Abstract
Disabled students have a right to access higher education. Yet, only about one-fifth of youth with disability in South Africa attend and complete tertiary education. The low uptake and throughput are attributed to systemic and structural barriers. The University of Cape Town’s (UCT) Vision 2030 is to ‘unleash human potential to create a fair and just society through three pillars of excellence, transformation and sustainability’. To operationalise this vision, the current needs of disabled students have to be seen holistically. This article shares the experiences of inclusion and participation at UCT from the perspectives of disabled students. An exploratory case study research design, informed by an emancipatory disability research paradigm, was used to gain a contextually layered understanding of participants with disability perspectives on campus life. Purposive sampling was used to select 10 participants enrolled in undergraduate and postgraduate programmes in the Faculties of Commerce, Humanities, and Health Sciences.
Data were gathered using four focus group discussions of 90 min duration each and thematically analysed. Humanising Praxis was used as a transformative framework to interpret the findings. ‘Fostering inclusion’ was one theme that revealed shifts in mindsets about disability to remove barriers to participation experienced by disabled students.
Contribution: To cultivate an attitude of belonging, students’ personal agency must be harnessed, and academics must engage more in disability-inclusive practices that create support systems for both academic and social inclusion.
Keywords: inclusivity; disability; transformation; higher education; institutional change; belonging.
Introduction
Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) globally are mandated to facilitate the inclusion of disabled students1 and to provide opportunities for these students to further their education so that they may find meaningful employment and contribute to society as they determine (Ndlovu 2021). This mandate also applies to South African HEIs (Mutanga 2017b). To transform universities into inclusive spaces where disabled students have the best opportunity to achieve their goals, they need to experience a sense of belonging, feel valued, and be part of a welcoming and accommodating academic environment. In this article, we present the findings from a qualitative research case study that explored the factors that influence inclusion and participation of disabled students at the University of Cape Town (UCT) in South Africa.
Positionality
Our positionality and lived experiences as a disabled female and two able-bodied females, our work, and disability inclusion activism and advocacy informed our research. It provides insights into how we attempted to embed a humanising praxis (Ramugondo 2024) in the study’s methodological choices. This study was undertaken by Dureyah Abrahams for a Master of Philosophy in Disability Studies in the Faculty of Health Sciences (FHS) at UCT. She is a black female born with a congenital condition called spondylometaphyseal dysplasia (England & Campeau 2020). Her lived experience as a disabled university student’ in keeping with Dureyah’s preference for identity first language.
The two co-authors were two supervisors. Theresa is a white, able-bodied professor in Disability Studies. An occupational therapist (OT) by profession, her shift in thinking and practice from an OT to a development practitioner and academic in Disability Studies happened in the early stages of her career when she worked in a rural hospital in her homeland in South Africa for 7 years. Disabled People South Africa (DPSA) held regular workshops with therapists, teachers and social workers to conscientise them to a different paradigm of community development and collaborative practice across sectors. Theresa started her journey at UCT in 1996 and was the founder of Disability Studies programmes at UCT in 2003. The curricula for these programmes were designed in collaboration with DPSA and the Centre for Disability Studies at Leeds University.
Sumaya is a black2, able-bodied woman who worked clinically as a physiotherapist for several years, before combining her passion for education with a commitment to social justice. She is a lecturer in the Division of Disability Studies and teaches on the undergraduate Higher Certificate in Disability Practice, Postgraduate diploma and MPhil in Disability Studies programmes that focus on improving participation of persons with disability and their families within communities. Her research combines her interest in education and the educational experiences of disabled students.
The experiences of disabled students in Higher Education Institutions
The Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) defines persons with disabilities as those who have long-term physical, mental, intellectual, or sensory impairments such that various barriers may hinder their full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others (UN 2006). Similarly, the social model of disability holds the view that it is not the disabled person’s impairment that limits their access, inclusion and participation, but society that creates barriers to inclusion (Tugli et al. 2014). Generally, the world has been constructed in a way that only considers those who are able bodied, which means that people with disability must adapt to a world that was not designed for them (Barnes 2019). Disability is socially constructed, dehumanising those with impairments. This approach to disability is a construct of ableism that prefers ‘normal ways’ of doing over anything that is different from the norm (Ndlovu 2021). Ableism is often the reason for many exclusionary practices.
Most research related to university disabled students’ experiences highlights a range of barriers and some facilitators to inclusion and learning. Physical accessibility barriers such as inaccessible campus buildings, lecturer offices and laboratories, poorly designed classroom furniture, poor campus signage, limit students’ access to teaching and learning spaces and their opportunities to engage with peers and lecturers (Abrahams et al. 2023; Moriña & Morgado 2016; Moriña, Sandoval & Carnerero 2020; Mutanga 2017b; Muzemil 2018). Clouder et al. (2018) and Perera-Rodríguez and Moriña (2019), who reported on digital technologies and inclusion, highlighted that university disabled students were quite familiar with digital technologies but that they felt their lecturers needed training in the use of technology. Upskilling lecturers is important to ensure that they understand the various technologies and the accessibility needs of disabled students related to technologies that could improve access to learning and participation (Hamman et al. 2025).
Kim and Lee (2016) investigated the effects of learning accommodations for HEI students on test scores, which showed that extra time and adapting test material improved test performance for disabled students. Timmerman and Mulvihill (2015) assert that training academic staff about accommodations makes them more perceptive to the needs of disabled students, how to support them and provide the necessary accommodations. Similarly, Mutanga (2017b) found that disabled students need support and understanding of peers in relation to their accommodation needs, so that their peers understand that accommodations are not preferential treatment that advantage disabled students over others. Such attitudinal barriers that disabled students face reflect the need for disability sensitisation for able-bodied staff and students (Ohajunwa, McKenzie & Lorenzo 2015). Mutanga (2017a:146) reports on attitudes of lecturers, where one lecturer wondered if disabled students would be an ‘embarrassment to their non-disabled peers’. These unhelpful attitudes and relationships between disabled students and academic staff continue to limit their inclusion and participation (Mutanga & Walker 2017). Mutanga (2017b) explored their social networks in a study on ‘Inclusion of students with disabilities in South African Higher Education’. Participants shared that their social network access was limited because systems and policies in place were not inclusive. One example was disabled students were allocated to two specific residences that could accommodate them, but this segregation isolated them from forming connections with the broader student body.
