Search

Students with disabilities are under-represented in higher education (HE) institutions in Botswana. The number of students with disabilities is on the rise but parity has not been attained. The struggle of students with disabilities to access and participate in HE remains an issue of great concern for disability activists and researchers. This paper sought to document the experiences of university students with disabilities in their struggle to access and participate in HE. Seven students with disabilities took part in the study. Data were gathered through semi-structured focus group interviews. Later on these data were triangulated with an access-audit of facilities. Constant comparison methods were used for data analysis. Six themes emerged, namely: attitudinal barriers; resource barriers; structural barriers; policy related issues; lack of support mechanisms; and lack of skills and knowledge. Implications of the findings to institutions of higher learning are discussed in order to promote wider participation for students with disabilities in HE in Botswana. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We welcome Forshaw's reply to our paper because it opens up debate about psychology and its relationship with the development of an emancipatory disability studies. In our paper we aimed to: (1) raise possibilities for disability studies researchers' engagement with psychology (rather than psychology colonizing disability studies); (2) trace some of the epistemological journeys we underwent in carrying out disability research and community psychology research; (3) consider these possibilities and journeys in relation to previous literature on emancipatory disability research. Forshaw's reply appears to ignore aims (2) and (3) and instead focuses on the ways in which we (mis)represent psychology. He suggests that we: present an inaccurate account of qualitative research in contemporary psychology; make a divisive argument for a 'breakaway group' of community psychologists; epistemologically contradict ourselves because of our concern with 'reality' and social constructionism; argue for only adopting participatory action research; not least, adopt 'simplistic' and 'outdated' views of psychology. We will respond to these criticisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]