Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Foucault's utopia: analyzing technofeminism, disability subjectification, and power within pandemic pedagogy
(USC Thesis Other)
Foucault's utopia: analyzing technofeminism, disability subjectification, and power within pandemic pedagogy
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Foucault's utopia: Analyzing technofeminism, disability subjectification, and power within
pandemic pedagogy
by
Alexis Anissa Diaz
A Thesis Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
MASTER OF EDUCATION
August 2024
ii
© Copyright by Alexis Anissa Diaz 2024
All Rights Reserved
iii
The Committee for Alexis Anissa Diaz certifies the approval of this Thesis
Kevin Meza
Atheneus Ocampo
Sheila Bañuelos, Committee Chair
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2024
iv
Acknowledgments
With most gratitude, I want to acknowledge the friends I have made at USC. When I first
began my grad school journey, I was not in the best of places, and being in a city that never felt
like home, I was in an even lonelier space. That first day of graduate school, I never saw a
graduation day. Your encouragement, friendship, and support have never gone unnoticed, and I
would have never been a USC alumna without you all. Gasia Pushian, Kimberly Le, Emalie
Mendoza, Alexis Linares-Sierra, Caitlin Song, and Jin Kim, thank you for being my home away
from home and thank you all for believing in me. Fight On!
v
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................... iv
List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... vii
Abstract....................................................................................................................................... viii
Chapter One: Introduction ..............................................................................................................1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................4
History of Disability in Higher Education ..........................................................................6
Statement of the Problem....................................................................................................8
Brief Description of Theoretical Frameworks and Relevant Theories ...............................8
Cripping Time...................................................................................................................10
Purpose and Significance of the Study .............................................................................11
Research Questions...........................................................................................................12
Brief Description of the Methodology..............................................................................12
Overall Organization of the Thesis...................................................................................13
Key Definitions.................................................................................................................13
Chapter Two: Research and Design Approach.............................................................................15
Design and Technicalities.................................................................................................15
Researcher Positionality....................................................................................................16
Limitations of the Study....................................................................................................17
Chapter Three: Literary Analysis..................................................................................................18
Assimilating to Passing.....................................................................................................19
Techno-Ableism in the “Post Pandemic” Age..................................................................20
White Time Versus Other Times......................................................................................22
(Mis)fitting In....................................................................................................................23
Climbing the Foothills Toward Inclusion .........................................................................24
vi
Redefining Fairness ..........................................................................................................25
Power and Discipline ........................................................................................................27
Docile Bodies....................................................................................................................28
The New Normal...............................................................................................................29
Surveillance and Hierarchical Observation ......................................................................30
Resisting Normalcy and Docility in the Neoliberal Institution ........................................32
Chapter Four: Discussion and Conclusion....................................................................................34
Recommend(actions) ........................................................................................................35
Universal Design for Learning (UDL)..............................................................................35
Flexible Learning Environments.......................................................................................36
Inclusion of Disabled Voices............................................................................................37
Future Research ................................................................................................................38
Intersectionality of Disability with Other Forms of Oppression ......................................38
Systemic and Institutional Ableism ..................................................................................39
Disability-Informed Strategies and Accommodations......................................................39
References....................................................................................................................................41
vii
List of Abbreviations
SWD Student with disability/disabilities
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
FDA Foucauldian discourse analysis
UDL Universal Design for Learning
viii
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed a significant shift in higher education, particularly for
students with disabilities (SWDs), necessitating a critical examination of the interplay between
technology, feminism, and disability rights within educational practices. This thesis explores the
impact of the pandemic on SWDs, focusing on the themes of technofeminism, disability
subjectification, and power dynamics. Employing Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA), the
study unpacks the complex relationship between language, power, and knowledge, revealing
how societal and institutional pressures can marginalize SWDs. The concept of "crip time" is
introduced to challenge normative structures of time and productivity, advocating for a more
flexible and accommodating approach to education. The research identifies attitudinal barriers
that persist despite improvements in inclusion and proposes solutions to enhance the educational
experience for SWDs. It also highlights the potential regression in accessibility and inclusivity as
institutions return to in-person instruction post-pandemic, arguing for the retention of
accommodations and adaptations that have proven beneficial. The study concludes by advocating
for systemic educational reform, emphasizing the Universal Design for Learning (UDL)
framework, the inclusion of disabled voices in decision-making, and the implementation of
trauma-informed and intersectional frameworks to address systemic ableism. By doing so, it
aims to contribute to the ongoing dialogue in the literature and to challenge traditional
hierarchies and binaries within academia, promoting a liberatory philosophy of education that
challenges the status quo.
Keywords: Pandemic Pedagogy, Universal Design for Learning, Disability
Subjectification, Foucauldian Discourse Analysis, Ableism, Systemic Educational Reform
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
I was in my first semester at the University of California, Berkeley, when we received
news of the COVID-19 pandemic. I can still recall when we first learned of its seriousness and
the lockdowns as I sipped pork broth at a local Chinese restaurant. I was in shock at the time, but
I also could not help but think about how the lockdown would impact my experience in college.
The idea that I would experience a lockdown, let alone a pandemic, felt almost Orwellian. I did
not know what was to come regarding the world around us, but most importantly, I was afraid of
wondering whether such a pivotal point in my life would be hindered.
After California Governor Gavin Newsom issued a statewide shelter-in-place order, all
schools were mandated to close to manage the pandemic (Lin, 2020). As a result of California's
early and intense initiative, my schooling, as was everyone else's, shifted to an online format
known as Zoom, "a web-based collaborative video conferencing tool that provides quality audio,
video, and screen sharing" (Serhan, 2020, p. 335). Zoom provided students with virtual learning
through online lectures, meetings, and webinars, and they were instructed alongside program
features such as recording, break-out rooms, screen sharing, polls, chat, and live annotation
(Serhan, 2020).
Resuming back to navigating the “normal” classroom, I have encountered barriers and
difficulties in accessing my education online through learning materials, participation, and
accommodations in light of the pandemic being "over." I am not alone in enduring this, however,
societal stigma surrounding my disability has determined it the “norm”. This was ultimately
heightened as the attitudes and actions regarding frustration amidst COVID-19 schooling have
eroded the perceived benefits of online learning for students with disabilities (SWD). Given the
short duration of preparation and education surrounding the logistics of online learning, a faulty
2
system would be inevitable, although not impossible, for improvement and eventually
preeminence.
As a SWD, the initiatives that were implemented at the height of the pandemic opened a
world of possibilities. In a society where every day is a constant reminder that the world was not
designed for your presence or participation, such a swift, flexible, and accessible transformation
introduced a long-awaited opportunity for space and belonging. However, the unfortunate overall
consensus of online learning has been deemed a lesser or "poorer" substitute compared to the inperson classroom experience, filled with unfavorable adjectives describing online learning as
inadequate, stressful, and ineffective (Mullaney, 2021). COVID-19 has been undoubtedly a
stressful and alienating experience for everyone. However, partaking in statements such as "I am
so over this" and "I wish things were just back to normal" alongside negative connotations when
referring to online learning is rooted in privilege and ableist philosophy when in-person
experiences are considered more valuable or fruitful. Zoom opened education in a different light
for SWDs, who now had the opportunity to approach their schooling flexibly and learn in a
welcoming space where every single student was catered to the same.
Such privileged biases continue to reinforce harmful notions of who has a seat at the table
in academia and who shall remain excluded. As a SWD who has greatly benefited from flexible
learning, hearing negative commentary surrounding accessibility has made me and many other
SWDs feel belittled, unimportant, and othered. As such, it is crucial to acknowledge the moral
baggage language can hold. Therefore, refraining from using language that actively marginalizes
and oppresses groups of people can help validate and normalize the existence and experience of
disability and disabled bodies (Sarrett, 2020).
3
While I acknowledge the rushed and little to no training of shifting classes to online due
to the pandemic, this thesis highlights online learning as a signifier for academics, who initially
resided in the spaces of the "norm", now being challenged to thrive in the time constraining and
frustrating space known as crip time. Coined by Alison Kafer (2013), crip time reflects on the
matters of which 'time' should be a "flexible expanded and exploded reimagination of what
constitutes a 'normal' timeframe" (p. 27). This not only reshapes expectations of how long
something 'should' take but also considers that all bodies perform differently and at different
paces. Rather than an extension of "normative" timing, crip time is a substitute that allows
individuals with disabilities to survive by narrowing non-normative bodies and minds into the
apparatus of capitalist production (Samuels & Freeman, 2021).
As nondisabled students grappled with online learning while simultaneously struggling to
balance personal responsibilities, they also found themselves low on energy, having difficulty
focusing or "keeping up", ultimately out of time. According to Samuels and Freeman (2021), the
notion of "out of time" refers to the temporalities derived from capitalism and crip time, ranging
from one's "productivity, capacity, self-sufficiency, independence, and achievement" (p. 251).
Opposite of SWDs, nondisabled students who initially had the privilege of normative abilities
found themselves interrupted as COVID-19 forced them to begin to learn, adapt, and live in the
crip time where disabled students permanently reside.
