Background: During apartheid, South African students with disabilities (SWDs) were educated in special schools and taught an inferior curriculum. Black learners with disabilities were discriminated against on grounds of both race and disability. Following South Africa’s first democratic election in 1994, the African National Congress (ANC) government put in place arrange of new laws to address the educational and other needs of those disadvantaged under apartheid, including persons with disabilities (PWDs). The South African government is a signatory of the 2006 United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) which has resulted in the country assuming obligations to promote inclusive education for ASWDs. However, research (see, for instance, Chiwandire & Vincent 2019; Chiwandire 2019; Mutanga 2019; Majoko & Phasha 2018; Mutanga et al. 2018; Mutanga 2017a; Chiwandire 2017; Israel 2017) has shown that SWDs continue to fare differently in comparison to their non-disabled peers in terms of participation in education with the likelihood of success. Higher education institutions (HEIs) have thus been urged to create conducive environments for the academic inclusion of SWDs with particular attention being paid to lecturers employing inclusive instructional strategies as well as flexible curricula, if they are to ensure the equal opportunity for academic success of SWDs in the regular classroom setting. The focus, to date, on academic inclusion, while important, has meant that issues relating to the social inclusion of SWDs have received minimal attention. Purpose: To date, there is a dearth of South African studies which have investigated the social inclusion needs of SWDs on South African campuses. Although a number of studies have given voice to the perspectives of SWDs and lecturers, with respect to their experiences in relation to matters of academic inclusion in South African higher education (HE), few have focused on Disability Unit Staff Members(DUSMs) who are pivotal to ensuring fair and equitable policies and practices for SWDs in HEIs. Disability Studies (DS) as a field has been criticised for being dominated by voices from the Global North, which fail to consider or effectively theorise Global South disability experiences in a contextually relevant way. The thesis argues that the failure to recognise the value of diversity and to treat SWDs as valued and welcomed participants in South African HEIs partly stems from policy, practice and relationships being informed by the Western individualist paradigm that prizes individual achievement and success rather than cooperation and mutuality. The African philosophy of Ubuntu, which stresses values of communalism, hospitality and respect for human dignity is offered here as an alternative starting point for achieving genuinely inclusive campuses. Methods: In-depth face-to-face qualitative interviews were conducted with 40 participants, most of whom were, at the time of being interviewed, Heads of Disability Units and DUSMs based at 10 different universities in four of South Africa’s nine provinces. Data were coded and analysed using Braun & Clarke’s (2006) method of inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Results: The findings of this study indicate that South African campuses are ableist spaces in which the social needs of SWDs are not prioritised. The thesis argues that in order for campuses to become genuinely inclusive, South African campuses ought to seek to inculcate in their members the values of the African worldview Ubuntu, in contrast to the dominant Western individualist orthodoxy. SWDs are being excluded and denied a sense of belonging and equal participation despite universities giving lip service to embracing such inclusive education-oriented values as co-operative learning. Non-disabled students steeped in Western individualism, which affirms the solitary pursuit of individual success rather than the value of interdependence and diversity, end up marginalising SWDs who are seen as less capable. DUSMs addressing the needs of SWDs through an ableist/Western individualist lens are not challenging unfair practices which are impairing the dignity of SWDs, particularly students with physical disabilities who are being forced to “fit into” oppressive inaccessible built environments on campuses. These DUSMs may unwittingly re-inscribe ableist assumptions that normalise discrimination against SWDs. Conclusions and Recommendations: Ubuntu values offer a starting point for building mutual respect and interdependence between SWDs and their non-disabled peers. The thesis finds however that as was the case in traditional African communities, which embraced the values of Ubuntu, acts of leadership are required if Ubuntu’s values of human dignity, mutual respect and acceptance are to be fostered on campuses. In a range of important ways, the dignity of SWDs is not respected at HEIs in South Africa. This includes, for example, such practical matters as the inaccessibility of toilets to wheelchair users and the lack of appropriate signage for blind students. Disrespectful attitudes and assumptions about SWDs on the part of non-disabled university members also result in SWDs’ human dignity being impaired. Ubuntu’s value of hospitality stresses the importance of promoting relations of group solidarity and interdependence between SWDs and their non-disabled peers. Both academic inclusion-oriented programmes and the promotion of a wide range of social activities, involving both SWDs and non-disabled students, can play an important role in cultivating the formation of long-term fruitful and respectful friendships between SWDs and non-disabled students. An enabling classroom environment alone is not enough to holistically address the social inclusion needs of SWDs. South African HEIs that embrace the Ubuntu values of communalism, human dignity and hospitality will be in a position to respect the needs of SWDs as “whole persons”. Amongst other things, this requires DUSMs to be fully empowered to make important decisions regarding vital matters such as disability inclusion, and it necessitates university management to relinquish their power, so that they may work collaboratively with DUSMs and SWDs, all on equal footing, to ensure that HE funding allocation, policy and planning also prioritises the social needs of SWDs.
PSYCHOLOGY STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE PERSONALITY OF AN INDIVIDUAL WITH LIMITED HEALTH OPPORTUNITIES