Critical Science and Technology Studies (STS) pedagogy involves not only the content of courses but also the design of curricula, classrooms, and buildings. This article explores disability and design through pedagogical vignettes from the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). We demonstrate how “crip” pedagogy critiques compliance-based approaches to architecture and accommodations, and offers constructive curriculum-building that improves them. The first two vignettes examine how buildings and classrooms are designed for specific bodyminds, contrasting the design of the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (NTID) in the 1960s with RIT's contemporary spaces and examining classrooms designed for spoken English and mediated communication. The final two vignettes focus on transforming STS curricula to explicitly address and challenge technoableism. One describes ethnographic work in engineering courses on medical device design, and the last examines course assignments that engage students as accessibility partners to teach anti-ableism. These examples, we argue, illustrate the potential for co-created changes in higher education that equip students to interrogate and act on issues of disability, health, wellness, and accommodations. We develop “crip” STS pedagogies to call on the field to incorporate more crip sensibilities into the theoretical contributions of disability studies and its practice in and around the classroom.
BarabSasha A.ThomasMichael K.DodgeTylerSquireKurtNewellMarkeda. January 2008. “Critical Design Ethnography: Designing for Change.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly35 (2): 254–68. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.2004.35.2.254.
2.
BaumanHansel. 2014. “DeafSpace: An Architecture Toward a More Livable and Sustainable World.” In Deaf Gain: Raising the Stakes for Human Diversity, edited by BaumanH-Dirksen L.MurrayJoseph J., 375–401. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
3.
BennettCynthia L.GleasonColeScheuermanMorgan KlausBighamJeffrey P.GuoAnhongToAlexandra. May 2021. “‘It’s Complicated’: negotiating Accessibility and (Mis)Representation in Image Descriptions of Race, Gender, and Disability.” CHI ‘21: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Article no. 375: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445498.
CechErin A. March 2023. “Engineering Ableism: The Exclusion and Devaluation of Engineering Students and Professionals with Physical Disabilities and Chronic and Mental Illness.” Journal of Engineering Education112 (2): 462–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20522.
6.
CharltonJames I.1998. Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. Oakland: University of California Press.
7.
ChuaMelde MeulderMaartjeGeerLeahHennerJonathanHouLynnKubusOkanO’BrienDaiRobinsonOctavian. 2022. “1001 Small Victories: Deaf Academics and Imposter Syndrome.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Imposter Syndrome in Higher Education, edited by AddisonMichelleBreezeMaddieTaylorYvette, 481–96. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.10 07/978-3-030-86570-2_29.
CueKatrina R.June 2024. “Defining Hearing Culture in the Context of Deaf Culture: A Grounded Theory Examination.” Disability & Society40 (6): 1690–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2024.2369649.
10.
DanforthScot. November 2018. “Becoming the Rolling Quads: Disability Politics at the University of California, Berkeley, in the 1960s.” History of Education Quarterly58 (4): 506–36. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26846603.
11.
DolmageJay. 2017. Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9708722.
12.
DymClive L.AgoginoAlice M.ErisOzgurFreyDaniel D.LeiferLarry J.. January 2013. “Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning.” Journal of Engineering Education94 (1): 103–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.x.
13.
GrecoGian Maria. October 2020. “Towards a Pedagogy of Accessibility: The Need for Critical Learning Spaces in media Accessibility Education and Training.” Linguistica Antverpiensia, New Series: Themes in Translation Studies18: 23–46. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v18i0.518.
14.
GrzankaPatrick R.BrianJenny DyckBhatiaRajani. October 2023. “Intersectionality and Science and Technology Studies.” Science, Technology, & Human Values50 (4): 713–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439231201707.
HamraieAimi. 2017. Building Access: Universal Design and the Politics of Disability. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctt1pwt79d.
HennerJonRobinsonOctavian. 2021. “Signs of Oppression in the Academy.” In Linguistic Discrimination in U.S Higher Education; Power, Prejudice, Impacts and Remedies, edited by ClementsGaillynnPetrayMarnie Jo, 92–109. New York: Routledge.
21.
