Conductive education
Thirty years on
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12313662 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Anne Emerson (0000-0002-1494-1528, University of Nottingham, corresponding author), Fiona Holroyd (University of Nottingham) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Pages | 1349-1354 |
| Publication date | 2019-11-07 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Disability & Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0968-7599 • E-ISSN: 1360-0508 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/09687599.2019.1685791 |
| OpenAlex | W2987581718 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 10 |
In 1989 Mike Oliver’s Current Issue about Conductive Education (CE) enabled disability activists and scholars to consider educational ‘tools’ and cures as potentially oppressive, and he expressed his view that CE was based on a set of assumptions about normality. Challenging the assumption that disabled people wished to be able to walk, Oliver led the way in demonstrating how barriers existed in society, not within the individual. Oliver’s social model fosters choice, empowerment and opportunities for maximising one’s potential, and we suggest that CE is one vehicle which offers these opportunities to young disabled people, supported here by the voice of a CE ‘graduate’ who wanted to share her experiences. Building on the importance of Oliver’s pioneering re-think of disability, we draw on the field of neuroscience to counter the main points in his critique that there is no evidential support for CE and that it is ideologically untenable
Disability studies · Empowerment · Epistemology · Field (mathematics · Ideology · Normality · Political science · Politics · Set (abstract data type · Sociology · Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders · Computer Science · Disability Rights and Representation · Educational and Psychological Assessments · Gender Studies · Law · Philosophy · Psychology · Social Psychology
| Highly cited | No |
|---|