In what ways are Oliver's (1990) provocative views on the politics of labeling disability similar to or different from Aimee Mullin's views on what disability means? Support your position.
I believe there are some similarities in the views of Oliver and Mullins in the fact that they both hit on the concept that ideas can be taught by the way a person is treated. Oliver protested that if being disabled was seen as a tradegy and disabled persons were treated like victims thus the disabled would start acting like victims. Mullins stresses this point but in a positive light. I loved the way she brought the kids in first without the adults and let them explore the legs. I feel this is a great way to get rid of any fears a child may have. She put the idea into their head that she could do anything such as jump over a house and even fly. I loved the term she used going from being "disabled to superabled". The idea was also planted in her friend's mind that being disabled was not fair (in a positive light) when her friend thought she was lucky to be able to change her height. Loved it! As educators, we have the opportunity to plant the same positive seeds in the minds of people around us.
I first have to say, WOW. What an awesome story from Aimee Mullins. I do think that there are some overlapping ideas between the TED video and the Oliver chapter. I think the most prominent idea to me was the power of potential and giving meaning to situations. I think that both Mullins and Oliver have made it clear that if you believe you can, you can do it. I really liked the point that Mullins had when she made the parents leave the room and how all of the sudden the children didn't see her as disabled. Oliver talks about how humans beings give meaning to their situations. Without their parents being there, these children to really able to see that if they have meaning (a positive one) then they will achieve (even things like fying, haha). Another thing I was baffled about was when someone told Mullins that she was "very attractive and didn't look disabled". These are the types of meanings we associate with disabled people...that they are unattractive. That is so sad. To me, this brings up the same question I believe is a focus of special education and that is the idea of labeling. It seems the special education is often negatively labeled, when if we were to positively label it, so much more could be achieved. I mean, Mullins had more autonomy over her body than "normal" people do. What normal person do you know that has five different heights without wearing heels? :)
I can see the similarity in ideas between Oliver’s work and Aimee Mullins’ story. Both accounts tackled the ideas of why society often conceptualizes those with disabilities as weak and feeble. Society often teaches us that because one is disabled that they are unable to do certain things. Oliver touched on this on page four when he said “In so doing it conserves the noting of impairment as abnormality in function, disability as not being able to perform an activity considered normal for a human being and handicap as the inability to perform a normal social role.” I must admit, I have even been a victim of stereotyping people based on their appearance. Many times when we see someone in a wheelchair we often think that they cannot participate in the same activities you and I can which is far from true. Just look at the University’s men’s wheelchair basketball team, they have won back to back national championships. Did they let their “handicap” stop them from pursuing their dreams? NO! I also liked the way Oliver and Mullins both mentioned how the ideas we place on these people can ultimately determine how he or she acts. If society tells us that someone with a learning disability cannot get into an Ivy League school, more than likely that person with the learning disability will think exactly that which is truly heartbreaking. Often we are trained to see these people as less capable which is clearly not the case, for example Aimee Mullin’s story. Also, Mullins and Oliver both touched on the importance of shining a positive light on having disabilities. I found it quite hysterical when she joked about Pamela Anderson having more prosthetic in her body than her and no one calls her disabled. Oliver mentions this in his piece when he writes “let us hope that the personal tragedy theory, the last in line, will soon disappear and be replaced by a much more adequate social theory of disability.” I also found what Mullins’ said about creating that conversation in society about how a disability is not overcoming a deficiency or replacing a loss but about how we can put a positive spin on these so called “negatives.” As special educators we have a chance to influence not only our students and their parents, but society as a whole. We have the opportunity to educate them and ask them not to look at these individuals as “disabled” or “handicapped” but to look at them as an individual who is capable of doing anything they sat their mind to.
Kimberly, I agree that the comment Mullins received about "being attractive and not looking disabled" is very disheartening. Sadly, it does show continued labeling of persons with disabilities. That is why it is so vital that educators set the example. As a kindergarten teacher, I feel I have a responsibility to teach my students to look deeper into an individual and not just at the surface. I stress that what matters is being pretty on the inside.
Elizabeth, I also agree that a person can reach any goal with determination. I do not allow my students to say "I can't". I tell them to say "I will try my best". I have found in my years of teaching that if I convince my students I believe in them, they start believing in themselves. It goes back to what Mullins said about putting a positive spin on the so called "negatives".
Kimberly, I enjoyed reading your post! I too agree with your statement “if you believe you can, you can do it.” I believe this is an idea we should constantly foster into our students. Many students I have worked with often come from low socioeconomic homes or have parents who are not really involved in their child’s work. Sometimes these students need that extra boost of confidence in order to give it their all, especially with students with disabilities. Often times, these students are ridiculed by their peers and society sees them as weak. It is our job as educators to help these students understand that they can do whatever they want to do with their lives as long as they give it their all.