A humanising praxis for disability inclusion
When reflecting on experiences of disability exclusion, we need to consider how we include (or exclude) disabled students and what this teaches us about our own humaneness, our values and our praxis. Steyn et al. (2021:3) refer to a critical question raised by philosopher Chinua Achebe, ‘what happened to the common humanity of human beings?’ Steyn et al. (2021:3) attribute these examples of inhumanity to the misuse of power to exclude ‘others from the human family’.
Embedding a humanising praxis in transformation imperatives at HEIs requires a commitment to a ‘theoretically informed and self-reflexive human action’ (Nonini 2016:242). We are encouraged to critically evaluate how our actions and interactions impact us and others (Ramugondo & Kronenberg 2015). Kronenberg (2018) asserts that a humanising praxis requires us to be aware of the harm we enact through dehumanisation and oppression. Then, to use that awareness, coupled with a political will and leadership (Rauch van der Merwe 2024) to actively work towards humanisation and liberation. This praxis calls on us to remove historical barriers to participation, disability exclusion and oppression by opposing any institutional practices and systems that maintain the status quo (Sonday, Ramugondo & Kathard 2019).
Universities are assigned the important role of being thinkers, designers, innovators and problem solvers, while being a place of learning for all and having a key role to play in graduating the next generations of leaders. However, universities tend to be a microcosm of society, ingraining many of the same exclusionary practices pervasive in broader society. Despite efforts to facilitate an improved university experience for disabled students, we are still getting it wrong (Ohajunwa et al., 2015).
University of Cape Town study context
The University of Cape Town has consistently held the status of being the top-ranked university in Africa. Karisa, Nseibo and McKenzie (2024:267) rightfully assert that UCT has the responsibility to lead the way in showing best practice ‘in matters of equal access to university education by all learners, including those with disabilities’. The UCT Vision 2030 (UCT 2021) is anchored by the strategic motto ‘Unleash Human Potential For A Fair And Just Society’. The Vision is supported by three pillars, one of which is transformation. Student access, support and success is one of six key components of UCT’s transformation process, with the focus on diversifying the student and graduate profile with higher proportions of black, socio-economically disadvantaged and disabled students. In addition, UCT’s Vision 2030 shares that educational and psychosocial support for students is continually being improved. At UCT the Office of Inclusivity and Change (OIC) houses the Disability Services (DSs) that supports disabled students. In addition, the Student Wellness Service (SWS) offers professional medical and counselling services to all students.
Disability inclusion should not simply be a numerical mandate on students and staff with disabilities that needs to be fulfilled, but a necessary transformation imperative to foster a deep understanding of how we learn from and about each other’s values and assets, and how we experience spaces together that connect or divide and oppress us.
Research methods and design
Study design, study population and sample
This qualitative study aimed to answer the research question: ‘What factors influence the inclusion and participation of disabled students in higher education?’ This article reports on one study objective that explored the support systems and services and how these influence inclusion and participation. A single case study was adopted to explore a real-life system (Creswell 2013).
Recruitment of participants and sampling strategy
Permission was granted to seek the assistance of DSs to advertise the study. Disability Services is a department within the UCT’s Office of Inclusion and Change (OIC) that supports disabled students who formally disclose their impairment and register with the unit. The advert indicated that disabled students with all impairment types were eligible to participate, that documents would be provided in braille if needed, and that a South African Sign Language interpreter would be available if needed. Furthermore, the advert was written in user-friendly language, free of jargon, to accommodate participants who may have challenges. Fifteen students responded to the advert. A sample of 10 students was purposively selected (Table 1), using the following inclusion criteria: between the ages of 18 and 35, from any race, any impairment type, registered in one of the five faculties as an undergraduate or postgraduate student, in any year of study, and conversant in English.
| TABLE 1: Demographic profile of study participants. |
Data gathering
Data gathering took place during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted online to eliminate the risk of potential exposure to the COVID-19 virus. This precaution was important for disabled students participating to reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19 because of the possibility of underlying comorbidities. It set participants at ease and helped to ensure participant retention. Participants were asked to ensure that they had a stable data connection and a quiet space where they could speak freely. Participants were compensated a fixed amount for data costs. Four FGDs were conducted – two FGDs with five students in each group were done initially within 2 weeks and followed up with a second focus group with the same participants to do member-checking of the emerging themes and sub-themes. Online facilitation was anticipated to be challenging because of the restrictions of not being able to be together in one room physically; however, this potential challenge was mitigated by creating a warm and comfortable environment and establishing group agreement rules before commencing the discussion.
The focus group setting provided a great opportunity for participants to meet one another and have their experiences and thoughts heard by others who could truly empathise and understand their shared experience. A common experience of disabled students feeling isolated meant that this data-gathering method became a means of socialisation and belonging. Each 90-min FGD was conducted after hours. Dureyah followed the guidance of McLafferty (2004) to build trust with the research participants prior to and after the FGDs. This was crucial to establish a neutral setting that felt familiar and conducive of participation. Prior to the start of the FGD, Dureyah set participants at ease, understanding from her own lived experience that sharing for some of the participants might create tension for them. She also engaged with the necessary sensitivity, encouraging participants to feel comfortable to share. She remained attuned to the emotions that participants expressed, thoughtfully acknowledging their difficult experiences. She offered participants time to pause and to continue when they felt comfortable to do so. Respecting the dignity of participants was a value that Dureyah committed to uphold having processed some experiences that she herself found challenging as a disabled student. If required, arrangements were made for participants who needed to be debriefed to see a counsellor. Dureyah’s approach reflects a humanising praxis to data gathering.
The four focus group questions were framed using the International Classification of Disability and Functioning’s five categories of environmental factors influencing participation (World Health Organization [WHO] 2001). The three categories relevant for this article were Support and Relationships, Services, Systems and Policies, and Attitudes.
Field notes (Creswell 2013) were used during the FGDs; they allowed Dureyah to make notes of interesting experiences that some participants shared that she wanted to probe further with other participants. It was used as a tool for debriefing and analysis, as it assisted the researcher with remembering specific information and factual validity. Field notes also allowed the researcher the opportunity for reflection in action and on action (Schön 2017) that she could come back to when preparing for subsequent FGDs and for data analysis.
