Empowering Disabled Voices: A Practical Guide for Methodological Inclusivity

Centering Disability in Biology Education Research

Biology education research has made significant strides in ensuring access and equity for students with disabilities. However, more work is needed to develop guidelines that prioritize the voices and experiences of disabled people, particularly those facing multiple forms of marginalization, in the research process itself. By drawing from critical frameworks like Disability Critical Race Studies (DisCrit), biology education researchers can transform current practices to empower disabled participants as knowledge generators.

The field of biology education has demonstrated a growing interest in disability-related topics. Researchers have explored strategies to promote inclusive classrooms, accessible instructional design, and equitable learning environments for students with diverse abilities. For example, studies have investigated the experiences of students with disabilities in active learning settings, the impacts of anxiety and depression on biology learning, and approaches to make genetics instruction more inclusive.

While this body of work advocates for crucial changes in biology education, our field is still developing methodologies to center the perspectives and expertise of disabled people, especially those who face intersecting oppressions related to race, class, gender, and other identity facets. The purpose of this article is to provide biology education researchers with practical guidance on how to design and conduct studies that authentically empower disabled voices using a critical disability framework.

We focus on Disability Critical Race Studies (DisCrit) as a model, as this theory has not been widely adopted in biology education research to date. DisCrit consists of seven tenets that explore the intersecting experiences of ableism and racism. By unpacking these tenets, we offer strategies for researchers to consider in the design, data collection, analysis, and dissemination phases of their studies. We also highlight examples from a hypothetical biology education research project led by Dr. Okazaki to illustrate how DisCrit can be operationalized.

Through this guide, we aim to support biology education researchers in developing equitable, inclusive, and accessible research practices that position disabled people as experts and knowledge generators. By embracing critical frameworks, our field can transform the way we investigate topics related to disability, ultimately leading to more just and empowering learning environments for all students.

Theoretical Foundations: From Disability Studies to DisCrit

Two broad theoretical perspectives, the medical and social models, have often guided disability-related research. The medical model understands disability as an individual deficit in need of a “cure,” while the social model views disability as arising from structural and societal barriers placed on people with disabilities. The social model and its scholarship have been critiqued for primarily benefiting white men with physical disabilities and failing to fully address the experiences of disabled women and people of color.

As Disability Studies advanced, more critically-oriented perspectives emerged, collectively referred to as Critical Disability Studies. This scholarship recognized the nuances in the lived experiences of disability and how power dynamics shape these experiences. From these critical perspectives, theories like Disability Studies in Education and Disability Justice arose, setting the stage for the development of Disability Critical Race Studies (DisCrit).

DisCrit was formalized by education researchers who sought to explicitly consider the intersectional experiences of disabled students of color. Drawing from foundational fields like Critical Race Theory, Disability Studies, and Feminist Theory, DisCrit consists of seven tenets that guide researchers in centering the perspectives of marginalized populations:

1. DisCrit focuses on how racism and ableism circulate interdependently to uphold notions of normalcy.
2. DisCrit values multidimensional identities and troubles singular notions of identity.
3. DisCrit emphasizes the social constructions of race and ability, while recognizing their material and psychological impacts.
4. DisCrit privileges the voices of marginalized populations, traditionally not acknowledged within research.
5. DisCrit considers the legal and historical aspects of disability and race and how they have been used to deny rights.
6. DisCrit recognizes whiteness and ability as property, with gains for disabled people often resulting from the interest convergence of white, middle-class citizens.
7. DisCrit requires activism and supports all forms of resistance.

By using DisCrit as a framework, biology education researchers can center the lived experiences of disabled students of color, explore the intersections of oppression, and work towards more equitable and inclusive research practices. In the following sections, we outline methodological considerations for each phase of the research process through the lens of DisCrit.

Designing a Study

When employing a critical framework like DisCrit, researchers should carefully consider the types of research questions they aim to explore and how to meaningfully engage communities in the research process. DisCrit-informed questions should delve into the nuanced and unique barriers experienced by individuals at the intersections of multiple marginalized identities.

For example, DisCrit-aligned research questions in biology education might investigate how racism and ableism jointly inform perceptions of “normal” in biology contexts, or how the strengths and assets used by disabled students of color to navigate these oppressions can be leveraged to improve equity and inclusion. Table 1 provides additional examples of research questions that align with each DisCrit tenet.

Table 1. The tenets of DisCrit and example questions for biology education researchers (Annamma et al., 2013).

