Syllabus for SPC ED 511: Social Construction of Disability

SPC ED 511: Social Construction of Disability

Home

Courses

Handouts

Vision

Vita

e-mail me

click here to go to the course home page

Course Outline

Spring, 2003, Thursdays, 4:20-6:50 p.m. (3 credit hours), EDUC 212

Instructor:	Julia Scherba de Valenzuela, Ph.D.
Office:	Hokona Hall, room 254
E-mail:	devalenz@unm.edu
Phone:	277-1406
Web site:	http://www.unm.edu/~devalenz/
Office Hours:	Mondays 4:00-7:00 on a drop-in basis (no appointment needed) Appointments are also available Tuesdays and Thursdays at 7:15 p.m.

The following information is included in this syllabus:

Course Overview
Readings
Course Design
Class Schedule
Mission Statements:

Grading Assignments:

quick writes
final essay
film review essay
book review essay

Grading Criteria:

quick writes
final essay draft
final essay
film review essay
book review essay

.Return to top

Course Overview

Course Description:

This course will explore the social construction of disability from a variety of perspectives. The notion of disabilities as a social construction has received considerable attention in the Special Education literature and this course is designed to prepare future teachers and researchers to interact with others regarding this concept in an articulate and informed manner. In this course we will:

examine relevant literature,
discuss current theory, and
deconstruct popular media, including films and written biographies.

Rationale:

The mission of the College of Education is to advance the quality of the educational experience for all learners and to educate professionals who can facilitate human growth in schools, homes, communities, and workplaces. In carrying out this mission, the College explicitly values diversity in people and perspectives. The rationale for the Mental Retardation and Severe Disabilities Emphasis: Studies in Education Equity for Diverse Exceptional Learners is supported by a shift in the major paradigm in mental retardation, severe disabilities, and bilingual special education from a solely trait-based conceptualization toward thinking about disabilities as an interaction between individuals with their unique characteristics, the different environments/contexts which individuals encounter, and needed supports. This new way of thinking forces reanalysis of structures designed to assist individuals in creating for themselves satisfying lives and challenging traditional notions of disabilities and handicaps.

This course supports the College of Education and Mental Retardation and Severe Disabilities Emphasis frameworks by addressing student abilities within the context of a diverse society, recognizing the need to support all individuals in life-long learning, and validating all individuals, including those with disabilities, as valuable members of their communities, including their communities of learners.

Course Objectives:

The objectives of this course are to prepare and develop teachers and other leaders who:

understand and are able to articulate a theoretically grounded definition of the social construction of disability.
understand how actions on the part of individuals can function to reconfirm or contest common notions of ability/disability.
understand how individual characteristics, such as socioeconomic status, ethnicity, language background, ethnicity, age, etc., contribute to the social construction of disability.
understand the function of social institutions, such as schools, in the social construction of disability.
understand how portrayals of individuals with disabilities in the media contribute to the social construction of disabilities.
are able to identify fundamental assumptions underlying service provision systems (i.e. special education or institutions) for individuals with disabilities.

.Return to top

Readings

Required Books:

(choose one of the following autobiographies)

Hockenberry, J. (1995). Moving violations: War zones, wheelchairs, and declarations of independence. New York: Hyperion.

Mairs, N. (1996). Waist-high in the world: A life among the nondisabled. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Required Readings:

(available on reserve at Zimmerman library and on-line at: http://ereserves.unm.edu/coursepage.asp?cid=261 - contact course instructor for password)

Bogdan, R. (1980). What does it mean when a person says, "I am not retarded"? Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 15(1), 74-79.

Bogdan, R., Biklen, D., Shapiro, A., & Spelkoman, D. (1982). The disabled: Media's monster. Social Policy, 13(2), 32-35.

Bogdan, R., & Knoll, J. (1995). The sociology of disability. In E. L. Meyen & T. M. Skrtic (Eds.), Special education and student disability, an introduction: Traditional, emerging, and alternative perspectives (4th ed., pp. 675-711). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.

