Research Abstract

There are many absent conversations within the field of Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) with respect to its historical context and present day functioning related to social marginalization and injustice.  These absences prevent us from imagining just ways in which people can communicate with each other across dis/abilities and support each other’s passions, interests and strengths.  It is unclear how the field is grappling with the realities of marginalization from a critical lens with the aim of subverting power imbalances and dismantling systemic oppression.  The concept of a critical landscape is applied to examine the ways in which systems of oppression are being identified within the field.  A scoping review was conducted to respond to the question: what is the critical landscape in the field of CSD?  A definition of a critical landscape was developed in tandem with additional inclusion criteria.  Final database searches were conducted between February 2021 and April 2021.  Subsequent to a reliability process, findings reveal 39 journal articles from 1998 to 2021 that met the criteria of a critical landscape.  This scoping review provides an overview and analysis of these articles revealing a total of three broad categories encapsulating oppressive processes/systems and nine recommendation domains.   This scoping review reveals gaps in literature, informs implications for future research, clinical practice and clinical education, and discusses review limitations to enhance future research on critical approaches within the field.  

• How is the field of Communication Sciences and Disorders grappling with realities of marginalization and injustice?

• Why does this matter? 

  • • • How do we  imagining just ways in which people can communicate with each other across dis/abilities and support each other’s passions, interests and strengths?

      • Equitable access to life opportunities: personal and collective growth, connection, education, health, well-being, dignity, and experiences of fun for all.

The concept of a critical landscape was applied to examine how systems of oppression are being identified in the field.  

A scoping review was conducted to respond to the question: what is the nature of a critical landscape in the field?  

A critical landscape was defined as evidence: 

a) identifying and challenging systems of inequity

b) aiming to understand marginalization as a function of social constructs rooted in systems that perpetuate inequity

c) providing recommendations to counter oppressive systems and working towards social justice

Figure 3.  Number of Articles in Relation to Focus/Disability and Population/Marginalization

Figure 3.  Article Focus and Population/Marginalization

The 39 articles that met scoping review criteria had different foci that were clustered within 10 categories: 

1) Augmentative and Alternative Communication

2) Acquired Brain Injury 

3) The entire Communication Sciences and Disorders field

4) Communication Disorders

5) Deaf and Hard of Hearing People

6) Health Care and Education

7) Professional Training and Curriculum Changes 

8) Speech, Language and/or Literacy Development/Disorders

9) Stuttering

10) Voice assessment/therapy.  

Within these foci, articles addressed 6 marginalized social groups that are not necessarily mutually exclusive and 2 processes of social marginalization: 

1) Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples

2) Arab Americans 

3) Bi/Multilingual speakers 

4) Children 

5) Black people, Black and African Language(s) speakers in South Africa

6)  LGBTQ+ people

8) the construction of a given disability (e.g. stuttering)

9) systems of oppression (e.g.  clinical training pre- and post- South African apartheid, Moonsamy et al., 2014) 

Some articles employed an intersectional lens when analysing interlocking oppressive systems leading to the marginalization of specific social identities (Donaldson et al., 2017; Guerrerro-Arias, et al., 2020; Jacob & Cox, 2017; Tönsing and Soto, 2020).  

The final 39 articles addressed 3 broad categories of oppressive processes/systems: 

1.  colonialism, imperialism, nationalism/assimilation, and/or apartheid 

2.  the medical model

3. marginalization based on disability, age, race, gender, and/or sexual orientation(s)

References 

Donaldson, A. L., Chabon, S., Lee-Wilkerson, D., & Kapantzoglou, M. (2017). Mirror, mirror on the wall: Reflections on speech-

language pathologists’ image as advocates, activists, and aides. Psychology in the Schools, 54(10), 1285–1293. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22083

Guerrero-Arias, B. E., Agudelo-Orozco, A., & Pava-Ripoll, N. A. (2020). Intersectional identity chronotopes: Expanding the 

disability experience. Disability & Society, 35, 1660-1681.  

Jacob, M., & Cox, S. R. (2017). Examining transgender health through the International Classification of Functioning,

Disability, and Health’s (ICF) Contextual Factors. Quality of Life Research, 26(12), 3177–3185. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1656-8

Moonsamy, S., Mupawose, A., Seedat, J., Mophosho, M., & Pillay, D. (2017). Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology in 

South Africa: Reflections on Transformation in Professional Training and Practice Since the End of Apartheid. 

Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 2(17), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1044/persp2.SIG17.30

Tönsing, K. M., & Soto, G. (2020). Multilingualism and augmentative and alternative communication: Examining language 

ideology and resulting practices. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 36(3), 190–201. 

Acknowledgements 

I acknowledge Lilly Padía's work in conducting this review's reliability & Pamela D'Andrea Martinez for actively supporting this process.  Thank you to Dr. A. Jordan Wright & Dr. Anat Lubetzky for external reviewer feedback.  Much gratitude to librarian Brynne Campbell for database search guidance, and to my primary advisors Dr. Nisha Sajnani and Dr. María Rosa Brea for ongoing feedback and furthering my reflections in order to go beyond my learning edges as we inspire each other to incite collective transformative change.