Center on Disability Studies, University of Hawai'i at Manoa Pacific Rim International Conference on Disability & Diversity Image Description: Center on Disability Studies logo. Examining the (Lack of) Impact the #Disabilitytoowhite Movement has had on Higher Ed Disability Service Provision Frederic Fovet, Ph.D., Royal Roads University, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, Frederic.Fovet@royalroads.ca Recommended Citation Fovet, F. (2020). Examining the (lack of) impact the #disabilitytoowhite movement has had on higher ed disability service provision. Pacific Rim International Conference on Disability and Diversity Conference Proceedings. Honolulu, Hawai'i: Center on Disability Studies, University of Hawai'i at Manoa. Licensed under CC BY 4.0. This article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center on Disability Studies, ISSN 2641-6115. Image Description: Creative Commons license CC-BY icon. ---Page i--- Examining the (Lack of) Impact the #Disabilitytoowhite Movement has had on Higher Ed Disability Service Provision Frederic Fovet, Ph.D. Royal Roads University Victoria, British Columbia, Canada Abstract: There is much talk of intersectionality within critical studies in academia, and yet there continues to be a significant disconnect between discourse and practice in this respect on campuses. In 2016, the #disabilitytoowhite movement brought attention to the pressing lack of focus on intersectionality within the Disability movement. It created debate, gave rise to emotion and offered hope that the Disability movement, and more particularly disability service provision, advocacy and scholarship within academia, might take notice and address this gap. Almost four years on, the sad observation has to be that little has changed. The author first examines his experience as accessibility consultant within higher education to explore the tension that exist with regards to race in higher ed disability service provision, and examines the hope that #disabilitytoowhite offered a change. The second part of the paper explores specific current areas of concerns. The third section offers suggestions that might enable accessibility services to address this tension and to shift practices in order to embed intersectionality in service provision. Keywords: Intersectionality; Disability; Race; Disability Service Provision; Accessibility Services; Higher Education; Management of Change Knowledge Focus: Postsecondary Education Topic Area: Research/Theory Focus Context and Objectives Objectives The paper first examines the media coverage surrounding the #disabilitytoowhite movement. It then unpacks the agenda of this activist movement. The paper subsequently surveys and gauges the current state of play around intersectionality within disability services, advocacy and scholarship in academia within the North American landscape. It examines and analyzes the resistance to change that is tangible in this area. Finally, the paper explores possible sustainable solutions for campuses attempting to address the lack of intersectionality within disability service provision. ---Page 1--- Context In 2016, the #disabilitytoowhite movement brought attention, within North America, to the pressing lack of focus on intersectionality within the Disability movement. The initiative was launched by blogger, Vilissa Thompson, but was originally an idea developed by Alice Wong. It quickly gained momentum on social media. Thompson originally launched the use of the hashtag as a response to a magazine article about 'beauty and disability' which had only featured white individuals with disabilities (Leary, 2017). Thompson is quoted by Leary as having stated: "For some people, it was the first time they publicly shared their plight at being invisible in this community" (para. 2). The hashtag rapidly became popular, was shared by disability activists of color, and went viral. Blahovex (2016) describes the hashtag movement in the following way; "has been starting discussions in the disability community regarding the media visibility and representation of disabled people of color. At the same time, it has been drawing controversy from those who do not understand or agree with the hashtag (para. 1). Figure 1 below offers an example of the sort of posts which have appeared on Twitter within the #disabilitytoowhite movement. Figure 1: Screenshot of Twitter posted by Vilissa Thompson (2016) Figure 1 Image Description: Screenshot of Twitter posted. Text includes "Vilissa Thompson, @Vilissa Thompson, #disabilitytoowhite When you search for Black disabled women images & end up finding your own pictures, sad face emoji, we need diverse stock images. 10:35 PM - 18 May 2016. What the hashtag movement showcased and highlighted was a chronic absence of representation of race and ethnicity in most societal dimensions of disability advocacy, fundraising, lobbying, and - importantly - service provision. For individuals of color with disabilities, this had the powerful liberating effect of opening up the space of disability discourse to the expression of their fears, concerns, needs and aspirations: "For many disabled people of color, it was extremely validating to finally have these conversations in a public space," writes Leary (2017, para.3). Individuals of color with disabilities have felt finally recognized, acknowledged and invited to share their voice. This explains the significant momentum which has, from 2016, powered this movement to the forefront of social media activity. ---Page 2--- It quickly also became a call for action for white disability scholars, advocates and support staff: The hashtag also became a wake-up call and a call-to-action for white disabled people. While I was already aware of intersectionality as a queer and historically low-income person, #Disabilitytoowhite constantly reminds me as an activist that I need to do better. It isn't enough to cover disability rights topics without seeking and centering the voices of disabled people of color (Leary, 2017, para.3) This of course is an equally important phenomenon. It has been powerful for persons of color with disabilities to find their voice and have this voice acknowledged, but in terms of transformative action (Garcia & Ortiz, 2013), the development of awareness among white disability scholar activists and support staff is just as significant. There was a noticeable impact on the consciousness of white members of the disability movement and the field of service provision (Frederick & Shifrer, 2019), and hope began to grow that disability service provision in higher