Critical Networks: Embedding Programmes for individuals with Intellectual Impairments in University Contexts in Australia, Chile and Ireland

Abstract

This paper focuses on post-secondary programmes for individuals with intellectual impairments within university settings in Chile, Ireland, and Australia. Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is adopted to explain how programmes are developed and sustained through relationships between human and non-human actors. Findings show that for all the university embedded programmes, parent-actors initiated network development. These different programmes were then sustained by other actor-networks, each with its distinct emphasis. In the Chilean network, the university’s strong, dynamic support made it a catalyst and social change leader in higher education inclusion across employers and broader society In the Irish network, a strong university actor drove extensive relationships with community and employers who also provided training support. In the Australian network, government played a key role, shaping networks through compliance and funding requirements. These findings contribute to the sustainable development efforts of future programmes.

Points of interest This article examines relationships between human and non-human actors when establishing training programmes for people with intellectual disabilities within university settings in Chile, Ireland and Australia.

Overall, important networks that contribute to developing and sustaining post-secondary programmes for individuals with intellectual disabilities, include parent networks, training and funding networks within universities, governmental funding networks, charitable organisations, employer partner networks, and community inclusion networks.

In all three contexts, parents were key in starting and successfully building actor networks within the universities which were then extended by others.

The Chile and Ireland networks focused on private charitable organisations, employer partners and universities to sustain the programmes. The Australian network, in comparison, relied on government funding, including funding from the National Disability Insurance Agency.