Gregor Wolbring and Sophya Yumakulov: Education through an Ability Studies Lens

Abstract:The purpose of this article is to engage with ability expectations evident in the education setting. The article exposes the reader to the academic field of ability studies which investigates how all kind of ability expectation (want stage) and ableism (need stage) hierarchies and preferences come to pass and the impact of such hierarchies and preferences on human-human, human-animal and human-nature relationships. We provide quantitative data on the ability expectation sentiment of children in the education setting from 1851-2014, using the NYT as a source and discuss the future impact of changing ability expectations including the ability expectation that humans enhance themselves beyond the species-typical for the education system (section 3). We furthermore engage with the meaning of the term learning disability (LD) conceptually providing some history of the meaning and appearance of the term LD within North America and we discuss the future of the term LD through the lens of changing ability expectations (section 4). We posit that the ability studies framework allows for a new community of practice bringing together people and ideas from disability studies and other fields in an innovative way, generating knowledge that will permit to deal with the ever changing societal challenges of ability expectation oppressions experienced by various social groups and to tackle the issue of ability expectation governance, ability privilege and ability power within and outside of the education setting.

Keywords: learning disability, ableism, ability studies, education, ability privilege, ability power, ability expectation oppression, enhancement

Table of Content

1. Introduction
2. Ability Expectation and Ableism
3. Ability expectation sentiment of children in the education setting 1851-2014
4. Case Study: LD through an Ability Studies lens
5. Conclusion
6. Literature

1. Introduction: Disabled People and Education

A 1853 New York Times article thematized the power of knowledge (New York Times, 1853) and the exclusiveness of knowledge  and its use to oppress the ones who lack the knowledge  (New York Times, 1853).  Education is seen as a right in and of itself and essential for realizing other human rights (Burke & Wolbring, 2010a). It is part of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and seen as a prerequisite for health, employment, gender equality, environmental conservation, economic security and democracy (Burke & Wolbring, 2010a). The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has education as one of its focuses whereby it covers Education for All (EFA), Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), Education for Human Rights (EHR), Inclusive Educations (IE) and Adult Education (AE) (Burke & Wolbring, 2010a)
To gain equitable access to education is a long time demand by disabled people[1], their families and organization of disabled people. The UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities outlines various actions that should be taken to achieve equitable level of education for disabled people such as “fostering at all levels of the education system, including in all children from an early age, an attitude of respect for the rights of persons with disabilities” (United Nations, 2007).  Article 24 solely focuses on the issue of access to education, that there is a right of disabled people to education and that “States Parties shall ensure an inclusive education system at all levels and life-long learning” (United Nations, 2007).  However this right is still contested and debates still focus on the right to an inclusive education and what inclusive education really means (e.g. see Vasagar, 2011).  
The purpose of this article is to engage with ability expectations evident in the education setting exposing the reader to the lens of ability studies. In section two we expose the reader to the concepts of ability expectation and ableism and the academic field ability studies and outline the similarities and differences between the academic fields of ability studies and disability studies both of which engage with ability expectations. In part three we showcase the utility of the ability studies lens by providing quantitative data on the ability expectation sentiment of children in the education setting from 1851-2014, using the NYT as a source  and discuss the future impact of changing ability expectations including the ability expectation that humans enhance themselves beyond the species-typical for the education system. In part four we engage with the meaning of the term learning disability (LD) conceptually through an ability studies lens and discuss the future of the term LD through the lens of changing ability expectations. We conclude in part five with an outlook what the findings might suggest for the future of who will be labelled as learning disabled and the functioning of the education system.

2. Ability Expectation and Ableism

The term ableism was coined by the disabled people’s rights movement in the UK and North America to indicate the cultural preference for species-typical physical, mental, neuro and cognitive abilities which was/is often followed by the disablement/disablism of people who are judged as lacking required physical, mental, neuro or cognitive abilities. This form of ableism is a key lens used in the academic field of disability studies (Campbell, 2009; Goodley, 2014; Wolbring, 2012c) . However the premise of this article is that there is more to ableism then how it was developed by the disabled people rights community. Every individual, household, community, group, sector, region, and country cherishes and promotes numerous abilities and finds others non-essential; for example some individuals see the ability to buy a given product as essential, others don’t; some perceive the ability of living in an equitable society as important, while others don’t. Abilities are also measured between countries, for example, quality of education and employment rates (Wolbring, 2008c, 2012c) . Competitiveness is an ability expectation cherished by many individuals and countries. Exhibition of ability expectations or ableism’s can have positive (enablement/enablism) and negative (disablement/disablism) consequences. Sustainable development (World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), 1987) was put forward as an alternative positive ability expectation of how humans are to engage with their natural environment to reign in the as negative perceived ability expectation of uncontrolled consumption of natural resources. Proponents of the capability approach developed lists of abilities they think have positive consequences if implemented (Wolbring & Burke, 2013). However, ability expectations and ableisms are also used as a tool to justify the negative treatment (disablement/disablism) of others. Disabled people are one group that experience the negative use of ableism and indeed that why they coined the term. However ableisms are also used to disable other social groups. Women are disadvantaged in many settings because they are labelled as lacking the ability of ‘rationality’ (see e.g. Suffragette’s fight for women’s right to vote) (Wolbring, 2008c). The claim that women are irrational beings is still used (Cornia, 1997; Daily, 2014; Goldberg, 1968; Oakley & Roberts, 1981; Toffel, 1996) . Irrationality is used as a tool to discredit one’s opponents in many discourses (see for example (Osborne, 2013; van Montagu, 2013)). Having certain abilities is having power. A 1853 NYT article [2] thematized that power comes with the ability to obtain knowledge. Having power allows one also to influence what abilities are seen as essential and how to treat and label people who do not have the ‘essential’ abilities(Wolbring & Diep, accepted). Indeed the disability studies field is based on the assumption that others labelled disabled people within a medical framework in order to be able to neglect the social disablement people labelled s impaired experience. Other fields also do so although they do not explicitly use the term ableism e.g. racism is often justified that one ethnic group is less cognitive able than another (Wolbring, 2008c) and people fighting racism try to question all kind of stereotypes linked to the oppressed groups including ability linked stereotypes(Gonzales, Blanton, & Williams, 2002). A gendered discussion around ability stereotypes exists (Appel, Kronberger, & Aronson, 2011; Kelso & Brody, 2014; Martinot, Bagès, & Désert, 2012) . Having abilities is also the portal to access privileges such as income, political influence and employment (Wolbring, 2014). Certain abilities are seen as essential for one being able to participate in democracy (Schmoker, 2008; Wolbring, 2012d)   and to obtain citizenship in the 21st century (Jackson, 2008; Wolbring, 2012a) . Ability privilege can play itself out within traditionally defined social groups (e.g. race, gender, class) however in general it is linked to the ability-have and ability not-have dichotomy (Wolbring, 2014). The above mentioned right to vote is one example of male privilege being justified by linking it to an ability namely the ability of rationality and where male have the power to decide who exhibits rationality and declaring that women are not rational; in this case women experience ability expectation oppression.  

