Full Picture

Article analysis:

The article presents a critical analysis of the orthodoxies within special needs education and the social model of disability presented by authors in the field of disability studies. The author argues that the special needs enterprise is in crisis, as legitimating a discipline that has traditionally been understood as dominated by the habilitation field, both in Norway and internationally. The article explores the interplay between impairment and the phenomenon of disability as a thinking chart.

However, there are potential biases in this article. The author seems to have a bias towards the social model of disability and against the medical model. While it is true that the medical model has been criticized for disempowering disabled people, it is also important to note that medical interventions can be necessary for some disabilities. Additionally, while classification systems have negative effects, they are necessary for public policy.

The article also presents unsupported claims, such as when it suggests that inclusion policies deny difficulty rather than embracing it. This claim lacks evidence and ignores the fact that inclusive education can provide support for students with disabilities while also promoting their participation in mainstream settings.

Furthermore, there are missing points of consideration in this article. For example, while it is important to have an understanding of disability that goes beyond over-individualizing or over-socializing, there is no discussion about how to achieve this balance. Additionally, while ICF has been criticized for upholding an understanding of restriction rather than oppression, there is no discussion about how to address this issue within a theoretical framework.

Overall, while this article provides valuable insights into the challenges facing special needs education and disability studies, it would benefit from more balanced reporting and exploration of counterarguments.