Christy, I really liked the point you made in your post about how so many times people view disabilities as a tragedy. Anytime I tell someone I am getting my Masters degree in special education their response typically is “awe, that’s so sweet! It takes a special person to deal with those kids!” It irritates me beyond belief that they look at these students like there is something terribly wrong with them. As a teacher, I will strive my best to educate society about everything we have to offer students with special needs and encourage them to look at the positives rather than the negatives.
I think that there are many similarities between the views of Oliver and Mullins. One main idea that I got from both is that a “disability” is not a concrete condition. It is simply a characteristic of that person and sometimes, as in Aimee’s case, an asset. I also think that they both pointed to the idea that the disabled should not look at their disability as something that is hindering or oppressing them, but rather look at their disability as an opportunity. One main idea that they both seemed to hint at was problems with society. Views that society have of the disabled are what have caused their problems. It is not their fault nor should it be attributed to their impairment when they have difficulties integrating into society. Overall, I feel both were very insightful!
I enjoyed reading the Oliver text and viewing the Mullins video clip. Both Oliver and Mullins take the burden of the exceptionality off the individual and place it on society. Every alternative question in the Oliver text discussed problems individuals with exceptionalities faced in their environments. In her interaction with young children, Mullins discussed that adults saw her condition as a disability. This statement reminded me of the negative question “Can you tell me what is wrong with you?” in the Oliver text, which placed the burden of the exceptionality on the individual. Both Oliver and Mullins hit on the impact state of mind has on the lives of individuals with exceptionalities. Oliver writes about the negative impact society’s views of disability can have on these individuals, such as learned helplessness alluded to in the tragedy theory. Mullins views her condition as a stepping stone rather than as a stumbling block. Wearing prosthetics has opened up many doors for Mullins. Among many other things, she is an accomplished fashion model and spokesperson. As Mullins states, when individuals with exceptionalities choose to wear prosthetics, they are capable of “designing their bodies from a state of empowerment” rather than a state of weakness. In this case, prosthetic legs are seen as extensions, just like clothes, which further allow these individuals to better express their personalities. When Mullins wants to run like the wind, she can put on her cheetah legs; when she applies for a managerial position, she can wear her extra tall legs to subtly hint at her ability to lead. Normal individuals are not capable of doing this. As educators, we should instill in our students the need to view their conditions as positives rather than negatives. When they do this, they focus on what they can do rather than on what they cannot do. This allows them to have a better quality of life (a major topic discussed in this course), because they view themselves as capable beings rather than as powerless drones.
I also wrote about tragedy theory. I completely agree with your thoughts about it. It reminds me of a class I had in an undergraduate course in which the instructor told us that individuals tend to live up to their given names. For example, the instructor stated that people named Jane are typically plain and that people named Wanda are typically overweight. A little silly, but it was something that stuck with me. It further reminds me that we must always hold our students to high expectations in order to enable them to achieve to their fullest potential. I believe if we do not actively do this then we are not meeting our job requirements.
The fact that labels are commonly viewed as detriments is something that intrigues me, as well. I believe it is the reason (as mentioned in our previous courses) that parents and guardians ardently fight to keep their children out of special education (even though their children are in dire need of help). Also, labels tend to stick with students even after they leave the public school system. I believe there is an ongoing fight to change the way society views exceptionalities. As mentioned in my Multicultural Education course, shifts in societal ideals are a massive undertaking; however, this should not stop us from creating “paths of least resistance” for others to follow. Such paths of least resistance could be instilling self-esteem in individuals with exceptionalities to better prepare them for life after school.
Christie I as well I loved that she let the children explore the prosthetic legs. I feel that exposure can make a possible uncomfortable situation more comfortable. This applies to the classroom and the world when it comes to individuals with disabilities. Sometimes individuals do not know how to approach others that are different because they lack exposure. This was a great way to let the children know that being different is not bad thing. Disabled can be super abled. I loved that statement. This one experience could impact these children's view on disability forever, in a positive way.
Kimberly I loved your post. I do agree that we need to stop with the labeling, and we do label special education in a negative way. It is sad but it seems that sometimes individuals in the school system or even outside of the school system views a child that receive special education services as not good enough, or smart enough. What is good enough or smart enough? An individual can label a person or service, but doesn't realize that a label only characterizes the package, but the package can contain so much more than what the label describes. The only way you will find this out is if you are willing to open and explore that package.