In addition to identifying relevant research questions, DisCrit-informed researchers should aim to foster reciprocal relationships with participant communities, viewing them as experts and co-constructors of knowledge. This aligns with Tenet 4, which privileges the voices of marginalized populations.

Researchers may wish to explore methodologies used outside traditional biology education research, such as action research, participatory action research, autoethnography, and phenomenology, as these approaches can better empower disabled participants as knowledge generators. Even quantitative research can be enhanced through the use of QuantCrit, a methodological framework that aligns with the goals of DisCrit.

Finally, researchers should engage in critical self-reflection about their own positionality and power in relation to the communities they study. Positionality statements can help researchers unpack their ontoepistemic, sociohistorical, and sociocultural identities and how these influence their research. Box 1 provides an example positionality statement written by the authors of this article.

Box 1. Positionality Statement

Ontoepistemic Positionality: The tenets of DisCrit highlight how notions of behavior, productivity, and intelligence are all mediated by perceptions of ability and race. We embrace this framework in our work, understanding that intersectionality emphasizes multiple layers of social oppression and privilege simultaneously. In writing this article, we aim to critique some of the cultural norms and methodologies in our field that have failed to challenge these oppressions.

Sociohistorical Reflection: In conceptualizing this article, we read deeply on the foundational theories for critical work on disability. We also consulted DisCrit scholars. We considered current norms in discipline-based education research and biology education research, comparing these to the tenets of DisCrit and other critically-informed disability theories. We actively worked to outline assumptions of neutrality and objectivity that are commonplace in our field, recognizing how these assumptions have the potential to cause harm to disabled people of color when left unexamined.

Sociocultural Reflection: Together, our experiences of disability include receiving accommodations in academic spaces, distributing accommodations to other disabled students as instructors, working as disability service coordinators, being researched as students with disabilities, and researching students with disabilities. We identify as disabled, deaf/hard of hearing, and as individuals with nonapparent disabilities. We also identify as white-passing and white cisgender women, which are identities that offer us privileges in certain spaces. One author is a first-generation college student from a rural working-class background, and both authors have experienced financial insecurity. We have seen firsthand the intersectional hurdles faced by multiply marginalized students with disabilities.

Collecting Data

In the data collection process, DisCrit-informed researchers must consider how they define and categorize disability, as well as strategies to facilitate access and inclusion for both participants and the research team. Tenet 2 of DisCrit problematizes the overreliance on medical diagnoses to understand disability, recognizing it as a socially constructed identity.

When defining disability within a study, researchers should avoid solely relying on predetermined labels or formal accommodations. Instead, an open-ended approach that empowers participants to self-identify can provide a more nuanced understanding of disability experiences. Box 3 provides an example of how a researcher might structure questions about disability and race in a participant screening questionnaire.

Box 3. Defining Disability and Categorizing Identity

Dr. Okazaki reads about how disability identity has been conceptualized in previous work. They learn that in some cases researchers might consider physical disabilities to include hearing and visual impairments, or they might be interested in only disabilities that impact mobility. Dr. Okazaki talks with their team of participant-researchers about how disability should be defined and bounded in the study they are planning. Together, the research team decides that “physical disabilities” will include hearing and visual impairments as well as disabilities that impact mobility. In writing up and presenting the findings of the study, the team will clearly define the ways in which they understand, define, and categorize disability.

Dr. Okazaki’s Participant Screening Questionnaire:
– Do you identify as having a disability? (Yes/No)
– Do you identify as disabled? (Yes/No)
– Please describe the nature of your disability (Open-ended response)
– Which race do you most closely identify with? (Checklist with option to select multiple)
– If the above options do not describe your race, please feel free to describe it here. (Open-ended response)

Beyond defining disability, DisCrit-informed researchers must also consider how to facilitate access and inclusion throughout the data collection process. This may involve incorporating principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Disability Justice, such as offering flexible interview options, providing materials in advance, and implementing accommodations requested by participants.

To help plan and communicate these access-oriented strategies, researchers can create an “Access and Equity Map” that outlines the steps they will take before, during, and after data collection. Box 4 provides an example of an Access and Equity Map for Dr. Okazaki’s hypothetical interview study.

