The 2024 Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) standards represent a pivotal and long-overdue advancement by explicitly integrating disability into the core competencies required across all counseling specialties. This shift marks a decisive break from the profession’s entrenched pattern of reducing disability to a medical diagnosis issue or a problem to be fixed rather than as a valid and valuable dimension of human diversity (Hartley & Saia, 2022). Historically, disability has been relegated to the margins of counselor education, often confined exclusively to rehabilitation counseling rather than recognized as an integral part of the training of all counselors (Pierce, 2024). This intentional siloing has contributed to systemic exclusion, reinforcing ableist norms and leaving generations of counselors underprepared to serve disabled clients (Feather & Carlson, 2019; Pierce, 2024). Therefore, as these new standards are implemented, counselor educators bear a professional and ethical responsibility to ensure disability inclusion is not merely performative but meaningfully infused in the curriculum and pedagogy (Hill & Delgado, 2022). As such, an intentional commitment to developing content that is accessible, equitable, and actively anti-ableist in both theory and practice is required of counselor educators.
Adopting new standards without simultaneously confronting the entrenched ableism within the counseling profession risks reinforcing the very exclusion these revisions aim to dismantle. At its most basic level, ableism refers to discrimination and prejudice against disabled people. Yet disability justice advocate Talia Lewis (2022) powerfully defines ableism from a lens that is expansive, intersectional, and systemic, moving far beyond individual bias.
Ableism is a system of assigning value to people’s bodies and minds based on societally constructed ideas of normalcy, productivity, desirability, intelligence, excellence, and fitness. These constructed ideas are deeply rooted in eugenics, anti-Blackness, misogyny, colonialism, imperialism, and capitalism. This systemic oppression leads to people and society determining others’ value based on their culture, age, language, appearance, religion, birth or living place, ‘health/wellness,’ and/or their ability to satisfactorily re/produce, ‘excel,’ and ‘behave.’ You do not have to be disabled to experience ableism. (para. 1)
Lewis’s definition underscores that ableism is not simply about access or accommodations; it is a deeply embedded, intersectional system of oppression, stigma, and bias. Within counselor education, this system is reflected in curricula that omit disability, pedagogies that default to deficit-based models, and institutional practices that fail to affirm disability as a cultural identity (Hartley et al., 2025; Hartley & Saia, 2022). These structures privilege non-disabled norms and reinforce a narrow, medicalized understanding of disability that sidelines the experiences, voices, knowledge, and leadership of disabled people, reducing them to passive recipients of care rather than recognizing them as full participants, experts, and changemakers within the field.
Unless we explicitly name, examine, and dismantle systemic ableism, it will continue to undermine equity, inclusion, and social justice in our profession. Disability scholars advocate for disability-conscious education, rooted in disability studies and justice, as a transformative shift from traditional, clinical models. This approach centers the lived experiences of disabled people emphasizing access, interdependence, and identity. Such principles are vital for training counselors to practice with cultural humility, anti-oppression, and respect for disability as a meaningful aspect of human diversity.
Additionally, supporting the professional development and leadership of disabled counselors is a critical, yet often overlooked, concern within the field (Hartley & Saia, 2022). Although the discourse on multiculturalism and diversity has gained traction in counselor education, disability continues to be marginalized in comparison (Rivas, 2020; Rivas & Hill, 2018). Representation of disability is lacking across counseling research, academic curricula, and the day-to-day experiences of counseling students. Research illustrates the depth of this exclusion: since 1990, only approximately 1% of articles in general counseling journals have focused on disability-related topics (Emir Öksüz & Brubaker, 2020; Woo et al., 2016). In a curriculum analysis, Priester and colleagues (2008) found that only 25% of multicultural counseling course syllabi included content on disability. Furthermore, Deroche and colleagues (2020) reported that more than half of counseling students believed disability received significantly less attention than other cultural identities in their coursework.
