Kimberlé Crenshaw’s theory of intersectionality (1991) reveals that identity is not experienced in isolated parts. Race, gender, class, disability and more are entangled. The three video testimonies offer an important provocation: that it is often the interaction between these identities and the systems that fail to account for them that generates exclusion. As an educator, I am learning that understanding this is critical not only to support individual students but also to shift structures that exclude more broadly.
In Disability and Race, Ade Adepitan reflects on navigating life as a wheelchair user who is racially Black (ParalympicsGB, 2020). He highlights how the Paralympics gave disabled athletes visibility, not because their impairments changed, but because systems shifted to accommodate and platform them. His plea is that racial equity requires similar structural investment. What remains unspoken in his account is gender. As a man, what privileges might shape his experience of mobility, visibility or authority? Would a woman or gender-diverse disabled person face different barriers in safety, healthcare or representation? Or does the fact that he is both disabled and Black mean he has a deeper or more relatable understanding of other marginalised groups?
Crenshaw (1991) reminds us that intersectionality is not only about identity categories, but also about how systems respond to them. Christine Sun Kim, a deaf artist, offers another intersectional lens, shaped by gender, economic precarity and caregiving responsibilities. Living in Berlin, she accesses subsidised childcare, transport and workspaces. These structural supports enable her to navigate daily life as a deaf artist and mother, resources that were inaccessible in her country of birth, the United States (Art21, 2023). Her reflection echoes Crenshaw’s assertion that systems must be examined for the compounded exclusions they produce. When these supports are present, disability is not necessarily limiting. Instead, it is the absence of accessible infrastructure that disables.
At the intersection of gender and disability, Chay Brown, a disabled trans man, discusses how being white and relatively cis-passing affords him a degree of privilege compared to others within the LGBTQIA+ and disabled communities. He notes that the invisibility of his disability allows him to “pass” in ways others cannot. His story highlights how privilege operates not just between identities but within them, particularly when some aspects are hidden or socially legible in normative ways (ParaPride, 2023).
One recurring theme across all three testimonies is the complexity of visibility, how some aspects of identity are highly visible while others remain hidden or misunderstood. In Ade Adepitan’s account, disability becomes more “seen” through media representation such as the Paralympics, yet this visibility does not extend equally across all racial or gendered lines. Christine Sun Kim points to the invisibility of structural support, how its presence or absence determines whether disability becomes disabling. Meanwhile, Chay Brown’s experience draws attention to how passing privilege can shield some from overt discrimination, while simultaneously creating internal tensions around recognition and authenticity.
These differing perspectives converge in one critical question: who is legible within our systems, and who is not? This brings us to recent data from the University of the Arts London (UAL): students with physical, sensory or medical impairments, often considered more visible disabilities, have the largest attainment gaps, down by 10 percentage points over four years (UAL, 2023). In contrast, students with mental health, social or communication-based disabilities, although potentially less visible, show more stable outcomes. This complicates the assumption that visibility automatically leads to support. Who is seen and understood in our systems? Who is supported? And how does institutional recognition, or its absence, reinforce these gaps?
Importantly, the UAL data does not currently take into account the intersectional identities of disabled students, something I believe could offer deeper insights and generate new approaches to addressing inequities. Without this, we risk flattening the experiences of our students and misdiagnosing the structural causes of underachievement.
In my own practice, I have supported students with dyslexia, ADHD and anxiety, disabilities that often remain unacknowledged. I also prepared to teach a deaf student via BSL interpretation. While they ultimately did not join, the process revealed institutional gaps in guidance, staff confidence and the embeddedness of inclusive design. This felt less like a missed opportunity and more like a call to action. As Bamber and Jones (2015) suggest, inclusive learning is not only about adapting teaching for individual needs; it is also about changing the systems that determine who is included in the first place.
Brown and Leigh (2018) remind us that higher education remains shaped by ableist norms, from lecture formats to studio spaces. Reflecting on this, I have begun to question not only my delivery methods but also the values embedded in the spaces I help design. Understanding intersectionality has helped me shift from asking, “How can I accommodate this student?” to “What kind of system would already include them?” Inclusive education is not about fixing students. It is about rethinking structures. Understanding one student’s needs more deeply can expose design flaws that affect many. That is the work I remain committed to in my evolving practice.
References
Art21 (2023) Christine Sun Kim in “Friends & Strangers” – Season 11. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NpRaEDlLsI
Bamber, J. and Jones, D. (2015) ‘Enabling inclusive learning’, in H. Pokorny and D. Warren (eds.) Enhancing Teaching Practice in Higher Education. London: Sage, pp. 161–176.
Brown, N. and Leigh, J. (2018) Ableism in academia: Theorising experiences of disabilities and chronic illnesses in higher education. UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.9781787354970
Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of colour’, Stanford Law Review, 43(6), pp. 1241–1299.
ParaPride (2023) Intersectionality in Focus: Empowering Voices during UK Disability History Month 2023. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yID8_s5tjc
ParalympicsGB (2020) Disability and Race – featuring Ade Adepitan. YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAsxndpgagU
University of the Arts London (UAL) (2023) Disability Attainment Gap Briefing. [Internal document]. London: UAL. [Unpublished]
This is a really interesting and insightful perspective Kuljeet, and has definitely led me to think more deeply about the subject, particularly around the idea that we should be creating systems that are entirely inclusive, rather than devising ways to meet the needs of any individual student that exhibits a disability. The entanglements and complexities of intersectionality, do not appear to be effectively addressed in any corner of society, and there is clearly a comprehensive need for improvement throughout the education system, including at UAL.
