{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05572755417956656, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026006191950464396, 'mean_word_length': 5.1915708812260535, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Voice, post-structural representation and the subjectivity of ‘included’ students

Aligned with the broader movement from structuralism to the post-structuralisms [Lather, P. 2013. “Methodology-21: What Do We Do in the Afterward?” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 26 (6): 634–645; St. Pierre, E. A. 2009. “Afterword: Decentering Voice in Qualitative Inquiry.” In Voice in Qualitative Inquiry: Challenging Conventional, Interpretive, and Critical Conceptions in Qualitative Research, edited by A. Y. Jackson and L. A. Mazzei, 221–236. London: Routledge; St. Pierre, E. A. 2013. “The Posts Continue: Becoming.” International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 26 (6): 646–657], research in disability studies for the past two decades has found ‘the potholes’ [Miller, L., J. B. Whalley, and I. Stronach. 2012. “From Structuralism to Poststructuralism.” In Research Methods in the Social Sciences, edited by B. Somekh and C. Lewin. London: SAGE] of disability rights scholarship. In this paper, I offer a critical research framework in the field of disability studies in education that is theoretical, political and personal. Concentrating on the positioning of disability, I draw on the methodological tools of post-structural representation, subjectivity and constructivist grounded theory to study how discursive practices within (and around) secondary schools shape ‘included’ disabled subjects. In the paper I develop this framework and then demonstrate its application in ongoing research that critically counters the conventions that marginalize particular students in schools.