Schools sustain a rigid binary between ability and disability based on medicalized conceptions. This dichotomy positions students categorically as "abled" or "dis/abled" with hierarchical implications. The binary naturalizes the idea that some students are competent while others are incompetent. Fixed categories prevent recognition of disability as socially constructed.

State University of New York at Binghamton

- Schools as Normalization Institutions
- Special Education's Roots in the Medical Model
- Ability/Disability Binary

The Systematic Ways U.S. Schools Construct and Perpetuate Disability As Deficit

The social model positions society as the disabling agent, rather than an individual’s impairment. Under the social model, an impairment is not automatically a disability. It is only a disability when society is not structured (physically, socially, or culturally) to include that impairment/variation. For example, in a society where glasses/corrective lenses are accessible and socially accepted, the impairment of having blurry vision without them is not necessarily disabling. The social model seeks to make changes in society, rather than focusing on disabled people to change.

Social Model of Disability

- Discursive Psychology as a "Sensitizing Frame"
- Dis/ability Notation
- Systematic Instruction Ideology

Theoretical Foundations - Core concepts framing the disability construction argument

Lester, J. N. (Ed.). (2021). Discursive Psychology and Disability. Palgrave Studies in Discursive Psychology. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Reference For: Discursive Psychology and Disability

U.S. public schools function as contemporary institutions of normalization, similar to prisons or health systems. They construct "normalcy" and position students who deviate as "abnormal" or "sick." Schools are the most proliferating mechanism making the "othering" of disability visible. This framework avoids interrogating the system's historical and sociopolitical foundations.

Schools as Normalization Institutions

Traditional special education roots itself in pathologization, intervention, and Eugenist philosophies. Students with disabilities are viewed through a deficit lens requiring them to be "fixed." The system demands students adapt to fit existing structures rather than questioning those structures. This approach perpetuates harm and dehumanization.

Special Education's Roots in the Medical Model

Ability/Disability Binary

- Important Books in the Social Model of DIsabilities

Important Literature in the Social Model of Disabilities

The disabled people’s movement was created in reference to people being disabled not because of functionality, but rather because of societal, institutional, and structural barriers that have limited the ability to fully participate in certain activities, settings, events, etc.  

Important Movements within the Social Model of Disability

Coinciding with the important movements within the social model of disability rights [node], sociologists Turner and Killian explain that without the collectivity of the social movement, the disability rights movement would not have become so effective through its institutionalized structure.  

Importance of Social Movement Theory within the Social Model of the Disability Rights Movement

Despite the more widely accepted social model, some people struggled with the idea that their disability is born from society as it can imply that their individual needs should be disregarded. In the 90’s, "feminist disability scholars", such as Liz Crow and Jenny Morris, called for an updated model that still placed the blame of discrimination on society, but made clear that even in the absence of oppression, the effects of disabilities would still have a felt negative impact. Since then, people's perspective shifted to include the idea that impairment and disability are linked.

Reframed Social Model of Disability

Because the social model of disability has become widely recognized as a rationale for multiple barriers, children with disabilities in educational settings have limited participation in certain activities or settings because of exclusive curriculums, poor faculty attitudes and biases, and physical barriers that prevent them from getting around. 

The Importance of National and International Recognition of the Social Model of Disability


Individuals who view disability solely in terms of the social model may unintentionally neglect the subjective, emotional and spiritual disability experience. This could potentially lead to distortions associated with the holistic development of a disability identity.   


Disability Identity Development in terms of the Social Model 


Disabilities have been studied and defined through many lenses over the years. The most popular of these perspectives are the medical model of disability and the social model of disability. An important lens may have been overshadowed over the years - the social relational perspective. 

How is Disability Understood? An Examination of Sociological Approaches

Laws and policies created by governments and government agencies in order to protect the rights of disabled individuals. 

Disability Rights Legislation 

In order for people with disabilities to have equal access to choice and autonomy, they must have the agency to decide when to participate in the mainstream. Thus, centers for independent living aim to support the ability for people with disabilities to function as independently as possible when given the proper resources. 



Centers for Independant Living (CIL's)


The Black Panther party news coverage of the 504 sit-in focused on the oppressions, stereotypes and stigma faced by disabled people. This coverage of the 504 sit-in focusing of the societal and political barriers of disability rather than the medical or physical barriers introduced readers to the social model of disability.

The Social Model of Disability in the Black Panther

The disability rights movement has been criticized for basing disability concepts around the lived experiences and bodyminds of white, heterosexual, wheelchair-using disabled men. One example of a concept that has been challenged is the social model of disability which has been critiqued in various ways - including but not limited to: individuals with chronic pain conditions citing that even with a more accessible society their pain would exist, and racialized and low-income individuals calling out how the social model of disability can erase how while society is ableist overall that ableism is inherently intertwined with racism, classism, and sexism. Disability rights activists have also had a history of leaning back on intracommunity hierarchies of "who is more disabled" that exclude individuals with chronic illnesses, mental disabilities, and intellectual and developmental disabilities. 