Thank you, Julia, I’m really glad the post prompted deeper thinking. I completely agree that building accessible teaching practices should be a foundational step, not a reactive one. The lack of intersectional understanding, especially in how data is collected and interpreted, is particularly concerning. Without recognising the full picture, our capacity to create meaningful, systemic change is limited, even with the best intentions or collaborative efforts.
You picked up on so many interesting aspects the interviewees touched on. It struck me that you highlighted that Ade has drawn an analogy between the structural barriers his disabled identity encounters to the barriers BAME individuals encounter. This stood out for me too.
Similarly, you identify poignantly the geo-political aspect in Christine’s experience that highly influenced her experience. Finally, The data you present with a focus on visibility of the disability is super insightful and thought provoking.
Thank you, Eva. I also found Ade’s comparison between the visibility of disabled athletes and the need for similar structural investment in racial equity powerful, it highlights how systemic change, not individual adaptation, drives progress. Christine’s experience also stayed with me, especially how geography and policy shaped what was possible for her. I’m glad the visibility data resonated; it made me question who gets recognised and supported in our systems, and who continues to fall through the gaps. Perhaps it’s just the tip of the iceberg in terms of understanding the issue.
Kuljeet this is SO well written! Thank you. The first paragraph is the perfect opener; and each paragraph has a phrase or insight that shows your wisdom and compassion too; and that relates to an approach in which ‘cultural awareness best results in action’. And actions are more effective (impactful) when we address systems and institutions, not only individuals and situations. Yes, yes, yes, couldn’t agree more. A wonderfully inspiring approach to take, thank you so much for the work you (already) do in this area. So, whilst this is all accurate, and VERY well referenced there is one thing I’m not sure of…the largest gap of disability down 10%, …is this saying that it is now the smallest gap, and is your point about the prioritisation of declared or visible, or even more socially accepted equality strands…? If so, I understand. Maybe it’s the way it was worded. This is a really fantastic blog post, any (more) anonymised individual stories (?) personal experiences (?) might be the only way I could think of to improve it; I mean, with writing like this… what else can I do, but read attentively and learn…! can I please use this as a teaching example..? Thanks again! Great work.
Thank you, Tim, your comments are very generous, and I’m pleased to hear you enjoyed the blog post. I found the process of reading into the topic and reflecting through this piece valuable, particularly in how it’s helped me surface new insights about my practice as an academic, as well as in my work in the wider sector.
I completely agree that the reference ‘down by 10-percentage-point’ needs to be clearer. On revisiting it, I’ve rewritten the paragraph as below to better reflect what the data is showing and how it ties into my broader argument and ongoing questions.
These differing perspectives converge in a critical question: who is legible within our systems, and how are they supported? Recent data from the University of the Arts London (UAL) shows that students with physical, sensory or medical impairments, often perceived as more visibly disabled, have some of the lowest levels of attainment, and have seen a 10% reduction in attainment over the past four years (UAL, 2023). In contrast, students with mental health, social, or communication-based disabilities, generally viewed as less visible, show more stable and overall higher levels of attainment. This challenges the assumption that visibility leads to greater support. It raises the possibility that visible disability may correlate with lower performance, perhaps due to subconscious biases or uneven systemic responses. What does this suggest about how visibly disabled students are seen and understood in our institutions? And how does institutional recognition, or its absence, contribute to the persistence of these gaps?
I would be keen to hear if these changes clarify my reflections from the UAL Disability Attainment Gap Briefing and help to make the arguments I’m constructing.
Thank you again for such affirming and constructive feedback, it’s motivating to know the piece resonated, and I’d be honoured if you’d like to use it as a teaching example.
Kuljeet, thank you for sharing this very well argued and careful blog post which sensitively and insightfully addresses some complex areas around Disability rights and visibility within UAL. I agree with you about the limited usefulness of UAL’s current data collection model and the way it makes intersectional identities unreadable, this has quite serious consequences as you diagnose, in flattening out the experiences of our students and potentially misdiagnosing structural attainment gaps. Thank you for addressing these so eloquently here.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comments Katriona. I’m glad the points around data resonated; it’s something I keep returning to, especially how the absence or flattening of intersectional data can unintentionally reinforce gaps rather than address them. Your point about misdiagnosing structural attainment issues really captures the risk well. I’m interested in how we might advocate for more nuanced, participatory approaches to data that centre lived experience. There’s definitely more to explore here!
Kuljeet, Its really interesting how you picked up on the institutional gaps present when preparing to teach a potential deaf student. These are things we don’t often think about until they become visible. The idea of staff confidence and gaps in guidance reveal the lack of inclusive design and have made me reflect on how I would respond to that situation. would I even know where to find the guidance? thank you for sharing!
Thanks, Ignacia, I completely agree. It often feels like the guidance and support sit behind ‘closed doors’ until a need arises, and then there’s a scramble to find the right resources. I’d love to see a shift towards making this knowledge more visible and accessible upfront, so we’re better equipped and can respond with more confidence and care from the start.
Thank you so much for your thoughtful comments Katriona. I’m glad the points around data resonated; it’s something I keep returning to, especially how the absence or flattening of intersectional data can unintentionally reinforce gaps rather than address them. Your point about misdiagnosing structural attainment issues really captures the risk well. I’m interested in how we might advocate for more nuanced, participatory approaches to data that centre lived experience. There’s definitely more to explore here!