As this interruption disrupted the normative structure of what constitutes an
"appropriate" time, nondisabled students began to live and learn through what is defined as crip
temporality. Crip temporality is defined as the temporal rhythms that are detached from
chrononormativity capitalist structures and predicated instead on the myriad realities of disabled
bodies and minds, for example, crip timescapes (Samuels & Freeman, 2021). This accelerated
4
clock lives in prognosis, to which nondisabled students resided during the pandemic's many
temporary accommodation spaces, including online learning modalities (Jain, 2007). Amidst the
height of COVID-19, "those who had lived previously with the privilege of normative ability
began to learn what sick and disabled people have known forever: that crip time isn't easy, it isn't
fair, it cannot be reasoned with" (Samuels & Freeman, 2021, p. 247).
As a permanent resident living in crip time, I witnessed my nondisabled peers grappling
with crip work environments and their personal lives in a state where both bodies and minds
were at risk. At the same time, simultaneously productivity remained at the forefront. However,
pre-pandemic forms of instruction were not necessarily mourned, especially by SWDs who
experienced inaccessibility, inequality, and inequity within the traditional in-person learning
formats.
Background of the Problem
SWDs enrollment in higher education is at its highest (Grimes, 2020); however, once
enrolled, SWDs may struggle to persist through their academic programs due to various factors
such as inadequate support services, inaccessible learning environments, or societal stigma
(Aquino & Scott, 2023). This is alarming, considering 21% of undergraduate students and 11.%
of post-baccalaureate students enrolled in higher education report having a disability (NCES,
2019). Despite the reported percentages, not all SWDs formally disclose their disability status;
therefore, the actual number of SWDs may be higher due to several factors, including students
not being required to self-identify their disability status to their institution's disability resource
office, some students may only share their disability status with specific members of the campus
community, and disability status may change over time, leading to adjustments in disclosure
based on evolving needs for accommodations and support services (Aquino & Bittinger, 2019).
5
Additionally, inadequate accommodations and support services, inaccessible learning
environments, and attitudinal barriers within the academic community have further exacerbated
the challenges faced by SWDs, resulting in delayed time to degree completion and reduced
graduation rates compared to their nondisabled peers (Knight et al., 2018). According to Aquino
and Scott (2023), "the success of this student group is often challenged at various stages within
their academic journeys, and oftentimes more complications, including the impact of COVID-19,
which may further complicate their academic progress" (p. 1).
SWDs already experience difficulties persisting through their academic programs and
completing their degrees. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has introduced new challenges for
SWDs, complicating their academic journey even further (Sutton, 2020). For example, Sutton
(2020) found that SWDs felt less supported by their schools compared to their nondisabled
student peers. Her study concluded that students' feelings of belonging and engagement within
remote learning and their plans post-COVID-19 were at the highest impact. Given the heightened
challenges SWDs face during the pandemic, higher education institutions must provide adequate
support and accommodations to ensure their continued academic success. Online formats
initially provided innovative approaches to education, offering flexibility in scheduling and
accessibility to learning materials from any location with internet access. For SWDs, online
learning often offered additional benefits, such as customizable accommodations and reduced
physical barriers compared to traditional in-person instruction.
Despite the official declaration of the pandemic's end and the return to “normalcy”, the
reality remains dystopian as the societal changes and attitudes brought about by the pandemic
have had lasting and negative consequences. With colleges and universities shifting back to
"normalcy”, there remains the risk of imperiling SWDs as the accommodations and adaptations
6
implemented during the pandemic have become disregarded. Shifting back to in-person
instruction while simultaneously denying accommodations, such as utilizing Zoom as an
alternative to attending class, exemplifies how the tools used during pandemic schooling have
been thrown out the door. According to Mullaney (2021), "The educational circumstances
imposed by COVID-19 offer the possibility not of returning to life as "normal" but of remaking
the ways we have been taught to think and learn" (para.14). Overall, the issue remains in place
and needs systemic interventions and support mechanisms to promote the equitable academic
outcomes of SWDs in higher education. The potential regression in accessibility and inclusivity
in education as institutions transition back to in-person instruction needs attention and ongoing
efforts to ensure that all students, including those with disabilities, have equal opportunities to
succeed.
History of Disability in Higher Education
Federal regulations play a pivotal role in education through the means of ensuring and
creating educational equality for all students. Equity for SWDs, however, has not been achieved
correspondingly due to the lack of support regarding accessibility. In the text, American Higher
Education in the Twenty-first Century, Lucas (2006) exemplifies how institutions are influenced
by the federal government through regulations and statutes. For example, the mandate of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has impacted higher education regarding what is deemed
necessary for student success. Lucas (2006) states, “Colleges have long argued that such
regulations represent a burden that contributes to the rapidly rising price of higher education” (p.
269). While many individuals within higher education support the goals of inclusive education,
there is a persistent concern that the cost of complying with federal regulations outweighs the
benefits (Lucas, 2006). The prioritization of convenience over inclusivity persists in the access to
7
education for SWDs, a concern that became increasingly evident during the COVID-19
pandemic. As students worldwide transitioned to online learning—a format SWDs had long
advocated for but which institutions had considered burdensome—the disparities in access and
support were highlighted.
Lucas (2006) further illustrates that diversity within higher education has also
contributed to dramatic societal changes. Mandates that aim to dismantle educational inequities
have represented what Lucas (2006) argues as “significant implications for American higher
education” (p. 428). Historically, primary domains of diversity within academia have revolved
around underrepresented communities. Lucas (2006) elaborates how “although legislation and
academic work has addressed disability rights” (p. 431), there have been numerous calls for
centralizing diversity and assembling a much deeper change on an institutional level. Placing
diversity at the forefront is crucial in establishing favorable and healthy conditions for diversity
(Lucas, 2006).
The 1990 passing of the ADA was a monumental codification that required colleges and
universities by law to mandate support for SWDs, which allowed for greater accessibility and
inclusivity. However, the ADA does not outline within its laws and policies what would best
support SWDs, nor are specific accommodations listed (Regulations, 1990). Relying on the
assumption that institutions will sufficiently modify course curricula and provide accessible
accommodations to fully include and engage SWDs is inefficient due to the complexity and
inconsistency of standards. By law, “all colleges and universities comply with ADA” (Tucker,
1989, p. 845); however, the law itself is not enough to support SWDs due to higher officials' lack
of understanding and enhancing what constitutes an “appropriate” accommodation. Ultimately,
to dismantle this issue further, we must “link diversity to its multiplicity of identities, to the
8
intersections of identities, and to their institutional and societal contexts as it is conceptually and
analytically important” (Lucas, 2006, p. 442).
Statement of the Problem
The issue I plan to address within higher education is the lack of accessible and inclusive
learning for SWDs. I specifically plan to focus on the issue surrounding learning modalities
utilized during the COVID-19 pandemic, as the same “unreasonable accommodations—too
expensive, too burdensome, not the way it’s done—suddenly implemented quickly, universally,
and with total social acceptance” (Samuels & Freeman, 2021. p. 248). This problem must be
addressed because the COVID-19 pandemic has illuminated that universities began to migrate
their school curriculum and resources online in just a few days, thus signifying the eagerness to
accommodate the majority rather than the minority. Everyone will eventually have a disability,
and the pandemic itself has exhibited how being able-bodied is, in fact, temporary. I will focus
on the ableist discourse surrounding the multimodal introduction and utilization of online
learning during the COVID-19 pandemic and the inclusive lessons learned that are currently
being dismissed. This problem illuminates the issue of who matters and who is worth putting at
the forefront of having access to education. 
Brief Description of Theoretical Frameworks and Relevant Theories
Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA): FDA offers a profound lens through which to examine
the intricate interplay between language, power, and knowledge in society. At its core, FDA
draws from Michel Foucault's insights into how discourses shape and are shaped by power
relations, influencing what can be said, thought, and enacted within a given historical context.
Foucault's (1976) notion of discourse extends beyond mere linguistic constructs to encompass
broader systems of knowledge production and regulation. These discursive formations are
9
intertwined with power relations, operating within specific social, cultural, and historical
contexts. By scrutinizing discourses, FDA unveils the mechanisms through which power
operates, highlighting how knowledge is not neutral but rather imbued with power dynamics.
Central to Foucault's framework is the concept of biopower, which underscores the shift
from sovereign power exerted over bodies to the governance of populations (Stewart, 2017).
Biopower entails the management of individuals and populations through the production and
dissemination of knowledge, alongside regulatory mechanisms implemented by institutions such
as the state and education (Stewart, 2017). Foucault's genealogical method further enriches FDA
by tracing the historical evolution of discourses and power relations. This approach unveils the
contingent and contested nature of knowledge production, shedding light on how institutional
norms, including ableism, are constructed over time. 
Moreover, Foucault's emphasis on self-formation and subjectivity underscores the
imperative to dismantle entrenched structures, such as those within schooling systems. By
interrogating the imaginary architectures of curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment, individuals
can challenge and redefine prevailing power dynamics (Stewart, 2017). In aligning Foucault's
insights with feminist theory, it becomes evident how his conceptual framework lays the
groundwork for understanding truth, power, and ethics. By interrogating dominant discourses
and power structures, FDA provides a foundation for feminist critique and activism, illuminating
avenues for transformative praxis.
