Inclusive participation means that anyone who wants to participate should be able to. Roughly one in four people in the United States have some form of disability — and must navigate society in whatever way they can. Those who can do it without support are often seen as resilient and those who cannot are considered less than, and their participation in society becomes limited.
This was one of the main ideas from “Pathologizing Ability: Considering Neurodivergent Experiences and Ableism in Learning Spaces,” presented at the National Association for Diversity Officers in Higher Education (NADOHE) annual meeting Friday by Dr. Naomi Nishi, Associate Dean for Culture, Community, and Accessible Care at Colorado State University.
Dr. Naomi Nishi
“I worry particularly about the use of resilience in kind of our age of both well-being work, and in that are we starting to blame disabled people for not being more resilient. And this goes for other identities as well, but so often I hear things when somebody asks for help, I hear things like resilience,” she said. “I hear things like personal responsibility. You should have thought about that. You should have asked for support earlier. You didn't ask for support at the right time.’”
Many institutions operate under the basic principle that accommodations for those who request them should be honored. But for institutions relying on the medical model of disability, there are questions around not just how to give accommodations, but to whom—especially if students haven’t been formally diagnosed. It is in this way that the pathology of neurodivergence and disability persist.
“We cannot meaningfully have democracy if we do not have full participation,” said Nishi. "We cannot have full participation if we are excluding by any type of identity, ... including by disability. We’re going to identify, prevent, and dismantle ableist assumptions and teaching policy, and apply anti-deficit and neuro ability inclusive strategies.”
She explained there are two models of disability: the medical model and the social model of disability. The medical model describes disability as caused by a physical, mental, or sensory impairment. This is a deficit-centered approach, which pathologizes neurodivergence and disability, and it is inherently harmful, Nishi said. “Pathology is the study of disease ... the medical profession is to cure, alleviate the effect of the impairment, to fix the person,” she said. This model prioritizes what is “normal” or “neurotypical” at the expense of those who do not meet those standards. This is the root of ableism, which Nishi said is a tool wielded in all systems of oppression.
“Not only is it used against disabled people and or neurodivergent people, it is a key tool of white supremacism patriarchy,” she said.
Higher education institutions make efforts to address these disparities by complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which laid the groundwork for equity for disabled individuals living in the United States. The ADA offers protections for those who have disabilities so that they can fully participate in society. The ADA “guarantees that people with disabilities have the same opportunities as everyone else to enjoy employment opportunities, purchase goods and services, and participate in state and local government programs.”
A democratic approach to inclusivity helps bridge the gap between how people with disabilities are treated and how they should be supported to fully participate in society, with limited guidance from the ADA. Institutions already know they need to upgrade their facilities to widen access for those with physical disabilities, and offer “reasonable accommodations” for many types of disabilities, including mental, psychological, and sensory disabilities.
This can be somewhat mediated and assuaged by considering and understanding the social model of disability, she continued, challenging the audience to focus on the barriers to full participation in society rather than someone’s pathology.
Nishi outlined what these barriers are, saying, “The essential barriers include the environment, which is inaccessible, including building services, language, communication. The barriers are in the attitudes, including prejudice, stereotyping, discrimination, and the barriers are in the organizations, which are inflexible in terms of procedures and practices.”
But panelists and audience members discussed that what qualifies as a “reasonable accommodation” is still vague, and it depends largely on what people are willing to do for those who either request or require them.
One attendee mentioned that a willingness to accommodate or not is where ableism shows up. Students are expected to be able to self-advocate to receive both access and necessary modifications, even if they are newly diagnosed.
Another noted that higher education professionals don’t necessarily know which questions to ask, or may not be familiar with what it looks like to accommodate students. Professionals may feel challenged to realize that the student may not know either. And leaving the burden on the students themselves to navigate the process around getting tested alone while they’re trying to understand if they would even be a candidate for accommodations is another barrier.
Everyday solutions, on an interpersonal level, include asking questions around assumptions and confusions, and collaboratively planning approaches and processes with neurodivergent colleagues. Institutions can also create affinity groups and support those who choose to take part. A scalable solution included creating fellowships for higher education leaders to better understand their students and faculty from all backgrounds and walks of life. For example, the Disability Support Leadership Institute was created at the State University of New York to help higher education leaders do this work.
Nishi reminded the audience that while all of these solutions are important, it is critical to seek permission and get informed consent from those you are helping to serve, particularly for some neurodivergent folks and people with disabilities.
