CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 218Disability Rights and RepresentationInclusion and Disability in Education and SportInclusive Education and Diversity

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A social relational model of disability: a theoretical framework for special needs education?

Reindal, Solveig Magnus·2008·European Journal of Special Needs Education
DOI 10.1080/08856250801947812
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper discusses various approaches to the phenomenon of disability in relation to special needs. Ever since disability researchers launched the social model of disability and criticised the field of special education for preserving an understanding of disability in accord with a medical model, the special education field has been in a state of crisis. The implication of this has been the embarrassment of talking about categories and levels of functional difficulty; as well as diagnoses, all of which enable individual assessments necessary for building the IEPs (Individual Educational Plans) and child‐centred teaching within special needs education. The challenge for special needs theorists is to consider the critique of the orthodoxy of special needs education and its understanding of disability, yet at the same time to develop an understanding of disability that can serve as a departure point for working in the field of special needs education. This implies an understanding of the phenomenon of disability, identifying pupils’ needs without contributing to the negative effects that often have come about in the wake of classification, categorisation and labelling in education. The present paper argues for a social relational model of disability as a platform for the enterprise of special needs education. The rationale for the social relational model of disability is that it better conforms to the morality of inclusion because the main issue of the social model, oppression, is not obliterated.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08856250801947812

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 50 references

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Bury , M. 1996 . “ Defining impairment and disability: Challenges and responses ” . In Exploring the divide: Illness and disability , Edited by: Barnes , C. and Mercer , G. 17 – 39 . Leeds : Disability Press .
  2. Clausen , H. , Kirkebæk , B. and Sætersdal , B. 1998 . Fortelling, konstruksjon og mennesker med funksjonshemming [Narration, construction and people with disabilities] , Oslo : Tano Aschehoug .
  3. Collin , F. 1997 . Social reality , London : Routledge .
  4. Kirkebæk , B. 2001 . “ Om omsorgens ulyst og det generelle ubehag ” . In Omsorgens tvetydighe [The ambivalence of care] , Edited by: Ruyter , K.W. and Vetlesen , A.J. 105 – 27 . Oslo : Gyldendal Akademiske forlag .
  5. NOU . 2003:16 . I f⊘rste rekke. Forsterket kvalitet i en grunnopplæring for alle [In the front range. Strengthened quality for a basic education for all] , Oslo : State Administration Service .
  6. Reindal , S.M. 1998 . Disability, personal autonomy and the subject ‐ a dilemma in special needs education? , Oslo : University of Oslo, Department of Special Needs Education .
  7. Reindal , S.M. 2007 . Funksjonshemming, kroppen og subjektet noen grunnlagsproblemer innenfor spesialpedagogikk [Disability, body and the subjects: Some fundamental questions within special needs education] , Bergen : Fagbokforlaget .
  8. Simonsen , E. 1999 . “ Intelligens, moral og rasehygiene [Intelligence, morality and eugenics] ” . In Etikk, genetikk og spesialpedagogikk: Seminarrapport kringsjå [Ethics, genethics and special needs education: Seminar report Kringsjå] , Edited by: Simonsen , E. and Kirkebæk , B. Oslo : Unipub .
  9. Skrtic , T.M. , ed. 1995b . Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity , New York : Teachers College Press .
  10. Solvang , P. , Froestad , J. and Söder , M. 2000 . Funksjonshemning, politikk og samfunn [Disability, politics and society] , Oslo : Gyldendal akademisk .
  11. Universitetet I Oslo Institutt for Spesialpedagogikk . 2004 . Spesialundervisning som ledd i tilpasset opplæring notat til utdannings‐ og forskningsdepartementet [Special education as adapted education: Report to the Department of Education and Research] , Oslo : Institutt for spesialpedagogikk .
  12. White Paper No. 30 . 2003–4 . Kultur for læring [Culture for learning] , Oslo : Ministry of Education .

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Reindal, S. M.
Affiliations
Education and Intercultural Studies
Corresponding author
Reindal, Solveig Magnus
ORCID
Reindal, Solveig Magnus
Venue
European Journal of Special Needs Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2008-03-17
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
135-146
ISSN
  • 0885-6257 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-591X
DOI
10.1080/08856250801947812
OpenAlex
W2040668848
Cited by
218
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
FWCI
15.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
European Journal of Special Needs Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Social Sciences › Education › Inclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
  • Social Sciences › Education › Inclusive Education and Diversity
Keywords
social model of disability, medical model of disability, special education, social relational model of disability, disability classification, individualized education program, inclusion, oppression

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review