Box 4. Access and Equity Map

Initial Contacts:
– Invite access talk (Reinholz & Ridgway, 2021)
– Reiterate confidentiality and purpose of the study to address stigma and anxiety (Rose, 2006; O’Shea & Meyer, 2016; Nance, 2017)
– Detail in-person, remote, and walking tour interview options (Kusenbach, 2003; Annamma, 2017; Bartlett et al., 2023)

Scheduling Interviews:
– Provide a list of supports and possible accommodations (McFarland et al., 2024)
– Release study materials and interview protocols ahead of time (Burgstahler, 2020)

During Interviews:
– Have accessible, printed, or “friendly” versions of questions (Burgstahler, 2020)
– Implement accommodations requested by participants

After Interviews:
– Follow up with participants about their experience (Reinholz & Ridgway, 2021)
– Engage in member checking to ensure interpretations reflect participant experiences (Birt et al., 2016; Annamma & Morrison, 2018)

By proactively planning for access and inclusion, researchers can create a more supportive and empowering data collection process for disabled participants.

Analyzing Data

A key aspect of DisCrit-informed research is the pursuit of nuanced, intersectional analyses that illuminate the complex interplay of ableism and racism. Tenet 1 of DisCrit emphasizes how these two forms of oppression circulate interdependently, often in subtle and invisible ways.

Researchers should aim to move beyond an additive approach to understanding marginalization and instead seek to analyze how different identity facets are “mutually constituted and interdependent” (Dill & Kohlman, 2012, p. 20). This transformative intersectionality goes beyond simply acknowledging differences to explore how those differences came to be and how they can be reframed as sources of strength.

Box 5 provides an example of how Dr. Okazaki and their research team might reflect on the characteristics of a transformative intersectional analysis in the context of their study.

Box 5. Characteristics of Transformative Intersectional Analysis

Intersectionality is…
– Leaving space for participants to share their unique experiences of agency in biology classrooms
– Highlighting asset-based findings rather than solely focusing on deficiencies
– Identifying patterns and unique challenges faced by students at the intersections of multiple identities
– Member checking to compare assumptions and interpretations from the research team against participant feedback
– Facilitating discussions among the research team about identities shared and not shared with participants as we analyze data
– Defining our ideas of agency compared with participants as part of analysis

Intersectionality is not…
– Prescribing categories of experience for participants to choose from
– Coding only for barriers and reasons that students are not the same as others
– Capturing experiences along singular axes of identity without considering environmental and personal contexts
– Assuming that researcher interpretations are representative of lived experience not shared by those researchers
– Imposing a dominant idea of agency upon individuals as only agreed upon by the research team

By engaging in transformative intersectional analyses, biology education researchers can shed light on the nuanced ways that racism and ableism shape the experiences of disabled students of color, while also highlighting their strengths and assets.

Disseminating Findings

The final phase of DisCrit-informed research involves the dissemination of findings in ways that center advocacy and promote meaningful change for disabled people of color. Tenet 7 of DisCrit emphasizes the importance of activism and resistance, which can take many forms, including intellectual activism through research.

Researchers can engage in intellectual activism by presenting their findings in a manner that clearly positions disabled people of color as knowledge producers, resists deficit-based narratives, and pushes for a more complex understanding of identity and ability. This may involve exploring alternative dissemination venues beyond traditional academic journals, such as practitioner-oriented publications, student organizations, or advocacy groups.

When disseminating their work, researchers should also consider principles of accessibility and universal design. This can include using captioning, accessible fonts, and clear communication of key ideas. Researchers may also wish to collaborate with community partners to identify the most impactful ways to share their findings and promote actionable change.

Box 6. Accessibility Considerations for Dissemination

Who is reading our work?
Goal: Ensure findings are shared beyond only academic audiences
Strategies: Publish in research-centered journals and practitioner journals, share reports with administrators and student listservs

What formats are we presenting our findings in?
Goal: Present findings in accessible written and oral forms, for both expert and lay audiences
Strategies: Use clear communication of goals and key ideas, check for web accessibility, inquire about accessible formatting for journals, use captioning and accessible fonts

Where is our work being presented?
Goal: Disseminate findings beyond traditional research talks to fellow biology education researchers
Strategy: Work with community partners to identify alternative venues like professional development sessions, student organizations, or advocacy groups

When are we sharing our findings?
Goal: Share knowledge throughout the research process, not just at the end, to effect timely change
Strategies: Discuss advocacy opportunities with the research team, empower community leaders in decision-making about progress and findings

Why do we want people to know about this work?
Goal: Center advocacy and anti-deficit perspectives, help bring about change for students
Strategies: Amplify participant voices, highlight exclusion, share