In sum, FDA offers a robust analytical tool for unpacking the intricate nexus of
language, power, and knowledge. By engaging with Foucault's interconnected theories on
discourse, power, ethics, and subjectivity, FDA facilitates critical inquiry and intervention,
10
fostering deeper understandings of social phenomena and pathways toward emancipatory
change.
Cripping Time
As the societal construction of disability remains a shifting discussion throughout time,
definitions and understandings of disability and its intersecting factors are also being illuminated
as time and culture change. With that, differing models of disability have also directed the
construction of disability and disabled identities. Johnstone's (2004) approach to disability
identity is an excellent guide that is broadly applicable and incorporates intersectionality rather
than being boxed in with singular identity models such as the medical and social models. Most
importantly, Johnstone's (2004) approach describes how students can present their disabilities
and identities in various ways based on contexts. A key takeaway from this is the utilization of
crip theory as a means to expose and challenge what is defined as the "right" way and what is
"normal" in terms of body, space, and time.
This form of crip theory helps reveal how able-bodies and able-mindedness are the
default narratives surrounding the bodies and lives of those with disabilities. To crip such
societal constructions and norms, recognition of a more accessible and inclusive society is 100%
possible. Drawing on Kafer’s (2013) "crip time," this framework challenges normative structures
of time and prioritizes the needs and experiences of individuals with disabilities. This approach
seeks to decenter traditional notions of productivity and professionalism in academia. I argue that
adopting a disability justice perspective in higher education can promote greater accessibility and
inclusivity for all students, while also challenging conventional understandings of
professionalism and student norms. As this thesis weaves together theories surrounding
disability, body, nominalism, and power subjectification alongside crip epistemologies and
11
feminist theory, I aim to elucidate the tensions inherent in applying crip time and critical
perspectives to educational practices.
Crip time can be an even greater approach to understanding time and productivity. Crip
theory resists the academic culture of productivity; crip time allows us to reflect upon ablebodied minds and bodies regarding time normalcy, such as how long specific tasks and things
should take (Kafer, 2013). Crip time for individuals with disabilities goes beyond the simple
tasks of being late because it may take longer to get ready or environmental factors that could
make someone with a disability late, such as an elevator that is down. It is also the daily tasks set
with normalized time frames that typically result in nondisabled individuals bending their bodies
to meet those time frames or deadlines. Crip time can lead to a shift of more inclusive timing as
it departs from what is known as straight and white time.
Purpose and Significance of the Study
The purpose of my study is to challenge the way SWDs are perceived and treated within
higher education regarding accessibility. COVID-19 is still in effect; however, “normalcy”
language and traditional forms of learning have resumed as the standard, excluding SWDs’
access to education. Using Foucault and disability theory to frame my argument further
illuminates a significant effort in opening the discussion and disclosing the truth to anyone in
higher education seeking to provide a diverse and inclusive learning environment.
In reviewing previous literature, this thesis seeks to inform how institutional efforts have
affected how we think about what constitutes a practical learning format and the questions we
might ask about power and subjectivity concerning them. For example, why is in-person course
attendance deemed more valuable than remote learning? Who is at stake when reinforcing
12
traditional modalities of learning? Moreover, why do traditional forms of productivity constitute
professionalism?
Research Questions
Using the lens of crip and Focauldian theory, the following research questions will help
guide this thesis to re-envision student productivity as a space for embracing radical values,
including disability justice. This approach aims to disrupt traditional hierarchies and binaries
within academia, opening up new possibilities for recentering learning and justice.
1. What are the primary themes in current scholarship works that discuss the power
differential among students with disabilities and the shift back to in-person learning in
higher education?
In addition, the following sub questions will be included:
2. What can we learn from the literature that could be utilized by institutions and programs
in higher education to create more inclusive learning spaces for students with disabilities
post-pandemic?
3. How does the performance of normalcy potentially impact the perceived abilities to
succeed for students with disabilities in higher education amid the transition back to inperson learning environments?
Brief Description of the Methodology
To provide a greater overview of this issue, a literature review research methodology will
be conducted to highlight existing research closely related to this thesis topic. By doing a
literature review-based thesis, researchers can further relate a study to the more extensive,
ongoing dialogue in the literature, filling in gaps and extending prior studies (Cooper, 2010).
Furthermore, reviewing existing literature provides a foundation for building a framework or
13
theory to establish the study's importance and a benchmark for comparing the results with other
findings (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). By considering how this study contributes to the existing
literature, I can address topics that have yet to be addressed and analyzed. Extending research
discussions and insights allows for contributing to the literature in a manner of how my topic
"adds to an understanding of a theory or extends a theory, or how the study provides a new
perspective or "angle" to the existing literature" (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 64).
Overall Organization of the Thesis
In Chapter 1, I introduced my topic, provided vital background information critical to the
thesis, included the research questions that will guide this study, and included key definitions. In
Chapter 2, I will provide more information about the research and design approach, including my
research positionality. In Chapter 3, I will include a robust literature review in response to the
research questions and informed by the theoretical frameworks. In Chapter 4, I will provide key
recommendations based on the literature.
Key Definitions
In this section, I provide key terms and definitions to help give the reader context for the
study.
Crip time: “Crip time is flex time not just expanded but exploded; it requires reimagining our
notions of what can and should happen in time, or recognizing how expectations of “how long
things take” are based on very particular minds and bodies” (Kafer, 2013, p. 27).
Techno-ableism: Building off Techno-feminism, which refers to the intersection of technology
and feminism, examining how technology impacts gender equality and how feminist principles
can be applied to the development and use of technology (Wajcman, 2013).Techno-ableism
refers to the discrimination, prejudice, or exclusion faced by people with disabilities within such
14
technological contexts. It encompasses various aspects, including inaccessible design, lack of
accommodations, and bias in technology development including the belief that technology itself
is a solution to disability (Shew, 2023).
15
Chapter 2: Research and Design Approach
In this chapter, I will discuss the design and technicalities of my research on existing
literature. I will also include an overview of my researcher's positionality related to the research
topic and the study's limitations.
Design and Technicalities
For this literature-based thesis, the primary sources of information used to conduct this
research include peer-reviewed scholarly articles, books, and online articles related to my thesis
topic. Leveraging USC Libraries as a source due to their extensive collections of databases, I
have utilized several databases, including Sage Journals, Springer, JSTOR, and Disability
Quarterly, to obtain literature on the intriguing exploration of the intersection between COVID19's impact on higher education, disability justice, and notions of time and productivity. The
sources selected and reviewed were used due to their relatability to my topic and their theoretical
frameworks that I could build off of.
Keywords to help direct my search have included: criptime, Whitetime, students with
disabilities in higher education, student support, disability support services, remote learning,
cyberfeminist pedagogy, technoableism, universal design for learning, higher education learning
during the coronavirus, Foucauldian discourse analysis, and feminist pedagogical approaches to
learning, to help filter and taper search results. These selected keywords have covered a broad
spectrum of themes relevant to the intersection of COVID-19's impact on higher education,
disability justice, and notions of time and productivity. This diverse set of keywords will likely
yield a rich pool of literature to draw from, enabling me to comprehensively explore various
aspects of my topic. I will organize my findings around these key themes and theoretical
frameworks from my literature review to ensure a robust analysis.
16
Researcher Positionality
According to Holmes (2020), “Positionality is integral to the process of qualitative
research, as is the researcher’s awareness of the lack of stasis of our own and other’s
positionality” (p. 8). As I present the findings within my research, I find it in the good spirit of
self-reflexivity to acknowledge my positionality as an educated woman and SWD who has
experienced learning in higher education before, during, and post-pandemic. Being aware of my
importance is crucial to the implications of my stance; therefore, I acknowledge that my
standpoint and personal lived experiences have influenced this thesis topic.
As an “insider” of this particular topic, my knowledge, educational background, and
experiences have been advantageous to this thesis as I use “terminology that is meaningful to and
from the perspective of a person from within the culture whose beliefs and behaviors are being
studied” (Holmes, 2020, p. 5). The insider positionality essentially allows the questioning of
outsiders reading this paper to thoroughly acknowledge and understand the experiences within a
specific cultural context. I recognize that my insider standpoint and my personal experiences
have influenced this thesis topic; however, denouncing my myopic and sympathetic view
towards this topic would be dishonest. Like many positionalities, being an insider can be
disadvantageous regarding implicit biases and sympathetic familiarity. However, Holmes (2020)
considers insider positionality as also exceptionally advantageous as the researcher can:
“ask more meaningful or insightful questions (due to possession of a prior knowledge),
(3) the researcher may be more trusted so may secure more honest answers, (4) the ability
to produce a more truthful, authentic or ‘thick’ description and understanding of the
17
culture, (5) potential disorientation due to ‘culture shock’ is removed or reduced, and (6)
the researcher is better able to understand the language” (p. 6).
To help delineate my biases within this thesis, I want to announce my engagement and
open-mindedness within reflexivity. “Researchers should engage in reflexivity to develop and
embrace their positionality, recognizing that it is not fixed and will necessarily change over time
(Holmes, 2020, p. 8). As I reference works, I am learning new and more significant meanings to
theory as well as developing deeper insights into my belief systems. Ultimately, positionality
influences research interests; therefore, presenting my role allows for greater transparency and
discovery within how exploration, analysis, framing of topics, and the selected methodology
have been conducted.