The framework of Ability Studies

Disability Studies is an academic field that investigates and questions the disablement/ disablism experienced by people labelled as impaired because they lack certain physical, neuro, mental and cognitive abilities (Ayim, 1997; F. K. Campbell, 2008; Goodley, 2014; Hehir, 2002; Overboe, 2007) . It investigates biopolitics and biopower (McRuer & Johnson, 2014; Saltes, 2013; Waldschmidt, 2006; Wolframe, 2013) in relation to people labelled as impaired and double discriminations such as racism and disablism experienced by people labelled as impaired (Beratan, 2006; F. A. K. Campbell, 2008; Chandler, 2013; Pieper & Mohammadi, 2014) .  We posit that the ableism engagement within disability studies is a sub-part of ability studies. Ability Studies is an academic field coined in 2008 (Wolbring, 2008c) conceptualized to investigate how all kind of ability expectation (want stage) and ableism (need stage) hierarchies and preferences come to pass and the impact of such hierarchies and preferences on human-human, human-animal and human-nature relationships (Wolbring, 2008c, 2012c, 2013, 2014). Ability studies moves the engagement with ability expectations and ableism beyond the boundaries of disability studies in various ways. For example disability studies is linked to people labeled as impaired whereby ability studies allows the investigation of body linked ability expectations of people not labelled as impaired in today’s discourses and the consequences of such ability expectations. One example is the ability expectation of the cognitive ability of rationality and the labelling of women as irrational. As such it allows to thematize how body linked ability expectations and ableisms are used to justify isms such as racism, castism, sexism and ageism (Wolbring, 2008c). It allows also investigating ability expectations and ableisms that are not per se linked to the human body such as the desire of people to consume certain products and the desire of companies and countries to be competitive. It allows investigating how ability expectations of humans impact nature and how ability differences between species impact how for example humans relate to animals (Wolbring, 2008c, 2012c, 2013, 2014) .  It is also different from disability studies that within ability studies the very meaning of ability expectation and ableism has been re-conceptualized to simply mean that one finds certain abilities as essential (Wolbring, 2008b). They do not have to have negative consequences. We mentioned the as positive perceived ability expectation of sustainable development earlier. The expectation by disabled people of being able to live in an equitable society as reflected in the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities is another example of expected positive consequences linked to certain ability expectations. This reconceptualization allows engaging with ability expectations that are seen as having positive consequences and to generate analyses of what ability expectations might be positive for whom under what circumstances. It encourages the study of how legal, ethical/moral (Wolbring, 2012b), biological, cultural and social constructs are exhibiting ability expectations and how such ability expectations and the actions they trigger lead to an ability based and ability justified understanding of oneself, one’s body and one’s relationship with others of one’s species, other species and one’s environment (Wolbring, 2008c). Ability Studies allows for inquiring into ability inequity and inequality (Wolbring, 2010a). The Ability Studies framework allows for a new community of practice bringing together people and ideas from disability studies and other fields in an innovative way, generating knowledge that will allow to deal with the ever changing societal challenges of ability expectations such as ability expectation oppressions experienced by various social groups and to tackle the issue of ability expectation governance (the need to control ability expectation dynamics and prevent negative consequences) and ability power. It allows for an impact analysis of ability creep and creeping ableism’s enabled by e.g. advancements in science and technology (Wolbring, 2013, 2014; Wolbring & Diep, accepted) . We believe the following dialogue from the computer game Deus Ex highlights nicely the fundamental importance of governing ability expectations exhibited by social entities from countries to individuals:
“Conversation between Alex D and Paul Denton
Paul Denton: If you want to even out the social order, you have to change the nature of power itself. Right? And what creates power? Wealth, physical strength, legislation — maybe — but none of those is the root principle of power.
Alex D: I’m listening.
Paul Denton: Ability is the ideal that drives the modern state. It's a synonym for one's worth, one's social reach, one's "election," in the Biblical sense, and it's the ideal that needs to be changed if people are to begin living as equals.
Alex D: And you think you can equalise humanity with biomodification?
Paul Denton: The commodification of ability — tuition, of course, but, increasingly, genetic treatments, cybernetic protocols, now biomods — has had the side effect of creating a self-perpetuating aristocracy in all advanced societies. When ability becomes a public resource, what will distinguish people will be what they do with it. Intention. Dedication. Integrity. The qualities we would choose as the bedrock of the social order” (Deus Ex: Invisible War (Wikiquote)).
Ability expectations are present and impact every facet of human life. Given the call for papers we focus in the next sections on the area of ability expectations of the education system.

3. Ability expectation sentiment of children in the education setting 1851-2014

Ableism as it relates to disabled people has been identified within the education system by many, especially disability studies scholars (Beratan, 2006; Ellman, 2012; Ferri & Connor, 2005; Hehir, 2002; McClean, 2006; Storey, 2007) with some using the ableism lens to question inclusive education (Runswick‐Cole, 2011) and segregated education (Cologon, 2013; Ferri & Connor, 2005; Rocco & Delgado, 2011) , on how to teach about ableism (Lalvani & Broderick, 2013; Livingston, 2000; McLean, 2005) . However education related ability expectations and ableisms are not only evident in regards to disabled people but ability expectations and ableisms are a general aspect of the education system. Education is one means through which one can obtain initial abilities such as reading. However, which abilities allow one to have power and gain privileges constantly change and, as such, education is not only seen as essential for children but also for adults (adult education (Darville, 1999) ). Indeed lifelong learning (Bhola, 2006; Dudziak, 2007; Liu & Constable, 2010; Walker, 2009) is seen as important due to the constant shift in ability expectations. Various aspects of the education system have been investigated using the ability studies lens (Burke & Wolbring, 2010b; Lucy Diep & Wolbring, 2013; Hutcheon & Wolbring, 2012; Wolbring, 2012a) . We present quantitative results of a study that investigated ability expectations of children within the education coverage of the NYT from 1851-2014. We furthermore present quantitative data on words used that imply certain ability capacities of students and words that reflect social issues student seen as not able enough often face.

Method

Analytical Framework

Newspapers and media at large play a decisive role in shaping how people view the world around them and how they react to it (Tynedal & Wolbring, 2013). Media both informs individuals and reflects public opinions and concerns, and when investigated through an ability studies lens, can reveal important shifts and developments in ability expectations. In this study a content analysis of  the New York Times (NYT) was performed to explore ability expectations of children as evident in the coverage of the topic of education from 1851-October 2014. We chose such a long period as the USA changed significantly in the last 150 years partly due to the two World Wars and Wall Street crash and changes in political systems in the World such as the appearance of communism to just name a few drivers. The NYT was chosen because it stated the importance of printed media as early as 1790 and because it’s a highly esteemed media source with over 136 Pulitzer Prizes to its credit more than any other news organization (Tynedal & Wolbring, 2013).
Data Source
To obtain quantitative data the NYT was investigated using the database “New York Times (1851-2009): ProQuest Historical Newspapers” (provided by the University of Calgary) for articles from 1851-1979 and the database “New York Times Late Edition (East Coast)” (ProQuest search engine provided by the University of Calgary) for articles from 1980-October 20, 2014). We downloaded 281 NYT articles from the time period of 1980-2014 that had the term “Child” in the title and the terms “education” and “ability” in the full text in one file using the batch download feature of the database. Using the same search terms for the time period of 1851-1950 we downloaded 174 relevant articles one by one. The initial hits were 551 however the database reproduced the full page of the NYT and not an individual article for that time which means that many articles were not relevant; for the timeframe from 1950-1979. All relevant articles from 1851-1979 had to undergo optical character recognition (OCR) using Adobe Acrobat software to transform the image file to a text file that allows for  searching the text for words. These article were uploaded as PDF files into ATLAS.ti© a qualitative analysis software.

