PRESENTED BY ROSH SUBRAYENUNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU NATAL

AIM: To explore and understand through thick descriptions how students with visual impairments at a University in KwaZulu-Natal embrace social exclusionary processes despite international and national policy frameworks.

1. What challenges of barriers related to social exclusion are experienced by students with visual impairment in their university environment?

2. Recommendations.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

1. Anti Oppressive theoretical framework (Dominelli, 2002)2. What is this framework premised on?3. Social divisions and relevance of the Anti Oppressive framework to this study.4. Personal, cultural and structural analysis of oppression (Thompson, 2001).5. Fundamental principles of anti oppressive practices (Burke and Harrison, 2005).6. The social exclusionary process (Dominelli (2002):- Social exclusion- “Othering”- Identity formationPositioning visual impairment in the context of social exclusion.

1. UN Convention on Human Rights (1948)2. UN Convention on the Rights of persons with

physical Disabilities (2006)3. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (1996)4. Education White Paper 3: A Program for the

Transformation of Higher Education.5. National Plan for Higher education (2001)

**Medical model vs Social model of DisabilityKEY EMPIRICAL STUDIES1.Bjarason (2002)- qualitative, Iceland, lack of peer group interaction.2.Gilson (2006)-qualitative, University of Hong Kong, mountainous terrain, exposure to obstacles, safety and physical challenges, inaccessibility to dormitories, use stairways, portable ramps in the absence of elevators.3.Castellano (2011), UK, qualitative study, positive outcomes, student helpers, community volunteers, link between university social workers and community social workers, advanced assistive technology.

4. Castelleno’s (2010) likens to the operationalization of the Ubuntu philosophy.

5. Argument by Barnes and Mercer (2005) on independent living.

6. Ferral (2007)-”visual cultural imperialism”7. The impact of living experiences on academic out

comes-absent/silence-South Africa.

.

1. Qualitative, voices, thick descriptions, subjective experiences (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

2. Semi structured, focus group.3. Fifteen participants, visual impairment, male and female4. Convenience sampling Why? Ease of access5. Data analysis-Vital and Jansen (1997).6. Academic rigour7. Guidelines for ethical research and limitations.

1. FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION UPON RECEIPT OF DISABILITY BURSARY

2. - Mullaly’s (1993) articulations on oppression.3. -”You are blind and you are

drinking....sighted student will make you spend on them. After a few days you will hear a student with a visual impairment saying “I am broke because of other people, or that my money is being stolen”.

4. - “When you ask for assistance then you must give something in return...food, money of purchases from your fashion account”.

2. EXCLUSIONS FROM STUDENT RESIDENCE ACADEMIC ACTIVITIES

3. Group study4. Group study meetings5. Inaccessible notices6. Exclusions from decision making.7. “...dominant groups do not approve of my

disability as I must work at the pace of non disabled students or take a hike”.

3. STUDENT RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES- Smells, bad odour-sighted students keep awat

from residences for students with disabilities.- “nursing homes, tunnels,

institutions, hospitals or homes for nuns’. Females asexual, labelling, academic isolation.

4. USE OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TECHNOLOGY AT STUDENT RESIDENCES

‘I cannot stay at student residences to do my work...In view of my degenerative condition, I rely on my sense of hearing and hence use the JAWS program. When I tell sighted students to lower their voices as I am using the JAWS program, in return they will say “WHAT IS JAWS, WHAT IS JAWS?

1. Disability likened to social class (rural-urban divide, model C vs public schools

“Home and university smell of poverty. Poverty and disability is linked. On campus you sleep without food, you come back to campus and there is no food. It is the same thing”.

1. Othering, powerlessness and voicelessness contributed to social exclusion.2. Positioned in a low hierarchy of humanness.3. Sighted enjoy pretentious relations with students with visual impairments.4. Sighted status to control and have power over students with visual impairments5. Absence of an ethic of care and spirit of Ubuntu6. Emotional and financial abuse7. “Automatic marginalisation”8. Relationship not only between disability and poverty but also between disability

and classism9. Able bodied community socialized into believing that persons with disabilities

are defective and must belong to under resourecd structures in society

1. Community Family Therapy Model (Rojano, 2004)

2. More scholarly work-living experiences at student residences-transformation of existing dominant ideologies of able bodied students.

Barnes, C & mercer, G. (2005). Disability, work and welfare: Challenging the social exclusion of disabled people. Work, Employment Society, 19(3), 527-545.

Bjarason, D.S. (2002). New voices in Iceland: Young adults with disabilities in iceland: The importance of relationships and natural supports. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 4(2), 156-189.

Burke, B & Harrison, P. (2005). Anti Oppressive practice. In R. Adam, L. Dominelli & M. Payne. (2002). Anti Oppresive Practices. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

- --

Castellano, E. (2011). Living the question-My study abroad: Experience at Lancaster University, England. Dominelli, L. (2002). Anti oppressive social work theory and practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave, Macmillian.Ferrell, K. (20070. Issues in the field of blindness and low vision.Gilson, C.L. (2006). The university of Hong kong A site visit on accessibility for people with disabilities studying in Hong Kong.Lincoln, Y.S & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury park: Sage Publications

Mullaly, R. (1993). Structural social work: Ideology, theory and practice. Toronto; McClelland and Stewart Inc.Rojano, r. (2004). The practice of community family therapy. Family Process, 43(1), 59-77.Republic of South Africa. Constitution of South Africa (1996).Republic of South Africa. Department of Education. Education White paper 3: A program for the transformation of higher education (1997)

Republic of South Africa. Department of Education. National Plan for Higher Education (2001).

United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006).

United Nations Convention on Human Rights (1948).

Vithal, R & Jansen, J. (1997). Designing your first research proposal. A manual for researchers in education and social sciences. Landsdowe: Juta & Co.