Critical discourse analysis of federal and provincial government grants for post-secondary students with disabilities in Alberta and Ontario.

Although higher education typically strengthens people with disabilities' chances to be in a competitive job market as a leverage to break away from poverty, the contemporary marketization of higher education within the era of neoliberalism has made degrees and diplomas increasingly unaffordable. The federal government responded to this predicament by increasing the Canada Social Transfer to offer up-front targeted funding to students with disabilities in 2008. However, virtually no literature has acknowledged whether financial grants meaningfully provide students with disabilities with an equitable opportunity to engage in post-secondary education. Using critical discourse analysis on government online materials that address federal and provincial disability grants for post-secondary students with disabilities in Alberta and Ontario, this study reveals how the neoliberal rhetoric of personal responsibility shapes the practice of government disability grants. This practice can leave students with 'more responsibility' while rendering 'less control' over their finances in an already disabling world. This study looks at how language is communicated by federal and provincial government grants to post-secondary students with disabilities in Alberta and Ontario. The research found that Canadian financial assistance programs for students with disabilities have been operating using techniques that largely reflect self-reliance and personal responsibility. Students with disabilities are left with more responsibilities to prove their worthiness for assistance. At the same time, students cannot know for sure whether they will receive the necessary funds to continue their studies. Medical understandings of disability are strictly used to determine the eligibility for financial assistance, leaving little room for students to decide what they need to suit their individual needs best. The findings suggest that government financial assistance programs are not firmly committed to providing students with disabilities with an equitable opportunity to engage in PSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]