Limitations of the Study
Literature review as a methodology provides theoretical foundations that have helped
build my research; however, utilizing such prior research contains limitations due to the
relevance of my topic. Given the COVID-19 pandemic was at its height in conversation during
2020-2021, research surrounding not only the health effects of COVID-19 (i.e., Long COVID) is
barely coming forward but as are pandemic-related experiences, such as the logistics related to
higher education. As a result, there is little research conducted on the information related to the
data backing up the impact regarding SWDs’ experiences resuming back to in-person classes.
Despite the scope of these limitations, this thesis will highlight the missing gaps in research to
cover relevant sources that will help close these gaps in the future, ultimately building off a
foundation for more significant and current insights and discoveries.
18
Chapter 3: Literary Analysis
In Chapter 1, I provided a historical overview of the foundations of ADA within higher
education; however, in this section, I will highlight the challenges that have since come about
and become further reinforced through the lens of pandemic pedagogy, disability theory, and
FDA. Ultimately, I will highlight SWD's experiences by exploring scholarship that delved
specifically into power differentials. Despite the growing body of literature surrounding
disability within higher education, considerations tend to focus on disability issues prior to the
pandemic. Very little literature also illuminates discussion over pandemic-time experiments
intersecting with disability justice. Given the lack of existing data, the selected scholarship can
inform readers of future implementations within the field of higher education.
Throughout my literary analysis, I have discovered three strong themes surrounding the
literature, including Foucault's Docile Bodies and the Normalization Process. This theme
explores how the treatment of SWDs is influenced by hierarchical power differentials and
societal norms, leading to their exclusion if they do not conform. It discusses the normalization
process as a technology of power that shapes the experiences of disabled individuals, positioning
them as "abnormal" or "non-typical."
Secondly, the impact of COVID-19 on SWD. The pandemic has had a dual impact on
individuals with disabilities, both positive and negative. While remote work has benefited some,
allowing them to work from home without disclosing their condition, it has also put pressure on
others to disclose their disability for accommodations. The pandemic has also led to an increase
in techno-ableism, where technology is expected to solve disability-related issues without
addressing fundamental accessibility needs.
19
Lastly, Systemic Educational Reform and Inclusivity. This theme argues for systemic
educational reform focused on the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework to
accommodate the diverse needs of all students. It calls for a reevaluation of normative time
structures and the adoption of a more inclusive "crip temporality." The theme also emphasizes
the need for a liberatory philosophy of education that challenges the status quo of White
supremacy and capitalist patriarchy, advocating for the inclusion of disabled voices in decisionmaking and the implementation of trauma-informed and intersectional frameworks to address
systemic ableism.
Assimilating to Passing
As the COVID-19 pandemic persists simultaneously in the age where normal language is
used throughout academia, SWDs seemingly are left to endure hierarchical power differentials
amidst the reinforcement of societal norms. As a result, the treatment of SWDs is greatly
influenced. As described by Foucault (1995), this normalization process involves the imposition
of societal norms and values, leading to the exclusion of those who do not conform. This
normalization becomes a technology of power, shaping the experiences of disabled individuals
and positioning them as "abnormal" or "non-typical" within their environments. Namely, SWDs
endure pressure to appear or perform as "less disabled", also known as disablism, to gain
acceptance and greater opportunities (Cook, 2021).
Cook's (2021) study exemplifies this phenomenon by examining the dual impact of the
COVID-19 pandemic on individuals with invisible disabilities, highlighting both the positive and
negative aspects of this experience. Her findings concluded that the concept of disablism is a
social-relational form of oppression that restricts the life activities of people categorized as
20
impaired (Cook, 2021). This oppression is often intertwined with other systems of inequality,
such as sexism, racism, and classism, issues heavily presented amidst the height of the pandemic.
In the context of COVID-19, the pandemic has ultimately led to an increase in remote
work, which has been beneficial for some individuals with invisible disabilities as it allows them
to work from home without the need to disclose their condition. However, this has also meant
that some individuals may feel pressured to disclose their disability if they require specific
accommodations that are not available in a remote setting. This "coming out" notion thus
exposes individuals with disabilities to stigmatization, discrimination, and othering. This is
especially evident in a recent study where Dolan (2021) found that individuals with disabilities in
institutional spaces were less likely to disclose their disability status as they feared they would be
perceived as incompetent and "unprofessional" compared to their colleagues. "Like other people
who may be read as "passing" as straight, White, or cisgender, people with disabilities face
nuanced situations in an ableist system" (Cook, 2021, p. 46).
In circumstances where they felt forced to disclose, the individuals with disabilities also
felt inclined to showcase that their disability would not impact their productivity (Dolan, 2021).
In a newspaper article, Wexler (2021) also revealed that her pregnancy- although not a disability
under the ADA, impairments as a result of pregnancy qualify as a disability under the ADA
(EEOC) -allowed her to detach her limitations from her work performance as remote work
provided her with concealment. This temporarily allowed her to be placed on equal footing with
her peers (Wexler, 2021). Like Wexler's story, many SWDs were able to assimilate to academia's
patriarchal, White, neoliberal, ableist norms through remote learning as they were able to avoid
stigma and discrimination, but only technologically.
Techno-ableism in the “Post Pandemic” Age
21
While Wexler (2021) argues that technology can partially normalize the lives of those
with disabilities navigating challenges, it is crucial to recognize that technology must not be
utilized instead of total accessibility. Shew (2023) refers to this event as techno-ableism, which
refers to the discrimination, prejudice, or exclusion faced by people with disabilities within
technological contexts. It encompasses various aspects, including inaccessible design, lack of
accommodations, and bias in technology development, including the belief that technology is a
solution to disability (Shew, 2023).
Although SWDs endured a moment of acceptance and normality, the reality has been a
temporary facade. Not only has this been evident through stories of SWDs but also through
policies, practices, and the ableist language that remains persistent in the "post-pandemic" age.
Rather than reinforcing the ideology that technological advances can cure one's disability,
pandemic pedagogy has presented an opportunity for systemic educational reform. With a focus
on the UDL framework to accommodate all students' diverse needs, UDL can benefit SWD
through personalized learning environments that use technology as an enhancement, not a
domain (Bashem et al., 2020).
"The pandemic compelled people around the world to confront how decisions made at the
top levels of institutions led to devastating consequences for citizens and exacerbated preexisting inequalities" (Cook, 2021, p. 43). In addition, nondisabled individuals faced a new
reality that forced them to recognize the systematic failures of structures in place that also
impacted them. As the pandemic disrupted the conventional understanding of time and
productivity for nondisabled students, they were granted grace and understanding in a crip time
zone, showcasing how UDL can benefit every student.
22
Unable to meet the demands of their pre-pandemic schedules, aka "out of time," the
experiences of nondisabled students begin to parallel the everyday realities of SWDs who
navigate life in ways that do not conform to standard societal expectations of time management
and productivity. For example, as nondisabled students adjusted to new modes of learning (like
online platforms) and accommodations necessitated by the pandemic, they inadvertently began to
experience aspects of crip temporality (Samuels & Freeman, 2021).
White Time Versus Other Times
Crip temporality encompasses a broader understanding of time that accommodates the
diverse needs of disabled bodies and minds. It challenges the rigid schedules and expectations
imposed by capitalist structures and offers a more flexible, accommodating approach to time
management and productivity (Samuels & Freeman, 2021). The pandemic created temporary
spaces of accommodation where nondisabled students had to navigate learning environments that
were more aligned with crip timescapes – the varied temporal realities experienced by disabled
individuals. This shift highlights how external disruptions, like the pandemic, can prompt a
reevaluation of normative time structures and potentially foster greater inclusivity in how time is
perceived and managed in educational settings. Additionally, the pandemic's crip timescape
exemplified the institutional structures in place that comply to account for a SWD "lack of fit."
For example, in the "post-pandemic" classroom, SWDs have begun to experience the reversion
of past ableist norms that determine what constitutes an "ideal student." Parsloe and Smith
(2022) describe the "ideal student" as a construct that reflects traditional and ableist definitions
of student competence and participation. This ideal is often juxtaposed against students labeled
as "incompetent" if they do not adhere to these norms, such as needing accommodations. Due to
23
the ableist assumptions embedded in these definitions, SWD are particularly vulnerable to being
labeled incompetent if they do not conform or participate as expected (Parsloe & Smith, 2022).
Furthermore, such somatic norms have played a crucial role in perpetuating the exclusion
of disabled individuals from philosophical disciplines and are evident within notions of
professional time, also referred to as "White time." Prior to the pandemic, students were often
required to engage in learning at prescribed times, known as White time. Rooted in straight
time, White time is the time of space, whether it be a future, opportunities, success, or life, that is
promised to those who reside on the heteropatriarchal sphere (Munoz, 2098). As a result of
digital classroom learning and field practicums, COVID-19 has allowed for a queering of
previously restrictive notions of time.
