Colonialism

Colonialism has been described as the denial or severing of relationships (Roberts, 2024; Donald). Dwayne Donald (Unlearning Colonialism, 2024) describes one manifestation of this as, “we're taught to fear that difference, to see it as problematic”, leading to, “arbitrary categories of race and culture and who's superior and who's inferior” (7:27). Roberts (2024) adds a “severing… from each other, the land, the waterways, our communities, and the more-than-human” (p.1). She argues that the “right-and-wrong” binary mentality is one of the most challenging ways colonialism is embedded in the education system. Building from this, she identifies several characteristics of colonial education: hierarchical, individualistic, separate, competitive, focused on acquiring knowledge, and governed by rigid notions of time. Karaoulas (2025) extends this analysis by outlining interconnected mechanisms of colonial education, including linguistic control, sociocultural discrimination, structural inequality, economic dependence, and the persistence of colonial frameworks.

Colonial systems can also sever relationships by pathologizing human differences, which justifies the segregation of communities labeled as disabled. Ineese-Nash (2020) argues that “disability” is a colonial imposition that perpetuates assimilation and does not align with Indigenous perspectives of difference, and that many Indigenous languages in Turtle Island have no word for disability as a concept. In this view, variation in body, mind, and spirit is part of the natural diversity of life and community. 

In regards to decolonization in education, Chrona (2022) questions if this concept is possible, considering that education is an inherently colonial construct. She noticed that education reforms are often justified through "decolonization", even when they are not aligned with the priorities of Indigenous peoples. This study approaches normativity through an anti-racist and anti-ableist lens and is informed by Indigenous perspectives. Although this study does not explicitly adopt a decolonial framework, it recognizes that colonial capitalism underpins colonial education systems. 

Capitalism

Self-advocate Sunny Taylor (2004) describes "non-working guilt", a feeling that disabled people experience, a feeling of internalized shame for failing the rules of capitalism. She describes her experiences as a disabled artist whose legitimacy as an artist is questioned due to her not supporting herself financially through her art sales. Under capitalism, unpaid labor and creative expression are not viewed as valuable. Disability Justice invokes an Anti-Capitalist politic (Sins Invalid, 2015). It acknowledges that justice requires shifting value from capital to something that every human innately embodies. Under capitalism, humans are valued for their ability to perform commodified labor and generate capital (Yu, 2024). As Taylor (2004) suggests, capitalism generates a mindset that views humans who operate outside of either preparing for the workforce or engaging in the workforce as unproductive and unworthy. 

Neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is rooted in colonial capitalist logic. It is the idea that human well-being is best achieved through individual liberties and privatization of services. Au (2016) argues that neoliberalism is an attack on the public sphere where the state withdraws economic and social support from communities. For example, the data produced from standardized testing is used to justify public school takeovers, closures, and voucher schemes, where public education funds are diverted to allow students to attend private schools (Au, 2016). Au (2016) further questions the adoption of progressive language to further neoliberal agendas, especially around narratives of racial equality. Racial capitalism is disguised as neoliberal multiculturalism. Instead of teaching about systemic, internalized, and implicit racism, racism is boiled down to vague messages of equality, "color-blindness", and multiculturalism. Explicitly addressing racism is viewed as racist. More pressure is put on meritocracy, the idea that one can succeed regardless of who they are-- as long as they "work hard" (conform to white supremacist, ableist, colonial capitalist systems). Neoliberal meritocracy can attribute failure to a lack of individual effort, and effectively deny the structural and material realities of oppression.

Colonial capitalism is foundational for understanding the current institution of education. Public education, including inclusive education, originated within institutions that were already structured by colonial and capitalist values. There is a need for more honest conversations about how racism, ableism, and colonialism operate through schooling. 