Cortés, C. E. (1995). Knowledge construction and popular culture: The media as multicultural educator. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 169-183). New York: MacMillan.

Dansforth, S. (2000). Resistance theories: Exploring the politics of oppositional behavior. Multiple Voices, 4(1), 13-29.

Danforth, S. (2000). What can the field of developmental disabilities learn from Michel Foucault? Mental Retardation, 38(4), 364-369.

Danforth, S., & Navarro, V. (1998). Speech acts: Sampling the social construction of mental retardation in everyday life. Mental Retardation, 36(1), 31-43.

Danforth, S., & Rhodes, W. C. (1997). Deconstructing disability: A philosophy for inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 18(6), 357-366.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Inequality and access to knowledge. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 465-483). New York: MacMillan.

de Valenzuela, J. S., Connery, M. C., & Musanti, S. I. (2000). The theoretical foundations of professional development in special education: Is sociocultural theory enough? Remedial and Special Education, 21(2), 111-120.

Ferguson, P. M. (1987). The social construction of mental retardation. Social Policy, 18(1), 51-56.

Figueroa, R. A. (1999). Special education for Latino students in the United States: A metaphor for what is wrong. In T. V. Fletcher & C. S. Bos (Eds.), Helping individuals with disabilities and their families: Mexican and U.S. perspectives (pp. 147-159). Tempe, AZ: Bilingual Review/Press.

Gartner, A. (1982). Images of the disabled/disabling images. Social Policy, 13(2), 15.

Gelb, S. A. (2000). "Be cruel!" Dare we take Foucault seriously? Mental Retardation, 38(4), 369-372.

Goode, D. (1992). Who is Bobby? Ideology and method in the discovery of a Down syndrome person's competence. In P. M. Ferguson & D. L. Ferguson & S. J. Taylor (Eds.), Interpreting disability: A qualitative reader (pp. 197-212). New York: Teachers College Press.

Harlan, S. L., & Robert, P. M. (1998). The social construction of disability in organizations: Why employers resist reasonable accommodation. Work and Occupations, 25(4), 397-435.

Jones, S. R. (1996). Toward inclusive theory: Disability as social construction. NASPA Journal, 33(4), 347-354.

Luckasson, R. (September/October 2000). New draft definition of mental retardation proposed. American Association on Mental Retardation: News and Notes, 1, 12.

Luckasson, R., et. al. (1997). Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and system of supports (9th ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.

McLaren, P. (1994). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (2nd ed.). New York: Longman. (chapter 5 is included in the required reading packet)

Mehan, H., Hertweck, A., & Meihls, J. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. (Chapter 7 is included in the required reading packet)

Mercer, J. R. (1992). The impact of changing paradigms of disability on mental retardation in the year 2000. In L. Rowitz (Ed.), Mental Retardation in the year 2000 (pp. 15-38). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Peter, D. (2000). Dynamics of discourse: A case study illuminating power relations in mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 38(4), 354-362.

Rao, S. S. (2000). Perspectives of an African American mother on parent-professional relationships in special education. Mental Retardation, 38(6), 475-488.

Rueda, R. (1989). Defining mild disabilities with language-minority students. Exceptional Children, 56(2), 121-128.

Safran, S. P. (1998). Disability portrayal in film: Reflecting the past, directing the future. Exceptional Children, 64, 227-238.

Sleeter, C. E. (1986). Learning disabilities: The social construction of a special education category. Exceptional Children, 53(1), 46-54.

Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1984). A rationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51(2), 102.

Taylor, S. J. (1988). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the least restrictive environment. JASH, 13(1), 41-53.

Taylor, S. J. (2000). Perspectives: Two perspectives on Foucault and postmodernism. Mental Retardation, 38(4), 363.

Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1980). Defending illusions: The institution's struggle for survival. Human Organization, 39(3), 209-218.

Wiest, D. J., & Kreil, D. A. (1995). Transformational obstacles in special education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28(7), 399-407.

Other Recommended Readings:

Ferguson, P. M., Ferguson, D. L., & Taylor, S. J. (Eds.). (1992). Interpreting disability: A qualitative reader. New York: Teachers College Press.

Goode, D. (1994). A world without words: The social construction of children born deaf and blind. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

Harry, B. (1994). The disproportionate representation of minority students in special education: Theories and recommendations. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.

Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities: Children in America's schools. New York: Crown Publishers.

Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.

Poplin, M. S., & Cousin, P. T. (Eds.). (1996). Alternative views of learning disabilities: Issues for the 21st century. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.

Skrtic, T. M. (1991a). Behind special education: A critical analysis of professional culture and school organization. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.

Skrtic, T. M. (Ed.). (1995). Disability and democracy: Reconstructing [special] education for postmodernity. New York: Teachers College Press.

Taylor, D. (1991). Learning denied. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

.Return to top

Course Design

Course Structure:

This course is designed so that students will interact actively with the course material -- whole and small group discussion, rather than instructor lecture, will make up the bulk of in-class sessions. Therefore, it is imperative that students arrive at each class having thoroughly read all of the assigned readings. Graded assignments are designed to be instructional as well as providing a means of arriving at a final grade for each student. Therefore, emphasis will be placed on graded out-of-class assignments that rely on analysis, synthesis and evaluation of course materials and development of critical thinking.

Students who require special accommodations or instructional modifications need to notify the instructor by the beginning of the semester, or as soon as difficulties become apparent, with appropriate documentation from the Student Support Services Center (277-3506), Mesa Vista Hall, Room 2021.

Specific Course Requirements:

Descriptions of and criteria for grading each assignment will be handed out in class. Extra copies can be obtained at the instructor's web site -- http://www.unm.edu/~devalenz/

Assignments:
1) quick writes (2 points each)
2) final essay draft
3) final essay
4) film review essay
5) book review essay

Points Possible:
20 points total
14 points
25 points
20 points
20 points

The total points possible for all of the above assignments add up to 99 points. The final point will be added to the student's grade at the instructor's discretion for any assignment that goes significantly above and beyond the work of other students. This allows the instructor to assign a grade of 'A+' only in the case of the student fulfilling the stated requirements for all assignments, attending all class sessions (or making up those missed) AND performing clearly superior work on at least one assignment.

Evaluation Procedures & Grading System:

Final grades will be determined by a point system (X out of 100 total possible points). Fractionated grading will be used, with the following breakdown:

A+ = 100
B+ = 88-89
C+ = 78-79

A = 94-99
B = 84-87
C = 74-77

A- = 90-93
B- = 80-83
F = below 74*

* Please note that, according to UNM regulations, graduate students may not be assigned a grade of C-, D+, D, or D-. Therefore, graduate students who do not accumulate a minimum of 74 points by the end of the semester will be assigned an F.

Incompletes and withdraws from the course will be allowed only in accordance with UNM policies. Please see the UNM catalog for a description of these policies.

Written directions for all assignments will be provided, along with the criteria for determining point values. Extra copies of assignments will be available at the instructor’s web site at: http://www.unm.edu/~devalenz/ All written assignments will be expected to be typed and follow the American Psychological Association Manual (5th ed.) format, unless otherwise specified. A brief guide to APA is also available on the instructor's web site, under the "handouts" link.

Policies:

1.) Academic Dishonesty: It is the responsibility of students to avoid practices that may be considered acts of academic dishonesty. UNM’s policy, as found in the UNM Pathfinder (2001-02), p. 58, is as follows:

Any student judged to have engaged in academic dishonesty in course work may

receive a reduced or failing grade for the work in question and/or the course.

Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, dishonesty in quizzes, tests, or assignments; claiming credit for work not done or done by others . . .

What does this mean for this course?
a.) In terms of written work, this means that you have the responsibility to make it very clear in all written work what portion of the work you wrote and what was written by other people, such as book or article authors, web site authors, or your colleagues. This includes both direct quotes and paraphrases.
b.) Additionally, you must make it clear what you read to complete the assignment (a ‘primary source’), versus what the authors of the sources read in preparation for their work (a ‘secondary source’).
So, if you didn’t actually write it or you didn’t actually read it, you must make that explicit. Failure to do so falls under the category of academic dishonesty and will result in the following:

The first time a problem of this sort appears in an assignment, I will assume that it is unintentional and will ask you to re-write the assignment. Points may be deducted from your assignment at my discretion. You will be required to meet with me to learn how to avoid this problem in future assignments.

The second time this problem is noted in an assignment, you will be assigned 0 points for that assignment.

If the problem appears for the third time, you will be assigned a failing grade in the course.

To assist you in understanding what plagiarism is and isn’t, you will be provided with a handout during the first day of class on what plagiarism is and how to avoid it. Further information on avoiding plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty can be found in the APA Manual and at the Dartmouth College Website: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~sources/contents.html. Rutgers University also has many resources on this topic, including an interactive presentation on plagiarism: http://sal.rutgers.edu/plagiarism.html. If you have any concerns or questions about how to appropriately indicate what is your own work and what is derived from the work of others, please see me during office hours, or if that time is not convenient, call or email to set an appointment time.

2.) Late Papers: Late assignments will receive a one (1) point deduction for every day late, with a limit of seven days allowed. If assignments are not turned in within 1 week of the assigned date, they will not be accepted, except in the case of significant illness (doctor's note required) or family emergency. If you will be not be able to be in class, please arrange for a friend to turn in your assignment during class, have the assignment faxed to the special education office by the time/date due, or have it handed in in person to either Terri or Jo in the Special Education office (Hokona Hall 273) prior to 5 p.m. on the date due. If your assignment will be turned in at the Special Education office, please make sure that the time and date it is received are documented by the staff. Do NOT put late assignments under my office door, unless you want them accepted as turned in on the day I find them, which may or may not be the same day as you turned them in. Since I am not at the university every day, this could cost you points.

3.) Re-Writes: In order to be fair to all students, re-writes will not be allowed, except under extraordinary circumstances, beyond the student's control. However, students are STRONGLY encouraged to talk with, e-mail questions to, and/or submit drafts to the instructor at least 1-2 weeks ahead of time, so that revisions can be made, if necessary, by the assigned due date.

4.) Class Attendance: Class attendance is mandatory - Students who miss three class sessions will be dropped from the course, regardless of the reason. Missed class sessions (up to three) can be made up with the following, turned in no later than three weeks after the missed class:

a photocopy of a colleague's notes from the missed class,
a typed response to the reading questions (available on the course website), and
a typed summary of all assigned readings for the class missed.
a typed response to the assigned quick write (available on the course website).

Five points will be deducted for every absence that is not made up. No excuse or documentation is necessary for missed classes.

Late arrivals to class interrupt the learning of all students. Therefore, a point will be deducted for arriving more than 20 minutes late to class. Arriving more than an hour late will be considered a class absence and will need to be made up, as indicated above.

5.) Class Participation: Class participation that is conducive to the learning of all course participants is expected. Behaviors that are considered to be conducive to learning (of the student him/herself and others) include:

arriving to class on time and well-prepared,
paying attention to instructor and/or other students when they are speaking,
turning off the ringer of your cellular phone and not taking calls within the classroom (please step out in the hall to speak if you must answer an emergency call),
use of appropriate and non-offensive language during class and in written class assignments,
demonstrating cooperation with and respect for the instructor and peers during class discussions,
actively participating, on-topic, during small group activities, and
showing consideration for other students' need for alternative teaching strategies.