COVID-19 has and continues to allow for new entry possibilities into higher education
by reconceptualizing professionalism (White time). Arrow and Grant (2021) also frame White
time as the indoctrination placement of marginalized groups into acting and appearing more
professional and civilized". Rooted in assimilation, White time is deemed the "right" and
"professional" way to do one's job. In traditional higher education settings, White time has been
constructed as linear and rigid, privileging certain bodies and abilities while marginalizing others
(Arrow & Grant, 2021). This ableist temporality often excludes SWDs who may require
flexibility and accommodation in their learning processes.
(Mis)fitting In
SWDs are enduring discriminatory practices that are defined as unprofessional,
inconvenient, and issues of the past, as in pre-pandemic. This concept existed before remote
learning as micro-practices of communication and cultural contracts were characterized by
ableist definitions of a "good student" in the pre-pandemic classroom (Parsloe & Smith, 2022).
24
In their study, Parsloe and Smith (2022) discovered that professors expected students to
assimilate to an ableist ready-to-sign contract, essentially telling SWD that they must act like
their nondisabled peers to succeed. This approach imposed normative expectations for
participation, such as immediate verbal contributions and oral discussions, which posed
accessibility-related challenges for SWDs (Parsloe & Smith, 2022). These expectations
ultimately led students to experience themselves as "misfits" when they struggled to comply with
these norms. Garland-Thompson (2014) states that mis-fitting refers to disability emergence
within interactions and environments, especially othering.
Undoubtedly, Parsloe and Smith's (2022) findings revealed themes such as (mis)fitting in
the pre-pandemic classroom and (mis)fitting in the COVID classroom. The study’s participants
described challenges related to accessibility, (in)visibility, disability identity, rigidity, flexibility,
and the threat of returning to normal (Parsloe & Smith, 2022). Ultimately, the pandemic
prompted some professors to loosen rigid expectations of "ideal" student participation, leading to
the exchange of ready-made contracts for co-created contracts. This shift reshaped normative
expectations of time and participation, disrupting traditional power dynamics and giving students
more autonomy in determining their participation.
Climbing the Footholds Toward Inclusion
Lund and Ayers (2022) discuss the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the disability
community in the United States, where they identified waves of discrimination, including
language and attitudes surrounding ableism and devaluation of disabled lives. For example,
rather than have their needs met, SWDs often abandon their schooling and isolate themselves at
home, an issue that has existed for disabled individuals before the pandemic (Lund & Ayers,
2022). Additionally, ableist approaches that prioritize avoiding litigation over disability rights
25
have contributed to SWDs being least likely to afford to remain enrolled at institutions during
COVID-19 (Wells, 2022). Wells' (2022) study also showcases that the pandemic exacerbated
existing inequalities, leading to significant drops in enrollment, retention, and completion rates
across various demographic and identity groups, including SWD.
As institutions embraced bending the clock back at the height of the pandemic to serve
nondisabled students, SWDs have ironically been under pressure to hurry and "return to normal."
However, "This rush to return to the pre-pandemic classroom felt like losing 'footholds' in the
climb toward inclusion" (Parsloe & Smith, 2022, p. 219). In addition, a lack of access to
resources and accommodations remains in the now-in-person spaces (Lund et al., 2020). As a
result, individuals with disabilities are left to face institutional barriers due to a lack of
prioritization. Lund et al. (2020) findings concluded that disability has intersected with both
trauma and stress in the context of a marginalized identity surviving in a pandemic.
Saia et al. (2021) also emphasize the need for a shift in societal attitudes and practices to
promote inclusive, accessible, and equitable solutions for all individuals. Through advocating for
the inclusion of disabled voices in decision-making processes and the utilization of traumainformed and intersectional frameworks to capture the complex and dynamic needs of disabled
individuals, they should also work within the context of the disability sphere to address systemic
and institutional ableism that continues to intersect with other forms of oppression, including the
effects reinforced through the COVID-19 pandemic through ableist procedures (Lund et al.,
2020; Saia et al., 2021).
Redefining Fairness
Lund and Ayers (2022) explore how "return to office" procedures could potentially
recreate access barriers for employees, including those at high risk for complications from
26
COVID-19. Consequently, they would be safer continuing to work from home. In education, one
can infer that similar considerations might apply to students with disabilities. The rapid shift
towards digital learning during the pandemic has presented accessibility in facilitating remote
work and flexible scheduling. It has supported productivity and accommodated students,
especially SWDs, who have longed for it (Cook, 2021). The pandemic also highlighted how
ableism is woven into academia, and students expressed a desire for a new normal that embraces
the flexibility and grace previously denied them (Bones & Ellison, 2022). Despite SWDs
advocating for increased accessibility not only for themselves but for all students and advocating
for a redefinition of fairness in higher education, this study implies that disability-related access
needs were often an afterthought, resulting in programs and supports not being immediately
accessible (Bones & Ellison, 2022).
As society considers a return to normalcy, it is essential to ensure that the needs of SWDs
are taken into account to provide them with equal opportunities for education and support.
Additionally, Shew (2020) highlights the disparities in the impact of COVID-19 on SWDs, who
are disproportionately affected and often overlooked in terms of accommodations and support.
Shew (2020) urges sustained changes beyond the pandemic, advocating for inclusive and
accessible planning that accommodates diverse abilities and schedules. For instance, Shew's
(2020) study emphasizes the value of multi-modal teaching and scholarly materials. It calls for
including individuals with disabilities in decision-making, recognizing their expertise in
navigating challenges, and fostering innovative solutions. Ultimately, her article underscores the
resilience and expertise of the disability community, emphasizing the need for broader
recognition and implementation of disability-informed strategies and accommodations,
particularly during the COVID-19 crisis.
27
Power and Discipline
As protocols related to COVID-19 have been rescinded in order to return to a sense of
normalcy, it is the disabled community who remains forgotten and further excluded from society.
As a result, individuals with disabilities are left to face institutional barriers due to a lack of
prioritization. The mutual constitution and reinforcement of the underrepresentation of
individuals with disabilities are shaped by somatic norms, seemingly dictating the field's implicit
and explicit, structural and material, organization around ability (Shew, 2020). The studies
mentioned above display evidence of what and who constitutes a valuable and prioritized
individual. It is expected that individuals with disabilities conform to "normalcy" or be compliant
with existing policies in place in order to gain opportunities.
This is alternatively referred to as docility, to which Foucault (1995) refers in his 'docile
body' framework, as the result of disciplinary techniques that create a pliable object that
performs under constant surveillance and regulation through control of power; in other words, a
prison for the soul. Focault's (1995) text introduces the concept of "disciplines," which are
methods of control that do not rely on ownership or direct domination. Instead, they focus on
making the body valuable and obedient through constant, uninterrupted coercion (Foucault,
1995). These disciplines became widespread during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
influencing various institutions today, including schools (Foucault, 1995). Foucault (1995) also
explores the interplay between two registers of understanding the human body: the anatomicalmetaphysical, concerned with the functioning and explanation of the body, and the technicalpolitical, focused on controlling and correcting bodily operations through regulations and
methods. Regarding the context of disability and pandemic pedagogy, such registers are evident
28
in convergence in the notion of docility, which can be intertwined to a body that can be
manipulated, trained, and improved for use.
Tremain (2020) further delves into the complex social and power relations surrounding
disability, using Foucault's concepts to elucidate the discursive construction of disability and the
need to challenge traditional philosophical notions of disability. Tremain's (2013, 2017) analysis
extends to biopower, where she critiques the treatment of impairment as a naturally occurring
phenomenon and explores the social construction of impairment. Institutional structures, hiring
practices, course curricula, and professional networks are heavily influenced by the somatic
norms that relate to impairment, leading to the disinheriting of disabled individuals (Tremain,
2017). Although docility sits at the center of Foucault's analysis of power and governance,
biopower, defined as a combination of normalization and population management (Foucault,
1995), is a crucial tool for managing lives, particularly felt by individuals with disabilities.
Docile Bodies
According to a study by Hewitt (2022), biopower encompasses surveillance, data
collection, and medical control, creating "docile bodies" that are easier to manage and
manipulate. Hewitt (2022) argues that the application of biopower exerts control over the lives of
disabled adults, often without resorting to overt force or violence. By incorporating a
Foucauldian approach, Hewitt's (2022) study aims to problematize current practices' emergence,
emphasizing historical contingencies and the need for systemic change. In the context of SWDs
and pandemic pedagogy, power, normalization, and biopower intersect in complex ways. This
insidious use of power creates an illusion of necessity, shaping the experiences and agency of
disabled individuals within their environment, including the classroom.
29
The "docile" state of submission and obedience is cultivated through various disciplinary
mechanisms, including educational systems prioritizing conformity over critical thinking and
liberation (Tremain, 2013, 2017). Producing docile bodies aims to maintain the status quo and
ensure the smooth functioning of the social and political structures that benefit the dominant
groups. Tremain (2013, 2017) challenges this traditional conceptualization of disability,
highlighting its construction as an apparatus of power and advocating for reconsidering disability
within academic and philosophical spheres.
Amidst the height of the pandemic, the importance of incorporating input from SWDs in
creating environments that cater to different needs and experiences is crucial and needed beyond
the post-pandemic discourse to sustain changes that have accommodated diverse abilities and
schedules (Shew, 2020). Stewart (2017) also highlights "docile bodies" as individuals who have
been disciplined and trained to be compliant and cooperative with the existing social order,
particularly one that is characterized by White supremacy and the capitalist patriarchy. Shew
(2020) argues that from its inception, the academy has sought to discipline students, particularly
those who are marginalized, into becoming compliant subjects who accept and cooperate with
the White supremacist status quo.