Inclusive education represents a shift from exclusionary practices to inclusive ones. It is rooted in global movements advocating for disability communities. From the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, to the 1994 Salamanca Statement, to the 2006 UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the right to education for all children has been legally recognized and affirmed for over 70 years globally (UNESCO, 1994; United Nations, 1948, 1989, 2006). Despite inclusive education being legally mandated, ableism persists through false inclusions, denial of access to neighborhood schools, placements in restrictive programs, denial of appropriate supports, disproportionate rates of discipline, academic potential underestimated, and less experienced teachers (Annamma et al., 2013; Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities [CRPD], 2025; Cruz et al., 2024; Naraian, 2021; NCD, 2019; Giangreco, 2021; Orsati & Causton-Theoharis, 2013). Slee (2022) argues that the inclusive education movement has been profoundly co-opted and watered down by neoliberal agendas. Inclusive education is a structural transformation, but is framed as a series of individualized interventions under neoliberalism. 

Inclusive education continues to evolve from integrating students labeled as disabled into mainstream schools (not segregated schools), to integrating students labeled as disabled into mainstream classrooms (not segregated classrooms), to accommodating all learners “regardless” of background, to restructuring of school systems to create environments that embrace diversity (Baglieri et al., 2011; Slee, 2022). The last iteration is how inclusive education will be defined in this study. Inclusive education is the continuous process of anti-oppressive transformation where schools welcome and support all students in their full diversity. Inclusive beliefs influence and reinforce inclusive practice. Cruz et al. (2024) found that even when teachers increase their self-efficacy in inclusive teaching practices, they still struggle to understand how what they commonly perceive as “good teaching”, “good student”, and “high ability” are entrenched in white neoliberal, neurotypical measures of success. Even with inclusive practices, exclusion persists because the underlying value system has not shifted.

Disability Rights to Disability Justice 

Self-advocacy organizations have been the frontline for Disability Rights, stemming from opposition to human rights violations such as eugenics, forced sterilization, and institutionalization of disabled communities (Stienstra, 2020). Disability Rights secured essential legal protections and access points for disability communities. This movement also largely centered white, cisgender, physically disabled perspectives and experiences. It focused on access into non-disabled spaces. Disability Justice emerged as an intersectional view of disability, centering the lives, needs, experiences, and strategies of queer, disabled, women of color (Sins Invalid, 2015). Disability Justice extends a common language and critical thought about how we move towards an inclusive society that values diverse identities. Self-advocate Lydia Brown explains, “When we talk about disability rights, we're saying how can we change laws and policies to get better inclusion and better opportunities. When we talk about justice, what we're talking about is how can we change society and culture so that disabled people are no longer thought of as less than” (SARTAC, 2015). Laws and legislation have provided mass resourcing for individuals with disabilities, but transformational change occurs when minds are changed. 

Origins of Disability Justice trace back to Sins Invalid, an artist-activist project. "Invalid" is a reminder of the lineage of eugenics, where disabled communities were, and still are, labeled as deviant and undesirable. The concept of "sin" can be applied to ableist views of disability where it is seen as immoral, as well as homophobic and transphobic rhetoric that views queerness as shameful and abnormal. Therefore, Sins Invalid seeks to invalidate sins, refuse oppressive norms, and serve as a rallying call to community actualization. Sins Invalid is an invitation to an artist-activist space to explore the inherent worth and wisdom of these communities. 

Disability Justice rejects capitalist notions of value and necessitates shifting the value from capital to something that every human innately embodies. Under capitalism, humans are valued for their ability to perform commodified labor and generate capital. Schooling often functions as a means to prepare students for entering the workforce. This generates a mindset that views humans who operate outside of productivity as unproductive and unworthy. In contrast, Disability Justice invites us to view humans as inherently valuable, without proof of productivity or achievement. 