Data preparation and analysis
The FGDs were recorded and transcribed. Dureyah listened to digital recordings several times while simultaneously reviewing the transcriptions that were amended for accuracy. Pseudonyms were assigned to each participant. Braun and Clarke’s (2013) six step thematic analysis was applied to the data through an iterative process of reading transcripts several times to identify units of meaning that were listed as codes, which were grouped together to form different categories; then categories were collapsed into subthemes, and themes emerged from these subthemes. Critical theory (Bohman et al. 2005) was used as a framework to interpret the findings to give an in-depth understanding while applying a critical perspective on society, its structures, services and issues of power to bring about a transformation.
Ensuring rigour
Four criteria were used to ensure trustworthiness of data (Lincoln & Guba 1985). Member checking of the first draft of findings was performed with participants to ensure the credibility of the study’s findings. Transferability involved describing the context of participants’ experiences in-depth. Dependability involved keeping an audit trail. Confirmability was ensured by supervisors reviewing the data for accuracy. Dureyah’s positionality warranted reflexivity (Creswell 2013) as part of good research practice. Reflexivity involved keeping a reflective journal and engagement with her supervisors in debriefing sessions. It was not always an easy and comfortable process that required an openness and a commitment to centring the voices, experiences and needs of the participants. She demonstrated her commitment to humanising the participants during different stages of the research process by creating a safe space, building trust and validating their experiences (Rauch van der Merwe 2024).
Following each FGD, she had a debriefing session with her supervisors. Debriefing was a valuable practice because it provided a space to engage with her supervisors about the FGD processes, manner of engagement with participants and the interview style. Importantly, it provided an opportunity to validate the experiences of participants and helped Dureyah reflect on and validate her own lived experiences as a disabled student at UCT. This helped her to process her own emotions related to her lived experiences and those of the participants. She made a commitment to honour the openness and vulnerability with which the disabled students shared their experiences and centred their voices in presenting the findings and discussion. While the debriefing sessions also facilitated the initial immersion and broad sense-making of the data, it importantly assisted the lead researcher with navigating any potential researcher bias.
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance was received from the Human Research Ethics Committee in the FHS at UCT (HREC 608 / 2021). Permission was granted from the relevant university authority to recruit participants from the undergraduate and postgraduate disabled students population. Ethical considerations included giving all participants an information sheet, which they signed before data gathering commenced. Informed consent confirmed that participation was on a voluntary basis; that anonymity would be ensured by removing all identifiers and using pseudonyms for the participants; confidentiality was discussed with all participants. Participants were reimbursed for data costs: they were aware that there were no direct benefits and no risks were anticipated.
Results: Fostering inclusion
The aim of this study was to explore what factors influence disabled students’ inclusion and participation in higher education. The findings emerged from data analysis of FGD, transcripts, researcher field notes, researcher personal journal reflections, and post-interview debriefing reflections with supervisors. Two themes emerged, namely Theme One: ‘Accessibility Equals Success’ which responded to two objectives that explored the access to products and assistive technology for disabled students, and Theme Two: ‘Fostering Inclusion’ addressed two further objectives that described the nature of support and how relationships influenced participation, which uncovered the attitudes (values, beliefs, feelings, seen in others’ behaviour) of different role players that influenced inclusion. Both themes in the findings spoke to the fifth objective that sought to determine how service systems and policies influence participation and inclusion.
This article focuses on Theme Two ‘Fostering inclusion’. See Table 2 for the subthemes and categories. In the table, quotes from data are given in italics when codes were used to name some of the subthemes and categories.
| TABLE 2: Sub-themes and categories of theme Fostering Inclusion. |
The theme ‘Fostering inclusion’ explores the barriers or challenges and the facilitators or enablers that disabled students experience in their everyday interactions with each other, their fellow students without disability, and academic, administrative, and support staff. The four subthemes (Figure 2) in the theme show the relational accessibility that needs to be fostered for the students to feel included. Each subtheme will be presented with direct quotes from data as evidence of each category.
Sub-theme 1: Supporting well-being
Linked to the first sub-theme, ‘Supporting well-being’, we present two categories: ‘Staffing influences financial affordability’ and ‘Stressors of mental health’. These categories highlight students’ experiences about their health and well-being and how this positions them regarding academic and social participation activities and relationships.
Staffing influences financial affordability
This category describes the staffing of the SWSs provided at UCT. Participants praised the level of healthcare service they experienced from SWS, where doctors, nurses, and other mental and physical health professionals attend to students medically and are emotionally supportive. They also shared that having access to this university service makes it financially affordable for students who are able to access the care they need directly, rather than seeking private healthcare. Sally shared her appreciation for the helpfulness that she valued from a doctor and who she felt a connection with:
‘Another thing that’s also been really helpful is this doctor at student wellness, she has really been amazing, she’s someone that I have invited to my graduation because that’s just how amazing she’s been.’ (Sally)
Another beneficial service the SWS provides is issuing doctor’s notes for sick leave, examination deferrals, extra time for examinations, or deadline exemptions. Finances are essential for inclusion and important for health-related expenses. Access to Student Wellness alleviates the financial burden of private healthcare, which means that students need not seek private healthcare, which is unaffordable to many:
‘I have to use my medical aid to pay for all these expensive private psychiatrists. You know, a session, one hour is like R2500 [$139] and everything is quite exclusive in a way … I was trying to see if I could use the psychiatrist on campus.’ (Troy)
‘I don’t have quick access to my [private] doctors; I can’t afford to go see a private doctor. So, at least with the Student Wellness doctor, she has been very helpful with getting my documentation for the deferred exams and if I need a script.’ (Sally)
The next category in the subtheme ‘supporting well-being’ focuses specifically on the mental health stressor that participants experienced that contributed to their sense of exclusion.
