The experiences of girls of color labeled with significant cognitive disabilities in middle school and high school have historically been excluded from educational research. This study sought to better understand how girls of color labeled with significant cognitive disabilities navigated multimodal discourses and classroom practices as well as how they were impacted by them. Using Disability Critical Race Theory and critical discourse theory, six students were focal participants and eight educators were secondary participants. Multiple case studies were used with primary (i.e., observations, audio/video recordings) and secondary (i.e., interviews, focus groups) data sources. Findings revealed how focal participants showed their discursive resourcefulness, despite absent communication supports and prioritization of oral/aural communication. Students also repositioned themselves in response to marginalization through talk and actions. Implications for research and practice are discussed. This study underscores the necessity of centering the experiences of girls of color labeled with significant cognitive disabilities in educational research to improve their school experiences.
AnnammaS. A. (2018). The pedagogy of pathologization: Dis/abled girls of color in the school-prison nexus. Routledge.
2.
AnnammaS. A.ConnorD.FerriB. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511
3.
AnnammaS. A.FerriB. A.ConnorD. J. (2018). Disability critical race theory: Exploring the intersectional lineage, emergence, and potential futures of DisCrit in education. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 46–71. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18759041
4.
AnnammaS. A.HandyG. T.MillerA. L.JacksonE. (2020). Animating discipline disparities through debilitating practices: Girls of color & withholding in the classroom. Teachers College Record, 122(5), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012200512
5.
AnnammaS. A.MorrisonD. (2018). DisCrit classroom ecology: Using praxis to dismantle dysfunctional education ecologies. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.008
6.
BerryR. A. W. (2006a). Teacher talk during whole-class lessons: Engagement strategies to support the verbal participation of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(4), 211–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2006.00219.x
7.
BerryR. A. W. (2006b). Inclusion, power, and community: Teachers and students interpret the language of community in an inclusion classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 489–529. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312043003489
8.
BhattacharyaK. (2017). Fundamentals of qualitative research: A practical guide. Routledge.
9.
BlackL. (2004). Differential participation in whole-class discussions and the construction of marginalised identities. The Journal of Educational Enquiry, 5(1), 34–54.
10.
BlissL. S.McCabeA.MirandaA. E. (1998). Narrative assessment profile: Discourse analysis for school-age children. Journal of Communication Disorders, 31(4), 347–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9924(98)00009-4
11.
BrantlingerE.JimenezR.KlingnerJ.PugachM.RichardsonV. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100205
12.
BroderickA.LeonardoZ. (2016). What a good boy: The deployment and distribution of “goodness” as ideological property in schools. In ConnorD. J.FerriB. A.AnnammaS. A. (Eds.), DisCrit: Disability studies and critical race theory in education (pp. 55–67). Teachers College Press.
13.
BrooksC. F. (2015). Role, power, ritual, and resistance: A critical discourse analysis of college classroom talk. Western Journal of Communication, 80(3), 348–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2015.1098723
14.
CammarotaJ.FineM. (2008). Revolutionizing education: Youth participatory action research in motion. Routledge.
15.
Causton-TheoharisJ. N.TheoharisG. T.OrsatiF.CosierM. (2011). Does self-contained special education deliver on its promises? A critical inquiry into research and practice. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(2), 61–78.
16.
CazdenC. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Heinemann.
17.
ClarkeL. W. (2007). Discussing Shiloh: A conversation beyond the book. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(2), 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.51.2.3
18.
CollinsK. M. (2003). Ability profiling and school failure: One child's struggle to be seen as competent. Routledge.
19.
CollinsK. M. (2011a). Discursive positioning in a fifth-grade writing lesson: The making of a “bad, bad boy.”Urban Education, 46(4), 741–785. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085911399339
20.
CollinsK. M. (2011b). “My mom says I'm really creative!”: Dis/ability, positioning, and resistance in multimodal instructional contexts. Language Arts, 88(6), 409–418.
21.