These disparities expose a systemic oversight that demands urgent redress. As Davis (2011) incisively asked, we must interrogate whether “there is something inherent in the way diversity is considered that makes it impossible to recognize disability as a valid human identity” (p. 4). The ongoing marginalization of disability in counselor education demands intentional reflection and action from educators, supervisors, and practitioners. The field must critically assess how disability is addressed, or overlooked, in teaching, practice, and professional standards. True progress requires embedding disability across all aspects of counselor education, not as a checklist item, but through a fundamental shift in how disability is understood, taught, and valued.
Counselor educators are uniquely positioned to serve as levers of change, shaping the next generation of counselors, informing institutional priorities, and advancing equity within and beyond the classroom. Disability rights pioneer Judy Heumann and colleagues (2019) powerfully remind us, “Change never happens at the pace we think it should. It happens over years of people joining together, strategizing, sharing, and pulling all the levers they possibly can. Gradually, excruciatingly slowly, things start to happen, and then suddenly, seemingly out of the blue, something will tip” (p. 183). The CACREP standards revision offers precisely such a lever. To seize it, counselor educators must act with intention and urgency—embedding disability-conscious pedagogy across the curriculum, partnering with disabled scholars and community members, and ensuring that disability is not an afterthought but a central component. Only then can the profession move from tokenism toward transformation.
Integration of Disability in Counselor Education
The revised CACREP Standards (2024) provide an opportunity to reframe the way disability is addressed in the counseling curriculum. Rather than presenting disability from a medical model-view via presentation of information about diagnoses or conditions, counselor educators are encouraged to acknowledge disability as a culture and identity, presenting disability-affirming counseling models and the Disability Counseling Competencies (Chapin et al., 2018) to directly address disability across the curriculum. The following sections provide additional information for those who are new to these concepts, as well as resources for curriculum development.
Recognition of Disability as a Culture and Identity
Despite population estimates that suggest somewhere between 15-20% of people worldwide have a disability (Centers for Disease Control, 2024; World Health Organization, 2023), there is a general lack of appreciation of disability as an identity and culture. This is likely a result of ableism and the stigmatization of disability, and the presentation of disability as a largely medical rather than cultural experience (Mueller et al., 2024). In addition, disabled people are underrepresented in counseling and counselor education, contributing to the lack of attention to disability culture and identity in counseling curricula. Disability culture is defined as, “the celebration and reappropriation of a traditionally negative identity and consists of expressions of disability pride” (Mueller et al., 2024, p. 57). Values inherent in disability culture include an appreciation for individual differences and human variation, interdependence, tolerance of unpredictability, and use of problem-solving, humor, and multiple approaches to accomplishing desired tasks (Mueller et al., 2024). This cultural view stands in stark contrast to westernized views on valuing independence and self-sufficiency, instead emphasizing individual autonomy and choice and being able to accept assistance as needed. It does not devalue disabled lives or ways of living; rather, it celebrates disability as an aspect of diversity (Forber-Pratt et al., 2019).
Disability identity draws on the social and diversity models of disability, where its development is defined as “a psychological, social, and cultural process of understanding and making meaning out of disability labels, embodied experiences, and participation in the disability community” (Mueller et al., 2024, p. 56). Disabled people are far from a monolith, and since disability intersects with other identities (e.g., race, gender, culture), individuals have had vastly different experiences with disability, stigma, and marginalization that need to be considered and understood holistically and within the individual’s context (Saia et al., 2024). Forber-Pratt et al. (2019) presented several models of disability-identity development, providing strong resources for class content. Research supports the positive influence of disability identity development on sense of self, resilience to structural and attitudinal discrimination, and mental health symptoms (Bogart, 2015; Forber-Pratt et al., 2019; Mueller et al., 2024).