The New Normal
Given that individuals with disabilities are stereotypically viewed as unproductive
members of society, institutions continue to reinforce such harmful stereotypes through their lack
of support in accommodating and including SWDs. Through her engagement with Foucault's
work, Tremain (2020) develops a comprehensive anti-foundational approach to disability,
challenging traditional paradigms and emphasizing the need for a more sophisticated
understanding of disability within the academic domain. Additionally, Shew (2020) insists that
30
the pandemic has shown that remote work, access to essential services without excessive
documentation, and the celebration of creative adaptation are feasible and beneficial for
individuals with disabilities. Ultimately, individuals with disabilities are expected to submit to
institutions' hierarchical observation and normalizing judgments, such as higher education, and
perform their designated societal roles without resistance (Stewart, 2017).
Moreover, in the article "The 'New Normal' for Disabled Students: Access, Inclusion, and
COVID-19," Bones and Ellison (2022) conducted a qualitative study focusing on the experiences
of SWDs in higher education pre and “post” COVID-19. Their research utilized the social model
of disability to explore how SWDs coped with the shift to remote learning and their access needs
before, during, and “after” the pandemic. The study aimed to shed light on the challenges faced
by SWDs and to advocate for a reimagining of fairness in higher education. The findings
indicated that SWDs resorted to self-accommodations during the pandemic, creating DIY
accessibility, and expressed a desire to retain the flexibility and grace they experienced (Bones &
Ellison, 2022). The study also highlighted the inadequacies of the traditional accommodation
process and the need for a culture of trust. It emphasized recognizing disability as a social
commitment, similar to work or family commitments (Bones & Ellison, 2022).
Surveillance and Hierarchical Observation
Through a robust study critically examining the historical and contemporary role of
higher education in the United States as a mechanism for producing compliant citizens who
uphold the status quo of White supremacy, Stewart (2017) employs FDA to argue that the
academy's disciplinary practices, such as hierarchical observation and normalizing judgments,
have been used to control and surveil marginalized groups. FDA concepts of hierarchical
observation and normalizing judgments to explain how higher education has functioned as a
31
social institution that controls and surveils its students has resulted in a disciplining effect
achieved through various means, including historical context, curriculum, and student affairs,
economic servitude, and arrangement of students as labor (Stewart, 2017).
Stewart (2017) asserts that these mechanisms have contributed to the rise of a leadership
class that supports and seeks to deepen the power of the patriarchal, White supremacist capitalist
state. Furthermore, Stewart (2017) traces the origins of education as a liberatory practice to the
African continent and the resistance of enslaved people in North America who risked
punishment to learn to read and write, viewing literacy as a pathway to communal emancipation.
Similarly, SWDs have risked being othered by refraining from assimilating to disablism, a
similar pathway to access and academic freedom. The U.S. educational system has historically
served to discipline SWDs, producing docility rather than empowerment (Stewart, 2017). This
has been achieved through rigid rules, surveillance, punitive measures, and, more recently,
curricula perpetuating dominant ideologies and student affairs practices that suppress disability
(Stewart, 2017). The article concludes by emphasizing the need for higher education leaders and
policymakers to shift their deficit-oriented views of marginalized students and to commit to a
liberatory philosophy of education that challenges and transforms the White supremacist,
capitalist state.
In another study, Beattie (2020) applies FDA within the realms of discipline,
governmentality, and biopolitics to analyze how neoliberal ideologies have reshaped the roles of
educational leaders, transforming them into economic-rational subjects who comply with
government agendas. The study argues that Foucault's three modes of objectification—dividing
practices, scientific classification, and self-subjection—reveal the reconfiguration of educational
leadership (Beattie, 2020). The persistent logic and ideologies in higher education that have
32
exacerbated such objectification and inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic include racism,
ableism, and neoliberalism, contributing to increased class- and race-based enrollment and
completion gaps (Wells, 2022). The pandemic also led to higher levels of stress, anxiety, and
depression among students, particularly those with preexisting mental health concerns (Wells,
2022). According to Wells (2022), the pandemic also exposed how decision-making processes,
rooted in unchanging ideologies, perpetuated and exacerbated inequitable systems and processes.
Resisting Normalcy and Docility in the Neoliberal Institution
Despite increased awareness of systemic racism and efforts to promote anti-racist
stances, decisions made during the pandemic resulted in disproportionately worse outcomes for
marginalized groups, particularly students of color (Wells, 2022). Such dividing practices are
observed in segmenting leadership into administrative and academic domains, with
administrative leaders becoming docile bodies that enforce government policies (Wells, 2022).
This issue is unveiled within language and attitudes surrounding the return to "normalcy"
alongside higher education professionals who refrain from utilizing helpful tools used during
remote learning as a method for universal learning in their classroom. Moreover, Wells' (2022)
study revealed that neoliberal ideologies, which promote privatization and market competition,
have led to a college education being increasingly seen as a private good rather than a public one,
therefore, adversely affecting economically marginalized individuals, especially during times of
crisis. Ultimately, these ideologies have contributed to increased inequality and racialized
impacts in higher education, exacerbating existing institutional, economic, and racial gaps.
Shew (2020) emphasizes that the pandemic has demonstrated the practicality of
accommodations long advocated for by the disabled community, such as remote work, flexible
schedules, and the use of technology for communication and research. Bones and Ellison (2022)
33
also highlight how the pandemic removed physical barriers such as constant travel to and from
campus, strict schedules, and forced routines, allowing students to center their bodies and learn
independently. In addition, the pandemic highlighted the need for professors to extend kindness
and flexibility to all students, recognizing that everyone has access barriers and commitments
outside academia (Bones & Ellison, 2022).
Overall, the pandemic led to a shift in perceptions, emphasizing the importance of
autonomy and flexibility for SWDs in their academic pursuits. Beattie (2020) suggests that FDA
can serve as a methodological framework for academics to critique such neoliberalist and
intervention in social order transformations. The paper concludes that despite the challenges
posed by neoliberal forces, a Foucaudian lens offers tools for resistance and the potential for
educational leaders to resist being turned into 'docile bodies.'
34
Chapter 4: Discussion and Conclusion
This thesis discusses the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on SWDs in the context of
FDA and its relativity within the broader implications of ableism in academia and society. It
highlights the struggles SWDs face due to hierarchical power structures and the enforcement of
societal norms, which often position them as "abnormal" and lead to their exclusion. The
pandemic has consisted of both positive and negative aspects for SWDs, such as the
accommodations generated overnight showcased an opportunity for UDL, yet were ultimately an
afterthought. The thesis also explored the intersection of ableism with other forms of oppression,
such as sexism, racism, and classism, and how these systems contribute to the marginalization of
SWDs. It critiques the notion of "techno-ableism," where technology is seen as a solution to
disability without addressing underlying accessibility issues. For example, allowing a SWD to
attend class via Zoom does not constitute a solution for UDL. The pandemic has temporarily
allowed SWDs to assimilate into academic norms through remote learning, but this acceptance is
shown to be a facade, as ableist language and practices persist in the “back to normal” and “postpandemic” society.
Throughout my literary analysis, the selected scholarship argues for a reevaluation of
normative time structures and the adoption of a more inclusive "crip temporality" that
accommodates the diverse needs of disabled individuals. It calls for systemic educational reform,
focusing on the UDL framework to benefit all students, especially SWDs, by providing
personalized learning environments. In addition, my methodology has also examined the
experiences of SWDs in the "post-pandemic" era, where there is a reversion to ableist norms that
define the "ideal student." It discusses the concept of "White time," which imposes linear and
rigid expectations that privilege certain abilities and marginalize others. The pandemic has led to
35
a recognition of the need for flexible learning environments and has prompted some professors to
adjust their expectations of student participation.
Finally, this thesis has outlined the impact of the pandemic on the disabled community in
the United States., noting increased discrimination and the devaluation of disabled lives. It
highlights the challenges SWDs face in accessing resources and accommodations, as well as the
intersections of disability with trauma and stress. This thesis advocates for the inclusion of
disabled voices in decision-making and the implementation of trauma-informed and
intersectional frameworks to address systemic ableism. It calls for sustained changes beyond the
pandemic to ensure inclusive and accessible planning that accommodates diverse abilities and
schedules.
Recommend(actions)
Overall, my thesis has critiqued the disciplinary mechanisms that produce "docile
bodies", which has ultimately guided the path to exclusion and othering. Advocating for a
reconceptualization of disability within the academic sphere is needed to not only challenge such
harmful concepts, but to also dismantle the powers that guide such. Below are some
recommendations that emphasize the need for a liberatory philosophy of education that
challenges the status quo and promotes equality and inclusion for SWDs. The research entails a
need for research on disability-informed strategies and accommodations to inform policy and
practice, ensuring they are practical and meet the needs of SWDs.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL)
The research delves into the "post-pandemic" classroom, discussing the potential
reversion to ableist norms and the importance of resisting the reassertion of an ableist "normal."