ConnorD. J.GabelS. L. (2010). Welcoming the unwelcome. In HobbelN. (Ed.), Social justice pedagogy across the curriculum: The practice of freedom (pp. 201–220). Routledge.
DávilaB. (2015). Critical Race Theory, disability microaggressions and Latina/o student experiences in special education. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 18(4), 443–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2014.885422
24.
DeanM.AdamsG. F.KasariC. (2013). How narrative difficulties build peer rejection: A discourse analysis of a girl with autism and her female peers. Discourse Studies, 15(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612471472
25.
Delgado BernalD. (2002). Critical Race Theory, Latino critical theory, and critical race-gendered epistemologies: Recognizing students of color as holders and creators of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.68.4.5wv1034973g22q48
ErevellesN.KangaA.MiddletonR. (2006). How does it feel to be a problem? Race, disability, and exclusion in educational policy. In BrantlingerE. (Ed.), Who benefits from special education? (pp.77–99).Routledge.
28.
ErevellesN.MinearA. (2010). Unspeakable offenses: Untangling race and disability in discourses of intersectionality. Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, 4(2), 127–145.
29.
EricksonF. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp.119–161). Macmillan Publishing Company.
30.
FoleyA.FerriB. A. (2012). Technology for people, not disabilities: Ensuring access and inclusion. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(4), 192–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-3802.2011.01230.x
31.
FoucaultM. (1972). The archeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. Pantheon Books.
GallagherD. J. (2001). Neutrality as a moral standpoint, conceptual confusion and the full inclusion debate. Disability and Society, 16, 637–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590120070042
34.
GeeJ. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (4th ed.). Routledge.
35.
GotandaN. (1991). A critique of “Our Constitution is color-blind.”Stanford Law Review, 44(1), 1–68. https://doi.org/10.2307/1228940
36.
HamraieA. (2013). Designing collective access: A feminist disability theory of universal design. Disability Studies Quarterly, 33(4).
JewittC. (2017). An introduction to multimodality. In JewittC. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp.15–30).Routledge.
40.
KinlochV.San PedroT. (2014). The space between listening and storying: Foundations for projects in humanization. In ParisD.WinnM. T. (Eds.), Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry with youth and communities (pp. 21–42). SAGE.
41.
KressG. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
42.
KulkarniS. S. (2020). Racial and ethnic disproportionality in special education programs. In U. Sharma & S. Salend (Eds.), Oxford research encyclopedia of education (pp. 1–22). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1242
43.
KurthJ. A.BornK.LoveH. R. (2016). Ecobehavioral characteristics of self-contained high school classrooms for students with severe cognitive disability. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 41(4), 227–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916661492
44.
LeonardoZ.BroderickA. (2011). Smartness as property: A critical exploration of intersections between whiteness and disability studies. Teachers College Record, 113, 2206–2232. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111301008
45.
LightJ.DragerK. (2007). AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: State of the science and future research directions. AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23(3), 204–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610701553635
46.
LimL.RenshawP. (2001). The relevance of sociocultural theory to culturally diverse partnerships and communities. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 10(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016625432567
47.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
MatsudaM. J. (1987). Looking to the bottom: Critical legal studies and reparations. Harvard Civil Rights–Civil Liberties Law Review, 22(2), 30–164.
50.
MerriamS. B. (2001). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass.
51.
MerriamS. B.TisdellE. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
52.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (Eds.) (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. SAGE.
53.
MillerA. L. (2019). Girls of color with intellectual and developmental disabilities reinventing education through an intersectional photographic lens. University of Kansas. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing (Accession No. 13904326).
54.
MillerA. L. (2020). Disabled girls of color excavate exclusionary literacy practices and generate promising sociospatial-textual solutions. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2020.1828649
55.
MillerA. L.KurthJ. A. (2021). Photovoice research with disabled girls of color: Exposing how schools (re)produce inequities through school geographies and learning tools. Disability & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2020.1828649
56.