Stressors of mental health
Participants found many stressors, such as increasing academic demands and exclusionary services and spaces. Participants detailed how much they were struggling mentally and emotionally. Troy also expressed that the mental health services of Student Wellness have assisted many students to improve their well-being and inclusion, which have been lifesaving for him:
‘I was using some counselling services from Student Wellness. It’s just been quite helpful, and just been quite supportive … If I did not have this support, I probably would have killed myself.’ (Troy)
Participants had some negative experiences and suggestions for improvement, explaining that there are too few mental health professionals to serve the large number of students. They struggled to obtain an appointment to consult with psychologists and psychiatrists when needed most. Troy drew particular attention to the focus on the need for quality service delivery:
‘[UCT] must increase the number of psychiatrists that they have for Student Wellness. It is really so disappointing that there is only one that is dealing with so many students and so many applications. You know it’s quite daunting … It’s quite sad … I was trying to see if I could use the psychiatrist at the campus, but I saw there is no slot for the next three month. All sessions for the rest of the year are quite full, and you can only take them for next year, which is quite exclusive on its own.’ (Troy)
The next sub-theme ‘Being there emotionally’ explores the other forms of support that students found to support their emotional wellbeing to foster inclusion.
Sub-theme 2: Being there emotionally
Social and emotional support, in this context, is support that disabled students receive from other people namely, family, friends, peers, and the personal agency students employ to support their emotional well-being. These support systems enable their inclusion, creating a feeling of connectedness and belonging.
Supportive family
Many participants attributed their success and inclusion to the support of their parents, not just in university life but throughout their schooling career. Participants noticed that their parents are often their first support system in making their educational journey inclusive. The common experience between the participants is the belief that parents have in their abilities and the support and encouragement that they received from their parents who assisted them:
‘My parents played a vital role … they actually made me realise that I can go to university.’ (Lloyd)
‘My parents … have also allowed me to continue being a university student … I actually considered dropping out because I thought that I was too young to do this, and it was just difficult because I was the only one in the faculty that I could see that had a physical disability.’ (Annie)
Troy mentioned how a photo provided a form of social support for him that encouraged and comforted him:
‘I have a nice picture of my mom, here on my desk in res. I know that I’m working hard for her. She’s my motivation driver.’ (Troy)
Nel, who has epilepsy, lived in a university residence at UCT. He explained that living alone is very dangerous as epileptic ‘fits’ are often unpredictable and can result in serious injury. His brother was allowed to live with him to provide support and assistance:
‘[G]iven my condition, stress causes my fits … My brother facilitated a lot for me too. He stays with me and helps if I have a fit.’ (Nel)
Yusuf attributed much support to his grandmother, who was his strongest advocate in helping him deal with bullying when he was younger. He expressed the importance of this support, especially at such a young age when one is very vulnerable as a youth with a disability. He faced many barriers of being misunderstood, having insecurities, and being bullied. Having a trusted advocate in his corner was a very comforting and essential support:
‘Support [is] shown by my parents, and specifically my mother. My grandmother came to school to fight my battles for me. It was a very sensitive time for me because you’re so young and just exploring yourself and growing, so it was difficult to realise you’re different … the patience [and] support [I received] … it’s support from my family.’ (Yusuf)
Supportive friends and peers
Friends were often the first line of support in the classroom when families were not present. Yusuf who had a speech impediment explained that friends provided emotional support by being encouraging and offering a shoulder to cry on:
‘I had immense fear of speaking, so I withdrew socially … My friends cheered me on. This was a pivotal moment.’ (Yusuf)
Troy also found that living in residence was isolating. He lived far from his family and friends who reside in his hometown. He stayed in touch by calling them whenever he needed their social support:
‘Every once in a while, I call my friends from home, and I call my family.’ (Troy)
Cody noticed that his friends also became a means of academic support too. Their study groups assisted with his learning, which got him through challenging academic times; this showed the value of additional peer academic support other than lecturers and staff:
‘My friends helped me a lot when I was going through tough times … they would just be there emotionally and like study groups.’ (Cody)
Personal agency
Participants often had to exercise their personal agency while also relying on the care and assistance of others that contributed to their well-being. Annie shared how she exercised her personal agency when she facilitated her inclusion by being assertive and directive:
‘[W]e would need to use the elevator, and the elevator will be full of able-bodied students, and they will just look at you and not get out or make space for me. Later, I learned to push my way, and I was just like no I need to force my way in.’ (Annie)
Annie was also often frustrated with poor or faulty services and systems, like elevators not provided or not working, then she had to figure out her own accessibility routes:
‘If I didn’t know a certain route [to take to class with my wheelchair], I would just have to figure out my own way.’ (Annie)
Despite all the services in place at UCT, Cody and Penny felt strongly that their personal agency assisted them the most with coping emotionally:
‘I would say most of the things that facilitate me is personal strategies like coping mechanisms.’ (Cody)
‘I’m a hard worker … I don’t give up on my dreams. That’s why I try to be resilient while chasing my dreams.’ (Penny)
Another personal strategy that facilitated inclusion is their social abilities to develop personal relationships with the volunteers of the DS, medical staff, and lecturers. This connection resulted in a better understanding of their disability needs with improved access to services and better quality of services. Consequently, there was more empathy and a drive to assist them:
‘I had to advocate for myself to get help or ask lecturers for something or ask the disability services and make relationships with volunteers to help me.’ (Annie)
‘[Y]ou have to advocate for yourself every second of the day … So, there’s also this “burden of change” on us as well.’ (Suzy)
Some students had to find ways to research and educate themselves about their own health conditions to facilitate their own needs:
‘I’d say the thing that’s helped me the most is information. Just loads and loads and loads of information research on Instagram, on YouTube, on the internet. I’ve consumed hundreds of gigabytes of data in just researching how to help myself.’ (Suzy)
‘Most of the things that I’ve been through, like depression and ADHD and stuff like that, I literally go to the internet and Google it and see what it means. I was kind of like seeing the kind of symptoms that I was showing so I do agree that researching, it’s quite important.’ (Troy)
Ray made a conscious decision to prioritise her health and focusing on self-care. She shared:
‘I only chose to focus on this year to look after myself because they say you can’t pour from an empty cup. So, I’m focusing this year on myself and to take care of myself.’ (Ray)
Sub-theme 3: Cultivating an attitude of belonging
Two categories were generated, namely Disability Services played a vital role and My team of volunteers, fostered a sense of belonging for disabled students.
