Who May Be Competent? Mothering Young Children of Color With Disabilities and the Politics of Care

• In Event: Communities-of-Color-Based Research for Racially Just Transformation in a State's Public Education System

Abstract

Purpose

Although marginalized families may offer insights to reshape educational practice (Ishimaru, 2018), few studies have positioned Mothers of Color who have young children with disabilities as knowledge generators. We explored how Mothers of Color who have young children with disabilities made meaning of underlying constitutions of competence within Washington schools and how they conceptualized possibilities for educational justice.

Theoretical Framework

We drew on two complementary perspectives: Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit; Annamma et al., 2013) and revolutionary mothering (Gumbs et al., 2016). DisCrit addresses how ableism and racism intersect to position Children of Color with disabilities outside social perceptions of “normal” in schools (Annamma & Handy., 2020). Revolutionary mothering places marginalized mothers at the center of future visioning (Gumbs et al., 2016). Together, these perspectives highlighted how Mothers enacted political clarity regarding ableism and racism as they strategically challenged dominant notions of competence in early childhood while dreaming for liberatory educational futures.

Methods & Data Sources

In this qualitative study, we used focus groups (Liamputtong, 2011) to engage with Mothers of Color who had young children with or “at risk” for disabilities in Washington state. Thirty-three Mothers of Color participated in ten focus groups. Data sources included transcripts of audio-recorded focus groups (n=10) and artifacts (n=16) that Mothers shared during meetings.

Analysis included cycles of descriptive, process, and in vivo coding (Saldaña, 2015). We constructed 48 codes (e.g., “I get no information,” “needs being met”) which we collapsed into 5 categories (e.g., “mothers learning systems,” “resistance”). We connected our coding scheme to literature and theory to construct themes (Ravitch & Riggan, 2016). We engaged in analytic memoing and member checking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), coordinated multiple types of data, and sought disconfirming evidence to challenge our findings (Ravitch & Riggan, 2016).

Findings

Across our data, Mothers expressed multiple ways they mothered for respect and care in relation to dominant notions of competence. For example, after sharing a Tumblr post about “respect” in school, Lua described how she enacted respect by homeschooling her child. To demand respect and care for their children, Mothers learned to navigate exclusionary early childhood systems and strategically push back. For instance, Karine strategically leveraged ResearchGate to identify and share articles on inclusion and racial bias with educational decision-makers. Even as they worked to address tangible concerns for their children’s participation within the current system, Mothers dreamed beyond inclusion into the status quo. For example, Annissa explicated her desire for multiply-marginalized children to be treated as children who have needs, questions, and insights. These critical and revolutionary perspectives surrounding competence generated individual and collective visions of what respect and care in early childhood could be.

Significance

Skrtic (1991) highlighted how schools have long been rooted in functionalist views of education as “objective, inherently orderly, and rational” (p.152). With political clarity, Mothers in our study offered counter-narratives to this organizational logic, contributing to existing literature in early childhood, teacher education, and justice-oriented teaching surrounding ways to re-orient toward teaching and learning in solidarity with multiply-marginalized young children.

Author

• Maggie Beneke, University of Washington