Disability-Affirming Counseling Models and Methods
Disability-affirmative therapy (DAT; Olkin, 2017) is a counseling approach for understanding disability context to more accurately develop a case conceptualization of an individual client. DAT is based on tenets of disability studies and encourages counselors to thoroughly explore how a client has experienced disability and ableism and how these experiences have shaped their self-concept and are part of their story. Olkin (2017) highlighted that disability is often viewed as a defining trait, leading others to assume it explains a person’s other identities or is the reason they are seeking help, regardless of whether that is actually the case. Using DAT and its template for gathering information allows the counselor to understand the unique impact disability has had on an individual. The template addresses physical and developmental experiences, identity (including intersectional identities), experiences with disability related microaggressions and other forms of stigma and discrimination, affiliation and connection with the disability community, and friendships and intimate relationships (Olkin, 2017). Evidence suggests promising treatment outcomes associated with DAT among neurodivergent (Kroll et al., 2024) and clients with physical disabilities (Zapata, 2020).
The Disability-Related Counseling Competencies (DRCC; Chapin et al., 2018) provide structure for presenting content in skills and practice-based courses to ensure attention to disability. The DRCC provide guidance for interacting with disabled people, accessibility and accommodations that may enhance interpersonal interactions and communication. The competencies include information that may improve counselors’ understanding of the ways disabled people are discriminated against and marginalized in educational, social, employment, and healthcare settings. The DRCC also provide context for understanding how disability may or may not be part of a client’s presenting concern, providing resources to acknowledge and support the individual’s intersecting identities (not just disability-related) and effective strategies for advocacy and supporting client self-advocacy.
Professional Development Resources and Instructional Strategies
Building on cultural models of disability, identity, and disability-affirming counseling approaches, we present areas of professional development and active strategies for counselor educators to advance our collective journey toward anti-ableism and infusing disability in the curriculum. This approach recognizes anti-ableist development not as a one-way transmission of knowledge from teacher to student, but a reciprocal, evolving process that implicates educators as learners. We also acknowledge that readers come to this work from varied vantage points and lived experiences; some may need to draw more heavily from certain resources than others and will be in different phases of readiness to move forward with infusing disability across curricula. First, we present resources and approaches for deepening self-reflection and awareness of ableism followed by concrete actions that translate into practice. The following is a description of activities and example resources to help readers engage with meaningful professional development to further their own understanding and prioritize anti-ableism in their pedagogy and counselor training.
Self-Reflection
Counselor educators come to our profession with our own identities and set of life experiences that shape how we think about disability, as well as our understanding of and relationship with ableism. Talila Lewis, who is an activist, educator, movement strategist, and community lawyer, described disability as, “one of the most fluid and complex marginalized identities; and ableism is the oldest, most radical, and one of the least understood systemic oppressions” (Yancy & Lewis, 2023, para. 6). Counselor educators training in the rehabilitation counseling specialty may be tempted to believe they understand disability and ableism because of our training in chronic illness, disability, and their impact (Hartley & Saia, 2022). Unfortunately, we are not exempt from ableism (Roundtree et al., 2025); research involving disability professionals (those who work directly with disabled people or whose work is about disability) demonstrated respondents explicitly and implicitly preferred non-disabled people (Friedman, 2023).
Educators who do not identify as disabled may consider their understanding of ableism as an outsider. They may not recognize their able privilege and how a lack of insight perpetuates continued structural ableism and marginalization of disabled people in academic and counseling spaces (Pierce, 2024). In counselor education, we use training and unpacking of privilege as a tool to understand power dynamics and sources of social disadvantage; however, ability privilege likely receives less attention than other forms of privilege (Hartley et al., 2025). Resources and trainings are available for understanding ability privilege and raising awareness of environmental, social, and cultural barriers disabled people experience (i.e., Larson & Choate, 2011). Instructors must ensure equity and accessibility during training to avoid reinforcing pity or framing disability as a pathology. The focus should remain on recognizing that disabled people lead meaningful lives (Hartley et al., 2025). What follows are specific recommendations for self-reflection, including strategies to increase self-awareness of ableist ideas/beliefs and activities to encourage self-reflection and discussion around ableism. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, nor should it be treated as a checklist. Rather, these suggestions are offered as tangible efforts to support ongoing, intentional self-reflection in the pursuit of anti-ableist practice.