education (HE) might seize this momentum to consider a radical review of its processes, outreach to students, and ethos (Aquino, 2016; Dunhamn et al., 2015). The movement triggered by the hashtag quickly also went global, and was never limited to the US, which showed the global relevance of its claims. Some advocates have critiqued the Global North world view adopted by disability studies (Disability History, 2019). It is now a popular and frequently used channel across all continents. The lived experiences of African Americans with disabilities who have been ignored and dismissed by the Disability movement and support services staff, have echoes with the experiences of Indigenous people with disabilities in Canada, New Zealand and Australia (Buettgen, Hardie, & Wicklund, Jean- François, & Alimi, 2018; Dion, 2017; Harpur & Stein, 2018; Velarde, 2018). The #disabilitytoowhite hashtag did not create solely a positive reaction, and it is perhaps the ferocity of the attacks it faced that are a testimony to its relevance. The hashtag and the exchanges and individuals it features have been the target of concerted and virulent trolling attacks. The author himself, having used the hashtag in 2017, became the victim of organized trolling by right-wing groups for an approximately 3-month period. The vehemence of the attacks themselves clearly demonstrate to what extent the movement is relevant, gives rise to feelings of denial, and has political meaningfulness in the contemporary landscape (Thompson, 2016). There was, obviously, great hope that the hashtag and the movement it triggered would lead academia particularly to take a hard look at disability service provision. White arguably scholars had at least acknowledged the lack of intersection in disability studies, there was little evidence that was acknowledged in the post-secondary sector, beyond disability studies departments, in service provision itself. This paper will explore the areas where this tension is ---Page 3--- palpable. It will examine current pitfalls and challenges, and subsequently propose certain solutions which may have immediate relevance for accessibility services in HE. Exploring the Literature The absence of references to race and ethnicity in the contemporary disability discourse is not a recent phenomenon. Certain scholars describe what they call a progressive whitewashing of the disability civil rights movement through the last two decades (Bell, 2012; Erkulwater, 2018). This is surprising and strikingly ironic as, of course, disability studies as a field is grounded in critical theory (Goodley, Lawthom, Liddiard & Runswick-Cole, 2019; Meekosha & Shuttleworth, 2009), and shares with Critical Race Theory a conceptualization of oppression and marginalization that should support an awareness of all the various levels on which these inequitable power dynamics are experienced by individuals (Fine, 2019). This perception of oppression and marginalization simultaneously on different levels of a person's lived experience, and with respect to their various identities, is what is referred to in Critical Theory as intersectionality (Collins, 2019; Shaw, Chan & McMahon, 2012). While intersectionality is discussed conceptually in terms of research and writing, it appears to be rarely considered in practice in the field when it comes to disability (Artiles, 2013; Mereish, 2012; Nichols & Stahl, 2019; Stanley, Buenavista, Masequesmay & Uba, 2013). Of course, this has not been the only instance where intersectionality has been ignored in the Disability movement, and recent resistance to Trans rights from some disability scholars has been just as surprising (Puar, 2014). Within academia itself, there is also insufficient awareness around intersectionality, even in research (Nichols & Stahl, 2019). There is definitely, among scholars, a conceptual awareness that this overlap of identities and experiences of oppression in HE is crucial to explore and document (Bailey & Mobley, 2019; Frederick & Shifrer, 2019). There is also an inherent understanding that this intersection is present globally, regardless of geographical and socio- economic context (Stienstra & Nyerere, 2016). The emergence of critical disability race theory has been hugely encouraging in this context (Annamma, Ferri, & Connor, 2018; Thorius & Tan, 2015), but there is nonetheless a lack of concrete engagement with this scholarship within HE accessibility service provision. As a result, there is growing suspicion and disconnect from the critical race studies scholars, activists and persons of color with the field of disabilities studies (Rollock, Gillborn, Vincent, & Ball, 2014; Mahon-Reynolds & Parker, 2016). This at times has been explained on campuses as a reluctance from disabled academics of color to embrace yet another oppressive label: "As a Black queer chronically ill woman, I work extra hard and produce in excess in the hopes of thwarting a latent imposter syndrome and my internalized ableist standards" (Bailey, 2017, para.6). But this phenomenon in itself is not sufficient to explain the conceptual dichotomy observed in HE practices and the frequent dismissal of this scholarship in campus interactions. ---Page 4--- Methodological Stance This paper represents a first exploratory paper on this issue, based on the analysis of phenomenological data (Sandi-Urena, 2018; Webb & Welsh, 2019) compiled through processes of auto ethnography (Hughes, 2020; Meneley & Young, 2013). This data was collected over a period of 5 years, through a careful examination of consultancy work the author carried out with accessibility services in the Canadian higher education. The author was the head of accessibility on a Canadian HE campus for 4 years from 2011 to 2015. He later became faculty but retained a consultancy role focused on assisting post-secondary accessibility services with universal design for learning (UDL) implementation, the redesign of their interface with students along social model principles, and the strategic revamping of their role across campuses - particularly with regards to support for faculty towards inclusive teaching. The data analysis carried out in this paper focuses on the author's phenomenological experiences within these various roles as a consultant over the last 5 years. In these various scenarios he has been able to interact with faculty, students and accessibility services personnel as an outside observer, often engaged in external reviews. This has afforded him an exceptional opportunity to reflect on the impact of race on disability service provision. While direct data