The blog post on Albinism in Uganda introduced the idea of the social model of disability. The Right to Education in Uganda discussed how Ugandan law is based on the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). In order to understand how the laws based on the UN CRPD are enacted it is necessary to understand the social model of disability applies to education.
In the 2014 thesis The Realisation of Human Rights for Disabled People in HigherEducation in Uganda: A Critical Analysis Drawing on the UNConvention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the social model of disability is described in detail. The writer of the thesis begins by discussing the development of the social in UK in the 1970's:
A social model of disability is theoretical understanding of the concept disablement from a socio-political perspective. That is to say an ideology explaining the relationship between people with impairments and their participation, the exclusion and the discrimination they face in society. It emerged from the political activism of disabled people's movements in the UK around the 1970s following definition of disability advanced by the Union of Physically Impaired People Against Impairment (UPIAS) as one of the Fundamental Principles of Disability. UPIAS argued that, disability is something imposed on disabled people on top of their impairment by an oppressive and discriminating social and institutional structure. Upon that direct experience and understanding of disability by disabled people themselves, the social model was developed by the scholars such as Michael Oliver influenced by the Marxist sociology; and the model is further been theorised by disability studies. In this ideology, disability should be understood as the inability to participate in mainstream activities because of society‘s economic, environmental and cultural barriers against people with impairment. In that way the social model centres the problem people with impairments face on society but not on the individual who has impairment and thus, argues for the removal of the disabling environment for equal participation of people with impairment. The general principles underpinning the social model of disability are that impairment and disability are distinctively different i.e. disability is a social oppression not impairment. Disability is a social construction, and to a large extent is culturally produced and culturally structured.
The view of the social model of disability contrasts the long known consideration of the individual/ medical understanding of disability which views social restrictions for disabled people as caused by impairment or individual deficit and informs the distinctions between impairment, disability and handicap provided in the International Classification of Impairment, Disability and Handicaps by the World Health Organization (WHO). In the WHO distinction, impairment is defined as any loss or abnormality in the functioning of the body organ; disability as the restriction or lack of the ability to perform tasks in a manner or within the range considered normal for human being; and handicap as the social disadvantage arising from either impairment and/or disability. Therefore, the focus is on the individual solution such as correcting, removing or curing the impairment or providing personal assistance. This view centres the problems of disability within an individual with impairment. That is what social model challenges, as it defines disability as a social oppression, not a form of impairment and distinguishes between the impairment that people have, and the disability or oppression which they experience.
The social model conceptualisation of disability has no doubt repositioned disabled people as rights claimants through bringing about the disability legislation, including influencing the adoption of the UN CRPD. It has also strengthened the building of the social movement of disabled people, by demanding barrier removal it is a liberation ideology for disabled people and it improvise the self esteem for disabled through confidence building and removal of stigma.
In Uganda, this research assumes that, the social model approach emerged when the National Union of Disabled Persons of Uganda (NUDIPU) was born in 1987 as a national voice for disabled people. NUDIPU‘s mission is to bring about long lasting disability social policy changes in Uganda and its formation was inspired by the international developments on disability around that time. The working of NUDIPU remains largely based on the social model of disability‘s concept of advocating for the removal of environmental barriers, change of negative attitudes and empowerment of disabled people. Even the Uganda disability legislation is to a large extent based on the social model of disability. This is due to the involvement of disabled people in the enactment of the disability legislation through the 5 MPs for disabled people.
Social Model of Disability and Inclusive Education
Critical to the realisation of a right to education is an inclusive education approach, seen to be providing equal opportunity to all to access education regardless of one‘s backgrounds or disability. To equalise opportunities in education, inclusive education argues for tackling school factors so as to enable every child including a disabled child access mainstream schools in his/her community. Therefore, the ideology underpinning inclusive education is similar to the one of the social model of disability. Both aim to address issues of marginalisation, oppression, exclusion and discrimination while trying to centre the problem of disability on the environment not on the individual person with a disability. On this matter, inclusive education centres exclusion of a disabled child in education to the school environment not on the impairment the child has.
This is also a clear shift away from the tenet of segregated education for disabled people. The segregated education as based on different disabilities views the barriers to learning as being within the person with impairment and was conceptualised based on the medical model of disability. Therefore, the shift towards inclusive education approach argues for schools to be reformed and pedagogy improved in ways that will lead them to respond positively to pupil diversity—seeing individual differences not as a problem to be fixed, but as opportunities for enriching learning.