Data Analysis

To obtain the keyword used to generate the quantitative data in table 1 to 3 we followed a two-step procedure. In step 1 we used the Word Cruncher function of ATLAS.ti© to extract a list of all the words present in the downloaded documents. We identified in this list (around 70000 words) a) words that indicate abilities linked to children and education; b) words that characterize the children related to abilities and c) words that indicate the situation of children in the education system that are not seen to be ‘normal’. In step 2 these identified words were used to generate quantitative data using the following procedure. The two databases covering the NYT already mentioned were searched for the keyword “education” in the title and “ability” and “children” in the text. These articles were then searched for the presence of the terms identified using the Word Cruncher function. To obtain a timeline of presence of the word cruncher identified terms the searches were divided into various time periods: 1851-1899 (for all the articles in the 19th century), 1900-1944 (a time of turmoil with two world wars), 1945-1959 (time after the end of the second world war and a long enough timespan to reach a full decade from where we could continue in decade steps) , 1960-1969, 1970-1979, 1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009 and 2010-2014 (ten year intervals). 

Limitation

Our data is not generalizable to the coverage of abilities related to children education in the USA or elsewhere. It also is not an exhaustive list of abilities as we generated the list from a limited set of articles namely that had child in the title and education and ability in the text.  

Results

Table 1 lists abilities that students were expected to exhibit.
Table 1 Abilities of students

Table 1 reveals that many ability expectations were covered to the same extend throughout the timespan covered such as writing, or being independent or the area of science. Some are covered for a long time to the same extend such as technology which was more or less the same mentioned in the 1940-1950’s than today. Some increased substantial after 1960 such as math. Some that went down over time were: having character, vocational training, being reliable and being mechanically able. There is also a quantitative difference with a variety of abilities mentioned constantly in more than 10% of the articles but many others hardly mentioned.  Table 1 showcase the power of an ability expectation lens. What we did not find as ability expectations is as revealing as what is mentioned and how often something is mentioned. One could use the newspaper data and compare it with other sources like government policy documents and compare the different types of sources as to ability expectations. One can also look at the data qualitatively to add more details to the story.  
Table 1 does only reveal ability expectations but one can use the ability studies lens also to investigate the imagery of a student in relation to ability expectations; e.g. do the newspapers label a student based on whether they fulfill or excel in ability expectations. Terms linked to these two aspects are covered in table 2.
Table 2 Characterization of the students and the situation of labelled students

Table 2 shows that terms identifying students that fall below or excel the norm are present from 1851-2014. As to terms used to write about the ones not meeting ability expectations one can identify changes in language over time such as the decrease in use of the terms retarded, cripple, defect or handicapped. However other terms took their place in the last 30 years such as disorder, mental and developmental. Our findings suggest that terms used to indicate falling short of expectations change but that the NYT continuously labels people as not fitting ability expectations. This fits with the high % of articles that use the terms achievement and tests (table 1). Interestingly terms such as people with disabilities/disabled people are virtually absence as are the terms children with disabilities/disabled children. The term disability by itself is present but when used the term is linked to a product such as disability pension and not a student. As to terms used for people exceeding ability expectations many of them are used from 1851-2014 with little change such as gifted and some are used more in recent times such as smart. The term ‘normal’ was used throughout with it being used with mostly the same frequency since 1980.
In table 2 we also list ability related terms that would indicate coverage of the social situation or social issues faced by the ‘not normal’ students. Some terms had a peak in the 1960-1979 area such as disadvantaged others increased over time such as segregated and some fluctuated but did overall not change a lot for decades such as equity.  However in general the social situation faced by the ones labelled as not normal were not very visible period independent of what term was used; for example the ability to experience integration was only mentioned in 2.86% of the articles from 2010-2014 and actually went down since the 1960 where it was at 20% indicating that the reader of the NYT today might not think that the ability to be integrated is still an issue.  

Discussion Future of changing ability expectations: impact on the educational setting