I really liked the reading by Oliver and the Aimee Mullins video. There were most definitely a commonality of ideas with both. What I really grasped was that you can not let society depict how you are, or how you are going to live your life. If you feel that your disability is a tragedy then you will play the victim (Oliver, 1990). What I love about Aimee Mullins is that she refuses to play the victim. She doesn't let society tell her how she should feel about herself or even what she is, or not capable of achieving because she is labeled disabled. She has turned something that is often viewed as a tragedy in our society and made it intriguing, artistic and creative.
She is viewed as not being disabled but super abled because of her strengths and accomplishments. She refused to be a loser in this game of life. She is a winner because she has chosen to be a positive influence in society instead of a victim of, or in society. I do believe that Oliver was trying to convey the same message. You have the ability to live your life how you want disabled or not. Society doesn't determine who you are but you determine who you want to be in society. This is the lesson that we need to teach our students.
When thinking about the ways that Oliver (1990) and Mullins present the ideas on the politics of being disabled, I think they have similar ideas. At first, after I read Oliver and started listening to Mullins, I did not think that they would have similarities at all after reading the excerpt on YouTube about what the video stood for. But they both present the view that we are tackling and trying to change how society looks at “disabled”. One of the first things that stood out to me in Mullins video was that she said that the children will react the way they see the adults react. When she said if an adult acts frightened, then the child will act this way. And I believe this to be true. If we act weird and frightened around someone who has a disability, then we are teaching our children to act this way. Also, in Oliver, he talks about how the disabled people are fostering a growing group and consciousness and identity of people with disability. Also, Aimee makes the comment that we are working toward society as making them authenticate and that they have potential and they change their own identities and potential. Lastly, Mullins said, we all have heart breaking strengths and glory and we all have our disabilities. Even though we are not classified as disabled, we have a disability somewhere inside of us.
I liked how you pointed out that Oliver and Mullins said the same thing, but Mullins put a little twist on it with it being positive. I believe that we need to teach our chidlren to look at students with disabilities in a positive light.
I liked reading your post. I liked how you said that Mullins was super abled, which I feel like she said that in the video, but if she didn't then kudos to you! :] With Oliver, when he mentioned the victim and tradgey thing, that really stuck out ot me too. I believe that society has come so much where what people think depicate how we see and view ourselves, which is a sad and very bad way to be. Everybody has potential and we don't have to live up to what society thinks we are or should be.
Both Oliver and Mullin's views empower individuals with disabilities instead of devaluing them. Oliver argues that current descriptions, perceptions and labels of disabilities lead to a oppression of individuals who have disabilities. Individuals who are directly affected by disabilities especially people who have disabilities are not involved in creating labels and classifications. Tables 1.1 and 1.2 were very interesting. The second set of questions shift a negative focus from the person with a disability to the inadequate environments they participate in. This leads to potential solutions, not "cures." Adaptations can be made to the environment that make it better not only for people with disabilities, but for all people. Mullin's an absolutely amazing woman found a way to use what is traditionally seen as a disadvantage to an advantage. I hope to never forget her friends statement" but, Aimee, that's not fair" Conversation is no long about overcoming deficiency, but about augmentation, about potential. Wow!
Amber and Christy, I also love the emphasis on positive. Not just children, but all of us need to learn to emphasize the positives of situations. As adults that means we have to unlearn things that prevent us from seeing the positives in situations. We must move from negative self talk about others and ourselves to positive self talk. A powerful concept the power of positive thought and action.
Jonathon When I read that your instructor told you that individuals tend to live up to their given names. I said to myself so true. My undergraduate professors stressed that labels had no place in IEPS only the strengths and needs of the individual student and how they would be addressed. Emphasis on strengths. In my experience as a classroom teacher at the secondary level. I see many students who have low self-effciacy and learned helplessness as result of being identified as a student who experiences difficulties learning.
I believe that the views of Oliver and Mullin are similar. Oliver (1990) states that it falls to the individuals with disabilities to critique the stereotypical view of seeing disability as a problem. Aimee Mullin addresses that same thought in the TED clip. When she had the children brought in she let them be curious with no adult there to tell them not to stare or ask questions. She was able to communicate her different sets of legs to them in a positive way. It is my hope that because of their experience those children, as they mature, will be much less likely to look at someone missing limbs as disabled and will more likely look at them just as they would anyone else. Oliver, in describing the criticisms of official definitions, states the conservation of the notion of impairment as “abnormality in function, disability as not being able to perform an activity considered normal for a human being and being handicap as the inability to perform a normal social role.” Aimee Mullin does not seem to have a problem in any of these areas, which implies that she may also express those same criticisms of official definitions.