Parsloe and Smith (2022) emphasize the need for a "new normal" that is inclusive and equitable
36
for all students, advocating for a shift towards co-created cultural contracts that value
individuality and resist oppressive discourses of "ideal" studenthood. They also acknowledge the
limitations of the topic regarding pandemic pedagogy in the classroom, therefore, they urge
further research, especially on the experiences of professors and the development of collective
disability consciousness among students (Parsloe & Smith, 2022).
The research especially advocates for implementing UDL frameworks in educational
settings to create personalized learning environments that accommodate the diverse needs of all
students, including SWDs (Parsloe & Smith, 2022)—overall, providing valuable insights into the
transformative potential of the pandemic on higher education and the imperative of prioritizing
equity and inclusion in post-pandemic pedagogy. Basham (2020) argues that integrating UDL
principles into the design of learning experiences can ensure accessibility and engagement for all
students. Leveraging technology and ensuring that the redesign of the education system
prioritizes equity can support learner variability and integrate modern technologies to create a
robust and effective educational system for the future (Basham, 2020). Saia (2022) explains that
UDL can reduce the need for individualized accommodations as everyone is ensured an
accessible learning environment. This includes providing multiple means of representation,
expression, and engagement (Parsloe & Smith, 2022).
Flexible Learning Environments
A flexible learning environment calls for creating inclusive and accessible learning
environments that recognize and respect the varied temporal realities experienced by disabled
individuals, promoting a broader understanding of time that accommodates diverse needs
(Parsloe & Smith, 2022). According to Shew (2021), society can better support individuals with
disabilities in the future by incorporating input from disabled colleagues and SWDs in creating
37
environments that make space for different needs and experiences. This includes planning
creatively and ensuring accessibility to allow more work offsite, welcoming suggestions from
disabled individuals on how to make the environment work best for their neurotype and
schedule, and making teaching and scholarly materials multi-modal to accommodate different
physical conditions and ways of reading and communicating, ensuring equal opportunities for
education and support (Shew, 2021).
Highlighting the benefits of remote work and flexible scheduling for SWDs, Bones and
Ellison (2022) suggest that remote work should remain an option because it has provided SWDs
with increased autonomy, reduced barriers to participation, and has the potential to foster a more
inclusive and equitable work and learning environment. In addition, Cook (2021) explains that
flexible work should continue to be offered, which has been shown to be beneficial for
individuals with disabilities. However, these arrangements should be made available to all,
regardless of their ability to work from home pre-pandemic, to ensure equitable access (Cook,
2021). In addition, remote work experienced during the pandemic has highlighted the need for
sustained changes beyond the crisis, advocating for inclusive and accessible planning that
accommodates diverse abilities and schedules (Bones & Ellison, 2022).
Inclusion of Disabled Voices
The research entails a need for research on disability-informed strategies and
accommodations to inform policy and practice, ensuring they are practical and meet the needs of
individuals with disabilities. Shew (2020) not only stresses the importance of including disabled
individuals in decision-making processes but to also leverage their expertise and ensure their
perspectives are represented. Shew (2020) emphasizes the role of the disabled community in
advocating for technologies and infrastructure that benefit everyone, particularly the need for
38
society to recognize and address the vulnerabilities of individuals with disabilities in the context
of the COVID-19 pandemic. By incorporating disability-led design principles into academic
projects and research, institutions can become more resilient and adaptable to various situations,
such as a pandemic (Shew, 2020). These concepts underscore the need to critically examine the
power dynamics and institutional practices that impact the experiences. For example, by
employing FDA, future researchers and practitioners can critically examine power differentials
in place and how disability is constructed, regulated, and managed within higher education
institutions through the lens of pandemic pedagogy (Wells, 2022).
These practices can uncover hidden power dynamics, challenge traditional assumptions
about disability, and advocate for more inclusive and equitable practices in higher education.
After all, individuals with disabilities are the experts in recognizing, navigating, and advocating
such challenges.
Future Research
Given the recent status of this thesis topic, I hope that the inevitable missing data will
influence future research surrounding the impact of COVID-19 on SWDs. The literary analysis
implies that further research is needed to understand the pandemic's long-term impact on SWDs
and identify effective strategies for support and inclusion. Below are a few takeaways for future
research.
Intersectionality of Disability with Other Forms of Oppression This suggests that future
research should explore the intersections of disability with other forms of oppression, such as
sexism, racism, and classism, to develop comprehensive approaches to inclusivity. Afterall, an
intersectional lens is needed to understand how COVID 19 has simultaneously challenged and
created opportunities for the institution and the individuals (Cook, 2021). According to Cook
39
(2021), institutions should develop and implement inclusive policies that recognize disability as
an intersectional identity. For example, these policies should aim to support individuals with
disabilities without requiring them to disclose their condition unless they choose to do so.
According to Saia (2022), eliminating categorical exclusions based on disability or diagnosis can
further address the needs of individuals with disabilities. For instance, minimizing
documentation further reduces excessive and demeaning documentation requirements for
accessing accommodations (Shew, 2020).
Systemic and Institutional Ableism Calls for research in addressing systemic and institutional
ableism, particularly as it intersects with other forms of oppression and as a means to develop
strategies for dismantling these existing barriers. Rodgers et al (2023) suggests that individual
accommodations are often insufficient without broader systemic change, therefore, universities
must advocate for changes at the institutional and societal levels to address the root causes of
ableism. Recommendations for advocating for systemic change can be researching existing
practices in place at other institutions and the exemplary models utilized that have resulted in
best practice. In addition, such research can highlight endeavors and challenges that come with
challenging the status quo. Flowers (2021) also calls for a critical examination of the ableist
norms that dictates the organization of spaces and institutions. This involves recognizing and
dismantling the somatic norms that privilege non-disabled bodies and exclude disabled
individuals.
Disability-Informed Strategies and Accommodations Implies that there is a need for research
on disability-informed strategies and accommodations to inform policy and practice, ensuring
they are practical and meet the needs of disabled individuals within higher education. Regardless
of year, SWDs deserve a reimagining of policies and practices in education to better support their
40
community. For example, Cook (2021) highlights the need for constant education on
accessibility issues, as even when accommodations are made with the intention of being
inclusive, they often fall short. This practice underscores the necessity of a 'literacy of
accessibility' as part of being socially literate especially when certain bodies are deemed more
worthy of an accommodation. The current research suggests that future research should focus on
understanding the complex needs of individuals with disabilities in the space of the new
“normal”, and how to address systemic barriers to inclusion effectively.
41
References
Americans with disabilities act of 1990, as amended. ADA.gov. (2024).
https://www.ada.gov/law-and-regs/ada/
Aquino, K. C., & Bittinger, J. D. (2019). The Self-(un) Identification of Disability in Higher
Education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 32(1), 5-19.
Aquino, K. C., & Scott, S. (2023). Supporting Students with Disabilities during the COVID-19
Pandemic: The Perspective of Disability Resource Professionals. International journal of
environmental research and public health, 20(5), 4297.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20054297
Arrow, K. M., & Grant, Z. S. (2021). Pandemic possibilities in crip time: Disrupting social work
field education. Intersectionalities: A Global Journal of Social Work Analysis, Research,
Polity, and Practice, 9(1), 98-114.
Basham, J. D., Blackorby, J., & Marino, M. T. (2020). Opportunity in Crisis: The Role of
Universal Design for Learning in Educational Redesign. Learning Disabilities (Weston,
Mass.), 18(1), 71–91.
Beattie, L. (2020). Educational leadership: Producing docile bodies? A Foucauldian
perspective on Higher Education. Higher Education Quarterly, 74(1), 98–110.
https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12218
Bones, P. D., & Ellison, V. (2022). The “New Normal” for Disabled Students: Access, Inclusion,
and COVID-19. Sociation, 21(1).
Cook, T. N. (2022). ’It’s a gift...and a curse’: How COVID Reframed Our Understanding of
Disability as an Intersectional Identity. Sociation Today, 21(1), 89-98
Cooper, H. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (4th ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage publications.
42
Dolan, V. L. B. (2023). “...but if you tell anyone, I’ll deny we ever met:” the experiences of
academics with invisible disabilities in the neoliberal university. International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education, 36(4), 689–706.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2021.1885075
Flowers, J. (2021). COVID-19 and the Disinheritance of an Ableist World. International Journal
of Critical Diversity Studies, 4(1), 107–126.
https://doi.org/10.13169/intecritdivestud.4.1.0107
Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison. 2nd Vintage Books ed.
New York, Vintage Books
Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality: An introduction, volume I. Trans. Robert Hurley.
New York: Vintage, 95, 1-160
Garland-Thomson, R. (2014). The story of my work: How I became disabled. Disability Studies
Quarterly, 34(2), 1–18. https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/4254/3594
doi:10.18061/dsq.v34i2.4254
Gray, V. K. (2019). Queering time: the futurity of Jose Esteban Munoz in Monae's Dirty
Computer.