collection with students of color with disabilities is methodological, which would be powerful, one must also acknowledge the practical challenges that inherently exist in such a process. There are significant power dynamics, processes of stigmatization, and fear of being ostracized by one's institution inevitably tied into any such methodological processes when they are considered with marginalized and racialized students (Muhammad et al., 2014). These phenomena will be described and analyzed below. As a result, while appealing such processes may not bring to light issues and trends that run counter to an institution's messaging, branding, or public relations message. These topics are de facto stifled by the hierarchical mechanisms of post-secondary institutions. There has been immediate appeal therefore in focusing instead on the author's phenomenological experiences with these students in contexts of consultation that have been informal, free-flowing, unguarded, authentic, and therefore eye-opening. Similarly, the author as an external consultant has been able to establish a rapport that has not been threatening with faculty and disability service personnel. This has enabled him to contextualize the issues identified in a wide ecological context. The author's phenomenological experiences with these various institutions allow important snapshot images -of a sociological flavor- that identify cross-country emerging trends without focusing on any institution specifically, themes that would remain dismissed through other methodological processes. These experiences represent the view of any external observer entering such institutional contexts candidly and inconspicuously. ---Page 5--- The analysis of this phenomenological data has been categorized under several overall themes: (i) a critical examination of the lack awareness around intersectionality in service provision, (ii) an examination of the mindset which is perpetuated by medical model structures that are framing service provision, and (iii) the resistance to change. Core Issues Around #Disabilitytoowhite Regarding Academia This first section of data analysis will highlight wide thematic issues that are currently causing tension in academia with regards to race and intersectionality within disability service provision. All of these have become rapidly observable to the author in his experiences as a visitor from institution to institution. Lack of Awareness of Intersectionality in the Format of Disability Service Provision Race and ethnicity are simply altogether absent from the discourse on disability service provision in HE. Race and ethnicity are never mentioned in accessibility services websites, brochures and messaging (Madaus, 2011). It is rarely discussed in intake appointments or during specific requests from services from students. Race is effectively white washed out of the discussion and the format of services (NEADS, 2018). There are few processes in place for students to discuss race and ethnicity with accessibility personnel. Students feel that their racialized identity is often being altogether dismissed or ignored within the space where these services are provided or discussed. It is clear when discussing accessibility with racialized students that they will often forego accommodations altogether rather than compromise and tackle these spaces where race is not acknowledged: "The experiences of Black disabled students are indicative of the way in which normalcy and coloniality continue to shape educational institutions," concludes Baker (2019, p. 69). Lack of Visual Representation of Diversity within the Mediatized Image of Disability Service Providers The visual representation of race in the field of disability service provision is problematic overall across society (Fraser, 2018; Thomas, Warren-Findlow, & Webb, 2019); in HE accessibility services it is simply non-existent. Disability service providers have had, over the last decade, great difficulties in the first instance in adapting the representation of disability to a new landscape, in a way that takes into account the full spectrum of embodiments, including 'invisible disabilities' (Merchant, Read, D'Evelyn, Miles, & Williams, 2019). This remains a challenge in 2020. The representation of race and ethnicity have simply never been considered. This has a major impact: visual representation on campuses plays a crucial role in outreach efforts and in drawing service users to the appropriate office. It creates and develops a sense of community among service users. Without visual representation of race and ethnicity in the branding and messaging of disability service provision, there can be no hope to successfully draw in students with disabilities who are racialized. ---Page 6--- Lack of Diversity in Staffing within Disability Service Providers There is a plainly identifiable issue around the very staffing composition of accessibility services in higher education. Racialized personnel are under-represented in disability service provision (Michalski, Cunningham, & Henry, 2017). The archetypal majority profile within these services is an end-of-career, white female adviser; there is in fact an issue around succession planning in accessibility services on many campuses, as many of the stakeholders are reaching retirement age and there is an insufficient influx of young diverse talent. From a critical pedagogy lens, just as it is crucial for racialized students to have strong faculty role models from their own community, race or ethnicity (Gist, White, & Bianco, 2018; Mecker & Rabinowitz, 2019), it will be difficult for racialized students to connect in genuine ways with accessibility services in HE if the personnel of these offices is not racially diversified. There is also a more insidious and subtle phenomenon at play in terms of the staffing of accessibility services. There is an overrepresentation of individuals of strong faith, with very strong religious convictions which are openly disclosed in the workplace. This is a profession which has traditionally, particularly in its emergence in the 1970s, attracted individuals who were committed to a model of 'help' and assistance with regards to students with disabilities, not one of autonomy and independence (Mole & Fovet, 2013a, 2013b). As a result, it has been a milieu of employment which has been particularly appealing to applicants with ties to missionary movements. While these vocational choices and the desire to assist students is admirable, it also comes with a post- colonial subtext which is understated but very persistent, and which