Constructions of Learning Disabilities within Contemporary Canadian Society: Discourse, Biopower and Governmentality

Understandings and definitions of disability have changed and varied across social and political climates within North America, affecting the ways in which disabled individuals are treated, represented, and responded to, within various facets of society. Learning disabilities, in particular, have been subject to change and language surrounding the label has shifted across different socio-political contexts. The objective of this research project was to explore and document the dominant discourse constructing learning disabilities within Canada, the various individuals involved with constructing the category of learning disability and how such constructions have informed broader, treatment approaches to learning disabilities within Canada. A qualitative content analysis of 200 media articles was employed to address the study’s objectives, along with a Foucauldian framework to theorize major findings. The major findings of this thesis include: Dominant medicalized discourses of learning disabilities circulate throughout media articles to construct learning disabilities as both an individual and social problem; medicalized understandings of learning disabilities influence how learning disabled individuals are governed, treated, as well as who becomes responsibilized to manage the problem of learning disabilities; the dominant discourse of learning disabilities complements broader neoliberal ideologies and social structures concerned with productivity, independence and self-sufficiency, impacting the lives of learning disabled individuals more generally. As a category, then, learning disabilities and approaches to learning disabilities cannot be fully understood without an understanding of the historical, social and cultural context in which the category has come to be produced and realized

Microaggressions Experienced by LGBTQ Academics in Canada: \u27Just Not Fitting In… It Does Take a Toll\u27

Given contemporary attention to diversity and inclusion on Canadian university campuses, and given human rights protections for sexual orientation and gender identity, it is tempting to believe that marginalization is a thing of the past for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) academics. Our qualitative study (n = 8), focusing on everyday experiences rather than overt discrimination, documents numerous microaggressions, the often-unintended interactions that convey messages of marginality. With colleagues, students and administrators, participants reported isolation, tokenism, invisibility, hyper-visibility, dismissal, exoticization, and lack of institutional support. Maintaining constant vigilance and caution was taxing. The everyday microaggressions that lead to isolation and a sense of dis-ease in pervasively cisgender-normative and heteronormative institutions are very difficult to challenge, as they are not the kinds of experiences anti-discrimination policies and procedures are designed to address

Microaggressions Experienced by LGBTQ Academics in Canada: \u27Just Not Fitting In… It Does Take a Toll\u27

Given contemporary attention to diversity and inclusion on Canadian university campuses, and given human rights protections for sexual orientation and gender identity, it is tempting to believe that marginalization is a thing of the past for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) academics. Our qualitative study (n = 8), focusing on everyday experiences rather than overt discrimination, documents numerous microaggressions, the often-unintended interactions that convey messages of marginality. With colleagues, students and administrators, participants reported isolation, tokenism, invisibility, hyper-visibility, dismissal, exoticization, and lack of institutional support. Maintaining constant vigilance and caution was taxing. The everyday microaggressions that lead to isolation and a sense of dis-ease in pervasively cisgender-normative and heteronormative institutions are very difficult to challenge, as they are not the kinds of experiences anti-discrimination policies and procedures are designed to address