Notesale: Turn your study into money

Document Preview

Extracts from the notes are below, to see the PDF you'll receive please use the links above

---

20048563
Compare and contrast the medical model of disability with the social model of disability within the
context of ‘special educational needs’
In this essay I plan to address the question “Compare and contrast the medical model of disability
with the social model of disability within the context of ‘special educational needs’”
...
I then plan to critically contrast them and compare them, using different
viewpoints, models and structures to enable me to do so
...

The medical model of disability is the traditional ideology through which special educational needs is
conceptualised in Western society (Hodkinson and Vickerman, 2009)
...
Therefore, the
focus is usually on the impairment that the person has (Rieser, 2006)
...
This deficit is thought to be needed to be cured or
treated by professionals (Kenworthy and Whittaker, 2000 cited in Hodkinson and Vickerman, 2009)
...
This can be Supported by Hodkinson and Vickerman who claimed:
“when state provision for special education began to be formulated in the nineteenth
century, medical officers were heavily involved in the process of identifying and placing
children with special needs within a separate segregated system” (Hodkinson and Vickerman
2009:19)
...
One of these arguments is the reliance on medical professionals, as outlined above
...
However, as the focus is not on what the
child can do, this leads to the dehumanisation of people with special educational needs and those
with impairments, as their lives are increasingly more controlled by medical professionals
(Hodkinson and Vickerman 2009) and thus creating a cycle of “dependency and exclusion which is
difficult to break” (Rieser, 2006:135)
...
Viewing the person as the problem can create ‘fault
lines’ which can lead to people with impairments and special educational needs feeling objectified
and in need of ‘fixing’ (Linton and Cherry cited in Goodley 2011:8)
...
Special educational need labels, while implying a deficit, can affect the person
who is labelled with them and anyone around the labelled person (MacMillan, 1973 cited in Kavale
and Forness, 1985:62)
...
Furthermore, these labels also “fail to capture
...
This could be because people with special educational needs are very
complex and more diverse than what their labels suggest
...

By not considering structure and culture, “the medical model, by focusing upon within-subject
variables, provides an incomplete picture” (Kavale and Forness 1985:62)
...
At the personal level, our individual thoughts and feelings are shaped by our own
experiences
...
For example, the structural level refers to how; the medical model is built into structure and
policy (Thompson, 2006)
...
The
medical model only looks at the ‘personal’ level and therefore sees disability as a ‘personal trouble’
rather than a ‘public issue’ (Fulcher 1989:25); this is why the UPIAS, 1976, created a new model of
disability
...
The social model of
disability views disability to be wholly a result of social oppression and nothing to do with the body,
unlike the medical model as seen from arguments previously mentioned (Oliver, 1996 cited in
Liasidou, 2012)
...

Therefore, this model sees disability as emanating from the environments in which people with
special educational needs and impairments interact and it was through this reflection of the
personal experiences of these people that the social model of disability came about (Frederickson
and Cline 2009)
...
As the medical model shows
to only take into account the personal level of Thomson’s (2006) PCS model, the social model only
takes into account structural levels
...
Just as height, weight, age, skin colour and physique have social and cultural
dimensions, so too does impairment” (Hughes and Paterson 1997 cited in French and Swain 2012)
...
Impairments are
important because “some are static, others episodic, some degenerative and others terminal”

3

20048563
(Shakespeare 2006 cited in Goodley 2012:634)
...
As well as ignoring the
knowledge that impairment gives, the social model does not cover a ‘disabled’ person’s experience
of impairment (Rieser 2006)
...

This is why “The social model needs to be clarified and extended if it is ever to provide an ideological
framework” (Terzi 2004 cited in Hodkinson and Vickerman 2009:25)
...
Although, “the social model of
disability does not deny the reality of physical impairments” (Fredrickson and Cline 2009:528) and
the medical model of disability does not deny the reality of social influences on disability, the two
models both focus exclusively on their sections of Thomson’s (2006) PCS model
...

Structuration theory takes into account the personal (agency) and the structural levels of disability
...
Although this theory combines what can be seen as key elements from the social
model and the medical model of disability, it does, however, also fail to take into account the
cultural level of disability
...
One of the main things about structuration
theory is that “It seeks to locate such freedom in the wider social context of the structure of society,
in terms of social constraints and influences” (Thompson 2003: 34)
...

Postmodernism would also suggest that you need to focus on the individual
...

However, some postmodernists may argue that “theory gets in the way of understanding the
realities of disabilism” (Watson 2012 cited in Goodley 2012:641) which subsequently suggests that
neither the medical or social models are helpful in understanding disability
...
Both the medical and social models
of disability do this and so postmodernism highlights the complexities and individuality of people
with impairments and special educational needs
...
There has been a substantial move towards this postmodern way of
disability theorizing, however it is making disability increasingly “difficulty to pin down, identify with
and mobilize around” (Swain 2011 cited in Goodley 2012) as it moves away from the models of
disability that everyone knows
...
They
both are theories which draw conclusions about people with special educational needs and those
with impairments
...
They do however draw from different sections of Thomson’s model
and so the theories are essentially different
...
These models are very different ideologically,
however, they both have the same theoretical problems
...
I have also considered some alternatives to these
models
...
The medical and
social models both have theoretical problems and it may be best, as people with special educational
needs and impairments are complex, to view every person on an individual basis
...


6

20048563
Reference List
Ashby, C
...
37; Issue
...
and Cline, T
...
(Second ed
...

French, S & Swain, J
...
(1989) Disabling Policies? A comparative approach to education policy and disability
...

Goodley, D
...
Vol
...
5: 633644
...
doi
...
1080/09687599
...
717884 [accessed 5th
January 2014]
Hodkinson, A
...
(2009) Key Issues in Special Educational Needs and Inclusion
...

Kavale, K
...
(1985) The Science of Learning Disabilities
...

Liasidou, A
...
London: Continuum International
Publishing Group
...
(2006) Disability equality: confronting the oppression of the past
...
(ed)
(2007) Education, Equality and Human Rights
...
) Oxfordshire: Routledge: 134-157
Thomas, G
...
(2004) Inclusive Education Readings and Reflections
...

Thompson, N

---