How could individuals with cognitive disability engage with media – not only as tools for support, but also as content to be understood, interpreted, and critically reflected upon? To date, research has largely focused on how digital technologies can assist in everyday life. Ulrica Brolinson’s PhD project seeks to shift this perspective by foregrounding citizenship.
In an increasingly digitalised society, citizens are expected to be digitally competent, employable, and adaptable. This expectation is closely aligned with the logic of the knowledge economy (Ball, 2012, 2021; Biesta, 2010; Rizvi & Lingard, 2017), where learning is framed primarily in terms of cognitive and communicative skills that enable participation in economic and social life. Such a perspective tends to rely on a largely homogeneous understanding of the citizen – one who is autonomous, rational, and capable of navigating complex information environments independently. However, this raises a critical question: what happens to those who do not fit this normative model?
Within discussions of media and information literacy (MIL), students in special education – particularly those with intellectual disabilities – are often overlooked in policy. This absence is not merely a deliberate omission but reflects a broader lack of attention to digital exclusion.
Without conscious and strategically planned inclusion, digitalisation risks reinforcing existing inequalities and transforming from a tool of empowerment into a mechanism of marginalisation. From this perspective, the answer to the question of whether MIL should be taught in special education is unequivocal: it must. This argument should first and foremost be understood as a matter of democratic citizenship.
Active Citizenship
To grasp the significance of MIL in this context, it is necessary to consider what constitutes “active citizenship” (Halvorsen & Hvinden, 2013; Lindqvist & Sépulchre, 2016). Active citizenship extends beyond mere protection or passive inclusion; it entails the capacity to act autonomously, participate in social life, and influence decisions affecting one’s own life.
Drawing on T. H. Marshall’s (1950) classical conception of citizenship as encompassing civil, political, and social rights, one can argue that digital participation is increasingly integral to all three dimensions.
Crucially, active citizenship does not depend solely on individual capacities or motivation. It is equally contingent upon external structures that enable meaningful participation. These structures include accessible information, adapted environments, and inclusive forms of communication. Without such supports, the expectation of active citizenship risks becoming exclusionary, privileging those who already possess the required competencies while marginalising others.
Ultimately, teaching MIL in special education is not simply an educational concern but a question of justice.
Ensuring that all individuals, regardless of cognitive ability, have the opportunity to participate in the digital public sphere is fundamental to a democratic society. Without such efforts, the promise of digital inclusion remains unfulfilled, and the gap between those who can and cannot participate meaningfully in society continues to widen.
Media Literacy in Adapted Settings
A communicative and inclusive learning environment plays a critical role in preparing students for participation beyond the classroom.
In this light, MIL education for students with intellectual disabilities must not be reduced to the acquisition of technical skills. Rather, it should be understood as a matter of participation rights. Providing appropriate external supports – such as visual aids and Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) – enables students to access, interpret, and engage with media and information in ways that are meaningful to them. These adaptations are not merely pedagogical tools, but they are essential conditions for exercising citizenship in a digital society.
The teaching components can be many. Students need access to technology and support to use it, combining high-tech tools (e.g. iPads) and low-tech supports (e.g. symbols, communication boards). To understand civic rights, students need opportunities to practise participation in digital contexts. MIL is therefore linked to teaching components that strengthen communication, participation, and responsible action.
Furthermore, MIL involves engaging in dialogue and decision-making. Activities such as class councils, school elections, and adapted surveys allow students to express opinions and participate, supported by visual communication tools. Students need to understand risks, rules, and rights. Through visual supports and guided discussions, they learn to evaluate information and act safely, balancing participation with protection.
By engaging with media in adapted ways, students can develop not only functional skills but also a sense of agency and belonging. This is particularly important in a media landscape characterised by multimodality, rapid information flows, and increasing complexity, where the ability to navigate and make sense of information is central to social participation.
Studying Non-Dominant Policy Frameworks
The global MIL framework promoted by UNESCO is underpinned by rights-based approaches that emphasise the universal right to access information. Yet, what these frameworks mean for the specific conditions and perspectives of diverse minority groups, including the disabled, is often less articulated.
The underlying assumption is often that the universal model is flexible, comprehensive and versatile enough to be made more inclusive. However, it may be fruitful to think how the fundamental epistemic structures should be reconfigured if the model is recentered according to these marginal groups. Analyses of other-than nation state policy frameworks can thus reveal blind spots in dominant frameworks, which often assume a homogeneous, fully able and linguistically privileged user.
Therefore, looking at MIL in non-dominant settings – that is, beyond normative models of citizen education and within contexts shaped by minority identities, lesser-used languages, and vulnerable positionings of learners – allows us to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the MIL ecology.
MIL in non-dominant contexts open new parths of discussion such as the role of adult and parental mediation, representativeness and support in the case of people of disabilities. For example, caregivers are less often examined as stakeholder of MIL, to be educated, updated and involved, even if they hold keys to certain groups’ participation.
Non-dominant perspectives may challenge taken-for-granted assumptions about what counts as competence, participation, and citizenship in digital environments. They expand the conceptual boundaries of MIL by foregrounding issues of accessibility, adaptation, and power, and by demonstrating how media engagement is shaped by social, cultural, linguistic, and cognitive diversity. In this way, studying non-dominant settings does not only add marginal cases to the field, but fundamentally reshapes how we understand the aims, practices, and responsibilities of MIL.
Ulrika Brolinson is lecturer and a doctoral student in Special Education at Karlstad University, Sweden, currently finalising her PhD thesis titled Att vara medborgare i en digital tid: Policyperspektiv och berättelser från anpassad gymnasieskola (”To be a citizen in a digital time: Policy perspectives and narratives from special upper secondary school”). She is collaborating on media literacy issues with Maarit Jaakkola, scholar in media and information literacy (MIL) and co-director of Nordicom.
References
Ball, S. J. (2012). Politics and policy making in education: Explorations in sociology. Routledge.
Ball, S. J. (2021). The education debate. Policy Press.
Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Paradigm Publishers.
Halvorsen, R., & Hvinden, B. (2013). Making persons with disabilities full citizens: New knowledge for an inclusive and sustainable European social model (DISCIT). www.discit.eu
Lindqvist, R., & Sépulchre, M. (2016). Active citizenship for persons with psychosocial disabilities in Sweden. Alter, 10(2), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2016.03.004
Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class. Cambridge University Press.
Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2017). Globalizing education policy. Routledge.
Photo: Towfiqu Barbhuiya / Unsplash