gives accessibility services a distinct flavor throughout North America. This will inherently perpetuate a feeling of unease for students who are non-Caucasian and push back against attitudes that might be oppressive because of their patronizing overtones (Tamburro, 2013). Lack of Critical Theory and Anti-Oppression Training Amongst Disability Service Providers Critical theory, critical pedagogy and anti-oppression practices have made considerable leaps within HE as a whole over the last decade (Moosa-Mitha, 2015; Grosland, 2019), and are generally embraced authentically by most branches of student services. This has not been the case for accessibility services. Once again, this is a bewildering phenomenon of resistance, since accessibility services will often be familiar with and use the notion of anti-oppressive practices with regards to the fight against institutional ableism (Bê, 2019), but they fail to transfer this concept onto the areas of race and ethnicity. In his encounters with student groups, this is systematically the top request that has been formulated: service users who are racialized want case advisers in accessibility services to go through anti-oppression training. More often than not, students suggest that the anti-oppression training could be provided by students themselves. ---Page 7--- Ongoing Status Quo The #disabilitytoowhite hashtag created debate, gave rise to emotions and offered hope that the Disability movement, and more particularly disability service provision, advocacy and scholarship within academia, might take notice and address this gap. It is clear, however, that structurally and on the scale of campuses as whole institutions, little progress has been made. The debate has remained conceptual, the attention has dimmed and the patterns identified above have not been addressed or diminished. Academia has not fulfilled its role and responsibility with regards to #Disabilitytoowhite four years on, and there is no perception that disability service provision is evolving in this direction. To make matters worse, currently, accessibility services are facing unprecedented pressure. The volume of students making requests for services has increased threefold over the last 10 years (Kendall & Tarman, 2016); staffing of these offices has not increased proportionately (Kloke, 2017); bottle necks are forming in the intake process; funding models are no longer sustainable (Chiwandire & Vincent, 2019). Unfortunately, these pressures are often used as an excuse to dismiss the need for transformation and reform of the format of service provision. Silo mentality in HE service provision is also a very tangible obstacle. Student services are extremely fragmented in HE, and function often with little awareness of the perspectives and flavor of services developed in other services on the same campus. This means that, as a rule, accessibility services consider disability in a void, and fail to consider race, socio- economic status, gender, sexual orientation, etc. They rarely reach out to support services for international students, services for indigenous students, or advocacy groups for racialized students. There is no culture of cross-service interdisciplinary collaboration. Examples and Illustration of this Tension It can be difficult to distinguish the element of deliberate intention in the instances of clumsiness around race in HE disability service provision that are observed. At best, they amount to a lack of cultural competence amongst HE disability service providers. At worse, they represent overt discriminatory practices in disability service provision. This second section of phenomenological data analysis highlights areas of tension around race and disability service provision which the author has experienced personally within his practice as a consultant. Examples of Lack of Cultural Competency Among HE Disability Service Providers International students who are racialized may, for example, have a very different understanding of 'Disability' and their lived experiences and challenges with coping with domestic classifications and processes around the provision of accessibility services are not sufficiently acknowledged (Maruza, 2020). In such cases, intersectionality is fully and dramatically at play, and these students may be feeling marginalized because of their disability, because of their race, and because of their status as immigrants. Two of these dimensions of their lived experience are not being adequately addressed by accessibility services. As a result, ---Page 8--- many international students with disabilities fail to approach accessibility services or to seek support (Soorenian, 2013). Professional competency training around cultural competency is urgently required. Similarly, indigenous students are often reluctant to approach accessibility services. It may be very difficult for indigenous students who have battled systemic racism and cultural shock in their process of admission to admit they may require support services. Disclosure is therefore problematic and there is very little awareness of this challenge within accessibility services. The intake format in accessibility is, in fact, fundamentally not culturally congenial to many. Accessibility staff can have distinctly eurocentric expectations when it comes to self- advocacy and disclosure. The first appointment in accessibility services, which requires one-on- one discussion and an explicit formulation of personal needs, is excessively intrusive for many indigenous students who verbalize the fact they would often prefer a meeting that might include indigenous support staff, and take the form of a circle. Instead, accessibility services expect that the student will comply and submit to intake processes which are not designed with their needs and preferences in mind. This leads to a noticeable reluctance of indigenous students to undertake the necessary steps for provision of services. An insidious and inconspicuous practice is emerging as a fixture in disability service provision. Students who do not fit a 'traditional' profile, or who are identified as problematic or as having unconventional needs, are more likely to be advised to take leave. Often this offer to take leave is wrapped in empathy, but the message is not less clear: students are given the implicit message that their needs are so significant that they ought to leave the institution while they focus on getting better, on fitting in, or on managing their needs. This message can create immense frustration for students when they are continuously confronted with