However, unlike the social model, inclusive education to some extent acknowledges the role played by impairment in exclusion process, it is noted that children and young people are not defined only by their special educational needs; other factors such as social disadvantage, family background, gender or ethnic group are critical to understanding needs and providing for the whole child. From that observation, the concept special educational needs also includes needs arising from a disability. This acknowledges, role played by disability in education. Practical evidence to that in Uganda are special educational units within some mainstream schools.
The Limits of the Social Model of Disability
Despite their robust ways of dealing with the question of inclusion, it should not be assumed, however, that there is full acceptance of the wisdom of social model or inclusive education. Critical limitations on each have emerged. On inclusive education, extent to which an inclusive education is relevant to all disabilities i.e. whether it is achievable or how can it be achieved is a major source of criticism. Disability activists especially the deaf and those with learning disabilities in Uganda argue that inclusive education in the long run disadvantage the deaf pupils or pupils with learning disabilities. They also hold opinion that the positive side of inclusive education is overestimated yet; there is lack of qualified teachers to teach effectively deaf pupils or pupils with learning disabilities. This shows that inclusive education is a complex issue. The question then is what Warnock raises, what needs to be defended - a right to learn or a right to learn in the same environment? Warnock argues that, it is the right to learn that must be defended, not the right to learn in the same environment. Warnock's argument is consistent with the arguments some disability activist in Uganda are advancing.
Another general observation about poor countries like Uganda regarding education is that education is more about the availability and redistribution of resources, and this is the same fact that cannot be underestimated in relation to inclusive education. As Rieser rightly points out, it takes political will, available human and material resources to provide inclusive education. Unfortunately, these are the very factors that are lacking/ inadequate in Uganda that are seen to be rendering the implementation of inclusive education problematic. While on the social model, the main criticism is on extent to which impairment and disability is separate in the exclusion process of disabled people and extent to which disablement is contingent upon social and cultural factors. These criticisms of social model point out that not all disabled people across the range of impairments get a fair deal in the model. Also, given that disabled people not as such a monolithic, homogeneous entity, it is challenging to construct a grand theory of disablement that is valid and pertinent for all impairment groups, across all cultural settings.
Therefore, it is arguable that, the social model provides a narrow understanding of disability, grounded on the view that impairment and disability are separate. Proponents of this claim contend that for the vast majority of the world‘s disabled people, impairment is very clearly primarily the consequence of social and political factors, not an unavoidable fact of nature. They further argue that, whereas there is certainly a causal relation between oppression and disability, when society plays a strong role in excluding and marginalizing impaired people to maintain that disability is squarely socially caused, the social model is over-socializing disability. Therefore, by distinguishing between impairment and disability, the model focuses on social discrimination faced by disabled people not on the intrinsic limitations associated with impairment, which also contributes to exclusion.
Another criticism is that, the model's argument that barrier removal is a solution for people with impairment‘s participation is also utopia idea as it is not achievable at some points. Because there are impairments where no amount of environment change would eliminate a disadvantage associated with it. For example, an individual own experience of living with impairment on a daily basis, sometimes in a state of acute physical pain, has an important and valid role in experiencing disablement.
Another criticism relates to the models argument that disability is an oppression, which is perceived as the common denominator that unites all disabled people. Given, differences in socio-economic or cultural backgrounds, it is contended that such an understanding of oppression is problematical, as both disability and impairment are socially and culturally constructed. Lang succinctly explains this issue by explaining that, what is meant to have impairment and experience disability is therefore, by implication, culturally defined and will vary between societies. He further illustrates it with the case of an individual who has dyslexia. He explains that, in a predominantly rural agrarian society, such as South India, the fact that an individual cannot read and write is not likely to inhibit their ability to work and participate fully in local community life, and will not be popularly considered to be disabled, and thereby encounter oppression. However, a person who is dyslexic living in a western-based society is more likely to be unemployed, for in a myriad of ways, in order to function within society, there is a prerequisite for an individual to be literate. This the same view held by Shakespeare who argues that the social model is not helpful in understanding the complex interplay of individual and environmental factors in the lives of disabled people, because its understanding of disability is narrow, in other words not wide enough to accommodate the experiences of all impairments. In terms of policy, the same argument contends that the social model is a blunt instrument for explaining and combating the social exclusion that disabled people face and the complexity of their needs.