I was also struck by the statement made to Aimee Mullen about her not looking disabled. I think people do tend to believe that pretty people could never be disabled and that anyone who is disabled must be unattractive. I don't guess I have ever thought about it until you mentioned it. I saw a young girl a few years ago that was missing the lower half of her arm and I immediately felt terribly sorry for her and wondered how such a horrible thing could happen to such a pretty girl. I guess in a way I was much like the person who made the comment to Aimee. It's amazing how age, maturity, and education can change the way we see things.
I agree with what you mentioned in your post that as special educators we must educate people and ask that they look at our students as capable individuals. It is very hard to motivate students who are seen by themselves and others as a hopeless case. They pick up on how they are treated and they know when someone sees them as less able than their peers. Maybe we can be the generation of special educators that helps to change how our students are thought of by others. :)
I love your idea of disabilities not being a "concrete" condition. I would have never thought to put it into those words. It really makes so much sense though! Unfortunately, like you said, the way society views disabilities is almost seems like most see it as "concrete". I think our job as educators should be to make sure to teach our students that nothing is concrete and that you can make your life what you want it to be.
Jonathan- I love the idea of the "body of empowerment". What a message. I really think that if society were to look from this perspective, the world would be such a better place. I honestly feel so many people look at the weakness aspect of "I can't do this" or "I can't do that". We are "disabling" ourselves if we do this.
I agree with you that Oliver and Mullins views were similar. You both brought up similar connections about no longer viewing the "disabled" individual as being deficient but rather as having opportunity and potential! I think that it is wonderful that the there is an effort being made to change the thought patterns on main stream America. I can relate to the "It’s not fair" statement! I am 5'4 and my baby sister is 5'9. I always say this to her. I wish I could change my height and pop up taller than her one day! It would be amazing! Seeing a disability as simply an opportunity for improvement can really empower individuals!
It appears that Oliver stresses the importance of definitions for disabilities. This can help practitioners can be educated, or trained on what encompasses some disabilities. As a result, a person's potential can be maximized for even with disabilities. However, this view can be oppressive for people with disabilities. They are similar viewpoints. Mullins brought up great point about children's natural curiosity and how adults teach kids not to stare or ask. The only thing is, some people do not want to answer questions about their disability and its more "polite" not to ask. But when Mullins invited the kids in, she gave them "permission" to get more information. I liked how she discussed the potential she has rather than her deficiencies.
As always, I have been following this discussion "quietly". Though you have all touched on different aspects of the issues in the two works (Oliver's & Mullins'), it appears to me that you all agree that there are strong commonalities in the perspectives they express. First of these is the lack of fixity of disability—that disability gets socially constituted in interactions among people, attitudes and perceptions. Two, that the language used to describe disability allows us a glimpse into the social construction of disability e.g., (the disability survey that Oliver describes tells us that disability is viewed from a medical perspective---a problem for the person with a disability) or the comments/”compliments” that Mullins receives (“You don’t seem disabled to me”) that tell us that society has a certain fixed image of what a person with a disability ought to look like and that fixed imagery of disability is “not beautiful/pretty”. Inherent your collective discussions here and your individual thoughts expressed in analytic memos (for those who submitted one on this module) is the distinction between the social model vs. the medical model of disability. Inasmuch as the ideas of social model of disability acknowledges the distinctions between disability/impairment, proponents of the model argue that disability is an aspect of human diversity (like race, class, gender, etc) and individuals with disabilities constitute a minority group that is sometimes subjected to discriminatory practices by the dominant group (read: non-disabled people or as they are referred to in this model , temporary able bodied [TABs]). Essentially, without naming/labeling it as such, the discussion you have been having is about the social model of disability (similar to The notion that disability is not a fixed or static category or a static state is built on the idea that disability is socially produced thereby giving it situational and experiential components…that someone is viewed as disabled (mildly, moderately or severely so) based upon situational demands and what aspects of their lack of functional ability are given consequence. For instance, for a “normal person” in the land of blind or deaf, being able to see or hear is of consequence in so far as being able to communicate with others who do not rely on language for communication or being of “normal height in a land like Lilliput---think popular texts like Groce’s book Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language: Hereditary Deafness on Martha's Vineyard where being a hearing person on Martha’s Vineyard in the 1600s was definitely disabled/disabling because of the majority residents were deaf or in Gulliver’s Travels, in the land of Lilliput being the “giant” was a distinct disadvantage. The social model of disability completely disrupts how we think of disability from the medical model. Your discussion here captures the essence of the social model of disability, and hopefully allows you to think of ways in which that model might inform daily interactions with students with SPD.
