My Definitions
Words matter. Here’s what I mean when I use the following words in my work — keeping in mind their meanings and how I use them has evolved over time. I am sure nuances will continue to deepen and shift as a result of changes both in my personal journey and in our work together.
Ableism
Ableism is attitudes and behavior that people without disabilities are more valued than those with disabilities. This perspective is embedded in our cultures, educational systems, employment opportunities, and national policies. Disabled people have historically been shunned, stigmatized, and marginalized across society. Ableism is often hidden and unrecognized in our interactions, left out of our diversity initiatives, and “othered” in the dialog about equity and opportunity for all.
Accessibility
Accessibility is the opportunity to engage with people, ideas, and self in an authentic and organic manner. When creating an accessible environment, it is critical to remember three things:
Access is not the burden of disabled people. While accessibility is sometimes achieved through tools and adjustments to a static resource — such as providing a transcript for a podcast — more often than not this retrofitting perpetuates the added burden on disabled people to do the “work” of access (requesting the transcript, waiting for it to be made, and often reading it outside of the context of the class or original content delivery). Transcripts and other accommodations for access benefit many people, not just deaf and disabled people, and should be standard practice across all delivery platforms.
Access is more than accommodations. Accessibility should be a system-wide understanding that the organization, leadership, and community are responsible for the design of our activities to be built in ways that either allow for multiple entry points or are easily amenable to adaptations and accommodations.
Access must be intentional. Too often we demand that the disabled — who already directly experience ableist systems, policies, and attitudes — also take on the burden of ensuring their own access to what abled people receive without effort. The system and its leadership need to have it as a named priority.
A11y
A11y isn't just a hip way to spell “ally.” Rather, a11y is an abbreviation of the word accessibility — keep the first and last letter, then between them put the count of letters removed (in this case, 11).
On the internet, the use of the term a11y helps to identify content related specifically to digital accessibility. For example, it is often used as a Twitter hashtag (#a11y) by digital accessibility practitioners and supporters.
deaf
Deaf identity is highly personal, often evolving, and very context-dependent — and something I understand intimately, as a person who identifies as deaf. The lower case “d” usage here is intentional, reflecting the heterogeneous and sometimes intersectional experiences of individuals who claim this identity. In this usage, deaf can include people who identify as culturally Deaf, who were born with hearing loss or who acquired it later in life, who use a range of language and communication modalities, who have additional disabilities, and who have intersectional experiences of deafness with identities such as race, gender, cultural heritage, and economic opportunity. Unless explicitly stated, my use of deaf is meant to be inclusive of this diversity.
Evidence
When taking a critical look at policies and practices, particularly in education, it is important to identify why those strategies are in place. In the world of educational research, we consider quality “evidence” and “evidence-based” practices to be those that are drawn from rigorous research methodologies. The longer I work in this field, particularly in understanding the critical research-to-practice process, the more I consider quality evidence to be based on three things.
It must be culturally relevant. For far too long, educational research has been considered neutral, when in reality, it reflects the values and biases of the researchers and the participants. Culturally relevant evidence demands that the entire research process — from design to recruitment to interpretation of findings to how results are shared — is built with and by people who are the focus of research.
It must be rooted in people. There are many different types of research approaches. Some focus on quantifiable results; others bring to bear the lived experiences of people. The value and meaning of a scale score or discrete outcome must be rooted in the stories, perspectives, and narratives that give context to a number.
It must have the goal of systems change. I am a strong advocate for research and evidence that leads to constructive dialog on how to dismantle systemic barriers to equity for all. Educational research that does not lead to the improvement of the lives of those who have been historically excluded from opportunities afforded to the privileged few is, to me, a waste of resources needed for systems change.