Disability has long been viewed through the lens of the Medical Model, putting emphasis on impairment, and ownership of overcoming such impairment on the individual. In the 1970s, The Social Model was developed to reframe disability not as a medical issue, but a societal barrier and form of oppression (CIC, 2018). By utilising the Social Model, we can support disabled people in a more inclusive way, reducing consequential othering.
Most people do not expect to become disabled, yet it is significantly more common to acquire a disability than to be born with it, even if temporarily (Hansbro et al., 2013). Injury, disease, mental health, even aging are all factors which we will face through our lives, all elements which can make up a disabled person’s experience. My own experience with chronic illness and recent utilisation of UAL Disability Services as a born-again student has made me critically reevaluate the way university is structured, and the barriers which students who are both visibly and invisibly disabled encounter. For context, I am privileged in the fact I might not present as disabled, as well as being an often white-passing, cis-woman. These factors mean I sit within an advantaged positionality, often able to avoid direct discrimination in comparison to those who are unable to mask their disability and/or identifiable characteristics. However, living with an invisible disability has also shown me the unique disadvantages similar students can face, such as lack of understanding, disability erasure, and disclosure anxiety to name a few (Lierman, 2024, pp.71-112). Interestingly, these disadvantages align with many aspects of being mixed race, such as racial erasure and lack of belonging…
Which brings me to Crenshaw’s (1991) Theory of Intersectionality. Her framework was built to understand how someone’s individual identities e.g. race, gender, class, sexuality, disability, do not just coexist as separate entities, but weave together to create a unique lived experience feeding into the systemic issue of oppression and privilege. For instance, students from cultural backgrounds where disability is more stigmatised, or terminology ranges from language to language may choose not to disclose, and in turn miss out on appropriate support (Lierman, 2024, pp.129-153). Additionally, some U.S. studies show that BAME individuals are up to 69% less likely to be diagnosed with ADHD between entering school up to university, compared to their white peers (Morgan et al., 2014). This data is supported by UAL’s 2025 Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report, where we can see a huge 22% drop in declared disability from non–Home students. (see Fig.1)
Although I hold a formal diagnosis, I didn’t until relatively recently due to various societal, cultural and systematic barriers (hello NHS wait times!). However, in a positive shift to inclusivity, UAL no longer requires medical diagnostic evidence for students to access disability support on their course. (Kennedy, 2026) It’s no secret NHS wait times impact those from lower socio-economic backgrounds most, (Robertson et al., 2023) vs. students who can afford more immediate private diagnosis. Previously, those without their formal diagnosis would’ve been disproportionally disadvantaged, unable to access university (as well as governmental) support. By combining the social model and intersectionality, this change can positively impact all learners. Though this shift is indeed encouraging, as a technical member of staff, I face the barrier of not always being privy to the ISAs of my students. Although ISAs use the social model to focus on removing disabling barriers for the student, ownership to seek that help and to agree adjustments still sits with the student, which mirrors the dated medical model. By utilising the social model, I would like to continue to reduce barriers disabled students face within my remit through developing more inclusive workshop practice e.g. continuing to develop comprehensive digital resources on processes for students to access, design/implementation of a modular worktable/space which can be adjusted depending on student needs, and collaboration with academics to ensure relevant ISA information is shared ahead of teaching.
It’s worth noting that the social model has its limitations, outlined in Shakespeare & Watson’s 2001 article ‘The Social Model of Disability: An outdated ideology?’ They argue that the (“strong”) social model does a disservice by not viewing medical impairment and social disability as intertwined threads of disabled identity. Whilst the social model did a lot to impact positive systemic change, the article does provoke me to think about our societal view on intersectionality as multiple contributing factors, and how it might also be implemented into a more holistic view on disability. By reducing disability to a social barrier alone, we might miss out on important aspects of one’s impairment which may very well include pain and limitations. Yes, we can create reasonable adjustments such as online resources, and extended deadlines – but a person’s physiological or mental suffering cannot always be mitigated through social change.
As an educator I believe in the importance of the Social Model, but I think it important to also consider the “negative” aspects of impairments that cannot be accommodated. Thus, encouraging research for further inclusive practice, be it social or technological advancements (Goering, 2015). Ultimately, I believe that compassion, respect and community are important pillars to fostering an inclusive learning environment; however, we must adopt an intersectional approach whilst checking our own unconscious biases and unlearning ableist attitudes to continually develop inclusivity within our practice.
References
Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6).
EDI Team, People & Culture dpt. (2025) Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report 2025. rep. London: University of the Arts London.
Goering, S. (2015) ‘Rethinking disability: The Social Model of disability and chronic disease’, Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, 8(2), pp. 134–138.
Hansbro, J. et al. (2013) Fulfilling Potential: Building a deeper understanding of disability in the UK today. rep. UK Gov Department for Work and Pensions.
Kennedy, C. (2026) ‘Inclusive Practice: Workshop 1’, PgCert in Academic Practice. London.
Lierman, A. (2024) The struggle you can’t see: Experiences of neurodivergent and invisibly disabled students in Higher Education. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers.
Morgan, P.L. et al. (2014) ‘Racial/Ethnic Disparities in ADHD Diagnosis by Kindergarten Entry’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(8), pp. 905–913.
Robertson, R., Blythe, N. and Jefferies, D. (2023) Tackling health inequalities on NHS waiting lists: Learning from local case studies. rep. London: The Kings Fund.
Shakespeare, T. & Watson, N. (2001). The Social Model of Disability: An outdated ideology?. Research in Social Science and Disability. 2. 9-28.
Spectrum Centre for Independent Living CIC. (2018) What is ‘The Social Model of Disability’? Southampton: SPECTRUM Centre for Independent Living.