Table 1 and 2 expose that ability expectations as evident in the coverage of education constantly change that ‘to achieve’ is an important ability and that labelling people not fitting the ability expectation norm is part of this reporting. What does this mean for the future? Expectations regarding particular valued abilities continue to change. Being computer and internet literate is a recent ability that is increasingly expected which is also revealed in the table 1. In some countries it is an increasing belief that everyone should have education beyond high school (Weintraub, 2005). For the USA the finding in table 1 that the term academic became increasingly visible between 1851 and 1960 and stated high since the 1960’s indicates the expectations that students go further academically after high school whether through college or University.  ‘Authentic intellectual skills’ such as critical thinking and problem solving, the ability to argue, analyzing arguments of others, conducting research and the ability to invent or synthesize information are other expected abilities today in same societal settings (Schmoker, 2008). Others are the ability to compete, connect, and cooperate on an international scale, to have knowledge of foreign languages and cultures and to analyze and solve problems, recognize patterns and similarities, and communicate and interact with other people, especially those who do not share the worker's culture (Jackson, 2008).
At least for so called developed countries it seems that people have to exhibit at an ever increasing speed new and ‘better’ abilities; an ability expectation creep is present. We posit that there seems to be a big difference in ability expectations between parents and children in many cultures. In Western Countries many of the abilities grandparents have, are seen as irrelevant by their grandchildren and are lost to these grandchildren and as to the abilities grandchildren have, many grandparents have no desire to learn.
However there is another paradigm shift underway. So far ability expectations and how to teach abilities in the education setting did not include abilities that are not in sync with species-typical abilities. However scientific processes and technological products are envisioned to increasingly give the human body physical, neuro, cognitive and mental abilities that are not species-typical(Ball & Wolbring, 2014). With these body intervention abilities comes the ability to changes one’s ability expectations of the body drastically. Hind in the Observer (UK) (Hind, 2005) writes, “One pundit on businesspundit.com cheers, 'Competitive advantage will come not just from managing knowledge generated within your company, but by cogniceutically managing the ability of your employees to learn, think, be creative....” At least 40 potential cognitive enhancers are currently in clinical development (Economist, 2004). These cognitive enhancers are envisioned to impact people so far seen as normal and people labelled as impaired because the fall below species-typical ability expectations (Ball & Wolbring, 2014)
Recently, the Millennium Project, a global think tank, evaluating what education could look like in the year 2030, concluded that national programs for improving collective intelligence; just-in-time knowledge and learning; individualized education; portable artificial intelligence devices and smarter than human computers will be abilities expected in 2030 (Millennium Project, 2007). The Millennium Project envisioned these changes to come partly through external technological advancement but also through direct modifications of the student’s body such as genetically increasing intelligence, chemistry for brain enhancement and artificial microbes enhancing intelligence. Indeed cognitive enhancement are increasingly discussed including the use in the education setting (Ball & Wolbring, 2014). Any of the 19 components of the Millennium project vision on education, if employed in the future, will impact the landscape of educational delivery, the meaning of education, and the design of education tools impacting students, teachers, education institutions and education-related decision makers alike. A recent poll by the journal Nature revealed that 79% felt that healthy people should be allowed to take cognitive enhancers and  one-third of respondents said they would feel pressure to give cognition-enhancing drugs to their children (Maher, 2008). 
What could the future hold for ability education of the future? Some think about a post-literal world (Dunleavy, 2009). The USA National Endowment for the Arts report To Read or not to read concludes that reading skills and levels go down in the USA with multitasking and visual media being two factors (National Endowment for the Arts, 2007). A recent study suggests that a multitasker cannot focus as well, and therefore to multitask might be harmful (Tamkins, 2009). With video blogs, video and podcasts, with video messages and other media tools it might become more important to verbalize one’s thoughts. We might increase the need for oral capabilities as part of learning which would make blindness or dyslexia less of an issue (West, 1997) but might pose challenges to other students who are not very good in verbalizing. How might future versions of non-invasive brain machine interfaces (Lucy Diep & Wolbring, 2013) that allow for thought control (Neurogaming conference, 2013) circumventing speech  decrease  the importance of the ability to speak? It might be more important to have the ability to control the device. With travel being expensive for many in academia it might be essential to learn new ways to relate, to build relationships, to communicate besides the traditional in room face-to-face interaction. What if research in an artificial hippocampus (a chip that replaces the memory part in our brain and becomes the repository of our memory) is successful (Berger, 2008)? What type of learning would one still need? Would we need totally different forms of learning? In the 2009 policy piece “Human Performance Study” written for the Directorate General for internal policies, Policy Dept. A: Economic and Scientific Policy Science and Technology Options Assessments of the European Parliament, one can find many examples of envisioned, appearing or already existing enhancements (Coenen et al., 2009). Many abilities seen as essential today might not be essential in the future and new abilities might become essential (of course one qualifier is that people would have to have access to them). ‘Therapeutic assistive devices’ given to the ‘impaired’ will generate many new abilities. Therefore the ‘impaired’ might set the trend of new needed abilities and influence the direction of obsolescence of existing abilities (Wolbring, 2010c). 
This section highlighted the ever present ability creep. Question is what will happen to people who cannot fulfill these new abilities?  In the next section we analyze the power of expecting certain abilities as an outcome of education through the term “learning disability” (LD). Section four starts by outlining the history of the term LD within the North American context and the visibility of the term in the NYT and the Globe and Mail, a Canadian newspaper. We then use a more literal meaning of the term (unable to learn a certain ability) to highlight cultural aspects of labelling certain abilities as essential to learn. We use the literal meaning of the term to investigate which abilities might be seen as essential to learn in the future especially based on emerging scientific processes and technological products and the ability expectation and ableism creeps that are linked to such advancements.

4. Case Study: Learning Disabilities through an Ability Studies lens

The history of “Learning Disabilities”

Christine Sleeter’s 1987 book chapter, Why is there learning disabilities? A critical analysis of the birth of the field in its social context outlined her interpretation of the early history and the coming to be of the term LD (LD) (Sleeter, 1987). Sleeter highlighted that students in LD classes were overwhelmingly white and middle class during the category's first 10 years and how “white middle class parents and educators who saw their failing children as different from poor or minority children pressed for the creation and use of this category” (Sleeter, 1986)p.50. The author classifies LD as a constructed category (Sleeter, 1986, 1987, 1998) generated in respond to certain political and social goals such as raising standards in schools for the purpose of the USA staying competitive against the Soviet Union after the Soviet Union launch the Sputnik (Sleeter, 1986, 1987) . The idea here is that the political Anti- Communism establishment in the USA found in unacceptable that the USA was beaten in putting a satellite into space by the Soviet Union. It was felt that there has to be a problem in the education system, as to what is expected from students in schools. Accordingly expectations were raised which led to the situation that students who were before seen as ‘normal’ all by a sudden found themselves as not fitting ability expectations anymore. As these students did not had a label before a new label was coined in North America namely the term “LD”. The discourse around LD in North America is a nice case study how one obtains a new label when one does not fit changing ability expectations. The dynamic evident around LD could repeat itself by generating new impairment labels for people who do not fit future new ability expectations.    

Method

Data Source
To obtain quantitative data for the use of the term LD in North American newspapers we investigated two newspapers that are accessible for a long time span. The NYT was investigated using the database “New York Times (1851-2009): ProQuest Historical Newspapers” (provided by the University of Calgary) for articles from 1851-1979 and the database “New York Times Late Edition (East Coast)” (ProQuest search engine provided by the University of Calgary) for articles from 1980-October 20, 2014).
The Globe and Mail is the only Canadian newspaper with national reach till the National Post joined this category in 1999. It was investigated using the database “Globe and Mail (1844-2010): ProQuest Historical Newspapers” (provided by the University of Calgary) for articles from 1851-1979 and the database “Canadian Newsstand Complete a database of 300 Canadian newspapers that covered the years from 1980-2014 (ProQuest search engine provided by the University of Calgary) for articles from 1980-October  20, 2014).
Data Analysis
The utilized databases were simply searched for the term “LD” in the full text and the results were divided into the same time periods as described in section three Ability expectation sentiment of children in the education setting 1851-2014 for comparability with the exception that for the Globe and Mail the first time period was 1844-1899 and not 1851-1899 as used for the NYT. 
LD: Its origin in North America
Newspapers are a good indicator of whether a term has moved into the public domain.
Table 3: appearance of the terms “LD” within the NYT from 1851-2014