it. It takes on the shape of microaggressions: this advice purports to be well intentioned but it carries subtext that suggests to them that the institution may not be the appropriate setting for them (Lett, Tamaian & Klest, 2019; Sue, 2010). Accessibility services construct outreach campaigns across campuses that are narrowly relevant to students who have been identified as having a disability and supported in K-12 education. This 'insider' perspective leaves out many racialized students. It assumes an understanding of diagnostic processes; it presumes students have financial access to such diagnostic testing; it creates a seamless intake process for students who have had the benefit of this privilege through K-12 education, but creates significant challenges for students who have not had these experiences (Yull, 2015). Overall it creates an insider culture which is perceived as complex, daunting, and even menacing for students who -because of their racial marginalization- have never been exposed to this environment. The implicit messaging perpetuated by this branding and this outreach messaging is that racialized students do not immediately fit the model, the processes and the culture of these offices. ---Page 9--- Accessibility services, furthermore, create quality assurance (QA) processes that are appealing to these satisfied 'insiders' and fail to explore the perceptions of dissatisfied service users. The culture of surveying students with regards to the quality of HE services has gained momentum (Langan & Harris, 2019). Accessibility services often achieve high rates of service user satisfaction. The validity of these processes, however, is questionable and the process of data collection is prima facie faulty (Jade, Christine, & Jacinta, 2020). Indeed, students who may be reluctant to register for these services for all the reasons explored above do not have a say in these QA processes. Insiders who have complied, been deemed to align with the institutional format of service provision, and who are unlikely to challenge existing practices are the only ones being surveyed. This is particular to accessibility services, as the overall student body is normally surveyed when it comes to the quality of all other student services; in the case of accessibility services, however, diagnostic disclosure and full registration is a condition sine qua non for the surveying. This becomes a self-justifying argument for the status quo. Overt Discriminatory Practices in Disability Service Provision Racialized students can at times be portrayed as 'difficult' simply because they are voicing their discontent with the format of service provision. Tone, demeanor and reticence to grant certain services can betray staff biases. These can also reveal a very narrow construct of what a student with disabilities should 'look like and act like.' Students can, as a result, be forced to jump through administrative hoops that more or less guarantee they give up on the process, particularly with regards to access to diagnostic documentation, the number of required appointments and follow-ups. Students are sometimes actively discouraged from joining student advisory committees because they are perceived as 'activists.' Overall it is not rare to observe a culture within accessibility services that feed and perpetuate a hidden agenda. Even when racialized students decide to challenge these inconspicuous but intentional setbacks, there are obstacles and challenges in their ability to access with ease informal processes of mediation and redress that may be less threatening. The less formal processes of mediation and dialogue can be seen as less appropriate for marginalized students who can quickly be pictured as 'angry' by staff. Racialized students will often need to escalate the appeals process formally, and often they find themselves cornered with the only option of seeking out legal advice and support, because internal institutional processes of redress have failed them. Challenges to the format of service provision, or even explicit mention of racialization, are escalated rather than addressed. This of course turns the entire process of redress into a journey fraught with risks that positions racialized students as subversive vis-à-vis the institution. ---Page 10--- Discussion on Challenges and Possible Solutions Looking toward the future, it becomes crucial to identify which systemic and institutional challenges are likely to remain an obstacle, but also what tangible solutions are ready for the taking. Ongoing Systemic Challenges Are there sustainable solutions available to campuses attempting to address the lack of awareness around intersectionality within disability service provision? This is definitely the case, but it is also important to identify ongoing systemic and institutional challenges that remain problematic, in order to contextualize the solutions proposed. HE disability service providers resist the push for more anti-oppression professional development on the basis that they are too under-resourced to undertake awareness training. It is sometimes also argued from a strategic perspective that racialized students represent too small a minority within their existing population of service users to become a priority. To an extent, a catch-22 process exists with regards to accessibility services on most campuses, as these units are unable to examine racial underrepresentation in their current service user base with the limited data they possess about racialized students who may not be accessing services. Targeted diversity hiring is often still not an accepted campus practice, and there are legal, cultural and organizational processes to address before the solutions proposed can have tangible impact. In order for transformation to occur, an awareness of the inherent issue of racial under-presentation first needs to be developed. The staff within accessibility services often remain in denial about the racial homogeneity of their profession. As a result, and as long as diversity is not proactively addressed in hiring practices within these units, service providers remain unable to unpack the inherent ethno-centricism of their practices (i.e., format of the intake, access to documentation, outreach, etc.). Possible Solutions One of the most significant recommendations to campuses that emerges from this paper is the creation of student advisory committees to guide accessibility services (Bishop, 2018). These committees offer an opportunity for management of these units to meet students and dialogue with them in a non-hierarchical