity and the level of acceptability of discrimination
mean for the identity development of individuals who might
identify with this group? About the development of theories
related to this social identity?
What does it mean for institutions that this group of
individuals to be gaining increasing access to higher
education?
What kind of things might the recognition of this presence of
this social identity group change about how you practice?
What might it change about our campus( es)?
13. REFERENCES
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A .
(2010). Student development in college: Theor y, research, and practice .
Sanfrancisco, CA: Jossey -Bass
Ferdman & Gallegos. (201 2) . Latina and Latino Ethnoracial Identity
Orientation. Wijey & Jackson. New per spectives on racial identity
development . 2 nd ed. New York: NYU Press .
Holvino. (201 2). The “Simultaneity” of Identities. Wijey & Jackson. New
per spectives on racial identity development . 2 nd ed. New York: NYU Press .
Johnson, H. M. (2006). Too late to die young: Nearly true tales from a life .
Macmillan.
Riddell, S., Tinklin, T., & Wilson, A . (2005). Disabled students in higher
education: per spectives on widening access and changing policy .
Routledge.
Editor's Notes
Interviewee 4- incomplete interview: participant was unable/unwilling to complete conversation on topic- extreme preoccupation with
Related to the post modern perspective discussed in the Riddell, S., Tinklin, T., & Wilson, A. (2005). Disabled students in higher education: perspectives on widening access and changing policy, article. Shift in definition from disability as personal deficit/sign of marked or blemished status to a culturally constructed concept. Relatively recent. Implications?
Keen awareness of themselves as differentSocial acceptability of attribution of “less than”- Interviewee 1: “Peer mentors have work and class and everything just like everyone else…They come in trying to write papers like, we need to learn how ‘the disabled’ live and I’m like, “veeerrrrry carefully” I can sum up your entire paper for you.” [that’s the primary difference]Interviewee 2: sometimes I get mean…when people treat me like I’m not normal. I don’t like that.Interviewee 3: “The looks are what hurt the most…looks of complete disgust or being terrified of what they are seeing. If you had grown up in a different environment, would you be different? - yes. When people first meet me they tell me that I have a bitchy persona about myself. I had to learn early to deal with the verbal abuse. I know the fine line between… laughing at and laughing with”** Controversial, but the concept of educational tracking and “special education” (separate tracking systems, least restrictive environment issue)Acceptable rationale for discrimination still, broadly speaking“I was told that the only way to go into forensics was to go into law enforcement and be a detective, and I can’t do the physical requirements of that because…’what if somebody gets killed on a mountain?’” (Interviewee 1)“The advisor was pretty straight with me…she pretty much told me she didn’t think the state would let me take my certification exam…The only place that will hire me is camp. I tell people that I am in a wheelchair because it is very important to me…Its like oh, we can’t help you, click.” (interviewee 3)Limited experience with others who share their social identity at even the broadest level“For the longest time I thought I was the only person out there with a disability” (Interviewee 2)I was the only person in my environment like me Family treats me as different (Interviewee 4*)
- Interviewee 4*- though he cut our conversation short, I followed up with those helping to support him. They shared with me that he is bullied and kind of hazed by other students and that is a concern, so they were hoping I was able to talk about positive or negative relationships with him. So used to being excluded he will accept any attention or opportunity to be normal. He shared that different people in his family treats him as the first three at different times- very complicated relationship with parents.
The “Simultaneity” of Identities (Holvino, 2012) Multiple, mutually influencing, simultaneously experienced identities. Interviewee 1- Multiple identities are more salient over time and contextInterviewee 3- Different prominent identities salient over time and contextDisabled Students in Higher Education; Negotiating Identity(Riddell, Tinklin, and Wilson, 2005)Stigma associated with social identityAvoidance/non-acceptance of the label despite self-identification. Interviewee 3- “My disability is just part of who I am…I didn’t come into contact or really understand others with disabilities until I was in my teens. Confused me…[this was not how my mom raised me]first person language is hard.” I feel like I don’t (identify with others with disabilities). My mom raised me to do things myself, didn’t shelter me.Others are more sheltered, or see themselves in a way that I feel like they shouldn’t. I am so open I think it makes them nervous. It bothers me because I think if there were more people who were more open and out there with their disability then things might change. Parents don’t want their kids to have the pressure on their shoulders…but that’s kind of how it has to be. I feel like they are just holding their kids back because they see themselves as defined”
LGBT identity theoriesNot typically a group that is born into a family that shares identityLgbt- not born into social identity group (in fact, only 17% of those with disabilities are born with their impairment at all) Interviewee 1: My mom saw me as her cripple child and used this to gain sympathy/pity Interviewee 3: My family has accommodated me well, step dad accepts me, but when I was born people told my mother she should give me up or institutionalize me Interviewee 4*: Siblings don’t get along/are mean- call me a disgrace to family; mom wants him to be able to have ‘normal’ life, bio-dad is gets frustrated with how he can’t shut up like othersD’Augelli’s Model of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Development (1994)Exiting heterosexual identity -Interviewee 1 has a progressive disability. Earlier in her life, many of the differences she identified with had nothing to do with her ability status. When the level of her impairment, so to speak, changed, she described kind of exiting a sense of normality. - Interviewee 3 felt more normal (or hopeful) and found some people to be accepting as a child. As the discrimination continued into adulthood, she described something like a realization that she was not part of the “norm”Developing a personal lesbian/gay/bisexual identity Interviewees 1 & 3 described changes in their identity over time and differences between how they see themselves and others see them. They understand that they are not part of the norm and the unique ways that their lives would be affected by their identity. Interviewee 1: challenge internalized myths about what it means to be a person with a disability.Developing a lesbian/gay/bisexual social identity Finding support networks and places/people that are more accepting. Interviewee 1- different social groups on campus, different levels of acceptance. Interviewee 3- different contexts and groups (family and camp) that are more safe and accepting.Becoming a lesbian/gay/bisexual offspring Different relationships that develop between parent-child that is loving and accepting but appropriate for the needs and desires of both Interviewees 1 & 3 have begun to develop what sound like average relationships as compared to same age peers. Interviewees 2 & 4 negotiate very different relationships based on their needs and the desires of both partiesDeveloping a lesbian/gay/bisexual intimacy statusDeveloping a lesbian/gay/bisexual community? Interviewee 1: involvement in DRC- partial element of my identity Interviewee 2: don’t identify with most individuals or “community” but does identify with Camp Community very strongly…?
