In this paper we draw on an intersectional critical framework to analyze and account for the simultaneous interworkings of race and dis/ability. Specifically, we draw on this framework to examine two aims of modern science: (a) to identify distinct biological markers of race and (b) to locate biological and neurological origins of Learning Disabilities (LD). These aims persist despite evidence that both race and LD are socially and politically constructed categories.
Purpose/Objective
By reviewing historical and contemporary attempts by researchers to locate race and LD as immutable features embodied by individuals, we reveal how the science behind these categories shares similar underlying systems of logic; both efforts attempt to locate social problems within bodies and illustrate what Samuels (2014) calls “fantasies of identification,” or culturally embedded desires to definitively identify and categorize bodies.
Research Design
This is a historical analysis
Conclusions/Recommendations
We assert the need to engage with intersectional analyses, not simply as demographic variables along the lines of identity categories, but as an analytical tool for uncovering underlying logics that undergird systems of oppression. Examining the shared scientific explanations of race and learning disabilities illuminates possibilities for rethinking key issues at the intersection of race and disability.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnnammaS. A. (2015). “It was just like a piece of gum”: Using an intersectional approach to understand criminalizing young women of color with disabilities in the school-to-prison pipeline. In ConnorD. J., ValleJ. W., & HaleC. (Eds.), Practicing disability studies in education: Acting toward social change (pp. 83—102). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
2.
AnnammaS., ConnorD. J., & FerriB. A. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1—31.
3.
AntonB. S. (2010). Proceedings of the American Psychological Association for the legislative year 2009: Minutes of the annual meeting of the Council of Representatives and minutes of the meetings of the Board of Directors. American Psychologist, 65, 385—475.
4.
BaglieriS., BejoianL. M., BroderickA. A., ConnorD. J., & ValleJ. (2011). [Re]claiming “inclusive education” toward cohesion in educational reform: Disability studies unravels the myth of the normal child. Teachers College Record, 113(10), 2122—2154.
5.
BaglieriS., ValleJ. W., ConnorD. J., & GallagherD. J. (2011). Disability studies in education: The need for a plurality of perspectives on disability. Remedial and Special Education, 32(4), 267—278.
6.
BakerB. (2002). The hunt for disability: The new eugenics and the normalization of school children. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 663—703.
7.
BankoleK. (1998). The human/subhuman issue and slave medicine in Louisiana. Race, Gender & Class, 5(3), 3—11.
8.
BellC. M. (2010). Is disability studies white disability studies? In DavisL. J. (Ed.), The disability studies reader (pp. 275—282). New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
BellC. M. (2011). Blackness and disability: Critical examinations and cultural interventions. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
10.
BlissC. (2012). Race decoded: The genomic fight for social justice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
11.
BüttnerG., & HasselhornM. (2011). Learning disabilities: Debates on definitions, causes, subtypes, and responses. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 58(1), 75—87.
CarlsonL. (2001). Cognitive ableism and disability studies: Feminist reflections on the history of mental retardation. Hypatia, 16(4), 124—146.
14.
CorcosA. F. (1997). The myth of human races. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
15.
DanforthS. (2009). The incomplete child: An intellectual history of learning disabilities. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
16.
DanforthS., & GabelS. L. (Eds.) (2006). Vital questions facing disability studies in education. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
17.
DavisL. J. (2013). Introduction: Normality, power and culture. In DavisL. J. (Ed.), The disability studies reader. New York, NY: Routledge.
18.
DelgadoR., & StefancicJ. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York, NY: New York University Press.
19.
DorrG. M. (2008). Segregation's science: Eugenics and society in Virginia. Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
20.
DrescherJ. (2012). The removal of homosexuality from the DSM: Its impact on today's marriage equality debate. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 16(2), 124—135.
21.
Dudley-MarlingC., & GurnA. (Eds.). (2010). The myth of the normal curve. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
22.
DunnL. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded: Is much of it justifable?Exceptional Children, 35, 5—22.
23.
DusterT. (1990). Backdoor to eugenics. New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
FerriB. A. (2012). Undermining inclusion? A critical reading of Response to Intervention (RTI). International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(8), 863—880.
25.
FerriB. A., & ConnorD. J. (2007). Reading resistance: Discourses of exclusion in desegregation & inclusion debates. New York: Peter Lang.
26.
FuchsD., & FuchsL. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93—99.
27.
FullwileyD. (2014) The “contemporary synthesis”: When politically inclusive genomic science relies on biological notions of race. Isis, 105(4), 803—814.
28.
GabelS. L. (2005). Introduction: Disability studies in education. In GabelS. (Ed.), Disability studies in education: Readings in theory and method (pp. 1—21). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
29.