Table 4: appearance of the terms “LD” within the Globe and Mail from 1844-2014

Tables 3 and 4 highlight that the term “LD was not present in the NYT and the Globe and Mail before 1960.  That the term “LD” does not show up in the two newspapers before 1960 seems to indicate that it was not used broadly up to that time or not at all. This might explain why Sam Kirk is credited to having coined the first official definition of LD for the U.S. in the 1960’s  (Sleeter, 1987). Title VI of Public Law 89-750, Elementary and Secondary Education Act Amendments of 1966, directed the US Commissioner of Education to establish within the Office of Education the National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children. This committee headed by Sam Kirk coined in 1968 the first official definition of LD in North America (Kirk, 1968). The definition was the following:
“Children with special learning disabilities exhibit a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using spoken or written language. These may be manifested in disorders of listening, thinking, talking, reading, writing, spelling, or arithmetic. They include conditions which have been referred to as perceptual handicaps, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, developmental aphasia, etc… they do not include learning problems which are due primarily to visual, hearing, or motor handicaps, to mental retardation, emotional disturbance or to environmental deprivation. ”  (Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, 1981)
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), uses for the most part this definition with the exception that ‘disorders of’ is replaced by ‘imperfect ability to’, ‘handicap’ is replaced by ‘disability’ and ‘environmental deprivation’ is expanded and changed to ‘environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage’. 
“[A] disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which disorder may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. Such term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. Such term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.” (20 U.S.C. § 1401 (30)) (Cortiella & Horowitz, 2014).
And this medical understanding of LD is still used today.
The report “The State of Learning Disabilities: Facts, Trends and Emerging Issues” states,
“The DSM uses the term “specific learning disorder.” Revised in 2013, the current version, DSM-5, broadens the previous definition to reflect the latest scientific understanding of the condition. The diagnosis requires persistent difficulties in reading, writing, arithmetic, or mathematical reasoning skills during formal years of schooling. Symptoms may include inaccurate or slow and effortful reading, poor written expression that lacks clarity, difficulties remembering number facts, or inaccurate mathematical reasoning. Current academic skills must be well below the average range of scores in culturally and linguistically appropriate tests of reading, writing, or mathematics. The individual’s difficulties must not be better explained by developmental, neurological, sensory (vision or hearing), or motor disorders and must significantly interfere with academic achievement, occupational performance, or activities of daily living. Specific learning disorder is diagnosed through a clinical review of the individual’s developmental, medical, educational, and family history, reports of test scores and teacher observations, and response to academic interventions (Cortiella & Horowitz, 2014).
That there is not much difference between the 1968 to today definition might suggest that there was not much movement in the definition over the years, however lively discussions over the definition are ongoing (Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, 1981; Mexico Child link Project, 2003; Strydom & du Plessis, 2000) . Criteria used to define people as learning disabled were and are still questioned (Reid Lyon, 2005; Rourke, 2005; Sleeter, 1986; Stanovitch, 2005) . The Learning Disabilities Association of Canada identified various problems including the middle-class phenomenon (Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, 1981).
“Certainly since 1968 the field of learning disabilities had been characterized by conflict and confusion, as the original focus and the term "LD" stretched to include in many cases any and all children who were underachieving for any reason. On the other hand, it is very possible that the “exclusion clause"[2] in the federal definition of LD] has had the effect of excluding from appropriate programs children with learning disabilities who have come from disadvantaged backgrounds. Often the learning problems of such children would be diagnosed only in terms of their deprived environment, and not looked at in the real context of physiological causes. Thus, learning disabilities have tended to become a middle-class phenomenon ~ while the child of the middle class would be diagnosed as having a LD, a child of the slums would automatically be considered deprived. Unfortunate also has been the designation of learning disabilities as solely an educational problem and not a medical or health problem.”
Recommendations from the report that provided the official definition of “LD” National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children to the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, Office of Education, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, First Annual Report on Handicapped Children  became part of the United States Public Law 91-320 and 94-142 mandating “Special Education” in the U.S. (Learning Disabilities Association of Canada, 1981).
The history of the timeframe around the term “LD” and the visibility of the terms in newspapers as outlined in this article is specific for North America as is the definition of “LD”. Lisa Pfahl and Justin Powell suggest that the term LD (lernbehindert) is used much longer in Germany (Pfahl & Powell, 2011). Given the description of the term by Pfahl and Powell suggests that what is called “learning disabled” (lernbehindert) in Germany is more in sync with the terms “intellectual disabled” or “mentally retarded” or “developmental disabled” and other similar words used in North America. Our findings also make it clear that the term LD in the North American setting is a medical one used to indicate a ‘disorder’ an ’impairment’ of people not fulfilling certain cognitive ability expectations. The term is not used to indicate that the person is experiencing disablement due to how the education system is set up. As such LD is used within the tradition of the medical model of disability and not the social model of disability. Given this premise of understanding the term LD and its history of how it came to pass what might the future hold for the term LD and who might be labelled as LD in the future?  

Discussion: Future of the term LD through a lens of changing ability expectations

The definition of LD is an arbitrary and at the same time strategic definition that according to (Sleeter, 1986) suited a particular group in the 1960’s. There are many abilities we are expected to learn as humans and different ones in different settings. All the abilities one is expected to have and cannot learn could be labelled as a LD if we as a society decide to label people in this way. Throughout history we see an ability creep where constant improvements of existing cherished abilities are demanded and new ability demands became the norm. Not being able to follow and adapt to this ability creep by fulfilling heightened or new ability expectations are seen as a failure of the person. Indeed the appearance of the LD definition in the 1960’s was the result of an ability expectation creep of students in school in response to the ability expectation of the USA of being competitive with the Soviet Union in space endeavors in the 1960’s (Sleeter, 1986, 1987) .  It is fair to assume that at different times people have been labeled as unable to learn what was seen as essential in a given societal framework. Hunter-gatherer societies, agrarian societies, industrial societies, knowledge-based societies and post-industrial societies all favor different abilities. A hunter/gatherer society would see a person as LD if the person could not learn to hunt and would not be able to use weapons or would not be able to remember which vegetation is poisonous or not suitable for consumption. An agrarian society would require less of an ability to learn how to use weapons for hunting but would require that one learns skills essential for farming such as how to use planting tools and learn about seeds. In an industrial society the abilities would have been how to operate machinery and generate tools, know how to manufacture. Today we have globally a mixture of societies with different ability needs and expectations and as such different forms of knowledge are important. In many places agrarian knowledge is still the predominant mode of knowledge needed. In many places traditional knowledge and abilities generated and used locally are needed and cannot be replaced easily with Western knowledge and abilities. This means globally we have a diversity of which abilities one is expected to learn. This means that people who are unable to learn any given ability might be seen as LD in one setting and ‘normal’ in another setting. Everyone who does not measure up could be labeled as LD, as unable to learn essential skills.
A creeping ableism/ableism creep that expects people to move beyond species-typical abilities through cognitive, neuro, mental and physical enhancements is increasingly evident(Ball & Wolbring, 2014; Wolbring, 2005; Wolbring & Diep, accepted) .What does the ableism creep mean for the label of LD?  We posit that every student without enhancement measures related to learning could be classified as LD and as such justifying the use of enhancement procedures for students. Of course people could reject the broadening of today’s LD definition but that would not solve their problem. Other labels competing with LD would be generated that would allow that new group to ask for support.  Indeed the history of the DSM is a case study in the constant generation of new disease labels.  Our accommodation system for students that are ability different from expectations is based on the student’s ability to link their difference to a medical diagnostic. The dynamic of the medicalization of the healthy (Wolbring, 2005, 2010b, 2012b, 2012c) that allows body ability enhancement interventions to be classified as a health care intervention with access to health dollars  - copies over to the area of education. One medicalizes missing abilities so that that new groups can benefit from the special education funding.
Article 24 – Education of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities(United Nations, 2007) asks that  “States Parties shall ensure an inclusive education system at all levels and lifelong learning”. The question is how a social and educational system can achieve this if it medicalizes people who do not have the abilities expected including the beyond species-typical enhancements?
Article 24 directs State Parties to ensure
The full development of human potential and sense of dignity and self-worth, and the strengthening of respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and human diversity;
The development by persons with disabilities of their personality, talents and creativity, as well as their mental and physical abilities, to their fullest potential;
Enabling persons with disabilities to participate effectively in a free society.
What does full human potential mean given the enhancement version of ability expectation? Does it mean the potential to exhibit certain abilities such as being productive or competitive? To what is a sense of dignity and self-worth linked? Could people who see themselves or seen by others as species-typical be seen as not worthy?  How is one best enabled to participate in a free society?  In many societies human potential, dignity, self-worth and participation are linked to the abilities one exhibits(Wolbring, 2012d). How can one feel self-worth if ones abilities are questioned; or ones understanding of what abilities are needed? As outlined before globally we have societies with various understanding of what abilities are needed. Who will decide which value systems of abilities are the right ones? Can different ability value systems live beside each other? One could say that the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) became necessary as the ableism value of species-typical functioning did not allow for the accommodation of the ‘sub species-typical’. What does that mean for the two ability value system beyond and not beyond species-typical? Sleeter (Sleeter, 1986) and others(Skrtic, 2005; Weintraub, 2005) ask what happens with the ones who do not measure up? Will it be seen as a waste to educate them? The 2003 Resolution of the Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative: point 6 seems to suggest that it’s seen as a burden that the expenditure for a ‘special education student’  is roughly double of that for a ‘regular education student’(Collaborative on Health and the Environment Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative Working Group, 2003). In a recent UK study 38 per cent of the 2000 British persons surveyed  believed that most people in British society see  disabled people to be a “drain on resources”(Scope, 2009). What does this herald for what is seen as ‘reasonable accomodation’ State parties are to ensure in education according to article 24 of the CRPD.
The dynamic around the appearance and use of LD within North America context highlights one problematic aspect of how ability expectations play themselves out and how ability expectations of a country and other dominant social groups that per se have nothing to do with education or abilities of a person can influence ability expectations of individuals and the education system as the tool that is to provide abilities seen as needed.  

