The Inclusion of Disability in Introductory Sociology Textbooks

Author(s): Diane E. Taub and Patricia L. Fanflik
Source: Teaching Sociology, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Jan., 2000), pp. 12-23
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1319418

Naliyah’s Blog

The authors argue that sociology is a discipline often used to highlight diversity and inclusion. However, one area that is often overlooked is that of physical differences in ability. The authors did content analysis of 25 textbooks from 1996-1998 examining them for “textual representation of disability and pictorial depiction of individuals with disabilities” (pg. 12). They identified two major themes: “disability as a defining social characteristic and disability as a basis for minority group membership” (pg. 12). The authors then discuss how individuals with disabilities might be portrayed in a more comprehensive manner. Some of their suggestions include: integrating photos of people with visible disabilities throughout texts rather than just in specific chapters where disability is discussed, not labeling captions of photos with words such as “crippled, blind” instead of calling people disabled, referring to them as “people who have disabilities,” having class discussions around the ways in which people with disabilities are active agents in countering challenges instead of painting them as victims of discrimination, discussing the range of disabilities one may have such as those that are not visible to include things such as mental illness.


This is a very important subject. Not simply for people taking sociology courses, but in advocating for us to educate able-bodied people about those who differ from themselves. I remember my professor in community college specifically having conversations with us about needing to hear from the perspectives of our classmates who were not able-bodied and to understand that not all of their situations were the same.

For instance, one of our classmates had cerebral palsy; he could not control his body and was in a wheel chair. He would drool and his head would lean off to one side while his arm would be upright with his wrist bent (in the fashion people often imitate when making fun of someone they call “retarded”). He could not speak and had a computer where he typed his answers which the computer than spoke aloud to the class.

By all appearances, people would assume he was mentally handicap. However, it couldn’t have been farther from the truth. He was a brilliant man who had absolutely no form of retardation; his body simply couldn’t do what he wanted it to. With the help of his computer and personal aid he wrote a story for a class paper (which he gave all of us) about his life and how people assume he is retarded. I have NEVER looked at people who are not able bodied the same way. I now understand that each person has very different experiences, needs, circumstances and that you cannot assume anything about the person and their intellectual capabilities by appearance.

I had another friend at the school, who had a less severe form of cerebral palsy. She could talk and function a little more independently, but still told me of what it was like to be 30 years old and still look like a kid and have her mom constantly in her life (as if she were still a child) unable to live as an adult.

What I learned from those classmates was the importance of educating others about the variety of challenges and differences they face. I also saw that we have so much we can gain from those who are not able-bodied and therefore must make sure they are not shut out of our learning and work environments nor our social arenas. This means that we must take an active role in accommodating and including students who are not able-bodied, just as we would someone who is a non- native English speaker or someone who has test anxiety. So when we talk about diversity we must make sure not to leave out those individuals so often forgotten about. Their stories are just as important as any other individuals’.