I believe there are some similarities in the views of Oliver and Mullins in the fact that they both hit on the concept that ideas can be taught by the way a person is treated. Oliver protested that if being disabled was seen as a tradegy and disabled persons were treated like victims thus the disabled would start acting like victims. Mullins stresses this point but in a positive light. I loved the way she brought the kids in first without the adults and let them explore the legs. I feel this is a great way to get rid of any fears a child may have. She put the idea into their head that she could do anything such as jump over a house and even fly. I loved the term she used going from being "disabled to superabled". The idea was also planted in her friend's mind that being disabled was not fair (in a positive light) when her friend thought she was lucky to be able to change her height. Loved it! As educators, we have the opportunity to plant the same positive seeds in the minds of people around us.
ReplyDeleteI first have to say, WOW. What an awesome story from Aimee Mullins. I do think that there are some overlapping ideas between the TED video and the Oliver chapter. I think the most prominent idea to me was the power of potential and giving meaning to situations. I think that both Mullins and Oliver have made it clear that if you believe you can, you can do it. I really liked the point that Mullins had when she made the parents leave the room and how all of the sudden the children didn't see her as disabled. Oliver talks about how humans beings give meaning to their situations. Without their parents being there, these children to really able to see that if they have meaning (a positive one) then they will achieve (even things like fying, haha). Another thing I was baffled about was when someone told Mullins that she was "very attractive and didn't look disabled". These are the types of meanings we associate with disabled people...that they are unattractive. That is so sad. To me, this brings up the same question I believe is a focus of special education and that is the idea of labeling. It seems the special education is often negatively labeled, when if we were to positively label it, so much more could be achieved. I mean, Mullins had more autonomy over her body than "normal" people do. What normal person do you know that has five different heights without wearing heels? :)
ReplyDeleteI can see the similarity in ideas between Oliver’s work and Aimee Mullins’ story. Both accounts tackled the ideas of why society often conceptualizes those with disabilities as weak and feeble. Society often teaches us that because one is disabled that they are unable to do certain things. Oliver touched on this on page four when he said “In so doing it conserves the noting of impairment as abnormality in function, disability as not being able to perform an activity considered normal for a human being and handicap as the inability to perform a normal social role.” I must admit, I have even been a victim of stereotyping people based on their appearance. Many times when we see someone in a wheelchair we often think that they cannot participate in the same activities you and I can which is far from true. Just look at the University’s men’s wheelchair basketball team, they have won back to back national championships. Did they let their “handicap” stop them from pursuing their dreams? NO! I also liked the way Oliver and Mullins both mentioned how the ideas we place on these people can ultimately determine how he or she acts. If society tells us that someone with a learning disability cannot get into an Ivy League school, more than likely that person with the learning disability will think exactly that which is truly heartbreaking. Often we are trained to see these people as less capable which is clearly not the case, for example Aimee Mullin’s story. Also, Mullins and Oliver both touched on the importance of shining a positive light on having disabilities. I found it quite hysterical when she joked about Pamela Anderson having more prosthetic in her body than her and no one calls her disabled. Oliver mentions this in his piece when he writes “let us hope that the personal tragedy theory, the last in line, will soon disappear and be replaced by a much more adequate social theory of disability.” I also found what Mullins’ said about creating that conversation in society about how a disability is not overcoming a deficiency or replacing a loss but about how we can put a positive spin on these so called “negatives.” As special educators we have a chance to influence not only our students and their parents, but society as a whole. We have the opportunity to educate them and ask them not to look at these individuals as “disabled” or “handicapped” but to look at them as an individual who is capable of doing anything they sat their mind to.
ReplyDeleteKimberly, I agree that the comment Mullins received about "being attractive and not looking disabled" is very disheartening. Sadly, it does show continued labeling of persons with disabilities. That is why it is so vital that educators set the example. As a kindergarten teacher, I feel I have a responsibility to teach my students to look deeper into an individual and not just at the surface. I stress that what matters is being pretty on the inside.
ReplyDeleteElizabeth, I also agree that a person can reach any goal with determination. I do not allow my students to say "I can't". I tell them to say "I will try my best". I have found in my years of teaching that if I convince my students I believe in them, they start believing in themselves. It goes back to what Mullins said about putting a positive spin on the so called "negatives".
ReplyDeleteKimberly,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post! I too agree with your statement “if you believe you can, you can do it.” I believe this is an idea we should constantly foster into our students. Many students I have worked with often come from low socioeconomic homes or have parents who are not really involved in their child’s work. Sometimes these students need that extra boost of confidence in order to give it their all, especially with students with disabilities. Often times, these students are ridiculed by their peers and society sees them as weak. It is our job as educators to help these students understand that they can do whatever they want to do with their lives as long as they give it their all.