Grimes, S. (2020). Student suggestions for improving learning at university for those with
learning challenges/disability. In G. Crimmins (Ed.), Strategies for Supporting Inclusion
and Diversity in the Academy: Higher Education, Aspiration and Inequality (pp. 329-
352). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43593-
6_17
Hewitt, M. (2022). How Does a Foucauldian Genealogical Approach Enhance the Study of
Long-Term Care through a Critical Disability Lens? Societies (Basel, Switzerland), 12(3),
73-. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc12030073
Holmes, A. G. D. (2020). Researcher Positionality--A Consideration of Its Influence and Place in
Qualitative Research--A New Researcher Guide. Shanlax International Journal of
Education, 8(4), 1-10
43
Jain, S. L. (2007). Living in Prognosis: Toward an Elegiac Politics. Representations, 98(1),
77–92. https://doi.org/10.1525/rep.2007.98.1.77
Jung, K. E. (2002). Chronic Illness and Educational Equity: The Politics of Visibility. Feminist
Formations, 14(3), 178–200.
Kafer, A. (2013). Time for Disability Studies and a Future for Crips. In Feminist, Queer,
Crip (pp. 25–46). Indiana University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gz79x.6
Knight, W., Wessel, R. D., & Markle, L. (2018). Persistence to graduation for students with
disabilities: Implications for performance-based outcomes. Journal of College Student
Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 19(4), 362-380
Lin, J. (2020, March 20). Gov. Gavin Newsom orders all of California to shelter in place.
CalMatters. https://calmatters.org/health/coronavirus/2020/03/california-coronavirushalf-of-californians-gavin-newsom-donald-trump/
Lund, E. M., & Ayers, K. B. (2022). Ever-changing but always constant: "Waves" of disability
discrimination during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Disability and
health journal, 15(4), 101374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2022.101374
Lund, E. M., Forber-Pratt, A. J., Wilson, C., & Mona, L. R. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic,
stress, and trauma in the disability community: A call to action. Rehabilitation
Psychology, 65(4), 313
Mullaney, C. (2021, February 8). The shift online has finally made space for disabled students.
The Times Higher Education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/shiftonline-has-finally-made-space-disabled-students
Muñoz, J. E. (2019). Cruising utopia: The then and there of queer futurity. In Cruising Utopia,
10th Anniversary Edition. New York University Press.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Home Page, a part of the U.S. Department of
Education. (2019). https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=60
Parsloe, S. M., & Smith, E. M. (2022). COVID as a catalyst: shifting experiences of disability
44
and (mis)fitting in the college classroom. Communication Education, 71(3), 204–222.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2022.2078497
Pregnancy discrimination and pregnancy-related disability discrimination. US EEOC. (n.d.).
https://www.eeoc.gov/pregnancy-discrimination
Rodgers, J., Thorneycroft, R., Cook, P. S., Humphrys, E., Asquith, N. L., Yaghi, S. A., &
Foulstone, A. (2022). Ableism in higher education: the negation of crip temporalities
within the neoliberal academy. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(6), 1482–
1495. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2022.2138277
Saia, T., Nerlich, A. P., & Johnston, S. P. (2021). Why Not the “New Flexible”?: The Argument
for Not Returning to “Normal” After COVID-19. Rehabilitation Counselors and
Educators Journal, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.52017/001c.28332
Samuels, E., & Freeman, E. (2021). Introduction: Crip temporalities. South Atlantic Quarterly,
120(2), 245-254.
Sarrett, J. (2020, November 19). Language matters: Ableism in everyday language. Medium.
https://sarrettspeaks.medium.com/language-matters-ableism-in-everyday-language1fc18b374b2d
Serhan, D. (2020). Transitioning from face-to-face to remote learning: Students’ attitudes and
perceptions of using Zoom during COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of
Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 335-342.
Shew, A. (2023). Against Technoableism: Rethinking Who Needs Improvement (A Norton Short).
WW Norton & Company.
Shew, A. (2020). Let COVID-19 expand awareness of disability tech. Nature (London),
581(7806), 9–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01312-w
Stewart, D. L. (2017). Producing ‘docile bodies’: disciplining citizen-subjects.
International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(10), 1042–1046. https://doiorg.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.1080/09518398.2017.1312598
45
Sutton, H. (2021), COVID-19 disproportionately impacts students with disabilities across all
sectors. Disability Compliance for Higher Education, 26: 9-9.
https://doi.org/10.1002/dhe.30973
Tremain, S. (2017). Foucault and feminist philosophy of disability. University of Michigan Press
Tremain, S. (2013). Introducing feminist philosophy of disability.
Violet, T. K. (2020). Foucault and Feminist Philosophy of Disability by Shelley L. Tremain
(review). International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 13(1), 174–177.
Wajcman J. (2013). Technofeminism. Wiley. April 7 2024.
Wells, R. S. (2023). Learning From COVID-19: Unchanging Inequality and Ideology in Higher
Education. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(13), 1655-1664.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221118278
Wexler, A. (2021). I hid my pregnancy while working remotely during the pandemic. It finally
put me on more equal footing with my male peers. Business Insider.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed a significant shift in higher education, particularly for students with disabilities (SWDs), necessitating a critical examination of the interplay between technology, feminism, and disability rights within educational practices. This thesis explores the impact of the pandemic on SWDs, focusing on the themes of technofeminism, disability subjectification, and power dynamics. Employing Foucauldian Discourse Analysis (FDA), the study unpacks the complex relationship between language, power, and knowledge, revealing how societal and institutional pressures can marginalize SWDs. The concept of "crip time" is introduced to challenge normative structures of time and productivity, advocating for a more flexible and accommodating approach to education. The research identifies attitudinal barriers that persist despite improvements in inclusion and proposes solutions to enhance the educational experience for SWDs. It also highlights the potential regression in accessibility and inclusivity as institutions return to in-person instruction post-pandemic, arguing for the retention of accommodations and adaptations that have proven beneficial. The study concludes by advocating for systemic educational reform, emphasizing the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework, the inclusion of disabled voices in decision-making, and the implementation of trauma-informed and intersectional frameworks to address systemic ableism. By doing so, it aims to contribute to the ongoing dialogue in the literature and to challenge traditional hierarchies and binaries within academia, promoting a liberatory philosophy of education that challenges the status quo.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Who’s taking care of our graduate students? The impact of the onboarding process for first-generation students transitioning into graduate school during the COVID-19 pandemic
PDF
Planting the seeds of change: a journey of resilience and challenges faced by men of color in community colleges
PDF
Well-being and healing as resistance: testimonios of Latina students’ arrebatos in California community colleges
PDF
Intent vs. impact: exploring how community-based organizations support Latino/a/e students through their educational journeys
PDF
Underrepresented students with disabilities transitioning into a 4-year university
PDF
Breaking the silence: testimonios of undocumented Latino men of color students navigating higher education in California
PDF
And I'm bring'n my kid's too: an examination of barriers to success for Single Mother Scholars of Color transferring from Los Angeles Community Colleges to 4-year universities
PDF
"Sino ka ba?" The impact of community gatherings on Pilipinx American students' identity formation and sense of belonging in higher education
PDF
Kākoʻo kaunaloa i ka ʻimi naʻauao: supporting determined perseverance in seeking education
PDF
Navigating the unknown: uplifting the experiences of mixed-status families in higher education
PDF
Testimonios of part-time enrolled Latina students: the challenges and experiences at a Hispanic-serving California community college
PDF
Culturally responsive advising in regards to Native American college students
PDF
The influence and role of social connections on international students' acculturation and sense of belonging
PDF
Humanizing career development for international graduate students: an exploration of career development support offered by a higher education institution
PDF
The use and perceptions of experimental analysis in assessing problem behavior of public education students: the interview - informed synthesized contingency analysis (IISCA)
PDF
Role of education system in supporting students and their families who identify as mixed-documentation status
PDF
An autoethnography: examining the association between maladaptive eating behaviors and the identity of a female Chinese international student
PDF
Ethnic studies as critical consciousness and humanization
PDF
Learning in the workplace: investigating perceived workload, work motivation, and choice independence in the construction industry
PDF
Improving career development: utilization of self-authorship in STEM career advising
Asset Metadata
Creator
Diaz, Alexis Anissa
(author)
Core Title
Foucault's utopia: analyzing technofeminism, disability subjectification, and power within pandemic pedagogy
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Master of Education
Degree Program
Education Counseling
Degree Conferral Date
2024-08
Publication Date
09/12/2024
Defense Date
06/28/2024
Publisher
Los Angeles, California
(original),
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
ableism,Disability,Foucauldian discourse analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,pandemic pedagogy,subjectification,systemic educational reform,universal design for learning
Format
theses
(aat)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Bañuelos, Sheila (
committee chair
), Meza, Kevin Anthony (
committee member
), Ocampo, Atheneus (
committee member
)
Creator Email
aadiaz@usc.edu;alexisadiaz17@yahoo.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC11399ASZT
Unique identifier
UC11399ASZT
Identifier
etd-DiazAlexis-13523.pdf (filename)
Legacy Identifier
etd-DiazAlexis-13523
Document Type
Thesis
Format
theses (aat)
Rights
Diaz, Alexis Anissa
Internet Media Type
application/pdf
Type
texts
Source
20240918-usctheses-batch-1212
(batch),
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
ableism
Foucauldian discourse analysis
pandemic pedagogy
subjectification
systemic educational reform
universal design for learning