To remedy the problem, Crow calls for a fresh look at the model and, in order to learn to include all the complexities, a focus on impairment and disability together. Shakespeare advocates developing the approach initiated by WHO. In this approach, disability is recognised as a complex phenomenon requiring different levels of analysis and intervention, ranging from medical to the socio-political.
The CRPD seems to have attempted to recognise the complexities faced by the social model in recital (e) recognising that disability is an evolving concept…and recital (i) recognising further the diversity of persons with disabilities‘ and in the definition of disability.
Other than the above criticism of the social model, in Uganda, as in other poor countries, the success of the social model ideology is hindered by poverty. In Uganda, while the social model ideology is applied, it is very much limited in its ability to bring equal participation for disabled people due to the economic, environmental and cultural factors. For example, within the private sector, the accommodation of disabled people through barrier removal, a key argument of the model, is a critical challenge to enforce. This is evident in the enforcement of the accessibility standards, especially with small scale private investments, which actually dominate the Ugandan economy. In higher education, similar circumstances are experienced. 81% of the universities are private universities. Some of those universities are profit motivated. Additionally, some of the private universities operate on rented premises. In those circumstances, such universities would find providing accessibility for disabled people not only challenging but also additional cost that could be avoided by not admitting a disabled person. Even for public universities, the limited technological development and internet infrastructure appear to be a barrier for disabled people.
In this research the key issues about the social model raised above are central as they inform the investigation of the practice of inclusion of disabled people across a range of impairments in higher education. It is central, too, that the treatment of disabled people is informed by the meaning a given society or a service provider attaches to a disability. At times it appears to refer to limitation and incapacity, or else to oppression and exclusion, or else to both dimensions. However, poverty could have also affected the realisation of rights of disabled people in higher education.
 |
| Didas Byaruhanga who graduated with a certificate in Adult and Community Education on January 27 2016. |
People in my community in Uganda regard my doctoral studies, as luck for me. To a large extent I do agree with their point of view, in light of my experience going through all levels of education in Uganda as a disabled person.
Around the time I started primary education in the mid-1970s, the concepts of a right to education and equal opportunities for disabled people were remote in the experiences of my community as such, education for disabled children as well as their future was bleak. They were chains of barriers a disabled child had to break through in order to attain education; they included empathy, prejudices, negative attitudes and believes about disability both at the community and school Long distance commutes from and to school were additional challenges I reckoned with throughout my entire primary level of education. Besides those challenges, movement for me on crutches on muddy village footpaths during the rainy seasons was nearly impossible. However, the most interesting experience in all these seemingly debilitating conditions was the passion of fellow pupils to assist me during those difficult times; notwithstanding sometimes teasing from some of them. The big pupils, especially the girls would carry me on their backs across muddy places on the paths. Obviously, under those conditions, disabled people would attain education through sympathy not as a right. For me, it was both sympathy as described and inspiration from my parents that has seen me reaching this level of education. At the time I was giving up education at primary level due to the long distance commute. My father passionately encouraged me to brave through difficulties I encountered during school. My zeal to study was powered by his words of encouragement: I give you a pencil; you will eat out of it. It will get you out of poverty, prejudice and the debilitating issue surrounding your disability. If you abide by its rule, you yourself will be a witness of this gift. He has remained with me forever through these words and they were a constant source of strength during my research. When I joined secondary school (1985-1992), I got relieved off the long distance commute as I was in a boarding school. Regular schools those days had no idea of handling a disabled student, except showing empathy on them. Prejudices, negative attitudes and believes about disability were there but varied from teacher to teacher. Like in the case of primary, also throughout my entire secondary education fellow students provided me all the personal assistance I needed as a disabled student.. Rarely did they consider me a burden. Even during the time of water crisis, they made it their duty to ensure I had bathed and washed. They would also collect meals from the dining hall for me. Even during the time of insurgency that hit Teso 1986-1992, I was not abandoned by the students.