Latino/a identity theoryView relationship to identity group as non-hierarchical and related to individual needs/survival Latina and Latino Ethnoracial Identity Orientation (Ferdman and Gallegos, 2012)Latino-integratedLatino-identified- Possibly where Interviewee 1 is currently? Expresses awareness of and affiliation with this identity/group, but within the context of many other identities. Does not Sub-group-identifiedLatino as other- possibly where Interviewee 3 is currently? Awareness of difference, but superficial understanding of nuances. Loose affiliation with some others who share identity based on proximity and similarity of other views/circumstances, not shared group history (& experience)Undifferentiated/denial- Somewhere between this and White Identified is the most likely fit for Interviewee 2 in this theory. Overall only surface level understanding/awareness of difference. Prefers and wants to be treated as ‘normal’ despite difference- perhaps what could be described as denial of difference. White-identified- possibly where Interview 4 is currently: sees the world through the lens of the dominant group and develops self perception accordinglyLatino/a identity theoryView relationship to identity group as non-hierarchical and related to individual needs/survival Latina and Latino Ethnoracial Identity Orientation (Ferdman and Gallegos, 2012)Latino-integratedLatino-identifiedSub-group-identifiedLatino as otherUndifferentiated/denialWhite-identified
There are so many sub-types of disability, including but not limited to the broad sub categories, such as physical or intellectual (root cause or manifestation?); visible or invisible (root cause or manifestation?) and even these categories can intersect or be broken down further in many different ways, such as- is an intellectual disability intelligence based or cognative processing related? Is it specific or broad/global? And then, s it visible or invisible? There are some social movements aimed at creating social change for/with this identity group and there seems to have been significant change over time. That being said, the comparison could be made that, in terms of achievement of civil rights, this group is where LGBTQ groups were in the 1950’s; Racial groups and women were prior to or around this time. My participants shared examples of explicit discrimination. Legislation like ADA and IDEA began being passed in the 90’s. Personally, I read a book that was the autobiography of a female lawyer with a severe and progressive physical disability. In this, she shared how she wrote articles countering and debated in person a philosopher (contemporary, respected & ‘legitimate’; I read some of the work that he premised these agreements on in my intro to morality philosophy class) who argues that we, the dominant and at least temporarily able group, should develop criteria and a system for determining the ratio of “expected quality of life in best and worse cases” and cost of care to society to keep an individual alive and use this to make utliitarian decisions about euthanizing individuals. Part of this argument is that below a certain “level of function” or “quality of life” compared to the norm, a person with a disability drops from the category of ‘full humanity’ in terms of moral consideration, so this kind of choice becomes appropriate. That is not just a ‘lunatic fringe’ representative and some marginal belief system- tenured academic widely read and influential in many spheres including circles of folks advocating for different paradigms of legal and political rights and protections- e.g. PETA
- Mostly female, mostly similar context, - Most of these theories were designed based on the premise of typical cognitive and intellectual development or achievement, given that the defining characteristic of the sub group of those with intellectual impairment is that they DIFFER from this premise, we have to use extreme caution when applying these theories to this population and seriously consider the fact that these theories may not be applicable to the identity development of these individuals at all, or even their holistic “human development”, as even theories like Piaget (cognitive developmental) or Kegan (holistic developmental), given their paradigms, may merely function to identify these individuals as separate and may not reflect the proper considerations or have the necessary sensitivity to really describe or asses these individuals in ways appropriate to their lived experiece, but rather only in the terms of the dominant group describing them even more so than with other identity groups.
What does the pervasiveness of negative representations of this identity and the level of acceptability of discrimination mean for the identity development of individuals who might identify with this group? This sounds related to the ambivalence of towards accepting this label described in the (Riddell, Tinklin, and Wilson, 2005) selection. It also seems possible that theories about this group might change over time as the context changes, in the way that theories about gender, race, and sexuality have.What does it mean for institutions that this group of individuals to be gaining increasing access to higher education?What kind of things might the recognition of this presence of this social identity group change about how you practice? What might it change about our campuses?