Teacher Education 

What are the challenges of preparing a predominately white, nondisabled workforce of preservice teachers to teach diverse student populations? Dunham & Alexander (2022) analyze six multimodal literacy identity projects created by preservice teachers based on intersectional competence. They found that the preservice teachers could identify different identity markers, especially race. One participant noted that she gravitated towards books that had characters that "look like me-- young, White, American girls" (p.9). However, she did not connect this reflection to critique misrepresentations or underrepresentations of other racial or cultural groups. Many of the preservice teachers reflected on personal experiences of marginalization-- especially race, religion, and disability. Dunham & Alexander (2022) paid attention to the identity markers that were not mentioned by the preservice teachers as well-- class or socioeconomic status. Additionally, many of them spoke about their identities as fragmented from one another. For example, one preservice teacher spoke of her racial identity and her gender identity in two different stories. Many of the preservice teachers were not attending to the ways that multiple forms of marginalization interact and reinforce one another. The authors address that this may be due to time constraints, lack of guidance, or deliberate decisions. Regardless, they emphasize the need for more complex dialogue around intersectional competency. 

Boveda & Aronson (2019) noticed a similar pattern. They analyzed the responses of twelve culturally and linguistically diverse special education preservice teachers. Many preservice teachers could reflect on their own racial and linguistic identities, expressing that diversity is an asset. However, some did not extend this notion of diversity as an asset to identity markers of sexuality, gender, or religion, expressing that those topics were "taboo" (p. 256). Additionally, when it came to their own intersecting identities, many participants shared stories of marginalization. However, when it came to their professional identities, they seemed to compartmentalize their personal identities. In terms of disability, speaking about children in terms of their disability designation, or in deficit-based terms, was prevalent. 

Perouse-Harvey (2022) explored how white preservice teachers understand and apply disability critical race theory (DisCrit) to identify and disrupt inequities in special education. They identify three primary challenges that preservice teachers experience when engaging in anti-oppressive work: (1) the relevance of racism and ableism to education, (2) the ability to understand experiences that they have not had themselves, and (3) reliance on stereotypes that perpetuate assumptions and marginalization. The findings from 18 preservice teachers emphasize the fluidity of this transformative process, noting that preservice teachers may first engage in resistance and then adopt new perspectives over time, or go back and forth between resistance and adoption, or only adopt course content that aligns with their previous orientations. Another consideration is that engaging critical frameworks must be partnered with practice and reflection. 

In a metaethnographic study, Pérez-Castejón et al. (2024) explored how teacher education programs can effectively shape the attitudes and perceptions of future teachers toward inclusive education. By synthesizing fifteen qualitative studies from various global contexts, the researchers identify practical school experiences as a primary catalyst for challenging personal biases and stereotypes. The findings emphasize that critical reflection and collaborative dialogue with peers and mentors are necessary to help students deconstruct deficit-based thinking. Pérez-Castejón et al. (2024) note that while reflection is common, the specific cognitive and ideological processes behind identity reconstruction are largely understudied.

Based on intersectional and anti-oppressive research in teacher education, McGraw et al. (2025) present a tool for informing course planning in special education teacher preparation. The authors argued that special education teacher preparation programs (SETPPs) generally fail to address intersectionality. Specifically, they often privilege disability markers in isolation and ignore the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse learners. The proposed tool guides educators through reflective questions across three domains: Identity, Power and Privilege, and Accessibility, Equity, and Instruction. McGraw et al. (2025) explicitly recommend autoethnography and personal narratives as powerful tools to move preservice teachers along the continuum from this dysconsciousness toward critical consciousness.

Teacher education research on intersectional understandings of inclusion emphasize concerns around preservice teachers' surface-level reflection, identity compartmentalization and fragmentation, overlooking structural and systemic privileges, and isolating disability from broader social justice initiatives. Scholars recommend reflective structures, intersectional frameworks, focusing on ideological reconstruction, and autoethnographic and personal narratives. 

Conclusion

An autoethnographic study provides depth and detailed analysis to understand this embodied process. The pursuit of anti-oppressive education systems demands confronting norms created by colonialism and capitalism. The co-optation of inclusive education highlights the urgent need to embrace the transformation proposed by self-advocates and critical scholarship. The field requires embodied accounts of how systemic oppression and normativity operate and are resisted. By utilizing creative methodologies to dissect the intersections of white privilege, cisnormativity, and neuronormativity, this study translates critical frameworks into a lived, anti-oppressive praxis.