5. Conclusion

This paper introduced the reader to the concepts of ability expectation, ability privilege, ability expectation oppression and ableism and the field of ability studies. The paper shows that ability studies allows one to generate a broad and foresight driven anticipatory ability expectation analysis and  that governance of ability expectations within and outside of the education setting is needed, an aspect missing from governance discourses so far (Lucy  Diep, Cabibihan, & Wolbring, 2014).  The article highlights that the definition of LD within the North American context is an arbitrary and at the same time strategic definition that suited a particular group in the 1960’s. The article outlines problem with a LD discourse and definition that focuses on the deficiency of the person, a discourse that cannot generate knowledge that analyses the broader picture of societal dynamics which in this case is about ableism, ability expectation oppression and ability privilege. The existing LD definition does not allow for a discourse around abilities, their cultural impact, and the impact of cultures on what abilities are desired.  The existing LD discourse does not allow looking at the impact of the societal dynamic of ability expectations on the educational setting.
Sleeter stated in 1986  “We need to shift our perspective from the failings of individuals or the inefficiencies of schools to the social context of schooling”   (Sleeter, 1986)p.54. Indeed the ability studies lens allows one to investigate the social construction of ability expectations and the role of different players in the social construction from individuals to powerful social groups to countries. Sleeter states further, “Rather than attempting to remake children to fit social needs, we must first give greater consideration to the possibility that society's expectations for children and society's reward structure for their performance may need remaking” (Sleeter, 1986)p.54. Indeed the lens of ability studies allows looking at the social dynamics and the impact of society’s ability expectations and what one should do.  However, Sleeters focus of remaking does not go far enough. One has to revamp our framing of social needs. As long as competitiveness, as in the measure of outperforming others in being more productive and more efficient, in being able to consume more, being stronger, faster... is a, if not the main social need, as long as this form of competitiveness is a proxy measure for a country’s or individual’s need to feel superior over another country or individual, embedding children into this dynamic is logical. It does not make sense to have reward structures for children that do not reflect social needs. The dynamic Sleeter described regarding how LD came to pass and why (Sleeter, 1986, 1987) made sense given the fact that for a country to outcompete another country seems often to be essential for the ‘self-esteem’ of the country and the regard its citizens have for their country.  Question is with the ever-increasing ability to modify body abilities through internal and external means breaching species-typical boundaries which social needs will dominate the narrative around these new abilities.  We are in for a continuous rat race for abilities made possible by internal and external body modifications  (Wolbring, 2008a) which will heavily impact the education system. We are in for an ability expectation and ableism creep. Question is whether this creep will lead to more ability expectation oppressions and the generation of new classifications for ability impaired people who cannot fulfill these new ability expectations, these new ability norms or whether we through the governance of ability expectations exhibit a greater ability diversity acceptance as so far.