MillerA. L.NyegenyeS. N.Mostafa-ShoukryF. R. (2022). Disrupting dominant modes of expression: Illuminating the strengths and gifts of two disabled girls of color. In AnnammaS. A.FerriB. A.ConnorD. J. (Eds.), DisCrit expanded: Inquiries, reverberations & ruptures (pp. 45–61). Teachers College Press.
57.
MindelM.JohnJ. (2018). Bridging the school and home divide for culturally and linguistically diverse families using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 3(12), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1044/persp3.SIG12.154
58.
NaraianS. (2016). Spatializing student learning to reimagine the “place” of inclusion. Teachers College Record, 118(12), 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811611801207
59.
NorrisS. (2004). Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. Routledge.
60.
OchsE. (1979). Transcription as theory. Developmental Pragmatics, 10(1), 43–72.
61.
Onyeka-CrawfordA.PatrickK.ChaudhryN. (2017). Let her learn: Stopping school pushout for girls of color. National Women’s Law Center.
62.
OrsatiF. T. (2014). Against the standards: Analyzing expectations and discourse of educators regarding students with disabilities in a kindergarten classroom. Education Research International, 2014, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/325430
63.
OrsatiF. T. (2015). Control, membership and consequences: Analysis of discursive practices to respond to behaviors of kindergartners with disabilities. Classroom Discourse, 6(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2015.1028952
64.
OrsatiF. T.Causton-TheoharisJ. (2013). Challenging control: Inclusive teachers’ and teaching assistants’ discourse on students with challenging behaviour. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(5), 507–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2012.689016
65.
PenningtonR. C.CourtadeG. R. (2015). An examination of teacher and student behaviors in classrooms for students with moderate and severe intellectual disability. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(1), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2014.919141
66.
PhillipsonR.Skutnabb-KangasT. (1996). English only worldwide or language ecology?TESOL Quarterly, 30(3), 429–452. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587692
67.
PiccoloD. L.HarbaughA. P.CarterT. A.CapraroM. M.CapraroR. M. (2008). Quality of instruction: Examining discourse in middle school mathematics instruction. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(3), 376–410. https://doi.org/10.4219/jaa-2008-809
68.
ProffittW. A. (2020). From “problems” to “vulnerable resources”: Reconceptualizing Black boys with and without disability labels in US urban schools. Urban Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085920972164
69.
RodwellM. K. (1998). Social work constructivist research. Routledge.
70.
RogersR. (2011). An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education. Routledge.
71.
RogoffB. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford University Press.
72.
SaldañaJ. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE.
73.
ScollonR.ScollonS. W. (2017). Multimodality and language: A retrospective and prospective view. In JewittC. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis (pp. 205–216). Routledge.
74.
SinclairJ.HansenS. G.MachalicekW.KnowlesC.HiranoK. A.DolataJ. K.BlakelyA. W.SeeleyJ.MurrayC. (2018). A 16-year review of participant diversity in intervention research across a selection of 12 special education journals. Exceptional Children, 84(3), 312–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918756989
75.
SotoG.YuB. (2014). Considerations for the provision of services to bilingual children who use augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2013.878751
76.
TaylorA.McDonoughK. (2021). Safeguarding the epistemic agency of intellectually disabled learners. Philosophy of Education. Advance online publication.
77.
TeachmanG.McDonoughP.MacarthurC.GibsonB. E. (2018). A critical dialogical methodology for conducting research with disabled youth who use augmentative and alternative communication. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417727763
78.
TichavakundaA. A. (2021). Understanding Black students beyond resistance: The tensions of centering Black life. Race Ethnicity and Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2021.2019004
79.
WodakR.MeyerM. (2016). Critical discourse studies: History, agenda, theory, and methodology. In WodakR.MeyerM. (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis studies (pp. 1–22). SAGE.
YuB.EpsteinL.TisiV. (2021). A DisCrit-informed critique of the difference vs. disorder approach in speech-language pathology. In HortonR. (Ed.), Critical perspectives on social justice in speech-language pathology (pp. 105–128). IGI Global.
