The issue of special education in the United States has been a contentious issue, at best, for the past 40 years. In Ontario, to a lesser extent, there have been issues of equal access to education for minoritized and racialized students. Special education in the Toronto area has not been without its issues surrounding parental advocacy, the use of assessments, and disproportionate number of English Language Learners in special education. This project examines how racialized and minoritized families understand special education practices and policies, specifically within the Toronto, York, Peel, and Halton Regions. The investigation is informed by nine interviews with students in grades 7 to 12, their respective mothers, and five special education administrators and educators. Students and parents identified themselves as Black, Latino/a, and South Asian. Within these categories, parents identified themselves as Somali, Trinidadian, Jamaican, and Punjabi-Sikh. Students were identified with a range of disabilities including learning, behavioural, and/or intellectual. This research focuses on ways to interrogate and examine the experiences of minoritized students and their parents by bringing forward otherwise silenced voices and understanding what it means to “speak out” against the process of identification and placement in special education. The findings of this investigation suggest a disconnect how policies and practices are implemented, and how, parents’ rights are understood. In particular, policies are inconsistently applied and are subject to the interpretation of educators and administrators, especially in relation to parental involvement and how much information should be released to families. The issue of language acquisition being read as a disability was also a noted concern. This investigation points to implications for teacher education programs, gaps in parental advocacy and notions of parental participation within schools, and re-examining special education assessments, practices, and policies.

The issue of special education in the United States has been a contentious issue, at best, for the past 40 years. In Ontario, to a lesser extent, there have been issues of equal access to education for minoritized and racialized students. Special education in the Toronto area has not been without its issues surrounding parental advocacy, the use of assessments, and disproportionate number of English Language Learners in special education. This project examines how racialized and minoritized families understand special education practices and policies, specifically within the Toronto, York, Peel, and Halton Regions. The investigation is informed by nine interviews with students in grades 7 to 12, their respective mothers, and five special education administrators and educators. Students and parents identified themselves as Black, Latino/a, and South Asian. Within these categories, parents identified themselves as Somali, Trinidadian, Jamaican, and Punjabi-Sikh. Students were identified with a range of disabilities including learning, behavioural, and/or intellectual. This research focuses on ways to interrogate and examine the experiences of minoritized students and their parents by bringing forward otherwise silenced voices and understanding what it means to “speak out” against the process of identification and placement in special education. The findings of this investigation suggest a disconnect how policies and practices are implemented, and how, parents’ rights are understood. In particular, policies are inconsistently applied and are subject to the interpretation of educators and administrators, especially in relation to parental involvement and how much information should be released to families. The issue of language acquisition being read as a disability was also a noted concern. This investigation points to implications for teacher education programs, gaps in parental advocacy and notions of parental participation within schools, and re-examining special education assessments, practices, and policies.

Nesta pesquisa, observamos a construção e articulação dos discursos sobre o tema da mudança climática na cobertura da Rio+20, feitas pelas revistas Veja, Isto É, Época e Carta Capital. Com apoio das Teorias do Jornalismo e sob a perspectiva teórica-metodológica da Análise do Discurso de linha francesa, analisamos as regularidades e diferenças dos discursos. Entendemos que desde a seleção dos temas, das fontes, do enfoque da reportagem, há uma visão específica de cada publicação — o seu “enquadramento discursivo”, que se constitui no lugar do movimento discursivo sobre o acontecimento relatado, e que responde basicamente a questão: “o que está acontecendo aqui?”. Por outro lado, observamos que o discurso das revistas é derivado de uma formação discursiva hegemônica, de viés econômico, ancorado nos conceitos de modernização ecológica, desenvolvimento sustentável, pela percepção do risco e da incerteza da humanidade sobre seu futuro. Percebemos que a racionalidade dominante — econômica — busca encobrir a complexidade ambiental. Na análise, contudo, identificamos alguns deslizamentos de sentido, oriundos de uma formação discursiva emergente, de viés ambiental. No discurso jornalístico, há a confluência de poderes, circunstâncias e construções que explicam porque as notícias são como são. Como o discurso é um processo dinâmico com sentidos em disputa, abre-se a possibilidade de pensarmos por que as notícias não são diferentes, outras, plurais? Ao propor um novo lugar para as notícias, evidencia-se a contribuição essencial dos pressupostos do Jornalismo Ambiental, seu papel questionador dos caminhos possíveis em relação ao meio ambiente, seu compromisso com o saber ambiental e com a construção da cidadania. / In this research, we observe the construction and articulation of discourse on the topic of climate change in the coverage of Rio + 20, made by Veja, Isto É, Época e Carta Capital. With the support of Journalism Theories and under the theoreticalmethodological perspective of Analysis of Discourse of line french, we analyze the regularities and differences of discourses. We understand that since the selection of themes, the sources, the focus of the report, there is a specific view of each publication — his "discursive framework", which is in place of the discursive movement on the reported event, and that basically answers the question "what's going on here?". On the other hand, we observed that the discourse of magazines is derived from a hegemonic discursive formation, economic bias, anchored in the concepts of ecological modernization, sustainable development, the perception of risk and of uncertainty humanity about their future. We realized that the dominant rationality — economic — search cover up the environmental complexity. In the analysis, however, identified some sense of landslides, coming from an emerging discursive formation, environmental bias. In the journalistic discourse, there is a confluence of powers, conditions and structures that explain why the news are as they are. As the discourse is a dynamic process with meanings in dispute, opens the possibility of thinking why the news is no different, other, plural? In proposing a new place for news, highlights the essential contribution of the Environmental Journalism assumptions, his questioning role of the possible ways in relation to the environment, its commitment to environmental knowledge and the construction of citizenship.