Christy,
ReplyDeleteI really liked the point you made in your post about how so many times people view disabilities as a tragedy. Anytime I tell someone I am getting my Masters degree in special education their response typically is “awe, that’s so sweet! It takes a special person to deal with those kids!” It irritates me beyond belief that they look at these students like there is something terribly wrong with them. As a teacher, I will strive my best to educate society about everything we have to offer students with special needs and encourage them to look at the positives rather than the negatives.
I think that there are many similarities between the views of Oliver and Mullins. One main idea that I got from both is that a “disability” is not a concrete condition. It is simply a characteristic of that person and sometimes, as in Aimee’s case, an asset. I also think that they both pointed to the idea that the disabled should not look at their disability as something that is hindering or oppressing them, but rather look at their disability as an opportunity. One main idea that they both seemed to hint at was problems with society. Views that society have of the disabled are what have caused their problems. It is not their fault nor should it be attributed to their impairment when they have difficulties integrating into society. Overall, I feel both were very insightful!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading the Oliver text and viewing the Mullins video clip. Both Oliver and Mullins take the burden of the exceptionality off the individual and place it on society. Every alternative question in the Oliver text discussed problems individuals with exceptionalities faced in their environments. In her interaction with young children, Mullins discussed that adults saw her condition as a disability. This statement reminded me of the negative question “Can you tell me what is wrong with you?” in the Oliver text, which placed the burden of the exceptionality on the individual. Both Oliver and Mullins hit on the impact state of mind has on the lives of individuals with exceptionalities. Oliver writes about the negative impact society’s views of disability can have on these individuals, such as learned helplessness alluded to in the tragedy theory. Mullins views her condition as a stepping stone rather than as a stumbling block. Wearing prosthetics has opened up many doors for Mullins. Among many other things, she is an accomplished fashion model and spokesperson. As Mullins states, when individuals with exceptionalities choose to wear prosthetics, they are capable of “designing their bodies from a state of empowerment” rather than a state of weakness. In this case, prosthetic legs are seen as extensions, just like clothes, which further allow these individuals to better express their personalities. When Mullins wants to run like the wind, she can put on her cheetah legs; when she applies for a managerial position, she can wear her extra tall legs to subtly hint at her ability to lead. Normal individuals are not capable of doing this. As educators, we should instill in our students the need to view their conditions as positives rather than negatives. When they do this, they focus on what they can do rather than on what they cannot do. This allows them to have a better quality of life (a major topic discussed in this course), because they view themselves as capable beings rather than as powerless drones.
ReplyDeleteChristy,
ReplyDeleteI also wrote about tragedy theory. I completely agree with your thoughts about it. It reminds me of a class I had in an undergraduate course in which the instructor told us that individuals tend to live up to their given names. For example, the instructor stated that people named Jane are typically plain and that people named Wanda are typically overweight. A little silly, but it was something that stuck with me. It further reminds me that we must always hold our students to high expectations in order to enable them to achieve to their fullest potential. I believe if we do not actively do this then we are not meeting our job requirements.
Jonathan Christian
Kimberly,
ReplyDeleteThe fact that labels are commonly viewed as detriments is something that intrigues me, as well. I believe it is the reason (as mentioned in our previous courses) that parents and guardians ardently fight to keep their children out of special education (even though their children are in dire need of help). Also, labels tend to stick with students even after they leave the public school system. I believe there is an ongoing fight to change the way society views exceptionalities. As mentioned in my Multicultural Education course, shifts in societal ideals are a massive undertaking; however, this should not stop us from creating “paths of least resistance” for others to follow. Such paths of least resistance could be instilling self-esteem in individuals with exceptionalities to better prepare them for life after school.
Jonathan Christian
Christie I as well I loved that she let the children explore the prosthetic legs. I feel that exposure can make a possible uncomfortable situation more comfortable. This applies to the classroom and the world when it comes to individuals with disabilities. Sometimes individuals do not know how to approach others that are different because they lack exposure. This was a great way to let the children know that being different is not bad thing. Disabled can be super abled. I loved that statement. This one experience could impact these children's view on disability forever, in a positive way.
ReplyDeleteSorry Christy. For some reason I want to spell your Christie.
ReplyDeleteKimberly I loved your post. I do agree that we need to stop with the labeling, and we do label special education in a negative way. It is sad but it seems that sometimes individuals in the school system or even outside of the school system views a child that receive special education services as not good enough, or smart enough. What is good enough or smart enough? An individual can label a person or service, but doesn't realize that a label only characterizes the package, but the package can contain so much more than what the label describes. The only way you will find this out is if you are willing to open and explore that package.