Challenges to definitions of disability by the Disability Rights Movement?

Disability studies is based around the premise that if the built environment was made more accessible and that accessibility was enforced through a legal system, that indequities that create disability would lessen to the possible point of disability disappearing as a form of embodiment. Disability Studies is focused around the social model.

Whereas, Critical Disability Studies is more centered around examining a political-relational model of disability that understands disability as a contestable and transformable category that has been created by larger political and historical forces - a political/relational model of disability, and more pointedly understanding how the category of disability both plays out in individual's lives while also critiquing and examining the system that created the model of disability.

Difference between Critical Disability Studies and Disability Studies

There have been various critiques of the social model of disability including that it doesn't full account for individuals with chronic illness, including mental illness, who may experience disabling effects in the absence of a built environment e.g. if they were laying in a void. Additionally, the social model of disability often ignores the entanglement of disablement, or the conditions underwhich individuals become disabled, with racial and gendered disparities in health care access, discrimination, and maiming either through war or structural systems of violence. 

Critiques of the Social Model of Disability

Identity-first language is often used by communities, for example the Deaf and autistic communities, who believe that identity-defining features cannot be separated from the individual. This is pertinent in languages such as English where adjectives typically precede nouns, e.g. "talented child" instead of "a child with talent."  

Some believe differentiating the language we use for disability from language we use for other adjectives may perpetuate stigma rather than mitigate it. 

Identity-first language is also prompted by individuals who believe that their disabled embodiment is essential to and should not be separated from them or their humanity. This usage also can signal how some disabled individuals view disability as an integral part of their cultural identity.

Some scholars have noted how person-first language is used to refer to children with disabilities but not often used for nondisabled children, this creates a separation with person-first language being used to discuss disability but identity-first language is used to discuss other identity neutral or positive attributes.

Some view the use of identity-first language as a way to highlight disability as an identity  category since identity-first language is used for other categories including race, gender, and sexual orientation.

Arguments for identity-first language

The edited volume publishes current research and theory demonstrating how Discursive Psychology (DP) provides nuanced understandings of disability. The book challenges the traditional view that disabilities represent a biological truth, arguing instead that disability is inseparable from the cultural models that define it and is continually produced within discourse. DP is employed as a theoretical and methodological perspective to examine how disability is made real, ascribed, contested, and negotiated in everyday and institutional social practices and language-in-use, providing a post-cognitive critique of medicalization. 

Book: Discursive Psychology and Disability

Developed by Michael Oliver, this model represents disability as culturally-constructed through centuries of medical thinking and knowledge systems. It argues disability concepts are deployed to attribute individual causes for systematic exclusion of certain bodies and minds. The model examines how medical discourse creates categories that justify social exclusion. It emphasizes material conditions and power structures behind disability construction.

Materialist Social Model

When AI design incorporates elements of the social model, the focus shifts to recognizing barriers in the environment — such as inaccessible digital interfaces or biased hiring algorithms — as the true sources of disablement. For example, inclusive design frameworks that emphasize accessibility standards in natural language processing or computer vision can push AI developers to mitigate structural inequities rather than framing disabled users as “edge cases.” However, the article points out that most AI development still fails to take this model seriously, meaning ableism remains embedded in the very design process.

How Social Model Shapes AI

Disability Studies in Education repositions disability as social, cultural, and political construction. DSE shifts focus from individual pathology to systemic structures. Core tenets include contextualizing disability politically, promoting social justice, privileging disabled voices, and rejecting deficit models. This provides theoretical grounding for systemic change.

Disability Studies in Education (DSE) Framework

Ultimate aim: schools move beyond labeling based on medical diagnoses. Framework guides shift toward understanding disability as social construction and political category. Emphasis on equity and full inclusion for all students. Change requires rejecting deficit models and embracing difference. 

Moving Towards Inclusion

The social model of disability, which frames disability as socially constructed and a universal experience, is suggested as a way to reduce both essentialism and blame, leading to lower stigma and greater support for disability policies.

Reducing Essentialism and Blame through the Social Model of Disability

Universal design is a framework for creating environments that are accessible and usable for everyone, regardless of their abilities. Professionals should strive to implement universal design principles in their workspaces and activities. Office space is often minimal, and there is not much professionals can do about it. If that is the case, acknowledge the limited space with your clients to show them you care. That will go a long way.

Universal Design

DP views thinking/learning as socially constructed through interactions, not internal cognition. It was used as a "sensitizing frame" rather than standalone method. This perspective challenged cognitivist competency notions.

Discursive Psychology (DP) as a "Sensitizing Frame"

Applied behavior analysis principles drove educational practices. This ideology permeated all classroom interactions. The authors argue it harms both students and teachers.

Learn Before

Related