Introduction
Racism and ableism have worked in tandem to oppress groups. This can be seen in the use of the debunked theories of eugenics and phrenology to label people of African descent as inferior in intelligence to justify their exploitation (Paris & Alim, 2014). Systems of oppression work to exclude populations that don’t conform to the norms of being white, able and male. Ableism specifically works against any person who thinks, looks, or acts differently than that associated with the mainstream concepts of ability. Waitoller and King Thorius (2016) raise the aspect of these binaries in many social constructs: ability as defined by disability, or blackness as defined by whiteness. Societal labels not only intersect with race, class, gender and ability, but they also are not static and have changed over time.
The future evolution of how ability is categorised can be guided by applying both culturally sustaining pedagogy (CSP) and universal design for learning (UDL). These emancipatory pedagogies disrupt the ingrained prejudices of eugenics that are still found in the practices of ranking student abilities (Waitoller & King Thorius, 2016). Combining the techniques of CSP with the best practices of UDL has been coined “cross-pollination” (Waitoller & King Thorius, 2016, p. 1) in an effort to merge the concepts of honouring individuals. CSP and UDL interrogate forms of oppression that often intersect like ableism and racism. Honouring students’ individual learning styles is found in both CSP and UDL and may allow us to move past labelling children and their abilities. Applying both UDL and CSP could allow students to rise above labels regardless of whether they have been applied appropriately or not.
Accepting Varied Abilities
Culturally sustaining pedagogy can be used to uphold ability as a culture and an aspect of identity. Teachers can help students interrogate the use of both positive and negative labels. They can discuss student positionality while critiquing how labels impact individuals in both tangible and intangible ways. This is one way to address the hegemonic organisations that have pitted minority groups against one another to uphold capitalism’s competitive aspects and meritocracy. UDL builds on this by accepting varied abilities while not placing them on a hierarchy, much like CSP accepts various cultures without placing one above another.
Ability is as much a part of one’s identity as one’s race, gender and other demographical data. Honouring all aspects of a child’s identity, including their exceptionalities, is an essential tenet of CSP. UDL fosters access to marginalised learners through structures and roles to sustain and honour students’ identities. Rather than requiring that a student complete a task that is difficult for their learning style, such as sitting still and completing a worksheet before beginning an activity, teachers should allow for modifications and adaptations that allow students to demonstrate understanding in ways that match their abilities and affinities (CAST, 2022). This mimics CSP by allowing students to make meaningful relevant connections to their cultures and heritages in projects and activities.
A main tenet of UDL is that the student is best positioned to understand their own best methods of learning. Helping students know when to employ accommodation strategies can help students as they progress through school. Allowing students the flexibility to reflect on their learning and making tasks relevant to them reduces barriers to education. This is mirrored in CSP’s attendance to relevance and reflection of one’s place in the broader schema.
Multiple Pathways to Knowledge
UDL utilises an individualised pathway model that is similar to CSP by allowing students to learn at their multiple intersections of identity. UDL focuses on the ways learners understand the content, called the “multiple means of representation, action and expression and engagement” (CAST, 2022). Classrooms can have tools that allow for self-selection based on student preference with no judgement given about what tool is used. Providing multiple pathways “redistributes access” to education (Waitoller & King Thorious, 2016), while also removing barriers to learning. Students should be expected to learn at different paces and to demonstrate that learning in various ways. Assessments should be altered so that they are no longer a tool to reproduce hierarchies based on ability or behaviours. This can be done by developing inclusive standards for all students so as to not reproduce deficit teaching and learning.
UDL seeks to disrupt the notion that there is a bell curve where students are on extreme ends of ability and that teaching should be centred on the majority of them while the outliers need special resources to access the mainstream (Waitoller & King Thorious, 2016). Teaching from a narrow mid-point is critiqued with the suggestion to meet all learners by starting with a broader range of abilities in mind. Instead of modifying an assignment for a collaborative class, teachers can meet the needs of all students from the very beginning. Teachers may have to provide multiple ways for students to learn the material and spend time reinforcing content.
Creating Inclusive Spaces
In both UDL and CSP, teachers set the tone for inclusivity through their interactions with children and their lesson design. Beginning a school year or semester with CSP lessons on how to successfully work in teams and communicate effectively is one way to emphasise the value of all classmates. Actively teaching students how to conduct respectful classroom discussions through modelling and scenarios can help children develop the social skills necessary to participate to the best of their ability. Teachers should be thoughtful of the needs of students with varying functional abilities by creating safe emotional and physical spaces for children.
While disabilities are not explicitly included in culturally sustaining pedagogy (CSP) practice, some of the tenets still apply. To provide inclusive and least restrictive environments for students to thrive, our teachers need to understand that cultural differences are not deficits to be addressed with special educational labels. Employing more asset-based lessons allows all children to flourish. By creating more inclusive spaces, we may have fewer instances of inappropriate labelling due to teacher referrals for special education evaluation. Both CSP and UDL are asset-based pedagogies that highlight the positive aspects of the differences between individuals. Both UDL and CSP seek to redistribute knowledge to all learners. By abolishing racism and ableism, we can begin the journey towards more equitable learning based on individuals rather than on their categorisation. As an identifier, ability is a way to exclude students along with ethnicity, race, gender and language. Using these pedagogies allows teachers to focus on the students as a whole rather than on the way they are labelled, making classrooms more equitable for all students.