Between Rights and Remediation: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Inclusive Education Policy in Ontario and Alberta

Abstract

This study uses Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (CDA) to investigate how Ontario and Alberta policy texts construct inclusive education. Using provincial documents on equity, special education, and accessibility, it examines the portrayal of students with disabilities, dominant inclusion discourses, and where responsibility for inclusion lies. The analysis indicates that Ontario views inclusion primarily through the lens of rights, accountability, and institutional duty while Alberta sees it via belonging, flexibility, and shared responsibility. . In both corpora, the student with disability is positioned as entitled to support, but remedial and managerial assumptions remain visible. Ontario’s texts show a stronger usage of legal language as well as being more monitoring and achievement-oriented in their governance compared to Alberta’s. Alberta’s policy is more in line with values-based, learner-centred speech and less explicit legal accountability. A specific study argues that inclusive education does not seem to be a fixed cohesive notion or concept. This paper contributes to disability and education research by offering a comparative study that show how the language of policy constructs inclusion in ways that might enable, limit or redirect practice.