GallagherD. J. (2003) Entering the conversation: The debate behind the debates in special education. In GallagherD. J. (Ed.), Challenging orthodoxy in Special education: Dissenting voices. Denver, CO: Love Pub. Co.
30.
GallagherD. J. (2010). Hiding in plain sight: The nature and role of theory in learning disability labeling. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(2). Retrieved from http://www.dsq-sds.org/article/view/1231/1278
31.
GravesJ. L. (2001). The Emperor's new clothes: Biological theories of race at the millennium. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
32.
HallahanD. P., & MercerC. D. (2001). Learning disabilities: Historical perspectives. Washington, DC: Special Education Programs
33.
HallahanD. P., PullenC. P., & WardD. (2013) A brief history of the field of learning disabilities. In SwansonH. L., HarrisK. R., & GrahamS. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 15—32). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
34.
HammillD. D. (1990). On defining learning disabilities: An emerging consensus. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(2), 74—84.
35.
HammillD. D. (1993). A brief look at the learning disabilities movement in the United States. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(5), 295—310
36.
HarryB., & KlingnerJ. K. (2006). Why are so many minority students in special education?: Understanding race & disability in schools. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
37.
HyndG. W., MarshallR., & GonzalezJ. (1991). Learning disabilities and presumed central nervous system dysfunction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14(4), 283—296
38.
KaferA. (2013). Feminist, queer, crip. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
39.
KaplanG. (2000). European respectability, eugenics, and globalisation. In CrottyM., GermovJ., & RodwellG. (Eds.), A race for a place: Eugenics, Darwinism, and social thought and practice in Australia (pp. 19—28). Newcastle, Australia: The University of Newcastle Press.
40.
KavaleK. A., & FornessS. R. (1987). History, politics, and the general education initiative: Sleeter's reinterpretation of learning disabilities as a case study. Remedial and Special Education, 8(5), 6—12.
41.
KavaleK. A., & FornessS. R. (1995). The nature of learning disabilities: Critical elements of diagnosis and classification. New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
Kidder-AshleyP., DeniJ., & AndertonJ. (2000). Learning disabilities eligibility in the 1990s: An analysis of state practices. Education, 121(1), 65—72.
43.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2005). The evolving role of critical race theory in educational scholarship. Race Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 115—119.
LeonardoZ., & BroderickA. (2011). Smartness as property: A critical exploration of intersections between whiteness and disability studies. Teachers College Record, 113(10), 2206—2232.
47.
LombardoP. A. (2008). Three generations, no imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
48.
LosenD. J., & OrfieldG. (Eds.). (2002). Racial inequity in special education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
49.
McRuerR. (2006). Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York, NY: New York University Press.
50.
MorningA. J. (2011). The nature of race: How scientists think and teach about human difference. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
OmiM., & WinantH. (1994). Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York, NY: Routledge.
53.
PetrillS. (2013). Behavioral genetics: Learning abilities and disabilities. In. SwansonH. L., HarrisK. R., & GrahamS. (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
54.
PoplinM. S. (1988). The reductionist fallacy in learning disabilities replicating the past by reducing the present. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 389—400.
55.
RobertsD. E. (2011). Fatal invention: How science, politics, and big business re-create race in the twenty-first century. New York, NY: New Press.
56.
SamuelsE. J. (2014). Fantasies of identification: Disability, gender, race. New York, NY: New York University Press.
57.
ScanlonD. (2013). Specific learning disability and its newest definition: Which is comprehensive? And which is insufficient?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(1), 26—33.
58.
SleeterC. E. (1986). Why is there learning disabilities? A critical analysis of the birth of the field in its social context. In PopkewitzT. S. (Ed.), The formation of school subjects: The struggle for creating an American institution. (pp. 210—237). London, UK: Palmer Press.
59.
SwansonH. L., HarrisK. R., & GrahamS. (2014). Handbook of learning disabilities. New York: The Guilford Press.
60.
TrentJ. W. (1994). Inventing the feeble mind: A history of mental retardation in the United States. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
61.
TuckerW. H. (1994). The science and politics of racial research. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
62.
TuckerW. H. (2002). The funding of scientific racism: Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
WareL. (2005). Many possible futures, many different directions: Merging critical special education and disability studies. In GabelS. (Ed.), Disability studies in education: Readings in theory and method. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
65.
WashingtonH. A. (2006). Medical apartheid: The dark history of medical experimentation on Black Americans from colonial times to the present. New York, NY: Doubleday.
66.
WattsI. E., & ErevellesN. (2004). These deadly times: Reconceptualizing school violence by using critical race theory and disability studies. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 271—299.
67.
WinantH. (2001). The world is a ghetto: Race and democracy since World War II. New York, NY: Basic Books.
68.
YudellM. (2011). A short history of the race concept. In KrimskyS., & SloanK. (Eds.), Race and the genetic revolution: Science, myth, and culture. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