Disability services played a vital role
Apart from all the services that the DSs provide to meet disabled students’ needs for physical accessibility on campus, they also create a community for disabled students. This social and emotional support provided a sense of belonging to disabled students, when they felt socially excluded by the rest of the campus. Yusuf, who has a speech impediment, was quite overcome by emotion when speaking about DSs, as he expressed his gratitude for their work and support:
‘My orientation head introduced me to the amazing Disability Services. … they played a huge role. I’m getting emotional [thinking about it] … University was very tough because I knew no one, so I sat and ate alone. Socialising was my biggest challenge. Disability Services changed that.’ (Yusuf)
Much like Yusuf, Cody shared that he struggled with socialising and creating relationships even at school. He wholly attributes his social life in university to the DSs:
‘It’s somewhere where I can turn to when I have problems. [It] has just helped me feel better in general.’ (Cody)
Lloyd expressed that DSs changed his life when he was introduced to Deaf culture. He felt a much closer connection to his community and felt a sense of belonging:
‘The Disability Services played a vital role, not only in my academic life, in my social life as well because before I was at the special school … We didn’t do any sign language, so I didn’t know many deaf students I didn’t know about the Deaf culture. So that was interesting for me.’ (Lloyd)
My team of volunteers
Disability Services provided volunteer assistants to scribe for disabled students or assist in getting to class to further facilitate day-to-day needs of disabled students. These volunteers are undergraduate or postgraduate students who avail their time and abilities to assist disabled students with their academic tasks:
‘The Disability Services helped me with note taking.’ (Lloyd)
Annie, who uses a wheelchair, needed assistance with getting to class, as she struggledd with the poor accessibility of the campus:
‘The Disability Services also has a team of volunteers. So, if I needed to get to a class or tutorial class, or I needed books from the library, then I would ask my team of volunteers to make my copies or take my notes … I would be saying to my volunteer ‘okay we’re going to go early; can you please just help me find the desk.’ (Annie)
Participants were vocal about how their requests for reasonable accommodation remained unmet by lecturers and administrators, as DSs and volunteers could only do so much to foster their inclusion.
Sub-theme 4: Asking for (reasonable) accommodations
Disabled students experienced barriers related to lecturers’ and administrators’ limited understanding of disability, which affected their participation and inclusion in academic programmes. The two categories in this sub-theme demonstrate the need to foster relationships that show a deeper understanding of disabling environments, beyond the impairment of the student.
They did not understand my needs
Some participants attributed their depression and other mental health struggles to the academic pressures of their programmes. Troy felt he was not coping because of the frustration he experienced:
‘I have not been coping! … This place is horrible and draining. My UCT chapter has been one of the hardest in my life. I’ve been academically great, but when I got to UCT it really made me doubt my capabilities to a point where I am so depressed.’ (Troy)
Ray expressed her frustration with getting staff and lecturers to understand that not all disabilities are physical or as apparent, so they cannot assume one’s needs and challenges. Her bipolar mood disorder is invisible, so she often finds that her calls for assistance are not treated as ‘seriously’ as those who have physical disabilities:
‘As a student, I struggle to get support. My lecturers are aware about my mental health condition, but I’m treated as if I’m a student without mental health disability. So, I feel like if we could have honest conversations with people, or staff members, so that they become more inclusive of students and be more supportive, it will be much better.’ (Ray)
Lloyd detailed how he now has anxiety about public speaking because a lecturer forced him to address the class despite him explaining to the lecturer why he needed to be exempted from doing so:
‘In my first year, that’s how I developed an anxiety to speak in public, because they did not understand my needs and kept making me speak in front of the class, especially when I kept having to tell them I prefer not to and that they should speak up for my hearing.’ (Lloyd)
Lecturers are narrow minded
Participants found that concessions such as assignment extensions or examination deferrals were very challenging to apply for because of the system in place. They had to plead their case to gain basic understanding and concession. Sally expressed the cost and burden of needing to prove her disability is too high to maintain and problematic:
‘[T]hey will not go into an extension if I’m too sick to do [my assignment]. I just need two weeks [extension] or whatever, but they’d be like, “sorry we can’t, so rather make your final exam”. I still have to produce a medical doctor’s note, and that costs money. [I told them] “I’ve giving you my medical certificates to show that I do have an illness, and this is the nature of my illness”, but even when I can’t work, I still have to go and purchase a doctor’s note The lecturer needs to be sensitive, they need to understand that they’re dealing with human beings … there’s just a lack of compassion.’ (Sally)
Lloyd, who is deaf, expressed that lecturers need awareness and sensitivity training to engage with, understand, and accommodate disabled students students:
‘One example, is where a lecturer did some accommodations for a bit then stopped because she saw I had a note taker … She just made a decision to stop and did not ask me. The disability services can only do so much too. I’m not asking for special treatment; I’m asking for access. So, yeah, my issue is mainly lecturers.’ (Lloyd, postgraduate student, Industrial Psychology, Male)
Penny expressed how lecturers may be a great means of support if they are well trained in inclusive education and disability awareness:
‘The support that you can get from the lecturers, if the lecturers are trained, they can reach out to these people with disabilities, now they can offer support, that is very important.’ (Penny)
Discussion
Fostering inclusion through a humanising and healing praxis
The theme, ‘Fostering Inclusion’, was generated from the four subthemes. ‘Supporting wellbeing’, ‘Being there emotionally’, ‘Asking for (reasonable) accommodations’, and ‘Cultivating an attitude of belonging’. We have applied Humanising Praxis as a theoretical framework to deepen our understanding of the subthemes of this theme to interrogate the relevance and need to embed disability inclusion authentically as part of transformation at UCT.
