CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 186Disability Rights and RepresentationInclusion and Disability in Education and SportDisability Education and Employment

Who May Be Literate? Disability and Resistance to the Cultural Denial of Competence

Kliewer, Christopher, Biklen, Douglas, Kasa-Hendrickson, Christi·2006·American Educational Research Journal
DOI 10.3102/00028312043002163
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Through a critical interpretivist frame, the authors use ethnography and archives to examine themes associated with society’s ongoing denial of literate citizenship for people with perceived intellectual disabilities. They link this denial to the experiences of other devalued and marginalized groups to challenge the common perception that citizenship in the literate community is an organic impossibility for people defined as intellectually disabled. The authors present four themes of literate disconnection and, in the conclusion, ponder the moral shift necessary to craft a science of literacy for all.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/00028312043002163

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Assuming dis/ability is an immutable fact disguises the social processes that position children of color as less than, making them more likely to be labeled with a dis/ability, and ignores the ways society dis/ables many people.

    “In this case, assuming dis/ability is an immutable fact disguises the social processes that position children of color as less than making them more likely to be labeled with a dis/ability and ignores the ways society dis/ables many people (Kliewer, Biklen, and Kasa-Hendrickson, 2006).”

    From Conceptualizing color-evasiveness: using dis/ability critical race theory to expand a color-blind racial ideology in education and society (2017) · cites this paper as Kliewer, Biklen, and Kasa-Hendrickson, 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kliewer, C., Biklen, D., & Kasa-Hendrickson, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Northern Iowa (US)
  • Syracuse University (US)
  • Chapman University (US)
ORCID
Biklen, Douglas
Venue
American Educational Research Journal
Publisher
American Educational Research Association (AERA)
Published
2006-01
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
163-192
ISSN
  • 0002-8312 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1011
DOI
10.3102/00028312043002163
OpenAlex
W2076303266
Cited by
186
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 19
FWCI
15.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • American Educational Research Journal (publishedVersion)
  • UNI ScholarWorks (University of Northern Iowa) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Inclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Education and Employment
Keywords
intellectual disability, literacy, marginalization, inclusive literacy

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