Affects of Human Aggregate

"Human aggregate components are those related to the collective characteristics of people in an environment" (Strange, 2000, p. 21).  These components range from demographic to psychosocial.  Environments that are inhabited mostly by individuals of one characteristic or type is said to be highly differentiated and consistent.  "The quality of anyone's experience is therefore a function of his or her congruence, or degree of fit, with the dominant group" (Strange, 2000, p. 21).  When an individual is in an incompatible environment they are less likely to be reinforced for preferred behaviors and is more likely to leave.  As I stated with the physical environment, safety and inclusion is extremely important, and this feeling of safety also comes from the congruence of the individual characteristics to the dominant characteristics in the environment.  According to the minority group paradigm (Jones, 1996) those who are of the numerical minority usually feel less welcome on campus.

I believe that the human aggregate is a very important aspect of the feelings of inclusion for students with disabilities because the term "disability" is socially constructed (which is also a big part of campus culture).    Jones (1996) explains that the social construction perspective  is based on understanding that what is believed about people with disabilties is based on meanings given to disabiltiies by those who do not have them. Regardless of where a student with a disability is, they are still the minority, regardless of where they are (except maybe the office of disability services).

Examples of how the Human Aggregate can affect students with disabilities.  
Low (1996) conducted several qualitative interviews with students with disabilities and noted the following:

-"Just as the road to hell is paved with good intentions, help from others may being students with disabilities into jeopardy" (Low, 1996, p. 239).  There are times when students that don't have disabilities try to help the students with disabilities which can end in making the situation worse. Low (1996) shared an anecdote of a time when a student was climbing up the stairs and another student grabbed their arm to help them and they ended up falling down the stairs.  The human aggregate needs to be informed on when to help and when not to.

-Sometimes the human aggregate can do the exact opposite form the situation about and ignore the disability.  This can be just as detrimental.  When a person ignores the disability they may say things that are harmful or hurtful like "let's go for a walk" or "you're crazy".  For someone with a mental illness, even joking around and telling someone they're crazy, but not meaning it in the literal way, can be very hurtful.

-Low (1996) explains that "the visible nature of student's disabilities often constrains the way in which others interact with them" .  In one of Low's interviews a student stated " if you're in a wheelchair people have to look down at you... they physically condescend to you" (p. 242).  This was something I had never thought about before.  Other people stated that they felt they would never have a relationship.  Students that don't have disabilities tend to stay away from those that do.  Because of this, students with physical disabilities tend to try to conceal them from the outside world so they aren't treated differently (not bringing all the needed materials for class like a brail machine, or not having a guide dog when it would be most beneficial)

-Students with learning disabilities and mental illness don't have to deal with the automatic stigma of a visible disabilities   These students, I believe more-so than students with visible disabilities, go back and forth between having a disabled identity and a non-disabled identity.  Low (1996) explains that there is an institutionalized acceptance of non-disabled identity, makes the student lose their disabled identity, which can be detrimental to the student who needs to accept the disabled identity to get the help and services they need to succeed.

-Eudaly (2002) in her paper about students with mental illness explains that instructors sometimes have worries about their personal and classroom safety when there is a student with mental illness in the class.  With these types of stigmas, even from teachers, fear to try to get the services they need because they are afraid to alienating themselves because those who are misinformed in the human aggregate of the institution (Eudaly, 2002, p. 3)

I believe that the human aggregate is probably what affects students with disabilities most.  From the social constructivist perspective, disability is constructed by the social environment/human aggregate, when in turn creates the campus climate and culture that the student is a part of.  The name "disability" already implies the contrary "abled" which in turn, already implies something negative.  On top of that, students must deal with the stigmas that SOCIETY (human aggregate) places on their already negative label.  Students with disabilities are already the minority which comes with its own hurdles, but must also deal with stigma placed on what is making them the minority.

Strange, C. (2000). Creating environments of ability. In H. Belch, Serving Students with Disabilities. New Directions in Student Services, Number 91. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 19-30.
Jones, S. R. (1996) “Toward Inclusive Theory: Disability as Social Construction.” NASPA Journal, 33, 347–354.Low, J. (1996).  Negotiating identities, negotiating environments: an interpretation of the experiences of students with disabilities. Disability & Society, 11, 235-348.
 Eudaly, J. (2002). A rising tide: Students with psychiatric disabilities seek services in record numbers. Retrieved October 10, 2007, fromhttp://www.heath.gwu.edu/files/active/0/psychiatric_disabilities.pdf