HennerJonRobinsonOctavian. May 2023. “Unsettling Languages, Unruly Bodyminds: A Crip Linguistics Manifesto.” Journal of Critical Study of Communication and Disability1 (1): 7–37. https://doi.org/10.48516/jcscd_2023vol1iss1.4.
JonesChelsea TempleCollinsKimberleeZbitnewAnne. March 2021. “Accessibility as Aesthetic in Broadcast Media: Critical Access Theory and Disability Justice as Project-Based Learning.” Journalism & Mass Communication Educator77 (1): 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958211000198.
24.
KaferAlison.2013. Feminist, Queer, Crip. 1st ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
25.
KerschbaumStephanie L. 2022. Signs of Disability. New York, NY: NYU Press.
26.
KitchinRob. 1998. “‘Out of Place’, ‘Knowing One’s Place’: Space, Power and the Exclusion of Disabled People.” Disability & Society13 (3): 343–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599826678.
27.
LangHarry.2021. Turn on the Words! Deaf Audiences, Captions, and the Long Struggle for Access. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
28.
LangHarry G.ConnerKaren K.. 2001. From Dream to Reality: The National Technical Institute for the Deaf, A College of Rochester Institute of Technology. Rochester: Rochester Institute of Technology.
29.
LatourBruno.1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
LintonSimi. 1998. Claiming Disability: Knowledge and Identity. New York: NYU Press.
32.
MarscharkMarkSaperePatriciaConvertinoCarolSeewagenRosemarie. 2005. Access to Postsecondary Education Through Sign Language Interpreting. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education10 (1): 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/eni002.
33.
McRuerRobert. 2006. Crip Theory: Cultural Signs of Queerness and Disability. New York: NYU Press.
34.
NapierJeminaBarkerRoz. April 2004. “Accessing University Education: Perceptions, Preferences, and Expectations for Interpreting by Deaf Students.” Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education9 (2): 228–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enh024.
35.
PriceMargaret. 2015. “The Bodymind Problem and the Possibilities of Pain.” Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy30 (1): 268–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12127.
36.
PriceMargaret. 2024. Crip Spacetime: Access, Failure, and Accountability in Academic Life. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.
37.
RandsMelissa L.Gansemer-TopfAnn M.. March 2017. “The Room Itself is Active: How Classroom Design Impacts Student Engagement.” Journal of Learning Spaces6 (1): 26–33. https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1286.
38.
SeaverNick. August 2015. “The Nice Thing About Context Is That Everyone Has It.” Media, Culture & Society37 (7): 1101–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443715594102.
39.
SeronCarrollSilbeySusanCechErinRubineauBrian. March 2018. “‘I am Not a Feminist, but.’ Hegemony of a Meritocratic Ideology and the Limits of Critique Among Women in Engineering.” Work and Occupations45 (2): 131–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888418759774.
40.
ShenemanNaomiRobinsonOctavian E.. 2024. “Tearing Down the Bypass, Rebuilding Main Street: Uncovering Epistemic Injury, Violence, and Erasure in Signed Language Interpretation.” In Critical Approaches to Institutional Translation and Interpreting: Challenging Epistemologies. edited by Monzó-NebotEstherLomeña-GalianoMaría, 50–74. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003350163-5.
41.
ShewAshley. 2023. Against Technoableism: Rethinking who Needs Improvement. New York: WW Norton and Company Inc.
TitchkoskyTanya.2011. The Question of Access: Disability, Space, Meaning. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
46.
TunstallElizabeth.2023. Decolonizing Design: A Cultural Justice Guidebook. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
47.
WhitneyKristoffer.2020. “Design for Deaf Education: Early History of the NTID.” In Making Disability Modern: Design Histories, edited by GuffeyElizabethWilliamsonBess, 143–58. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
48.
WilliamsonBess. 2019. Accessible America: A History of Disability and Design. New York: NYU Press.
ZaksZosia. 2023. “Changing the Medical Model of Disability to the Normalization Model of Disability: Clarifying the Past to Create a New Future Direction.” Disability & Society39 (12): 3233–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2023.2255926.
