EMMANUEL SASU BOAKYE - EXCLUSION AS ACADEMIC FREEDOM VIOLAITON.pptx

KNUST powerpoint template submit CODESRIA academic freedom conference

1. Presenter: Emmanuel Sasu Boakye 1 Excluding SVI from STEM Education in Ghanaian Universities: A Violation of Academic Freedom and Impedance to Intellectual Diversity Co-Authors: Francis Kwadwo Awuah & Patrick Swanzy Kwame Nkrumah Univ. of Science and Technology CODESRIA Conference on Academic Freedom Day 3 / Parallel Session 3 01/05/2025

2. 2 BACKGROUND Definitions for Academic Freedom is well documented in both scholarly and anecdotal literature. These definitions offer different views on how academics and students could enjoy their rights to science and contribute to it as well (Mama, 2011). Despite the varying views, a consensus could be drawn that Academic Freedom as a right ensures that everybody has the right to learn, teach and research without discrimination (Macfarlane, 2016). In this regard, students’ participation in learning are not to be based on ability, gender or race.

3. 3 WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE? Despite the existence of frameworks such as the Kampala Declaration (1990) and Dar es Salaam Declaration (1990) on Academic Freedom, students with vision impairment are excluded from STEM curricula in Ghanaian universities. As scholarly works have immensely investigated Academic Freedom, a literature review could not substantiate the existence of literature on how exclusion from STEM programme and curricula participation is a violation of Academic Freedom, as many of such works link to inclusive education, which is another problem of the continent. Hence, this study was conducted to script the voices of SVI on how exclusion violates Academic Freedom and the voices on SVI academics on intellectual impedance.

4. 4 WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE? However, despite the existence of frameworks such as the Kampala Declaration (1990) and Dar es Salaam Declaration (1990) on Academic Freedom, students with vision impairment are excluded from STEM curricula in Ghanaian universities. As scholarly works have immensely investigated Academic Freedom, a literature review by the authors could not substantiate the existence of literature on how exclusion/marginalisation in programme and curricula participation is a violation of Academic Freedom, looking at the Kampala Declaration (1990) Hence, this study was conducted to script the voices of SVI on how exclusion violates Academic Freedom.

5. 5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS How does the exclusion of students with visual impairment from STEM education violate their academic freedom? How does the exclusion of students with visual impairments from STEM education influence their intellectual contributions? What implications has the exclusion of students with visual impairments on intellectual discourse in STEM education?

6. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK The Academic Freedom as Structural Equity was used as the analytical framework for the study (López- Corredoira , 2022; Velez & Curry, 2020). Menand (2021) proclaims that academic freedom is not merely about the absence of censorship but also about the presence of equitable conditions that enable meaningful participation in intellectual inquiry. The framework emphasizes that Academic Freedom is a structure with the potential of promoting equity in accessing science and contributing to science. The framework suits its deployment in this study because of its strength to capture how Academic Freedom rights are essential to the promotion of science.

7. 7 METHODOLOGY Paradigm: Constructivist (Kuhn, 1970)- multiple reality, knowledge is construed by social actors Approach: Qualitative Research (Cresswell and Poth, 2017) Design: Case Study (Yin, 2018) Instrument: Semi-structured interviews and Document analysis (Cohen et al., 2017) Sampling Technique: Purposive sampling Key Informants: 11 informants – 7 SVI, 4 Tutors (data saturation) Issues of credibility, transferability, confirmability and dependability were prioritized to aid the trustworthiness of the research (Lincoln and Guba, 1985). Issues ethical consideration such as consent, voluntary participation, anonymity and confidentiality were also prioritised .

8. 8 DATA ANALYSIS The qualitative data garnered through the interviews were analysed using thematically guided by Tesch’s (1992) approach and data from documents were sourced using Preview, Question, Read, and Summarize PQRS ( method) . 1. Transcription of interview audios. 2. Open Coding 3. Themes identification The qualitative data analysis process was iterative and hence this approach was not followed religiously followed as revisits were down to some initial stages to better illuminate the voices and experiences of students and academics knowledge about the phenomenon.

9. 9 KEY FINDINGS Research Questions Findings SVI STEM Exclusion as Violation of Academic Freedom Institutional Negligence and Ableist Infrastructure Instituting policies where SVI purchase their own gadgets to promote inclusive education Establishment of predominantly sighted-oriented classrooms and laboratories Lack of SVI-friendly reference materials Pedagogical Ableism in Curricula Rigid curricula that are only suited to sighted students Legal Compliance vrs . Moral Responsibility Institutions are lost in why the academic freedom rights of students should be respected.

10. 10 KEY FINDINGS Research Questions Findings Influence of SVI STEM Exclusion on Intellectual Contributions Testimonial Injustice in Peer Review SVI researchers’ contributions are often dismissed as unscientific Hermeneutical Marginalisation in Knowledge Frameworks Non-visual epistemologies lack institutional recognition, leaving SVI without tools to articulate their work. Disability Innovation as Unrecognised Labour Institutions co-opt scientific contributions without credit to SVI and VI academics.

11. 11 KEY FINDINGS Research Questions Findings Implications of SVI STEM Exclusion on Intellectual Discourse Homogenisation of Problem-Solving Sight-centric norms in science limit creativity Global Epistemic Inequities Exclusion exacerbates Global North/South divides. Cycles of Exclusion and Underrepresentation Lack of SVI role models in STEM, perpetuating stereotyping

12. 12 CONCLUSION The study concludes that the exclusion of SVI from STEM education in Ghanaian Universities is as a result of turning blind eyes to the dilemmas of the victims. Also, the exclusion persists as there is a dearth of literature on the cost of excluding SVI from STEM education. Lastly, the exclusion of SVI from STEM education impedes the growth of science as diversity of knowledge systems from SVI and academics with vision impairment are not welcomed.

13. 13 LESSONS LEARNT Dismantle Ableist Infrastructures in STEM Education Establish Protocols to Validate Non-Visual Epistemologies through Scholarly Recognition Cultivate Inclusive Cultures through Training and Representation

14. 14 ASANTE MEDAASE THANK YOU