ABSTRACT
To talk of ability is not to speak of a biological “fact,” but rather to call forth a socially produced system of norms that construct and regulate the boundaries between ability and disability. Indeed, it is difficult to conjure ability without simultaneously bringing disability to the fore. The very category of “youth” relies upon normative notions that produce categories of ability, distinguishing at-risk and deviant students from those of promise. In other words, normalcy creates the “problem” of disability (Davis, 2006, p. 3). Moreover, such ideas are reified by the labels used to sort students into categories of regular, special, and gifted. Once divided into types, specialized curriculum, teacher certification, special classes, and so on further cement these differences. But, when and where should we begin to tell the story of “(dis)ability” and what are some of the ways of talking and thinking that engender our present ideas about (dis)ability?