fashion. Acknowledging and including racialized students through this informal channel overcomes many of the obstacles that have been highlighted in this article. Cultural awareness training and anti-oppression workshops also appear as a pressing priority in this landscape, and one that is relatively easy to implement (Pope, Reynolds & Mueller, 2019). There are now many models of anti-oppression awareness that have been developed in HE, and it is therefore relatively easy to import them into disability service provision. Often these workshops already exist on the campus in question, and are being offered ---Page 11--- in other departments and units (Wu et al., 2019). An interdisciplinary dialogue and collaboration would effortlessly support the import of such practices into accessibility services, and it is urgent for accessibility services to reach out and establish rapport and shared practices with other student services (Robsham, 2016). Tackling intersectionality between race and disability in accessibility services needs to be contextualized within a wider shift away from medical model practices and towards social model implementation. Medical model practices, which are unfortunately still prominent in HE disability service provision, reinforce deficit model approaches to student needs (Merchant et al., 2019). Deficit model views are rarely limited to the ways these services construct disability, and inherently also feed deficit views of any student who does not fit an idealized mainstream view of the 'traditional student,' and hence taints perceptions of racialized students (Roberts, 2019; Stewart & Collins, 2014). The social model of disability instead encourages professionals to view disability as an interaction between individual embodiments and the design of specific environments or experiences (Mole, 2013; Tugli, Klu, & Morwe, 2014). It is no longer viewed as an inherent individual characteristic; it is instead a perception individuals experience when environments are not designed in a sufficiently inclusive way to address the multiple needs of diverse individuals. Social model implementation, particularly the adoption of universal design for learning (UDL) practices (Kennette & Wilson, 2019), allows for a seamless inclusion of international students, racialized students, and indigenous students (Fovet, 2019). UDL indeed aligns very effectively with culturally responsive practices in HE (James, 2018). Active collaboration and cooperation with staff from international students' offices and Indigenous students support services, as well as advocacy groups supporting students who feel racialized should be an urgent priority for all accessibility services units on all campuses. This is a process that will not happen spontaneously; it goes against the silo mentality and the mindset that has been allowed to develop in student services and student affairs. It will require reflection, proactive strategies, and significant effort. New practices will have to be created, opportunities for dialogue will have to be initiated. Interdisciplinary in practices is a mindset that takes determined momentum to create (James Jacob, 2015). Similarly, there currently exists isolation between accessibility services and academic departments which focus on critical theory, critical race theory, and critical disability race theory. Osmosis needs to be created so that the research and teaching taking place on campuses around these topics is allowed to permeate into accessibility services, and to inform service provision (Madaus, 2011). The final recommendation of this paper is a call for action. It is essential that more scholarship emerge on this topic. The paucity of literature on the lack of awareness around intersectionality in HE accessibility services is an indictment of the failures that are currently dismissed or ignored in the field. It would also be for HE accessibility services to embrace, feed and showcase the #disabilitytoowhite hashtag. Three years on, activity on Twitter around the ---Page 12--- hashtag is still strong and has permeated many layers of society. The use of the hashtag in itself has a powerful potential to create awareness, disrupt hegemonic mindsets, to trigger change, and to highlight the voice of racialized students, which is otherwise not acknowledged within these services. The words Thompson (2016) need to resonate within the HE accessibility community, and the hashtag is a phenomenal tool to ensure momentum grows and transformative action begins; "There is a lack of representation and diversity within the disability community from the organizations that are supposed to empower us as individuals ... there is a lack of diversity in those voices and those stories" (Blahovec, 2016). Author Frederic Fovet, Ph.D., is an associate professor within the School of Education and Technology at RRU. His practice and research portfolio focus on learners with Social, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (SEBD). He has been a teacher and principal for some-15-years. Over the duration of his PhD Frederic took on the position of director of the Office for Students with Disabilities at McGill; during this period, he gained a solid grounding in disability studies. He was responsible for cross-campus efforts to develop Universal Design for Learning at McGill, and has been program chair of the three first Pan-Canadian Conferences on UDL. Image Description: Photo of Frederic Fovet References Annamma, S. A., Ferri, B. A., & Connor, D. J. (2018). Disability critical race theory: Exploring the intersectional lineage, emergence, and potential futures of DisCrit in education. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 46-71 Aquino, K. C. (2016). The disability-diversity disconnect: Redefining the role of student disability within the postsecondary environment (Doctoral thesis, College of Education and Human Services, Seton Hall University, New Jersey, United States). Seton Hall University Dissertations and Theses (ETDs). 2218 Artiles, A. (2013). Untangling the racialization of disabilities: An intersectionality critique across disability models1. Du Bois Review: Cambridge, 10(2), 329-347. Bailey, M. (2017). Race and disability in the academy. The Sociological Review. Retrieved from https://www.thesociologicalreview.com/race-and-disability-in-the-academy/ Bailey, M., & Mobley, I. A. (2019). Work in the intersections: A Black feminist disability framework. Gender & Society, 33(1), 19-40. Baker, L. (2019). Normalizing marginality: A critical analysis of blackness and disability in higher education (Doctoral Thesis, Department of Social Justice Education, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada). Retrieved from: https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/95661/3/Baker_Leroy_201906_PhD_the sis.pdf ---Page 13--- Bê, A. (2019). Ableism and disablism in higher education: The case of two students living with chronic illnesses. Alter, 13(3), 179-191 Bell, C. (Ed.). (2012). Blackness and disability: Critical examination and cultural interventions. