Claiming Disability: Knowledge and Identity

4. DIVIDED CURRICULUM

DIVIDED CURRICULU M The gate s of the institution s an d sheltere d dwelling s tha t hav e housed disable d peopl e ove r th e centurie s hav e been opened . The critica l gaze of our newl y minted citizens , unaccounte d fo r al l these years , i s no w traine d o n th e dominan t narratives . Throug h their eyes, we see the replication an d justification o f social practice s in ou r intellectua l traditions . Thi s chapte r provide s a disabilit y reading o f thos e traditions , a s well a s a discussion o f th e obstacle s to meaningful inquiry . Butler an d Walter s (1991 ) not e tha t decision s abou t curriculu m transformation ar e based , i n part , o n th e answe r t o th e questio n "Are these ignored, distorted , subordinate d peopl e and thei r histor 4 ies an d legacies , an d experience s importan t t o understandin g an d expressing ou r America n selves? " (326) . T o get th e academ y t o engage tha t questio n wit h respec t t o disability , disabilit y right s activists an d disabilit y studie s scholar s hav e first had t o assum e th e responsibility o f proving that disable d peopl e occupy a subordinat e position i n critica l socia l an d economi c domains , tha t disable d people ar e a significan t constituency , an d tha t ou r historie s an d legacies have been distorted . Further , disabilit y studies ha s demon strated ho w th e status an d assigne d role s of disabled peopl e are no t inevitable outcome s o f impairment s bu t th e product s o f socia l and politica l processes . No w i t i s incumben t o n peopl e acros s th e disciplines t o stud y th e consequence s o f oppressin g peopl e wit h disabilities and , significantly , t o stud y th e consequence s o f con structing a knowledge bas e within whic h tha t socia l positionin g i s deemed rationa l and morall y sound . In directin g attentio n no w t o th e rol e o f th e academ y i n th e social response to disability, I will focus on three domains. The first is th e natur e o f inquir y int o disability ; th e second , th e structur e of th e curriculu m i n highe r educatio n an d it s rol e i n organizin g information s o a s t o represen t certai n version s o f th e world ; an d the third, th e content o f the curriculum . 1. INQUIR Y Research, whether aimed at disability as subject matte r and disable d people as subjects o r erroneously ignorin g disability, plays a role in constructing disability . A number o f questions aris e when thinkin g about ho w th e metho d an d focu s o f th e proces s o f acquirin g ne w knowledge shap e understandin g o f disability . Fo r instance , ho w does th e structur e an d focu s o f researc h contribut e t o ableis t no tions of disability? What perspectives inform th e choice of variables, theories t o b e tested , interpretativ e framework s t o b e employed , and subjects/object s t o b e studied ? Ho w ha s th e researc h agend a DIVIDED CURRICULU M 72 been influence d b y th e absenc e o f disable d peopl e i n academi c positions? I will star t wit h th e las t question . Disable d peopl e ar e rarel y i n the researcher' s positio n becaus e o f a hos t o f factors , includin g limited educationa l opportunities , discriminatio n i n hirin g an d promotion, an d inadequat e suppor t fo r disabilit y studie s scholar ship . Further , whe n...