The themes commonly surface the value of interpersonal relationships, underpinned by acceptance, understanding, compassion, affirmation and appropriate support for disabled students that fosters their sincere and authentic inclusion. Importantly, Sally a participant with disability, when relating some of her experiences in the study, appealed for the ‘need to understand that they’re [lecturers] dealing with human beings’. Based on the presented findings, we argue that Sally’s appeal should not be limited to lecturers but applies to all forms of human interaction between staff (academic and non-academic), students, volunteers, and disabled students in the academy. Kronenberg (2018) aptly reminds us that ‘Being human is not a given but a political potentiality, which manifests on an oppression-liberation continuum of enacted harmful negations and salutogenic affirmations of our humanity’. Simply put and applied to this study, there was evidence of oppression where students felt excluded, devalued and unsupported. On the other hand, there were instances where students experienced support and inclusion, both emotionally materially and physically, manifesting an attitude of belonging and thus liberation. The staff of the two services provide support for both students’ health and well-being and lecturers’ academic and administrative staff. The pivotal role played by families, friends, and peers of the disabled students is as crucial to fostering inclusion that facilitates academic success. Such relationship building is central to a humanising praxis for disabled students to feel an authentic sense of acceptance and the potential for ‘cultivating an attitude of belonging’. This change will transform disabling environments that participants experienced into inclusive academic and social spaces (see Figure 1).
 |
FIGURE 1: Elements that foster inclusion are rooted in a humanising and healing praxis to transform spaces of teaching, learning and socialising. |
|
Figure 1 reflects the possibilities of transforming higher education by embedding disability inclusion as a humanising and healing praxis, which is a dynamic process. The centre triangle reflects that inclusive attitudes support well-being and respond to accommodations. The outer triangles create a base that shows how supporting well-being that is responsive to emotional health and healing builds strong foundations for embedding disability inclusion to cultivate an attitude of belonging. Reciprocal relationships have the potential to change beliefs, feelings, and behaviour about disability through engagement between disabled students, their peers, staff, and volunteers of services and academic departments, so that stigma, prejudice, and discrimination related to one’s understanding of disability shifts internally. These shifts in understanding disability create a willingness to respond to reasonable accommodations needed by students, which, along with social inclusion and support for well-being, facilitates academic success.
Supporting well-being and being there emotionally
These two sub-themes highlight the supportive roles of staff, family, friends and their own personal agency. Participants felt that the support and assistance from disability services (DS) significantly facilitated their academic success. Their social and emotional support opens many doors for social inclusion by creating a safe space for students to meet and socialise comfortably. The recognition of the need to belong, safety and the enactments of inclusion in our praxis in HEIs (Rauch van der Merwe 2024) are essential in the academic success of disabled students. In the same way, lecturers could make disabled students feel included and welcomed in spaces by assisting them with accommodations (Mutanga & Walker 2017).
Student Wellness Service provides easy on-campus access to free medical assistance and doctors’ notes. Participants also praised the SWS for their commendable work in mental health, although there is a long waiting list. Students incur additional costs when accessing private healthcare because of the few psychiatrists and psychologists at SWS. Findings showed how participants are triggered when discussing their mental health issues and the need for improved treatment. Some attributed their depression and struggles to the pressures of their programmes. The constant explanations and repeated information about reasonable accommodations were stressful. Johnson and Lester (2022) highlighted that university Student Wellness centres need increased funding because the services required are difficult to sustain on a tight budget. We reflect on UCT Vision 2030’s transformation imperatives; in doing so, it is important to recognise that to facilitate access, support and success of students who are marginalised, such as disabled students, we need to address some of the power dynamics and systems of oppression that we inherited from our South African history and that we continue to perpetuate.
Emotional support was valued by participants who were encouraged by family members, friends and peers. The participants felt discouraged from attending university because of potential exclusion and limited emotional (and physical) support. Similarly, Francis et al. (2020) commented that disabled students often feel that their family or close friends are the best support and caregivers as they know them best and can provide accommodations better than a ‘strange’ caregiver. Recognising this relational need, it is imperative for universities to facilitate such social interaction. Social interaction strategies should be designed in collaboration with disabled students. These improved social interactions should not be thought of solely as an opportunity for disabled students, but importantly as an opportunity for all students (of different races, socio-economic backgrounds, genders, geographical contexts) to be able to learn from, with and about each other, thus strengthening human connection, compassion and understanding (Lorenzo & Joubert 2011).
Apart from these external support systems, participants spoke about their personal agency that enabled them to remove barriers to participation. Jaarsma et al. (2014) coined the term ‘personal facilitation’ that involved doing things for themselves or improving how they engaged with others and external support systems. Other personal facilitators were practicing self-belief, enjoying recreational activities, self-care, fitness, and maintaining social contacts. Notably, personal facilitation challenges stereotypes that students and persons with disability are wholly dependent and a burden on society (Jaarsma et al. 2014). Awareness of how students practice personal agency as facilitation to foster inclusion is vital to reciprocal learning about the accommodations that HEIs and academics need to provide.
Asking for reasonable accommodations that cultivates an attitude of belonging
Participants identified how DSs in the Office for Inclusivity and Change (OIC) provide many reasonable accommodations such as extra examination time, designated desks, assistive devices, assistive technology, inclusive learning materials, accessible transport, scribes, and personal assistants. Disability Services also advocates for accessible spaces, such as installing and maintaining elevators, ramps, and inclusive walkways. Participants mentioned how disabled students often feel isolated, with little social engagement in class because of the designated seating for disabled students situated at the back of teaching venues. David and Kuyini (2012) have advocated for socially conducive environments in teaching spaces, and lecturers have a critical role to play here. However, a study by Abrahams et al. (2023) demonstrated that a focus on physical accessibility is not a holistic inclusion.
Participants also expressed how they feel when staff consider them as a burden, lazy and always asking for accommodations. They face a greater risk to mental health challenges, as the barriers they face at university are often mental health stressors, such as anxiety, burn-out, and depression, affecting their well-being and ability to cope with academic pressures. Couzens et al. (2015) support this finding, as they also identified that disabled students struggle more than their peers without disability with their academic responsibilities. The added time needed to negotiate for their needs or accommodations and requests for accessible academic materials exacerbates mental health struggles. They sometimes need additional sick leave that could affect their academic success and delay graduation. Coduti et al. (2016) found that disabled students have higher levels of distress because of course load, deadlines, and pressure to perform academically. Oladele and Oladele (2016) noted that there is a correlation in Nigerian universities between depression and suicidal ideation among disabled students related to academic stress. These experiences are dehumanising for disabled students.
The category of ‘Lecturers are narrow minded’ highlighted the barriers that lecturers and other professional and administrative staff seem to place on disabled students when they have limited disability and sensitivity awareness. The other category ‘They did not understand my needs’, spotlighted the mental health struggles that disabled students currently face related to poor understanding and necessary compassion from UCT staff, especially for those with ‘invisible’ disabilities. An ‘invisible’ disability is when one’s impairment and accommodation needs are not clearly visible to many people, such as mental health conditions, psycho-social disabilities, some vision disabilities, learning disabilities, and neurological developmental disabilities (Osborne 2019). Participants described their experience of having to provide proof of their mental health conditions several times to gain rightful accommodations, concessions, extensions, or sick leave. They find this burden of proof to be academically and emotionally challenging. Osborne (2019) and Mutanga and Walker (2017) reported that some lecturers and staff do not believe that an illness exists and that students are taking advantage of the system. These perceptions are because of prejudice and create barriers to academic accommodations (Tugli et al. 2014). David and Kuyini (2012) argue that policymakers need to increase the resources provided to improve the knowledge and awareness of disability inclusion of educators and non-academic staff.