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press. Bishop, D. (2018). More than just listening: The role of student voice in higher education, an academic perspective. IMPact: The University of Lincoln Journal of Higher Education. 1 Blahovec, S. (2016, June 28) Confronting the whitewashing of disability: Interview with #DisabilityTooWhite Creator Vilissa Thompson. Huffington Post. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-blahovec/confronting-the- whitewash_b_10574994.html Buettgen, A., Hardie, S., Wicklund., E., Jean-François, K.M., & Alimi, S. (2018). Understanding the intersectional forms of discrimination impacting persons with disabilities. Ottawa: Government of Canada's Social Development Partnerships Program - Disability Chiwandire, D., & Vincent, L. (2019). Funding and inclusion in higher education institutions for students with disabilities. African journal of disability, 8(0), 336. Collins, P. (2019) Intersectionality as critical social theory. Durham and London: Duke University Press. Dion, J. (2017). Falling through the cracks: Canadian indigenous children with disabilities. Montreal: McGill Centre for Human Rights and Legal Pluralism Disability History. (2019, September 13). Histories of disability activism are often centered in the minority worlds/Global North, despite the long narrative of #DisabilityRights activism across the world. In these photos, blind African women activists meet for seminar in Addis Ababa in 1981. Twitter. Retrieved from: https://twitter.com/DisabilityHistr/status/1172513021052280835 Dunhamn, J., Harris, J., Jarrett, S., Moore, L., Nishida, A., Price, M., Robinson, B., & Schalk, S. (2015). Developing and reflecting on a Black disability studies pedagogy: Work from the National Black Disability Coalition. Disability Studies Quarterly 35(2) Erkulwater, J. (2018). How the nation's largest minority became White: Race politics and the Disability Rights Movement, 1970-1980. Journal of Policy History, 30(3), 367-399 Fine, M. (2019), Critical disability studies: Looking back and forward. Journal of Social Issues, 75, 972-984. Fovet, F. (2019). Not just about disability: Getting traction for UDL implementation with international students. In K. Novak & S. Bracken (Eds.) Transforming Higher Education through Universal Design for Learning: An International Perspective, Routledge, London Fraser, B. (2018). Cognitive disability aesthetics: Visual culture, disability representations, and the (in)visibility of cognitive difference. Toronto/Buffalo/London: University of Toronto Press ---Page 14--- References (cont.) Frederick, A., & Shifrer, D. (2019). Race and disability: From analogy to intersectionality. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 5(2), 200-214 Garcia, S. B., & Ortiz, A. A. (2013). Intersectionality as a framework for transformative research in special education. Multiple Voices for Ethnically Diverse Exceptional Learners, 13, 32-47. Gist, C. D., White, T., & Bianco, M. (2018). Pushed to teach: Pedagogies and policies for a Black women educator pipeline. Education and Urban Society, 50(1), 56-86. Goodley, D., Lawthom, R., Liddiard, K., & Runswick-Cole, K. (2019). Provocations for critical disability studies. Disability & Society, 34(6), 972-997 Grosland, J. (2019). Through laughter and through tears: emotional narratives to antiracist pedagogy. Race Ethnicity and Education, 22(3), 301-318 Harpur, P., & Stein, M. (2018). Indigenous persons with disabilities and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. International Human Rights Law Review, 7(2), 165- 200. Hughes, S. (2020). My skin is unqualified: An autoethnography of Black scholar-activism for predominantly White education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 33(2), 151-165 Jade, M., Christine, B., & Jacinta, D. (2020). Moving on from quality assurance: Exploring systems that measure both process and personal outcomes in disability services. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities James Jacob, W. (2015). Interdisciplinary trends in higher education. Palgrave Communication, 1, 15001 James, K. (2018) Universal design for learning (UDL) as a structure for culturally responsive practice. Northwest Journal of Teacher Education, 13(1), Article 4. Kendall, L., & Tarman, B. (Reviewing Ed.) (2016). Higher education and disability: Exploring student experiences. Cogent Education, 3(1) Kennette, L., & Wilson, N. (2019). Universal design for learning (UDL): Student and faculty perceptions. Journal of Effective Teaching in Higher Education, 2(1). Kloke, S. (2017, March 1). Our time to swim: Contextualizing staff burnout in disability services in higher education. Student Affairs. Ryerson University. Retrieved from: https://www.ryerson.ca/studentaffairs/storytelling/2017/03/our-time-to-swim-- contextualizing-staff-burnout-in-disability-se/ Langan, A.M., & Harris, W.E. (2019). National student survey metrics: Where is the room for improvement? Higher Education, 78, 1075-1089 ---Page 15--- Leary, A. (2017, June 14). Reflecting on the impact of #disabilitytoowhite. Rooted in Rights. Retrieved from https://rootedinrights.org/reflecting-on-the-impact-of-disabilitytoowhite/ Lett, K., Tamaian, A., & Klest, B. (2019). Impact of ableist microaggressions on university students with self-identified disabilities. Disability & Society, 1-16. Madaus, J. (2011). The history of disability services in higher education. New Directions for Higher Education, 5-15 Mahon-Reynolds, C., & Parker, L. (2016). The overrepresentation of students of color with learning disabilities: How "writing identity" plays a role in the school-to-prison pipeline. In D. Connor, B. Ferri, S. A. Annamma (Eds.), DisCrit: Critical conversations across race, class, & dis/ability (pp. 145-155). New York, NY: Teachers College Press Maruza, F. M. (2020). An analysis of disability representation in African higher education policies. Journal of Comparative & International Higher Education, 11(Winter), 158- 161 Mecker, L., & Rabinowitz, K. (2019, December 27). America's schools are more diverse than ever. But the teachers are still mostly white. The Washington Post. Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/local/education/teacher-diversity/ Meekosha, H., & Shuttleworth, R. (2009). What's so critical about critical disability studies? Australian Journal of Human Rights, 15, 47-75 Meneley, A., & Young, D. (2013). Auto-ethnographies: The anthropology of academic practices. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press. Merchant, W., Read, S., D'Evelyn, S., Miles, C., & Williams, V. (2019). The insider view: Tackling disabling practices in higher education institutions. Higher Education, 1-15. Mereish, E. H. (2012). The intersectional invisibility of race and disability status: An exploratory study of health and discrimination facing Asian Americans with disabilities. Ethnicity and Inequalities in Health and Social Care, 5(2), 52-60 Michalski, J., Cunningham, T., & Henry, J. (2017). The diversity challenge for higher education in Canada: The prospects and challenges of increased access and student success. Humboldt Journal of Social Relations, 39, 66-89 Mole, H. (2013). A US model for inclusion of disabled students in higher education settings: The social model of disability and universal design. Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 14, 62-86 Mole, H., & Fovet, F. (2013a). 'You need me' - Examining the power and privilege dimension of service provision. Communiqué, 14(1), 31-33 Mole, H. & Fovet, F. (2013b). Aide? Une notion à revoir - Pouvoir, privilège et la redéfinition de nos rôles de conseillers sous le modèle de la conception universelle. Rendez-Vous, Edition du 38ème Congrès de l'AQETA, 27(2), 18-21 ---Page 16--- References (cont.) Moosa-Mitha, M. (2015). Situating anti-oppressive theories within critical and difference- centered perspectives. In S. Strega & L. Brown (eds) Research as Resistance: Revisiting Critical, Indigenous and Anti-Oppressive Approaches. 2nd ed. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press, 65-95. Muhammad, M., Wallerstein, N., Sussman, A., Avila, M., Belone, L., & Duran, B. (2014). Reflections on researcher identity and power: The impact of positionality on community based participatory research (CBPR) processes and outcomes. Critical Sociology, 41(7), 1045-1063 NEADS. (2018). Landscape of accessibility and accommodation in post-secondary education for students with disabilities. Ottawa, ON: National Educational Association of Disabled Students. Retrieved from: https://www.neads.ca/en/about/media/AccessibilityandAccommodation%202018- 5landscapereport.pdf Nichols, S., & Stahl, G. (2019). Intersectionality in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(6), 1255-1268 Pope, R., Reynolds, A., & Mueller, J. (2019). Multicultural competence in student affairs: Advancing social justice and inclusion. John Willey & Sons: San Francisco, CA Puar, J. (2014). Disability. Trans Studies Quarterly, 1(1-2), 77-81 Roberts, E. K. (2019). Who is missing? A critical analysis of disabled students' subjectivity in an ableist university culture. (Doctoral Thesis, Health and Social Development, University of British Columbia). Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0378471 Robsham, K. (2016, October 27). Breaking down campus silos. Presence. Retrieved from: https://www.presence.io/blog/breaking-down-campus-silos/ Rollock, N., Gillborn, D., Vincent, C., & Ball, S. J. (2014). The colour of class: The educational strategies of the Black middle classes. New York, NY: Routledge Sandi-Urena, S. (2018). Phenomenological approaches to study of learning in the tertiary level chemistry laboratory. Química Nova, 41(2), 236-242 Shaw, L. R., Chan, F., & McMahon, B. T. (2012). Intersectionality and disability harassment: the interactive effects of disability, race, age, and gender. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 55(2), 82-91 Soorenian, A. (2013). Disabled international students in British higher education. Rotterdam, Sense Publishers Stanley, S. K., Buenavista, T., Masequesmay, G., & Uba, L. (2013). Enabling conversations: Critical pedagogy and the intersections of race and disability studies. Amerasia Journal, 39(1), 75-82 ---Page 17--- Stewart, D., & Collins, K. (2014). Constructing disability: Case studies of graduate students and new professionals with disabilities in student affairs. College Student Affairs Journal, 32(1), 19-33 Stienstra, D., & Nyerere, L. (2016). Race, ethnicity and disability: Charting complex and intersectional terrains. In S. Grech,& K. Soldatic, (Eds.), Disability in the Global South (pp. 255-268). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Sue, D. (2010). Microaggressions and marginality: Manifestation, dynamics, and impact. John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ. Tamburro, A. (2013). Including decolonization in social work education and practice. Journal of Indigenous Social Development, 2(1), 1-16 Thomas, E. V., Warren-Findlow, J., & Webb, J. B. (2019). Yoga is for every (able) body: A content analysis of disability themes within mainstream yoga media. International Journal of Yoga, 12(1), 68-72 Thompson, V. (2016, May 18). For the trolls on the #DisabilityTooWhite hashtag. You are the reason the hashtag exists. #BrutalTruth. Twitter. Retrieved from: https://twitter.com/VilissaThompson/status/733147220787204096 Thorius, K. A. K., & Tan, P. (2015). Expanding analysis of educational debt: Considering intersections of race and ability. In D. Connor, B. Ferri, & S. A. Annamma (Eds.), DisCrit: Critical conversations across race, class, & dis/ability (pp. 87-97). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Tugli, A.K., Klu, E.K., & Morwe, K. (2014). Critical elements of the social model of disability: Implications for students with disabilities in a South African institution of higher education. Journal of Social Sciences, 39, 331-336. Velarde, M. (2018). Indigenous perspectives of disability. Disability Studies Quarterly, 38(4). Retrieved from https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/6114/5134 Webb, A., & Welsh, A. J. (2019). Phenomenology as a methodology for scholarship of teaching and learning research. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 7(1), 168-181 Wu, D., Saint-Hilaire, L., Pineda, A., Hessler, D., Saba, G., Salazar, R., & Olayiwola, N. (2019) The efficacy of an anti-oppression curriculum for health professionals. Family Medicine, 51(1), 22-30 Yull, A. (2015). The impact of race and socioeconomic status on access to accommodations in postsecondary education. American University Journal of Gender Social Policy and Law, 23 (2), 353-392 ---Page 18--- ---END OF DOCUMENT---