6. Literature

Appel, M., Kronberger, N., & Aronson, J. (2011). Stereotype threat impairs ability building: Effects on test preparation among women in science and technology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 904-913.
Ayim, M. (1997). Crimes against the Deaf: The Politics of Ableism. Canadian Journal of Education, 22(3), 330-335.
Ball, N., & Wolbring, G. (2014). Cognitive Enhancement: Perceptions Among Parents of Children with Disabilities. Neuroethics, online first open access 1-20.
Beratan, G. D. (2006). Institutionalizing inequity: Ableism, racism and IDEA 2004. Disability Studies Quarterly, 26(2).
Berger, T. W. (2008). Implantable Biomimetic Electronics as Neural Prostheses for Lost Memory Function. 2008 International Conference on Intelligent User Interface A New Generation of User Interfaces.
Bhola, H. S. (2006). Adult and Lifelong Education for Poverty Reduction: A Critical Analysis of Contexts and Conditions. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, 52(3/4), 231-246. doi: 10.2307/29737078
Burke, B., & Wolbring, G. (2010a). Beyond Education for All: Using ableism studies lens and the BIAS FREE framework. Development, 53(4), 535-539.
Burke, B., & Wolbring, G. (2010b). Beyond Education for All: Using ableism studies lens and the BIAS FREE framework. Development (Rome), 53(4), 535-539.
Campbell, F. A. K. (2008). Exploring internalized ableism using critical race theory. Disability & Society, 23(2), 151-162.
Campbell, F. K. (2008). Refusing able (ness): a preliminary conversation about ableism. Paper presented at the M/C Journal.
Campbell, F. K. (2009). Contours of ableism: Palgrave Macmillan Basingstoke.
Chandler, E. (2013). Mapping difference: Critical connections between crip and diaspora communities. Critical Disability Discourse/Discours Critiques dans le Champ du Handicap, 5.
Coenen, C., Schuijff, M., Smits, M., Klaassen, P., Hennen, L., Rader, M., & Wolbring, G. (2009). Human Enhancement Study Science and Technology Options Assessment S T O A.
Collaborative on Health and the Environment Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative Working Group. (2003). The Resolution of the Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative:. Collaborative on Health and the Environment webpage. from http://www.healthandenvironment.org/?module=uploads&func=download&fileId=778
Cologon, K. (2013). Inclusion in education: towards equality for students with disability.
Cornia, R. D. (1997). Current use of battered woman syndrome: Institutionalization of negative stereotypes about women. UCLA Women's Law Journal, 8(1), 99-123.
Cortiella, C., & Horowitz, S. H. (2014). The state of learning disabilities: Facts, Trends and  Emerging Issues New York: National Center for Learning Disabilities. from http://www.ncld.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2014-State-of-LD.pdf
Daily, S. (2014, February 7). Japanese Women Boycott Sex With Any Man Who Votes For Tokyo's "Menstruating Women Are Irrational" Governor, Daily Star, p. online. Retrieved from http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/International/2014/Feb-07/246687-sex-strike-against-leading-tokyo-governor-candidate.ashx#axzz2sYz4XFQp
Darville, R. (1999). Knowledges of adult literacy: surveying for competitiveness. International Journal of Educational Development, 19(4-5), 273-285.
Diep, L., Cabibihan, J.-J., & Wolbring, G. (2014). Social robotics through an anticipatory governance lens. LNAI, 8755, 116-125.
Diep, L., & Wolbring, G. (2013). Who Needs to Fit in? Who Gets to Stand out? Communication Technologies Including Brain-Machine Interfaces Revealed from the Perspectives of Special Education School Teachers Through an Ableism Lens. Education Sciences, 3(1), 30-49.
Dudziak, E. A. (2007). Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning in Latin America: the challenge to build social sustainability. Information Development, 23(1), 43-47. doi: 10.11 77/0266666907075630
Dunleavy, D. (2009). Teaching in a Post-Literate World. Dunleavy's blog. http://ddunleavy.typepad.com/techcomm/2009/07/index.html
Economist, T. (2004, 2004 September 16). Reports Supercharging the brain. The Economist.
Ellman, L. (2012). Opening Eyes to the Blind: A Unit Plan that Confronts Ableism in a Standards-Based General Education Classroom. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 85(1), 15-22.
Ferri, B. A., & Connor, D. J. (2005). Tools of exclusion: Race, disability, and (Re)segregated education. Teachers College Record, 107(3), 453-474.
Goldberg, P. (1968). Are women prejudiced against women? Society, 5(5), 28-30.
Gonzales, P. M., Blanton, H., & Williams, K. J. (2002). The effects of stereotype threat and double-minority status on the test performance of Latino women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 659-670.
Goodley, D. (2014). Dis/ability studies: Theorising disablism and ableism: Routledge.
Hehir, T. (2002). Eliminating ableism in education. Harvard Educational Review, 72(1), 1-32.
Hind, J. (2005, 2005). What's the word, The Observer. Retrieved from http://observer.guardian.co.uk/magazine/story/0,,1534827,00.html
Hutcheon, E. J., & Wolbring, G. (2012). Voices of “disabled” post secondary students: Examining higher education “disability” policy using an ableism lens.
Jackson, A. (2008). High Schools in the Global Age. Educational Leadership, 65(8), 58-62.
Kelso, G. A., & Brody, L. R. (2014). Implicit Processes and Emotions in Stereotype Threat about Women’s Leadership. In J. Zheng (Ed.), Exploring Implicit Cognition: Learning, Memory, and Social Cognitive Processes: Learning, Memory, and Social Cognitive Processes (pp. 118-137). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.
Kirk, S. (1968). The National Advisory Committee on Handicapped Children. Exceptional Children, 34(7), 814-484.
Lalvani, P., & Broderick, A. A. (2013). Institutionalized Ableism and the Misguided “Disability Awareness Day”: Transformative Pedagogies for Teacher Education. Equity & Excellence in Education, 46(4), 468-483.
Learning Disabilities Association of Canada. (1981). Definition of Learning Disabilities Background Information. Learning Disabilities Association of Canada. from http://www.ldac-taac.ca/Defined/pdf/OldDef.pdf
Liu, Y., & Constable, A. (2010). ESD and lifelong learning: a case study of the Shangri-la Institute's current engagement with the Bazhu community in Diqing, China. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, 56(2/3), 271-285. doi: 10.2307/40928672
Livingston, K. (2000). When architecture disables: Teaching undergraduates to perceive ableism in the built environment. Teaching Sociology, 28(3), 182-191.
Maher, B. (2008). Poll results: look who's doping. Nature, 452, 674-675.
Martinot, D., Bagès, C., & Désert, M. (2012). French children’s awareness of gender stereotypes about mathematics and reading: When girls improve their reputation in math. Sex Roles, 66(3-4), 210-219.
McClean, M. (2006). Review of New Directions in Special Education: Eliminating Ableism in Policy and Practice. The Teachers College Record.
McLean, M. A. (2005). Learning and teaching about disability: the possibility of disestablishing ableism.
McRuer, R., & Johnson, M. L. (2014). Proliferating Cripistemologies. Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, 8(2), 149-170.
Mexico Child link Project. (2003). Learning Disability - definitions, origins, history. Mexico Child Linp Project webpage. from http://www.mexico-child-link.org/learning-disability-definition.htm
Millennium Project. (2007, 2007). State of the Future 2007: Education and Learning 2030. from http://www.millennium-project.org/millennium/Education-2030.html
National Endowment for the Arts, U. (2007). To Read or Not To Read A Question of National Consequence.
Neurogaming conference. (2013). NeuroGaming Conference and Expo. from http://www.neurogamingconf.com/
New York Times. (1853, Feb 19). Free Education and Industrial Schools--Lecture of Alexander Jones, New York Daily Times (1851-1857), p. 6.
Oakley, A., & Roberts, H. (1981). Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In A. Bryman & R. Burgess, B. (Eds.), Qualitative Research (Vol. 4, pp. 30-62). London, UK: SAGE.