Recommendations
A more inclusive approach that generates a consciousness in lecturers about disability and chronic illnesses will create a more inclusive environment. Student housing needs to allow disabled students to have a live-in caregiver who is a family member ideally. There is a need to create barrier-free classroom spaces to accommodate disabled students where they experience social engagement, such as lecturers ensuring social involvement from disabled students in lessons and beyond.
Conclusion
While participants experienced multiple structural, institutional and attitudinal barriers, they demonstrated their assets and personal agency needs to be harnessed and harvested to transform higher education into authentic inclusive spaces for all. Fostering changes in beliefs, values, and behaviour about disability through authentic relationship networks that the participants created can cultivate an attitude of belonging that embeds inclusive practices and policies in higher education. This humanising praxis approach was evident in small pockets of both the SWS and Disability Services, which need to be nurtured to deepen inclusion of disabled students. Specific attention needs to be given to the financial affordability of services and accommodations, as they exacerbate the mental health stressors that students experienced, and diminish the emotional well-being of all. Missed opportunities for reciprocal learning between staff and students (with and without disabilities) meant limited accommodations were given to students. Participants highlighted that it was essential to understand that disability is more than an impairment and that their experience of the environment is more disabling. The assets and strengths of disabled students, and their personal agency indicates a determination to succeed in their studies, to become leaders in restoring their dignity and identity as equal human beings in every facet of everyday life.
Finally, the researcher, being disabled herself, experienced unsettling emotions at times as she listened to participants’ stories, having had similar experiences as an undergraduate student. On the other hand, she was also able to relate to some of the more positive experiences. As a researcher, she navigated the tension between wanting to foreground her own story and those of the participants but was committed to centring the participants’ voices. The research journey and the shared experiences of being a disabled student were validating and affirming for the researcher in many ways.
Acknowledgements
This article is partially based on the author’s dissertation titled ‘Factors that influence the inclusion and participation of disabled students in higher education’ towards the degree of Master of Philosophy in Disability Studies in the Division of Disability Studies, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Cape Town, South Africa, on 3 September 2024, with supervisors Prof. Theresa Lorenzo and Ms Sumaya Gabriels. It is available here: https://open.uct.ac.za/items/1920bd1e-0c3a-4225-ab48-aff5d083ce5a.
Competing interests
The authors reported that they received funding from the Mastercard Foundation. The authors have disclosed those interests fully and have implemented an approved plan for managing any potential conflicts arising from their involvement. The terms of these funding arrangements have been reviewed and approved by the affiliated university in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.
Authors’ contributions
All authors participated in the design and conceptualisation of the study. D.A. conducted the data collection of the study and initial analysis with the guidance of S.G. and T.L. S.G. and T.L. wrote the first draft of the article, and D.A. edited the draft, and all authors worked in the final submitted version of the article.
Funding information
D.A. received a scholarship from the Mastercard Foundation.
Data availability
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article and its references.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency, or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings, and content.
References
Abrahams, D., Batorowicz, B., Ndaa, P., Gabriels, S., Abebe, S.M., Xu, X. et al., 2023, ‘“I’m not asking for special treatment, I’m asking for access”: Experiences of university students with disabilities in Ghana, Ethiopia and South Africa’, Disabilities 3(1), 114–128. https://doi.org/10.3390/disabilities3010009
Barnes, C., 2019, ‘Understanding the social model of disability: Past, present and future’, in N. Watson, A. Roulstone & C. Thomas (eds.), Routledge handbook of disability studies, 2nd edn., pp. 14–31, Routledge, London.
Bohman, J., Derrida, J., Fraser, N., Habermas, J., Hohendahl, P.U., Huyssen, A. et al., 2005, Globalizing critical theory, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, MD.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V., 2013, Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners, SAGE Publication, London.
Clouder, L., Cawston, J., Wimpenny, K., Mehanna, A.K.A., Hdouch, Y., Raissouni, I. et al., 2018, ‘The role of assistive technology in renegotiating the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education in North Africa’, Studies in Higher Education 44(8), 1344–1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1437721
Coduti, W.A., Hayes, J.A., Locke, B.D. & Youn, S.J., 2016, ‘Mental health and professional help-seeking among college students with disabilities’, Rehabilitation Psychology 61(3), 288–296. https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000101
Couzens, D., Poed, S., Kataoka, M., Brandon, A., Hartley, J. & Keen, D., 2015, ‘Support for students with hidden disabilities in universities: A case study’, International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 62(1), 24–41, https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912x.2014.984592
Creswell, J. W., 2013, Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, Sage, Thousand, Oaks, CA.
David, R. & Kuyini, A.B., 2012, ‘Social inclusion: Teachers as facilitators in peer acceptance of students with disabilities in regular classrooms in Tamil Nadu, India’, International Journal of Special Education 27(2), 157–168.
dlovu, S., 2021, ‘Provision of assistive technology for students with disabilities in South African higher education’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18(8), 3892. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18083892
England, J. & Campeau, P.M., 2020., Spondylometaphyseal dysplasia, corner fracture type, National Center for Biotechnology Information, viewed 27 February 2025, from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32200603/.
