16 Conclusion: Re/visioning the Ideological Imagination in (Special) Education - Alex Gurn 241
Introduction This book project began not as an edited book but as an article submission to an academic journal, one that was followed by a resounding rejection letter or more aptly put: an objection letter. The letter cited ﬂaws not so much in the construction of a principled argument about the normal curve but in the na- ture of the principles underlying the argument, which in the readers’ estimation, amounted to an attack on the tradition of science and, more speciﬁcally, “positiv- ism.” Interestingly, the original article, nearly identical to our Chapter 2, operated in certain ways in keeping with the legacy of positive science, visible in our at- tempt to construct an overt and discernible research logic about the problem (i.e., explicating a researchable problem, making an assertion or hypothesis, presenting contrasting evidence about the assertion, and discussing these ﬁndings in the context of special education research and practice). Even more bewildering, one reader’s remarks intimated that s/he was deeply offended by our words, feeling personally attacked. After the rejection, we chose not to resubmit the article to another journal and, instead, with the encouragement of Scot Danforth, one of the co-editors of the series in which this book appears, proposed an edited text in which we would invite a group of researchers and educators to interrogate the ideological foundations of the normal curve, including what it means to be con- strued as outside the boundaries of “normal.” SIXTEEN Conclusion: Re/visioning the Ideological Imagination in (Special) Education Alex...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.