Osborne, H. (2013). James Delingpole Leads Climate Change Sceptics in Trashing IPCC's 'Sexed-up' Report. from http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ipcc-climate-change-report-skeptics-royal-society-509664
Overboe, J. (2007). Vitalism: Subjectivity Exceeding Racism, Sexism, and (Psychiatric) Ableism. Wagadu: A Journal of Transnational Women's and Gender Studies, 4(2), 23-34.
Pfahl, L., & Powell, J. J. (2011). Legitimating school segregation. The special education profession and the discourse of learning disability in Germany. Disability & Society, 26(4), 449-462.
Pieper, M., & Mohammadi, J. H. (2014). Ableism and Racism: Barriers in the Labour Market. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 3(1), 65-92.
Reid Lyon, G. (2005). Why scientific research must guide educational policy and instructional practices in learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 140-143.
Rocco, T. S., & Delgado, A. (2011). Shifting lenses: A critical examination of disability in adult education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2011(132), 3-12.
Rourke, B. P. (2005). Neuropsychology of learning disabilities: past and future. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 111-114.
Runswick‐Cole, K. (2011). Time to end the bias towards inclusive education? British Journal of Special Education, 38(3), 112-119.
Saltes, N. (2013). ‘Abnormal’Bodies on the Borders of Inclusion: Biopolitics and the Paradox of Disability Surveillance. Surveillance & Society, 11(1/2), 55-73.
Schmoker, M. (2008). Measuring What Matters. Educational Leadership, 66(4), 70-74.
Scope. (2009). Most Britons think others view disabled people "as inferior". Scope. from http://www.scope.org.uk/cgi-bin/np/viewnews.cgi?id=1244379033 and  http://www.comres.co.uk/resources/7/Social%20Polls/Scope%20PublicPoll%20Results%20May09.pdf
Skrtic, T. M. (2005). A political economy of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 149-155.
Sleeter, C. E. (1986). Learning Disabilities: The Social Construction of a Special Education Category. Exceptional Children, 53(1), 46-54.
Sleeter, C. E. (1987). Why is there learning disabilities? A critical analysis of the birth of the field in its social context. In T. S. Popkewitz (Ed.), The foundations of the school subjects. (pp. 210-237). London: Palmer Press. (Reprinted from: Not in File).
Sleeter, C. E. (1998). Yes, Learning Disability is Political; What Isn't? Learning Disability Quarterly, 21(4), 289-296.
Stanovitch, K. E. (2005). The Future of a Mistake: Will Discrepancy Measurement Continue to Make the Learning Disabilities Field a Pseudoscience? Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 103-106.
Storey, K. (2007). Combating ableism in schools. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 52(1), 56-58.
Strydom, J., & du Plessis, S. (2000). The Right to Read; Beating Dyslexia and Other Learning Disabilities. Audiblox. http://www.audiblox2000.com/book.htm
Tamkins, T. (2009). Drop that BlackBerry! Multitasking may be harmful. CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/25/multitasking.harmful/index.html
Toffel, H. (1996). Crazy Women, Unharmed Men, and Evil Children: Confronting the Myths About Battered People Who Kill Their Abusers, and the Argument for Extending Battering Syndrome Self-Defenses to All Victims of Domestic Violence. Southern California Law Review, 70, 337-344.
Tynedal, J., & Wolbring, G. (2013). Paralympics and Its Athletes Through the Lens of the New York Times. Sports, 1(1), 13-36.
United Nations. (2007). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. United Nations. from http://www.un.org/disabilities/
van Montagu, M. (2013). The Irrational Fear of GM Food. from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303680404579141741399966328
Vasagar, J. (2011). Parents of special educational needs children could get care budgets, The Guardian, UK. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/mar/08/special-needs-children-budgets and see http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/tory-manifesto-favours-special-needs-children-in-mainstream-schools/2204
Waldschmidt, A. (2006). Normalcy, Bio-Politics and Disability: Some Remarks on the German Disability Discourse. Disability Studies Quarterly, 26(2).
Walker, J. (2009). The inclusion and construction of the worthy citizen through lifelong learning: a focus on the OECD. Journal of Education Policy, 24(3), 335-351. doi: DOI 10.1080/02680930802669276;PII 911593744
Weintraub, F. (2005). The evolution of LD policy and future challenges. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(2), 97-99.
West, T. G. (1997). In the Mind's Eye: Visual Thinkers, Gifted People With Dyslexia and Other Learning Difficulties, Computer Images and the Ironies of Creativity. Amherst, New York: Prometheus books.
Wikiquote. (August 12, 2013). Deus Ex: Invisible War.   Retrieved January 23, 2008, from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Deus_Ex:_Invisible_War
Wolbring, G. (2005). HTA Initiative #23 The triangle of enhancement medicine, disabled people, and the concept of health: a new challenge for HTA, health research, and health policy. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR) webpage: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR).
Wolbring, G. (2008a). "Is there an end to out-able? Is there an end to the rat race for abilities?". Journal: Media and Culture, 11(3).
Wolbring, G. (2008b). The Politics of Ableism. Development, 51(2), 252-258.
Wolbring, G. (2008c). Why NBIC?  Why Human Performance Enhancement? Innovation; The European Journal of Social Science Research, 21(1), 25-40. doi: 10.1080/13511610802002189
Wolbring, G. (2010a). Ableism and Favoritism for Abilities Governance, Ethics and Studies: New Tools for Nanoscale and Nanoscale enabled Science and Technology Governance. In S. Cozzens & J. M.Wetmore (Eds.), The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, vol. II: The Challenges of Equity and Equality (pp. 89-104). New York: Springer.
Wolbring, G. (2010b). Nanotechnology and the Transhumanization of Health, Medicine, and Rehabilitation. In D. Lee Kleinmann, J. Delborne, K. Cloud-Hansen & J. Handelsman (Eds.), (pp. 290-303). New Rochelle, NY: Mary Ann Liebert.
Wolbring, G. (2010c). Obsolescence and body technologies Obsolescencia y tecnologías del cuerpo. Dilemata International Journal of Applied Ethics, 2(4), 67-83.
Wolbring, G. (2012a). Citizenship Education through an Ability Expectation and "Ableism" Lens: The Challenge of Science and Technology and Disabled People. Education Sciences, 2(3), 150-164.
Wolbring, G. (2012b). Ethical Theories and Discourses through an Ability Expectations and Ableism Lens: The Case of Enhancement and Global Regulation. Asian Bioethics Review, 4(4), 293-309.
Wolbring, G. (2012c). Expanding Ableism: Taking down the Ghettoization of Impact of Disability Studies Scholars. Societies, 2(3), 75-83. doi: 10.3390/soc2030075
Wolbring, G. (2012d). Nanotechnology for Democracy versus Democratization of Nanotechnology. In H. v. Lente, C. Coenen, T. Fleischer, K. Konrad, L. Krabbenborg, C. Milburn & F. Thoreau (Eds.), Little by Little: Expansions of Nanoscience and Emerging Technologies. Dordrecht: AKA-Verlag/IOS Press. (Reprinted from: Not in File).
Wolbring, G. (2013). Ecohealth through an ability studies and disability studies lens In M. K. Gislason (Ed.), Ecological Health: Society, Ecology and Health (Vol. 15, pp. 91-107). London, UK: Emerald.
Wolbring, G. (2014). Ability Privilege: A needed addition to privilege studies. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 12(2), 118-141.
Wolbring, G., & Burke, B. (2013). Reflecting on Education for Sustainable Development through Two Lenses: Ability Studies and Disability Studies. Sustainability, 5(6), 2327-2342.
Wolbring, G., & Diep, L. (accepted). Chapter 4 Cognitive enhancement through an Ability Studies lens. In F. Jotterand & V. Dubljevic (Eds.), Cognitive Enhancement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wolframe, P. M. (2013). TITLE: Reading Through Madness: Counter-psychiatric Epistemologies and the Biopolitics of (In) sanity in Post-World War II Anglo-Atlantic Women’s Writing. McMaster University.  
World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development.