Discussion Activities
Revisit Lewis’ (2022) Definition of Ableism. This community-driven definition is markedly different from more academic definitions of ableism and explicates what writers often refer to as stereotypes, stigmatization, discrimination, and oppression experienced by disabled people (c.f., Dunn, 2024). Faculty and students can consider where and how ableism is evident in program and counseling spaces, and how the status quo perpetuates exclusion and marginalization of disabled students, faculty, and counselors. Critical reflection questions: What has my experience been with disability to this point? How did I learn about ability and disability? How is dis/ability considered within this program? What existing practices support inclusion and equity? What practices reinforce exclusion, marginalization, and disadvantage based on dis/ability status? What are ways that our program can be more inclusive across disability status?
Center the Lived Experiences of Disabled People and Their History in Nondisabled Spaces. It is critical for counselor educators and students to understand the complicated history of the treatment of disabled people, disability activism, and their role in disability policy. Disability community members have long asked non-disabled people to stop speaking for them, developing policies about them, and generally assuming they know what is best (Saia, 2023). A famous phrase used by community members to express this desire is “nothing about us without us.” Understanding when, how, and under what conditions national anti-discrimination legislation (e.g., The Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act) came about can be important steps in increasing awareness of ableism. Going beyond these landmark acts to understand where laws and policies in the U.S. continue to oppress and marginalize disabled people is also critical to identifying and understanding ableism (Fleming et al., 2024). Readings that can help with understanding the impact of current laws and policies in the United States and their impact on disabled people (from disabled creators) can be found in several of the books, documentaries, and podcasts in Table 1. Fleming and colleagues (2024) synthesized historical gains in rights and access for disabled Americans, outlining areas of policy that continue to hinder equity in medical care, community life, and civil rights. Critical reflection questions: Why do counselors need to understand disability laws and policy? What harm occurs when community voices are not listened to? Why is accessibility so important for equity? What do leaders in the disability community say about advocacy priorities and gaps in disability policy?
Interrogate, Compare, and Contrast Models of Disability and Their Impact on the Disability Community. Models of disability are a common starting point for education on disability and its impact. For a resource, please see Hill and Delgado (2022) and Smart and Smart (2006) to review disability models for inclusion in counseling courses. There is an implicit conflict among models, since the medical model inherently views disability as “abnormal” pathology requiring treatment, which can feed ableist norms and beliefs if not considered within our social and political context (Tran et al., 2024). The social and disability justice models create opportunities for disability-conscious learning by highlighting the ways counseling and disability services have institutionalized ableism (Bowen et al., 2026). In medical training, efforts have been made to recognize and combat ableist practice in health care (Bowen et al., 2026); we are well-positioned to mirror this effort in counseling.
With respect to increasing self-awareness of ableism, educators may consider dimensions of structural ableism reflected in counseling and disability services based on a medical model of disability and seek out of narratives of disabled people and their experiences in counseling. Reflection may include questioning existing hierarchies and considering how to build a health and social services system that promotes intersectional social justice (Bowen et al., 2026). Critical reflection questions: How do different models of disability (i.e., medical, social, biopsychosocial, cultural) shape how we understand disability and respond to it as a society? How does ableism intersect with other systems of oppression, such as racism, sexism, classism, or heteronormativity? How is ableism embedded in higher education, health care, employment, and other institutions?
