Select Page
  

as attached the 2 articleshttp://www.thinkingautismguide.com/2010/07/living-…and this is the original question for the assignment after reading the required articles Living the Least Dangerous Assumption, and Inclusive Language as a Form of Disability Advocacy in Schools, consider your prior personal experiences, and professional experiences/aspirations. Have you been exposed to this notion previously, or is this your first time really thinking deeply about inclusive language and disability? Contemplate if the way educators discuss disability really matters. How have the readings impacted your understanding of communicating for and about all students in neutral and inclusive ways, and how do you see yourself as trying to implement the principles of inclusive language in the future? Note: If you believe or do not believe that using these principles are necessary or important, explain your rationale. Make connections to course readings: at a minimum, include one quote from the textbook and one quote from this module’s required course readings (APA format for quotes requires name, year and page number of quote).This is my work and I need editing and correction:I was very impressed by the Inclusive language article that I read, it made me think about choosing my words and thinking about them carefully. Before reading this article, I did not think as deeply as I am thinking now. This article will support me and help me a lot in the future of my dealings with PWD.Inclusive language article explains misconceptions and makes us formulate and replace them to fairly concept. “It is a vehicle for addressing unwanted narrow definitions of people with disabilities.” (Dinaro, 2017). Furthermore, choosing an appropriate language in schools where there is no judgment or diminishing the value of others. This article taught me that such words have a very powerful effect that can limit one’s ability or grieve others. Therefore, we have to be very careful and watch our language to avoid these bad resultsAlthough we as human beings are not infallible from mistake and forgetfulness, we must correct our mistakes immediately. After reading this article, I should try to convey what I learned to everyone in my society to benefit from. in addition, stop hurting others feelings by judging them and let them know everyone is capable to do something.I read also the Living the Least Dangerous Assumption article that talks about the benefits of living the least dangerous assumption and the steps that help us to achieve this concept. “We must come to understand that refusing to presume competence is, in the long run, more costly than making that least dangerous assumption.” (Ahern, 2010)We must believe that everyone has special potential and capabilities and any goal needs time to be an achievement. We have to be patient because the patient always brings the desired results. ”Patience makes things possible (allow processing time)” (Ahern, 2010)
doc8.docx

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
just do editing and correct my work
Just from $10/Page
Order Essay