My undergraduate university education (1992- 1995) was no different in the way I received support from fellow students. Unlike my primary and secondary education where physical accessibility wasn't a challenge as there were no stairs to mount. This became my immediate challenge in the university to reckon with. In addition to mounting stairs daily, were also reasonably long distances from my hall of residence to the lecture rooms and library. Moreover, a change in one lecture to another meant a change in the lecture rooms. Most often, it was moving from one faculty / department to another. Some faculties are quite considerable distances a part. Because of these distances, during my second year, I opted to skip attending some lectures. When I realised missing lectures would disadvantage me in the end, I approached one lecturer whose lectures I found difficult to attend regularly to explain my challenge. Whereas this lecturer acknowledged my challenge, he only counselled me that my situation could not be addressed as the option of changing either lecture room or time for the lecture would affect all lectures in the university as the timetable is centrally made taking account of the lecture rooms. I did not proceed any further with the complaint as I thought, his explanation was logically correct. It is now, that I am realising that I was ignorant of my rights to keep demanding for a possible solution that would suit me. I should have proceeded with a complaint to the Dean of the Faculty or to the Academic Registrar or even to the Deputy Vice-chancellor Academics. At that time, I thought it was just enough to explain my position to the relevant authority. If my concerns could be solved, well and good; if not, I continue braving through those challenges. After all, the university had no known formal support for disabled students. If a disabled student received support from the university it would be at the discretion of the Dean of Students. What is now guaranteed by CRPD as a reasonable accommodation was generally lacking at that time. If such related practice was done then it was informal and was between the concerned lecturer and disabled students and would arise out of sympathy of the lecturer.
I joined the world of work of disability rights campaigning (1997- 2007). On access to education, the focus of the disability campaigns nationwide was centred on making primary education inclusive for disabled pupils. This was in response to the growing numbers of disabled pupils in primary schools due to the introduction of the universal primary education policy 1998. Much emphasis was then placed on creating awareness to communities about the rights of disabled pupils to education and the policy makers to make primary education accessible for disabled pupils. On the side of government much of its funding allocated to education was allocated for primary education. On disability inclusion, more teachers were trained in special educational needs. A programme to facilitate disabled pupils access education called Educational Assessment Resource Services (EARS) was established in every district. EARS provided in-service training of teachers in special needs education. It also carried out assessment of disabled pupils and providing advice on placement of such children to relevant schools. Therefore, it could be stated that both government attention on inclusive education and disability rights campaigns in Uganda were focused on primary level of education.
When I enrolled for postgraduate studies (MA 2000-2003; and the Postgraduate Diploma in Project Planning and Management (PGDPPM) 2002-2003) in two universities, I could see that there was no significant change in the universities in regards to equal opportunities for disabled people in higher education. What was significant in public universities was admission of disabled students through affirmative action. The support provided in public universities was mainly welfare support and was largely adhoc still based on discretion of the Dean of Students. Around that time in Uganda, there was increased human rights awareness, increasing disability rights campaigns and burgeoning disability law and policy. But all these developments rarely were making noticeable progress in improving the educational situation for disabled students in human rights terms in higher education. Especially in light of the CRPD) requiring that persons with disabilities have a right to education without discrimination and on the basis of equal opportunities.
Those experiences led me to question the extent to which Uganda is achieving an inclusive higher education for disabled people in light of the developed disability legal framework and increasing disability awareness in the country. My thinking as described above was grounded on the growing inclusive environment for disabled pupils at lower levels of education that is seen surprising higher education with large numbers of disabled students, yet higher education appears not ready for disabled people, more so given the critical challenges facing Ugandan higher education such as inadequate funding and inadequate space visa-vi increasing enrolment as described before in this section.
Like all theories, the social model of disability has its limitations. When the social model of disability is applied to education it can be seen that disability is both a medical and a social construct. The social model of disability is however valuable in the broad sense providing its limitations are grasped. These limitations can be summed up in the following manner:
- The right to learn should be defended not the right to access learning.
- The social model focuses on social discrimination not on the intrinsic limitations associated with impairment
- There is a complex interplay between the individual and society. Forinstance dyslexia may not be important in an agrarian economy it is a disability in western setting.
- Some barriers, like forinstance pain, cannot be removed
- Poverty may also be a dimension of impairment
Above all disability is a complex interaction between the individual and society. In that interplay it must always be born in mind how the impairment interacts with social barriers.
No comments :
Post a Comment