Identify and Understand the Impact of Ableist Microaggressions. Ableist microaggressions send a message that disability status is inherently negative, devaluing, and minimizing to disabled people. Aydemir-Döke (2024) outlined domains of ableist microaggressions commonly experienced by disabled people, including several instances and examples highly relevant to counselor education and training. Within educational and professional settings, disabled professionals and students commonly encounter low expectations, denial of disability experiences, denial of identity, patronization (or false admiration/inspiration), and marginalization or exclusion (Roundtree, 2024). These microaggressions may come in the form of assuming a student or professional is unable to perform at an expected level of skill or expertise, over- or under-acknowledging the role of disability in one’s identity and daily experiences, or being labeled inspiring for doing the same expected activities non-disabled peers do regularly. Faculty, instructors, supervisors, and counselors-in-training need to be attuned to these forms of ableist microaggressions to understand how they reflect implicit ableism and how comments and interactions impact disabled faculty, students, supervisors, and clients. Critical reflection questions: What are ableist microaggressions? How do they differ from overt discrimination? Why can they be harder to recognize or address? What are some common ableist microaggressions you have observed or experienced (e.g., “You don’t look disabled,” “You’re so inspiring”)? How might these comments seem well-intentioned but still cause harm? What are some ways to respond when you witness or commit an ableist microaggression?
Seek Out Direct and Indirect Contact With Disabled Individuals and Disability-Centered Cultural Events. Exposure to the of lived experiences through first-person narratives of disabled people may provide additional awareness and insight that could help increase disability competence (Alaveraz-Delgado et al., 2018; Antonak & Livneh, 2000; Cameron & Rutland, 2006; Guess, 2022; Martiny et al., 2022). Engagement with community activities, taking the form of immersive events, service-learning, and cultural experiences, are ways to gain more experience and awareness (Bowen et al., 2026). Consider books, podcasts, or social media by disabled creators as other sources of first-person narratives. Another way to interact with the narratives of disabled people is to participate in sessions led by disabled educators and advocates. Look for training from groups like Sins Invalid and DREDF (Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund). Critical reflection questions: What assumptions or biases might I hold that could influence how I engage with disability-led spaces? In what ways has my understanding of disability been shaped by non-disabled perspectives? What power dynamics exist when non-disabled professionals lead disability-related education, and how does that differ from disability-led initiatives?
Class Activities
Many activities can be useful to encourage discussion and self-reflection around ableism. Activities should be intentional and framed to improve awareness. A general note of caution is to ensure activities do not encourage “inspiration porn” (Young, 2014) or a negatively skewed sense of the lived experience of disabled people. For example, simulation activities such as using a wheelchair for an hour or wearing a blindfold to simulate blindness should be avoided, as they risk reinforcing stereotypes and creating inaccurate, overly medicalized impressions of disability (Emir Öksüz & Brubaker, 2020). Activities and exercises related to accessibility (i.e., an accessibility or usability audit of a public space) can be used to discuss systemic barriers observed (Pebdani & Bourgeois, 2019). Wherever possible, disabled people with lived experience of the conditions or barriers to be examined through these activities should be involved with the activity or debrief. Avoid tokenizing and/or burdening disabled people with the task of teaching students about disability or taking on the responsibility of representing the disability community themselves. Assignments such as interviewing a disabled person may unfairly tax community members and set the precedent that it is permissible to ask disabled people personal questions when that is harmful (Adymir-Döke, 2024).
Privilege and Perspective Mapping. This is an experiential activity designed to help participants reflect on the ways privilege and marginalization including ableism intersect with their own identities (Boylan & Woolsey, 2015). Participants respond to a series of prompts such as, “I can enter any building without difficulty,” or “I regularly see people like me represented in media.” For each statement, they physically position themselves along a continuum (e.g., from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”) either in person or virtually. This visual mapping of responses allows participants to recognize patterns of privilege and exclusion within the group. When facilitated in a group setting, the activity is often followed by a guided discussion to explore personal insights, emotional reactions, and implications for inclusive practice.