Nesta pesquisa, observamos a construção e articulação dos discursos sobre o tema da mudança climática na cobertura da Rio+20, feitas pelas revistas Veja, Isto É, Época e Carta Capital. Com apoio das Teorias do Jornalismo e sob a perspectiva teórica-metodológica da Análise do Discurso de linha francesa, analisamos as regularidades e diferenças dos discursos. Entendemos que desde a seleção dos temas, das fontes, do enfoque da reportagem, há uma visão específica de cada publicação — o seu “enquadramento discursivo”, que se constitui no lugar do movimento discursivo sobre o acontecimento relatado, e que responde basicamente a questão: “o que está acontecendo aqui?”. Por outro lado, observamos que o discurso das revistas é derivado de uma formação discursiva hegemônica, de viés econômico, ancorado nos conceitos de modernização ecológica, desenvolvimento sustentável, pela percepção do risco e da incerteza da humanidade sobre seu futuro. Percebemos que a racionalidade dominante — econômica — busca encobrir a complexidade ambiental. Na análise, contudo, identificamos alguns deslizamentos de sentido, oriundos de uma formação discursiva emergente, de viés ambiental. No discurso jornalístico, há a confluência de poderes, circunstâncias e construções que explicam porque as notícias são como são. Como o discurso é um processo dinâmico com sentidos em disputa, abre-se a possibilidade de pensarmos por que as notícias não são diferentes, outras, plurais? Ao propor um novo lugar para as notícias, evidencia-se a contribuição essencial dos pressupostos do Jornalismo Ambiental, seu papel questionador dos caminhos possíveis em relação ao meio ambiente, seu compromisso com o saber ambiental e com a construção da cidadania. / In this research, we observe the construction and articulation of discourse on the topic of climate change in the coverage of Rio + 20, made by Veja, Isto É, Época e Carta Capital. With the support of Journalism Theories and under the theoreticalmethodological perspective of Analysis of Discourse of line french, we analyze the regularities and differences of discourses. We understand that since the selection of themes, the sources, the focus of the report, there is a specific view of each publication — his "discursive framework", which is in place of the discursive movement on the reported event, and that basically answers the question "what's going on here?". On the other hand, we observed that the discourse of magazines is derived from a hegemonic discursive formation, economic bias, anchored in the concepts of ecological modernization, sustainable development, the perception of risk and of uncertainty humanity about their future. We realized that the dominant rationality — economic — search cover up the environmental complexity. In the analysis, however, identified some sense of landslides, coming from an emerging discursive formation, environmental bias. In the journalistic discourse, there is a confluence of powers, conditions and structures that explain why the news are as they are. As the discourse is a dynamic process with meanings in dispute, opens the possibility of thinking why the news is no different, other, plural? In proposing a new place for news, highlights the essential contribution of the Environmental Journalism assumptions, his questioning role of the possible ways in relation to the environment, its commitment to environmental knowledge and the construction of citizenship.

Nesta pesquisa, observamos a construção e articulação dos discursos sobre o tema da mudança climática na cobertura da Rio+20, feitas pelas revistas Veja, Isto É, Época e Carta Capital. Com apoio das Teorias do Jornalismo e sob a perspectiva teórica-metodológica da Análise do Discurso de linha francesa, analisamos as regularidades e diferenças dos discursos. Entendemos que desde a seleção dos temas, das fontes, do enfoque da reportagem, há uma visão específica de cada publicação — o seu “enquadramento discursivo”, que se constitui no lugar do movimento discursivo sobre o acontecimento relatado, e que responde basicamente a questão: “o que está acontecendo aqui?”. Por outro lado, observamos que o discurso das revistas é derivado de uma formação discursiva hegemônica, de viés econômico, ancorado nos conceitos de modernização ecológica, desenvolvimento sustentável, pela percepção do risco e da incerteza da humanidade sobre seu futuro. Percebemos que a racionalidade dominante — econômica — busca encobrir a complexidade ambiental. Na análise, contudo, identificamos alguns deslizamentos de sentido, oriundos de uma formação discursiva emergente, de viés ambiental. No discurso jornalístico, há a confluência de poderes, circunstâncias e construções que explicam porque as notícias são como são. Como o discurso é um processo dinâmico com sentidos em disputa, abre-se a possibilidade de pensarmos por que as notícias não são diferentes, outras, plurais? Ao propor um novo lugar para as notícias, evidencia-se a contribuição essencial dos pressupostos do Jornalismo Ambiental, seu papel questionador dos caminhos possíveis em relação ao meio ambiente, seu compromisso com o saber ambiental e com a construção da cidadania. / In this research, we observe the construction and articulation of discourse on the topic of climate change in the coverage of Rio + 20, made by Veja, Isto É, Época e Carta Capital. With the support of Journalism Theories and under the theoreticalmethodological perspective of Analysis of Discourse of line french, we analyze the regularities and differences of discourses. We understand that since the selection of themes, the sources, the focus of the report, there is a specific view of each publication — his "discursive framework", which is in place of the discursive movement on the reported event, and that basically answers the question "what's going on here?". On the other hand, we observed that the discourse of magazines is derived from a hegemonic discursive formation, economic bias, anchored in the concepts of ecological modernization, sustainable development, the perception of risk and of uncertainty humanity about their future. We realized that the dominant rationality — economic — search cover up the environmental complexity. In the analysis, however, identified some sense of landslides, coming from an emerging discursive formation, environmental bias. In the journalistic discourse, there is a confluence of powers, conditions and structures that explain why the news are as they are. As the discourse is a dynamic process with meanings in dispute, opens the possibility of thinking why the news is no different, other, plural? In proposing a new place for news, highlights the essential contribution of the Environmental Journalism assumptions, his questioning role of the possible ways in relation to the environment, its commitment to environmental knowledge and the construction of citizenship.