Francis, G.L., Gross, J.M.S., Lavín, C.E., Casarez Velazquez, L.A. & Sheets, N., 2020, ‘Facing double Jeopardy: The transition experiences of Latina family caregivers of young adults with disabilities living in a rural community’, Rural Special Education Quarterly 39(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756870519879069
Hamman, N., Hodgkinson-Williams, C., Karassellos, L., Nwanze, I. & Small, J., 2025, ‘Enabling design: Creating an equity-focused framework for blended learning’, Progressio 45, 18. https://doi.org/10.25159/2663-5895/16177
Jaarsma, E.A., Dekker, R., Koopmans, S.A., Dijkstra, P.U. & Geertzen, J.H., 2014, ‘Barriers to and facilitators of sports participation in people with visual impairments’, Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly 31(3), 240–264. https://doi.org/10.1123/2013-0119
Johnson, A. P., & Lester, R. J., 2022, ‘Mental health in academia: Hacks for cultivating and sustaining wellbeing’, American Journal of Human Biology 34(S1), e23664. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.23664
Karisa, A., Nseibo, K. & McKenzie, J., 2024, ‘What does research on disability inclusion at University of Cape Town reveal regarding strategies to achieve inclusion?’, South African Journal of Higher Education 38(5), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.20853/38-5-5187
Kim, W.H. & Lee, J., 2016, ‘The effect of accommodation on academic performance of college students with disabilities’, Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin 60(1), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034355215605259
Kronenberg, F., 2018, ‘Everyday enactments of humanity affirmations in post 1994 Apartheid South Africa: A phronetic case study of being human as occupation and health’, PhD dissertation, University of Cape Town.
Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G., 1985, Naturalistic Inquiry, pp. 289–331, SAGE, Thousand Oaks. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
Lorenzo, T. & Joubert, R., 2011, ‘Reciprocal capacity building for collaborative disability research between disabled people’s organizations, communities and higher education institutions’, Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 18(4), 254–264. https://doi.org/10.3109/11038128.2010.525748
McLafferty, I., 2004, ‘Focus group interviews as a data collecting strategy’, Journal of Advanced Nursing 48(2), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03186.x
Moriña, A. & Morgado, B., 2016, ‘University surroundings and infrastructures that are accessible and inclusive for all: Listening to students with disabilities’, Journal of Further and Higher Education 42(1), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877x.2016.1188900
Moriña, A., Sandoval, M. & Carnerero, F., 2020, ‘Higher education inclusivity: When the disability enriches the University’, Higher Education Research & Development 39(6), 1202–1216. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1712676
Mutanga, O. & Walker, M., 2017, ‘Exploration of the academic lives of students with disabilities at South African universities: Lecturers’ perspectives’, African Journal of Disability 6, 316. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v6i0.316
Mutanga, O., 2017a, ‘Students with disabilities’ experience in South African higher education – A synthesis of literature’, South African Journal of Higher Education 31(1), 135–154. https://doi.org/10.20853/31-1-1596
Mutanga, O., 2017b, ‘Inclusion of students with disabilities in South African higher education’, International Journal of Disability, Development and Education 65(2), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912x.2017.1368460
Muzemil, A., 2018, ‘Campus physical environment accessibility for person with disabilities in the Ethiopian public universities’, International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding 5(5), 286. https://doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v5i5.455
Nonini, D., 2016, ‘Praxis’, Dialectical Anthropology 40(3), 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-016-9429-2
Ohajunwa, C., McKenzie, J. & Lorenzo, T., 2015, ‘Enabling a disability-inclusive curriculum: A case study’ African Journal on Disability 4(1), 8 pages. https://doi.org/19.4102/ajod.v4i1.157
Oladele, A.O. & Oladele, I.T., 2016, ‘Depression and suicidal ideation among college students with and without learning disabilities in Nigeria’, The European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences 16(2), 138–153. https://doi.org/10.15405/ejsbs.187
Osborne, T., 2019, ‘Not lazy, not faking: Teaching and learning experiences of university students with disabilities’, Disability & Society 34(2), 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2018.1515724
Perera-Rodríguez, V.H. & Moriña, A., 2019, ‘Technological challenges and students with disabilities in higher education’, Exceptionality 27(1), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2017.1409117
Ramugondo, E.L. & Kronenberg, F., 2015, ‘Explaining collective occupations from a human relations perspective: Bridging the individual-collective dichotomy’, Journal of Occupational Science 22(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2020.1810111
Ramugondo, E.L., 2024, ‘Occupational consciousness: Theorising to dismantle system racism and dehumanisation’, Journal of Occupational Science 32(1), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2024.2429681
Rauch van der Merwe, T., 2024, ‘The 26th Vona du Toit Memorial Lecture: Harnessing human praxis: Turning our wisdom into practice and impact’, South African Journal of Occupational Therapy 54(2), 107–114. https://doi.org/10.17159/2310-3833/2024/vol54no2a13
Schön, D.A., 2017, The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action, Routledge, London & New York.
Sonday, A., Ramugondo, E.L. & Kathard, H., 2019, ‘Professional role transgression as a form of occupational consciousness’, Journal of Occupational Science 26(3), 366–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2019.1630852
Steyn, M., Mpofu, W., Adejare, G.S., Akanle, O., Burnett, C., Fasuyi, J. et al., 2021, Decolonising the human: Reflections from Africa on difference and oppression, Wits University Press, Johannesburg.
Timmerman, L. & Mulvihill, T., 2015, ‘Accommodations in the college setting: The perspectives of students living with disabilities’, The Qualitative Report 20(10), 1609–1626. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2334
Tugli, A.K., Zungu, L.I., Klu, E.K. & Ramathuba, D., 2014, ‘Knowledge of disability rights and the Social Encounters of students with disabilities in a tertiary institution in South Africa’, Journal of Social Sciences 38(2), 145–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2014.11893244
United Nations (UN), 2006, Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and optional protocol, United Nations, viewed 30 October 2023, from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/rights/convtexte.htm.
University of Cape Town, 2021, Vision 2030, viewed 20 February 2025, from https://www.news.uct.ac.za/images/userfiles/files/publications/UCT_Vision_2030.pdf.
World Health Organization, 2001, The World Health Report 2001: Mental health: New understanding, new hope, World Health Organization, viewed 30 October 2023, from https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42390.
Footnotes
1. Dureyah prefers identity-first language that describes or names a person who has disabilities by referring firstly to their disability before any other identity (i.e. disabled student)
2. The term ‘black’ is defined using the definition of black by Steve Biko (2002) Steve Biko believed that Black identity was both political and psychological, not merely about skin colour. Under Apartheid, he saw all oppressed people of colour, Africans, Coloureds, and Indians, as “Black” politically, linked by shared oppression. Being Black thus means proudly embracing Blackness as a liberating identity, free from Apartheid’s imposed racism and inferiority.
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