Discuss the Importance of Language Use. A language audit can be an important tool for clinicians and educators to recognize and replace ableist language. Identifying commonly used ableist terms (e.g., “crazy,” “dumb,” “OCD”) and discussing their impact can lead to conversations about respectful alternatives (Rahman, n.d.). Euphemisms about disability (such as differently-abled or “diverse abilities”) should also be avoided because, while they seem positive, they reflect and perpetuate disability stigma (Andrews et al., 2019; Tran et al., 2024). There are many language-related topics relevant to the disability community including but not limited to the use of person-first language (e.g., person with a disability, person with autism) vs. identity-first language (e.g, disabled person, Autistic; Dunn & Andrews, 2015). An exploration of etiquette is also essential to avoid microaggressions and for specific disability needs or unusual assistive technology. For example, service dog handlers invest significant time, money, and effort into their dogs’ training to act in an essential assistive technology role. Yet, they frequently experience poor etiquette that leads to distraction for the service animal or team, jeopardizing team effectiveness and threatening the dog and/or handler’s safety (Pierce, 2018). A useful starting point for discussions around language is this language module (Saia, n.d.). This module outlines both person-first and identity-first language and includes a chart highlighting examples of harmful terms alongside preferred alternatives. It also features an interactive activity that can be completed individually or in groups, making it well-suited for classroom or training settings.The Anti-Ableist Teaching website offers a range of resources such as videos, lesson plans, and curated content all vetted by members of the disability community. The resources tab is especially helpful, as it consolidates diverse materials in one place, making it easy to find media such as TED Talks to integrate into a class discussion.
Critique of Disability Media Portrayals. It can be enlightening to critically watch media clips that contain disabled characters to explore the intent and purpose of the portrayal. There are four primary stereotypes used to portray disabled people in media: the villain, the victim, the innocent fool, and the “super crip” (Heumann et al., 2019). Critique of media portrayals includes evaluating for the presence of these stereotypes and the representation of disabled characters, both in prevalence and in the depth of character development and storylines. Consider the following questions to deepen the critique: Is this character realistic or a stereotype? Who benefits from this narrative? Is the disabled character portrayed by a disabled actor? Is the character’s entire identity defined by their disability, or are they shown as a complex, multifaceted person? Is the disabled character given agency, or are decisions made for them?
Acknowledge the Fatigue Accompanying Disability. Christine Miserandino’s (2003) Spoon Theory effectively articulates the energy cost of many disabilities. An activity such as Pennies to Spend (Olkin, 2021) can help participants visualize this cost more concretely. In this exercise, participants are given a limited number of pennies to represent their available energy or capacity for the week. Each daily task—such as getting dressed, commuting, working, or preparing meals—requires them to “spend” a certain number of pennies. The goal is to allocate pennies for necessary activities without running out before the end of the week, highlighting the challenge of managing disability-related fatigue and limited energy.
Curricular Resources to Increase Understanding of Disability
Hill and Delgado (2022) provided the most comprehensive resource to date in their “ACES Teaching Brief: Incorporating Disability Knowledge and Content into the Counselor Education Curriculum.” We recommend readers start here for an overview of recommendations and strategies for educators. Hill and Delgado introduced a number of methods to integrate disability content into the counselor curriculum, including (a) ways that counseling theory can be applied to disabled people; (b) case studies of clients with disabilities for a counseling skills course; (c) modifications for clients with disabilities for a group counseling course; (d) ways psychosocial aspects of both individuals with disabilities and their families could be integrated into lifespan/human development course; (e) information related to disability and career development, accommodations, and related regulations for a career course; and (f) addressing accessibility and encouraging students to actively seek out opportunities to work with individuals with disabilities in practicum/internship courses. Table 1 provides example resources to be used as a starting point for deepening our understanding of disability, with an emphasis on centering disabled voices and creators. This list reflects a point in time and is not meant to cover all possible resources available. Media is subject to constant updating with new creators and release of new products.