ReplyDeleteI really liked the reading by Oliver and the Aimee Mullins video. There were most definitely a commonality of ideas with both. What I really grasped was that you can not let society depict how you are, or how you are going to live your life. If you feel that your disability is a tragedy then you will play the victim (Oliver, 1990). What I love about Aimee Mullins is that she refuses to play the victim. She doesn't let society tell her how she should feel about herself or even what she is, or not capable of achieving because she is labeled disabled. She has turned something that is often viewed as a tragedy in our society and made it intriguing, artistic and creative.
ReplyDeleteShe is viewed as not being disabled but super abled because of her strengths and accomplishments. She refused to be a loser in this game of life. She is a winner because she has chosen to be a positive influence in society instead of a victim of, or in society. I do believe that Oliver was trying to convey the same message. You have the ability to live your life how you want disabled or not. Society doesn't determine who you are but you determine who you want to be in society. This is the lesson that we need to teach our students.
When thinking about the ways that Oliver (1990) and Mullins present the ideas on the politics of being disabled, I think they have similar ideas. At first, after I read Oliver and started listening to Mullins, I did not think that they would have similarities at all after reading the excerpt on YouTube about what the video stood for. But they both present the view that we are tackling and trying to change how society looks at “disabled”. One of the first things that stood out to me in Mullins video was that she said that the children will react the way they see the adults react. When she said if an adult acts frightened, then the child will act this way. And I believe this to be true. If we act weird and frightened around someone who has a disability, then we are teaching our children to act this way. Also, in Oliver, he talks about how the disabled people are fostering a growing group and consciousness and identity of people with disability. Also, Aimee makes the comment that we are working toward society as making them authenticate and that they have potential and they change their own identities and potential. Lastly, Mullins said, we all have heart breaking strengths and glory and we all have our disabilities. Even though we are not classified as disabled, we have a disability somewhere inside of us.
ReplyDeleteChristy:
ReplyDeleteI liked how you pointed out that Oliver and Mullins said the same thing, but Mullins put a little twist on it with it being positive. I believe that we need to teach our chidlren to look at students with disabilities in a positive light.
Timothy:
ReplyDeleteI liked reading your post. I liked how you said that Mullins was super abled, which I feel like she said that in the video, but if she didn't then kudos to you! :]
With Oliver, when he mentioned the victim and tradgey thing, that really stuck out ot me too. I believe that society has come so much where what people think depicate how we see and view ourselves, which is a sad and very bad way to be. Everybody has potential and we don't have to live up to what society thinks we are or should be.
Both Oliver and Mullin's views empower individuals with disabilities instead of devaluing them. Oliver argues that current descriptions, perceptions and labels of disabilities lead to a oppression of individuals who have disabilities.
ReplyDeleteIndividuals who are directly affected by disabilities especially people who have disabilities are not involved in creating labels and classifications.
Tables 1.1 and 1.2 were very interesting. The second set of questions shift a negative focus from the person with a disability to the inadequate environments they participate in. This leads to potential solutions, not "cures." Adaptations can be made to the environment that make it better not only for people with disabilities, but for all people.
Mullin's an absolutely amazing woman found a way to use what is traditionally seen as a disadvantage to an advantage. I hope to never forget her friends statement" but, Aimee, that's not fair" Conversation is no long about overcoming deficiency, but about augmentation, about potential. Wow!
Amber and Christy,
ReplyDeleteI also love the emphasis on positive. Not just children, but all of us need to learn to emphasize the positives of situations. As adults that means we have to unlearn things that prevent us from seeing the positives in situations. We must move from negative self talk about others and ourselves to positive self talk. A powerful concept the power of positive thought and action.
Jonathon
ReplyDeleteWhen I read that your instructor told you that individuals tend to live up to their given names. I said to myself so true. My undergraduate professors stressed that labels had no place in IEPS only the strengths and needs of the individual student and how they would be addressed. Emphasis on strengths. In my experience as a classroom teacher at the secondary level. I see many students who have low self-effciacy and learned helplessness as result of being identified as a student who experiences difficulties learning.
I believe that the views of Oliver and Mullin are similar. Oliver (1990) states that it falls to the individuals with disabilities to critique the stereotypical view of seeing disability as a problem. Aimee Mullin addresses that same thought in the TED clip. When she had the children brought in she let them be curious with no adult there to tell them not to stare or ask questions. She was able to communicate her different sets of legs to them in a positive way. It is my hope that because of their experience those children, as they mature, will be much less likely to look at someone missing limbs as disabled and will more likely look at them just as they would anyone else. Oliver, in describing the criticisms of official definitions, states the conservation of the notion of impairment as “abnormality in function, disability as not being able to perform an activity considered normal for a human being and being handicap as the inability to perform a normal social role.” Aimee Mullin does not seem to have a problem in any of these areas, which implies that she may also express those same criticisms of official definitions.