DO NOT DUPLICATE OR DISTRIBUTE FOR CUC COURSEWORK USE ONLY
Inclusive Language as a Form of Disability Advocacy in Schools
(in press, Encyclopedia of Disability Studies, 2017)
Dr. Andrea Dinaro
Inclusive Language As a Form of Disability Advocacy in Schools is one tool used to shape
neutral understandings about learning, learners, and environments regarding disability; it
promotes access, clarifies misconceptions, and models expectations of equity. Using Inclusive
Language in schools deliberately replaces expired terminology and description about disability.
Thus, Inclusive Language can articulate resistance to the current and historical practices of
exclusion (see Exclusion entry) and inequities affecting people with disabilities that are
purposefully or subconsciously reinforced, particularly through language.
What is Inclusive Language As a Form of Disability Advocacy in Schools
Language is dynamic and ever-evolving; it is a subtle and direct resource for teaching and
learning. Formally and informally throughout schooling, students and staff obtain understandings
about disability with both instant and deferred consequences. One avenue is via language and
rhetoric.
Inclusive Language is a form of disability advocacy by setting a foundation in schools through
selecting and accepting language (terminology, vocabulary, emphasis) that refrains from
judgment about disability and people with disabilities; it is a vehicle for addressing unwanted
narrow definitions of people with disabilities. Yet, Inclusive Language does not mandate
political correctness or define any individual’s lived experience with or about disability.
Inclusive Language is one type of inclusive practice such that inclusive practices are welcoming,
accessible, and comprehensive learning environments for all that are participatory and
interactive, (rather than just a shared separated space without interaction between disabled and
non-disabled peers). Inclusive Language expresses Disability Studies concepts by working
towards accessible and accurate history, practices, representation, autonomy, education, theory,
policy, arts and culture affecting or regarding disability and disabled people; the participation
and manner in which disability is discussed and disabled people are referenced matters in
historical, current, and future contexts.
Background/History
The meaning of words used to talk about disability can vary based on contexts and relations.
Unfortunately in school settings, disability is typically first considered based on a legal and/or
medical definition and secondly may further vary based on cultural beliefs. Thirdly, the disability
community influences the definition and perception of disability through context and interaction,
collectively as a culture—that is, disability culture (see Disability Culture entry).
However, for example, under the U.S. law that governs protections and access to a free and
appropriate public education, people with disabilities are formally categorized under 14 IDEIA
federal categories: autism, deaf-blindness, deafness (the community prefers Deaf),
developmental delay, emotional disturbance (in Illinois, emotional disability is the term used),
hearing impairment (the community prefers Hard of Hearing to hearing ‘impairment’),
intellectual disability (changed from Mental Retardation per Rosa’s Law P.L. 111-256),
orthopedic impairment, other health impairment, specific learning disability, speech or language
impairment, traumatic brain injury, and visual impairment including blindness (National
Dissemination Center on Children with Disabilities, 2012).
This categorical system is still pervasive and offers debate about the issue of constructions of
normalcy, conformity, terminology as a social system, identity development, autonomy, power,
creating ‘otherness,’ and the ways in which language contributes to exclusion such as
segregation, discrimination, and harassment. Examples of counter-efforts regarding terminology
have occurred initiated by disabled people, such as Rosa Marcellino (a 9 year old with Down
syndrome). Her advocacy helped change the term Mental Retardation to Intellectual Disability at
a federal level (Rosa’s Law, 2010).
Important Points to Know about Inclusive Language As a Form of Disability Advocacy in
Schools The type of language and rhetoric used in schools can reinforce negative attitudes and
exclusion. But
since exclusion can manifest as action or inaction, can be quiet, unintentional, innocent,
unapparent, and
seemingly justified, there may be an additional challenge of the lack of acknowledgment of a
problem at all. This situation may also be understood as a microagression (a seemingly harmless,
yet negative subtle act towards a minority group—see Microaggression entry). Equally, language
that reinforces exclusion can be blatant, cunning, apparent, deliberate, and systematic.
Inclusive Language is a neutral approach and natural support that is identified by the community
being referenced as acceptable or preferred, and instills the dynamic and contextual experiences
related to access, equity, identity, and autonomy. “Negative…attitudes [including
expired/outdated language] toward disability can undermine opportunities for all students to
participate fully in school and society” (Hehir, p. 9, 2007). Inclusive Language is one step to
address the problem of practices that reinforce negative and narrow understandings of disability
and people with disabilities, such that excludes, oppresses, negates, alienates, dismisses, denies,
or otherwise marginalizes people who are perceived as having a dissimilar body or mind from
the majority.
As described in Nothing About Us Without Us (Charlton, 1998), “Language informs attitudes and
beliefs because it is a medium of translation of expression and thought…the Disability Rights
Movement has targeted language as an important issue” (p. 65, 67). This matters to the field of
Disability Studies, and all applied fields, because language affects both incidental and essential
power of how people with disabilities are understood and equity is addressed. Table 1 presents
alternatives to consider as schools reflect upon language common in education settings.
Table 1: Example Inclusive Language that Counters Common Expired/Outdated
Terminology
1. Instead of ‘normal’ use ‘standard’ or ‘typical’
Because normal implies that something else is abnormal and inferiority is inferred.
2. Instead of ‘regular’ education use ‘general’ education
Because regular implies that something else is irregular and undesirable is inferred.
General is
common or basic.
3. Instead of ‘special ed. Kid’ use ‘receives special education services’ Because students
are not the services they receive.
4. Instead of ‘special needs’ use ‘needs,’ (or the type of need, such as ‘mobility needs,
social emotional needs, intensive academic needs, or medical needs’)
Because all students have differing needs and ‘special needs’ has uninvited negative
historical connotation about people with disabilities.
5. Instead of ‘handicapped person’ use (a) ‘person with a disability*’ or (b) ‘disabled
person**’ Because ‘handicapped’ is an expired term, that has uninvited historical
implication about people
with disabilities. Additionally, instead of ‘handicapped parking’ say ‘accessible’ for
accessible parking, accessible exit, accessible seating, and accessible restroom.
Because the correct terminology recognizes that the built environment either constructs
inaccessibility or it supports accessibility. Moreover, it is for the person with the
