Understanding the Philosophical Foundations of Disabilities to Maximize the Potential of Response to Intervention

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Abstract: In the United States and elsewhere in the world, disabilities are being studied by two different schools of thought: special education and disability studies. In the field of special education, analyses are often pragmatic and instrumental. In contrast, analyses in the field of disability studies are often historical and cultural, explaining disabilities as constructed by social value. This lack of agreement about disabilities leads us to ask: How can practitioners and researchers begin to address the issue of which students might need intensive interventions for their disabilities through the response to intervention (RTI) approach when disabilities are viewed so differently by scholars in the field? In this article I compare and contrast the philosophical foundations of disabilities in special education and disability studies and conclude that the dimensions of pragmatic, instrumental, historical, and cultural factors must be taken into account in order to achieve both the macro and micro levels of RTI implementation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)647-660
Number of pages14
JournalEducational Philosophy and Theory
Volume47
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 7 2015

Fingerprint

disability
disability studies
special education
pragmatics
cultural factors
macro level
micro level
Response to Intervention
lack
school
Special Education
Disability Studies
Values
student

Keywords

  • disability studies
  • philosophy of disability
  • response to intervention
  • special education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

@article{8bf3ef8106cd450a8e68301b7a571345,
title = "Understanding the Philosophical Foundations of Disabilities to Maximize the Potential of Response to Intervention",
abstract = "Abstract: In the United States and elsewhere in the world, disabilities are being studied by two different schools of thought: special education and disability studies. In the field of special education, analyses are often pragmatic and instrumental. In contrast, analyses in the field of disability studies are often historical and cultural, explaining disabilities as constructed by social value. This lack of agreement about disabilities leads us to ask: How can practitioners and researchers begin to address the issue of which students might need intensive interventions for their disabilities through the response to intervention (RTI) approach when disabilities are viewed so differently by scholars in the field? In this article I compare and contrast the philosophical foundations of disabilities in special education and disability studies and conclude that the dimensions of pragmatic, instrumental, historical, and cultural factors must be taken into account in order to achieve both the macro and micro levels of RTI implementation.",
keywords = "disability studies, philosophy of disability, response to intervention, special education",
author = "Kuo, {Nai Cheng}",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "7",
doi = "10.1080/00131857.2014.905763",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "47",
pages = "647--660",
journal = "Educational Philosophy and Theory",
issn = "0013-1857",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding the Philosophical Foundations of Disabilities to Maximize the Potential of Response to Intervention

AU - Kuo, Nai Cheng

PY - 2015/6/7

Y1 - 2015/6/7

N2 - Abstract: In the United States and elsewhere in the world, disabilities are being studied by two different schools of thought: special education and disability studies. In the field of special education, analyses are often pragmatic and instrumental. In contrast, analyses in the field of disability studies are often historical and cultural, explaining disabilities as constructed by social value. This lack of agreement about disabilities leads us to ask: How can practitioners and researchers begin to address the issue of which students might need intensive interventions for their disabilities through the response to intervention (RTI) approach when disabilities are viewed so differently by scholars in the field? In this article I compare and contrast the philosophical foundations of disabilities in special education and disability studies and conclude that the dimensions of pragmatic, instrumental, historical, and cultural factors must be taken into account in order to achieve both the macro and micro levels of RTI implementation.

AB - Abstract: In the United States and elsewhere in the world, disabilities are being studied by two different schools of thought: special education and disability studies. In the field of special education, analyses are often pragmatic and instrumental. In contrast, analyses in the field of disability studies are often historical and cultural, explaining disabilities as constructed by social value. This lack of agreement about disabilities leads us to ask: How can practitioners and researchers begin to address the issue of which students might need intensive interventions for their disabilities through the response to intervention (RTI) approach when disabilities are viewed so differently by scholars in the field? In this article I compare and contrast the philosophical foundations of disabilities in special education and disability studies and conclude that the dimensions of pragmatic, instrumental, historical, and cultural factors must be taken into account in order to achieve both the macro and micro levels of RTI implementation.

KW - disability studies

KW - philosophy of disability

KW - response to intervention

KW - special education

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929839437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929839437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00131857.2014.905763

DO - 10.1080/00131857.2014.905763

M3 - Article

VL - 47

SP - 647

EP - 660

JO - Educational Philosophy and Theory

JF - Educational Philosophy and Theory

SN - 0013-1857

IS - 7

ER -