ReplyDeleteKimberly,
ReplyDeleteI was also struck by the statement made to Aimee Mullen about her not looking disabled. I think people do tend to believe that pretty people could never be disabled and that anyone who is disabled must be unattractive. I don't guess I have ever thought about it until you mentioned it. I saw a young girl a few years ago that was missing the lower half of her arm and I immediately felt terribly sorry for her and wondered how such a horrible thing could happen to such a pretty girl. I guess in a way I was much like the person who made the comment to Aimee. It's amazing how age, maturity, and education can change the way we see things.
Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you mentioned in your post that as special educators we must educate people and ask that they look at our students as capable individuals. It is very hard to motivate students who are seen by themselves and others as a hopeless case. They pick up on how they are treated and they know when someone sees them as less able than their peers. Maybe we can be the generation of special educators that helps to change how our students are thought of by others. :)
Brandi-
ReplyDeleteI love your idea of disabilities not being a "concrete" condition. I would have never thought to put it into those words. It really makes so much sense though! Unfortunately, like you said, the way society views disabilities is almost seems like most see it as "concrete". I think our job as educators should be to make sure to teach our students that nothing is concrete and that you can make your life what you want it to be.
Jonathan-
I love the idea of the "body of empowerment". What a message. I really think that if society were to look from this perspective, the world would be such a better place. I honestly feel so many people look at the weakness aspect of "I can't do this" or "I can't do that". We are "disabling" ourselves if we do this.
Ginger and Farah
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Oliver and Mullins views were similar. You both brought up similar connections about no longer viewing the "disabled" individual as being deficient but rather as having opportunity and potential! I think that it is wonderful that the there is an effort being made to change the thought patterns on main stream America. I can relate to the "It’s not fair" statement! I am 5'4 and my baby sister is 5'9. I always say this to her. I wish I could change my height and pop up taller than her one day! It would be amazing! Seeing a disability as simply an opportunity for improvement can really empower individuals!
It appears that Oliver stresses the importance of definitions for disabilities. This can help practitioners can be educated, or trained on what encompasses some disabilities. As a result, a person's potential can be maximized for even with disabilities. However, this view can be oppressive for people with disabilities. They are similar viewpoints. Mullins brought up great point about children's natural curiosity and how adults teach kids not to stare or ask. The only thing is, some people do not want to answer questions about their disability and its more "polite" not to ask. But when Mullins invited the kids in, she gave them "permission" to get more information. I liked how she discussed the potential she has rather than her deficiencies.
ReplyDeleteAs always, I have been following this discussion "quietly". Though you have all touched on different aspects of the issues in the two works (Oliver's & Mullins'), it appears to me that you all agree that there are strong commonalities in the perspectives they express. First of these is the lack of fixity of disability—that disability gets socially constituted in interactions among people, attitudes and perceptions. Two, that the language used to describe disability allows us a glimpse into the social construction of disability e.g., (the disability survey that Oliver describes tells us that disability is viewed from a medical perspective---a problem for the person with a disability) or the comments/”compliments” that Mullins receives (“You don’t seem disabled to me”) that tell us that society has a certain fixed image of what a person with a disability ought to look like and that fixed imagery of disability is “not beautiful/pretty”. Inherent your collective discussions here and your individual thoughts expressed in analytic memos (for those who submitted one on this module) is the distinction between the social model vs. the medical model of disability. Inasmuch as the ideas of social model of disability acknowledges the distinctions between disability/impairment, proponents of the model argue that disability is an aspect of human diversity (like race, class, gender, etc) and individuals with disabilities constitute a minority group that is sometimes subjected to discriminatory practices by the dominant group (read: non-disabled people or as they are referred to in this model , temporary able bodied [TABs]). Essentially, without naming/labeling it as such, the discussion you have been having is about the social model of disability (similar to
ReplyDeleteThe notion that disability is not a fixed or static category or a static state is built on the idea that disability is socially produced thereby giving it situational and experiential components…that someone is viewed as disabled (mildly, moderately or severely so) based upon situational demands and what aspects of their lack of functional ability are given consequence. For instance, for a “normal person” in the land of blind or deaf, being able to see or hear is of consequence in so far as being able to communicate with others who do not rely on language for communication or being of “normal height in a land like Lilliput---think popular texts like Groce’s book Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language: Hereditary Deafness on Martha's Vineyard where being a hearing person on Martha’s Vineyard in the 1600s was definitely disabled/disabling because of the majority residents were deaf or in Gulliver’s Travels, in the land of Lilliput being the “giant” was a distinct disadvantage. The social model of disability completely disrupts how we think of disability from the medical model. Your discussion here captures the essence of the social model of disability, and hopefully allows you to think of ways in which that model might inform daily interactions with students with SPD.