I expect students to demonstrate consistently positive class participation. Frequent and/or significant failure to fulfill these expectations will result in the student being dropped from the course. The following four areas are defined below:

Respect for self and others
Positive contribution to the group
Listening
Openness

Respect for self, colleagues and instructor is shown by: 1) following group norms during discussions, 2) consistent use of oral and body language that is professional, and 3) frequent reference to classmate's opinions and perspectives in class discussion in a positive and supportive manner.

Positive contribution to the group is demonstrated when: 1) the quantity of contributions is neither significantly more or less than that of other students, 2) the student is not usually the first one to talk after a prolonged silence, 3) contributions are almost always on topic, and 4) comments frequently engage other participants or support the engagement of other students in a consistently positive manner.

Listening is demonstrated by: 1) providing previously provided information to colleagues when asked, 2) not redundantly repeating what was already stated, 3) consistently following directions, and 4) incorporating others' responses and comments in contributions to class discussions.

Openness is shown by: 1) consistent recognition and consideration of alternative perspectives, 2) consistent reaction to alternative ideas in a thoughtful manner, and 3) a positive response to criticism.

.Return to top

Class Schedule

January 23, 2003 (#1)

Topic: Introduction

Read: no reading due on the 1st class

January 30, 2003 (#2)
Topic: Theoretical frameworks
Read: Jones (1996) AND McLaren (1994) - Chapter 5

February 6, 2003 (#3)
Topic: The sociology of disability
Read: Bogdan & Knoll (1995)

February 13, 2003 (#4)
Topic: Comparing and contrasting paradigms and considering legitimizing myths
Read: Mercer (1992) AND Taylor & Bogdan (1980)

February 20, 2003 (#5)
Topic: Exploring images in the media
Read:

Cortés (1995)
Gartner (1982)
Bogdan, Biklen, Shapiro & Spelkoman (1982)
Safran (1998)

Due: Watch "Something About Mary" prior to this class

February 27, 2003 (#6)
Topic: Intersecting critical theory and the social construction of disability
Read: Harlan & Robert (1998) AND Danforth (2000 - resistance theories)
Due: Film review essay

March 6, 2003 (#7)
Topic: Why do we keep talking about race, class and gender?
Read: Darling-Hammond (1995) AND de Valenzuela, Connery, & Musanti (2000)
**mid-semester class evaluation (how is it going so far?)

March 13, 2003 (#8)
Topic: Mental retardation
Read: Ferguson (1987), AND Luckasson, et al (1997), AND Luckasson (2000)

March 20, 2003 (#9)
No Class -- UNM Spring Break

March 27, 2003 (#10)
Topic: The process of socially constructing disability
Read:

Danforth & Navarro (1998)
Peter (2000)
Taylor (2000)
Danforth (2000 - Foucault)
Gelb (2000)

Due: draft of progressive study guide

April 3, 2003 (#11)
Topic: Institutional involvement in constructing disabilities
Read: Rao (2000) AND Mehan, Hertweck, & Meihls (1986) -- chapter 7

April 10, 2003 (#12)
Topic: Personal perspectives of disability
Read: Bogdan (1980) AND Goode (1992)

April 17, 2003 (#13)
Topic: What does the social construction of disability imply about inclusion?
Read: Taylor (1988) AND Stainback & Stainback (1984)
Due: book essay

April 24, 2003 (#14)
Topic: Approaches to reform
Read: Rueda (1989) AND Wiest & Kreil (1995)

May 1, 2003 (#15)
Topic: Approaches to reform, cont.
Read: Sleeter (1986) AND Danforth & Rhodes (1987)

May 8, 2003 (#16)
Topic: Approaches to reform, cont.
Read: Figueroa (1999)
Due: final draft of progressive study guide
.

Home Courses Handouts Vision Vita e-mail me

Return to top
Last updated: January 23, 2003