Critical Inclusive Education as a Full-Measure Solution for Inclusivity, Equity, and Justice (Poster 2)

• In Event: Critical Special Education: Reexamination, Reimagination, and Rethinking of Research, Policy, and Practice

Abstract

For decades, dominant (special) education research, policy, and practices have perpetuated exclusionary, inequitable, and unjust educational experiences. Despite attempts to remedy these problems by refining existing research, policy, and practice, these problems persist. This poster engages a full-measure response to these enduring challenges through a theoretical turn toward critical inclusive education. By illuminating paradigmatic applications, this poster demonstrates how special education operates along functionalist logic and argues that a contrasting metatheoretical foundation–one capable of transcending dominant (special) education by inherently centering inclusivity, equity, and justice–is necessary for addressing increasingly unique needs of all students, their families, and their communities.

To accomplish this aim, this poster introduces the metatheoretical paradigms of social science (Burrell & Morgan, 1979), their applicability to special education (Skrtic, 1991, 1995), and how wicked problems can be perpetuated through a field’s dominant metatheoretical frame (e.g., McCall & Skrtic, 2009). In addition, this work extends the concept of wicked problems by illustrating the difference between half- and full-measure solutions in the context of special education. In particular, this work describes how the special education pillar of dispute resolution is a half-measure solution that serves as a symbolic ritual to give the appearance of progress on a case-by-case basis but falls short of actually attaining inclusivity, equity, and justice because the metatheoretical foundation of special education is flawed. In contrast, this poster posits a paradigmatic shift through the tenets of humanizing education—adhocratic organizations, civic professionals, and precedent-based dispute resolution— essential to carrying out collective, deliberative problem-solving for addressing all needs in a pluralistic society (McCall & Skrtic, 2009; Skrtic, 2012). The pillar of dispute resolution is again utilized as a conduit for exemplifying the paradigm shift, notion, and possibilities of critical inclusive education.

In conclusion, we posit that a strong metatheoretical foundation, one that values difference and liberation, can serve as a starting point to developing theoretically grounded research, policy, and practices necessary to transform educational institutions in ways that are inherently inclusive, equitable, and just.

Authors

• Chelsea Morgan, University of Kansas

• Courtney L. Wilt, University of Wisconsin - Whitewater

• William A. Proffitt, Montclair State University