disability to decide how they choose to identify (e.g., to use *PFL or **IFL).
1. (a) Using *person-first language (PFL) recognizes the individual and their
disability but does not
solely define the person by one characteristic or designation.
2. (b) Using **identity first language (IFL) recognizes the individual as a minority
group identity.
Using ‘disabled’ is not incorrect, however unfortunately non-disabled people
often misuse and misunderstand it; the disability community most often uses it as
a preference to emphasize group identity and disability culture.
6. Instead of ‘normal students, regular students or healthy students’ use ‘students’, or if
necessary to specifically distinguish use ‘non-disabled students’ or ‘typicallydeveloping students’
Because this demonstrates neutrality, respect and carries no judgment regarding
development.
7. Instead of ‘wheelchair kids’ or ‘in a wheelchair’ use ‘uses a wheelchair’ or ‘is a
wheelchair user’ Because a wheelchair is a support device/equipment. It is not a sole
identifier of an individual. The
person is not always ‘in it;’ but rather it is used.
8. Instead of any judgmental reference to capabilities of people with disabilities such as ‘in
spite of’ ‘suffer from’ or ‘despite,’ simply state the facts, such as any examples above;
when possible, point out the exclusion in the environment such as ‘person who
experiences inaccessibility’
Because we have a responsibility to acknowledge that language informs society with subtle
messages of value and power.
9. Instead of referencing these descriptions as ‘politically correct’ terms say ‘Inclusive
Language’ to address ‘outdated or expired terminology’.
Because we have a responsibility to acknowledge that language and terminology evolve and
influence attitudes and beliefs.
Modified with permission from ‘Because It Matters How We Describe People with
Disabilities/Disability/disAbility/Disabled Person/Disabled.’ (Dinaro, A., Stolz, S., & Brosseau,
H., 2010)
Dilemmas, Debates and Unresolved Questions About Inclusive Language As a Form of
Disability Advocacy in Schools
Ladau (2015) explained that “Language is never ‘one size fits all.’…It makes me wonder if
people really think that the particulars of language [Identity First Language or Person First
Language] are bigger than the true injustices or victories experienced by the disability
community” (para. 12). The query affirms that the choice of language does not convey the full
message, nor is it greater than the actual issue; yet it can detract or enhance, mislead or inform,
and even divide or unite.
Activists and scholars are alert to the impact Inclusive Language may have in decreasing the
stigma of notions of inferiority and devaluation about disability, but also acknowledge that
simply renaming terminology without support to help all students construct meaning is not a
comprehensive approach. An example is the simple fact that it is possible for one to use current
and preferred language by the disability community, and still hold beliefs and demonstrate
practices counter to inclusive practices. “Due to low expectations that society has perpetuated
from early age, learners with disabilities rarely leave school with a clear picture of what they are
capable of contributing towards community life” (Murugami, M. W., 2009, para. 19). Therefore,
it is not about allies knowing the ‘right words to say’; an unresolved issue is that disabled
students are informed about disability in systematically negative ways such as segregation,
exclusion, the lack of access to disabled role models or positive representation of disability in
curriculum, and the power in everyday language and discourse.
The Future and Conclusions
Inclusive Language is just one element of inclusive practices that affect disabled people. Future
efforts can start with self-awareness as a critical step to identifying opportunities for
improvement and taking action to move past expired terminology that reinforce outdated
understandings of disability (see Table 2). Research and activism are needed to consider the
pervasiveness of exclusion in schools and the current and potential experience that Inclusive
Language can contribute in society at large.
Table 2. Self-Assessment Rubric:
My Role in Using Inclusive Language As a Form of Disability Advocacy in Schools
I create or reinforce barriers to inclusive practices and
negative stereotypes about people with disabilities.
Hazardous Role
I consciously contribute to exclusion and treat or view
disability as inferior or unequal.
(Oppositional, Discrimination,
Anti-advocate/Ally)
I use outdated/ expired, marginalizing, degrading language
about disability and people with disabilities/Disabled person
I have no position about inclusive practices and stereotypes
Damaging Role
about people with disabilities.
I do not view exclusion as my problem to address.
(Inaction, Negative Prejudice,
I do not notice or address others’ use of outdated/ expired,
Passive/ Unreceptive, Antimarginalizing, degrading language about disability and
Advocate/Ally)
people with disabilities/Disabled person
I have minimal awareness of inclusive practices and
stereotypes about people with disabilities, but believe it is
Beginning Advocate/Ally Role relevant.
I am willing to learn more about ways to address exclusion
with inclusive practices.
I strive to learn how to notice or address others’ use of expired/outdated,
marginalizing, degrading language about disability and people with
disabilities/ Disabled person
I can compare and contrast inclusive practices across environments and
Developing
conditions and notice exaggerated generalizations (stereotypes) about people
Advocate/Ally
with disabilities. I can identify and determine safe spaces and approaches to
Role
address others’ use of outdated, marginalizing, degrading language about
disability and people with disabilities/Disabled person
I participate in action to reduce or eliminate exclusion.
I effectively evaluate situations such as stereotypes or exclusion, name the
injustice, and plan for improvements.
Proficient
I can differentiate conditions and approaches when addressing others’ use of
Advocate/ Ally
outdated/expired, marginalizing, degrading language about disability and
Role
people with disabilities/Disabled person.
I welcome/embrace the collaboration and perspective of other Disabled
advocates and allies
I actively advocate and continuously seek information and strategies to teach
others about the issues of exclusion and strategies to combat it.
I celebrate diversity by co-leading efforts and action to create inclusive
environments.
Accomplished
Advocate/Ally
Role
I demonstrate solidarity.
I actively model and teach how to address others’ use of outdated/expired,
marginalizing, degrading language about disability and people with
disabilities/ Disabled person.
I pursue the collaboration and perspective of other Disabled advocates and
allies.
References
Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Hehir, T. (2007). Confronting ableism. Educational Leadership, 64(5), 9-14.
Johnson, M. (2006). Disability awareness do it right. Louiville, KY: Avacado Press.
Ladau, E. (July 20, 2015). Why person-first language doesn’t always put the person first
Retrieved from http://www.thinkinclusive.us/why-person-first-language-doesnt-always-put-theperson- first/
Murugami, M. W. (2009). Disability and identity. Disability Studies Quarterly 29(4). Retrieved
from http://www.dsq-sds.org/article/view/979/1173

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

Order your essay today and save 10% with the discount code ESSAYHSELP