Concrete Actions
Counselor educators must move beyond reflection and awareness to engage in concrete, sustained action that meaningfully integrates disability and anti-ableist practice across teaching, supervision, and scholarship. While self-reflection and increased information are essential starting points, they are insufficient without an ongoing, actionable commitment to embedding disability content in ways that affirm the inherent value and contributions of disabled people. Transformative change requires more than good intentions, it demands accountability and centers impact (Pierce, 2024). The following section issues a clear call to action for counselor educators: the time for passive inclusion has passed (Hill & Delgado, 2022). The time for anti-ableist engagement is now. This section provides recommendations on increasing the visibility of disability in counseling, engaging accessible pedagogy, and building understanding and skills in allyship to represent concrete actions necessary to promote anti-ableist counselor training.
Increasing Visibility of Disability in Counseling
Disabled faculty are significantly underrepresented in institutes of higher education at all levels (Friedensen et al., 2021) and are likely similarly underrepresented in clinical and community counseling settings. Disabled people are often invisible in counseling research and not commonly reported as a norming group in standardized assessment development (Emir Öksüz & Brubaker, 2020). Within counseling and counselor education leadership and advocacy, there is little to no discussion of the disability identity or community status of leaders, including those responsible for integrating disability information into the counseling curriculum (Emir Öksüz & Brubaker, 2020). This lack of visibility of disabled voices in the development of training and counseling and disability service structures underscores the importance of centering the lived experience of disabled people in counselor education and training efforts. Systematic utilization of positionality statements can help clarify where and how disabled leaders are already active in influencing policy and advocacy efforts in counseling.
Accessible Pedagogy
An actionable strategy for educators to enhance anti-ableist pedagogy is to ensure our own classes are accessible for all students regardless of disability status. This requires building on what was learned by reflecting on ableism in academic and counseling spaces, understanding how current practice marginalizes disabled students, and becoming more informed about the experiences of disabled people via their own narrative and voices. Providing students with information about resources that can support them, including disability-related resources, reduces stigma and opens a conversation should students want to discuss further. Actively discussing access and equity, and modeling accessible practices such as turning on subtitles and/or providing transcripts of media, requiring accessible documents, and holding events in accessible spaces are ways to create a more inclusive environment for disabled students and faculty (Roundtree et al., 2025).
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a pedagogical approach that can be used in the context of increasing disability-related knowledge, as it can serve as a crucial framework to foster a more inclusive and comprehensive training environment for future counselors. UDL principles can enhance accessibility through three key components providing multiple means of: (a) representation, (b) expression, and (c) engagement (CAST, 2024). Representation means delivering course content through multiple formats (e.g., lectures, guest presentations, online resources, multimedia) to accommodate different learning styles and ways of processing information. Expression entails providing students with various options for showcasing their knowledge and skills (e.g., tests, written assignments, oral presentations, digital creations) that match their individual capabilities and preferences. Engagement encompasses creating diverse opportunities for student participation (through in-class activities, group discussions, and virtual interactions) to sustain interest and active involvement, especially for learners who may struggle with traditional classroom formats (CAST, 2024; Chiu et al., 2025). By incorporating these UDL principles, counselor education programs can create more inclusive learning environments that not only teach about disability but also model accessible pedagogical practices.
Allyship
Particularly for faculty, instructors, counselors, and counselor-trainees who are not members of the disability community, engagement in allyship materials and group discussion may support readiness to serve as allies. Forber-Pratt et al. (2019) provides explanation and strategies for developing allyship skills in clinical training. Allyship is a preferred concept to highlight over advocacy because of the common misunderstanding and misdirected history of advocacy that has been performed in ways that minimize and erase the voices and accomplishments of disabled people. Disabled people have been subject to non-disabled people speaking on their behalf and making decisions for them in ways that have limited their autonomy and legal rights, even including the right to make decisions about their own bodies under the guise of protection, advocacy, and acting in their best interest (Fleming et al., 2024; Saia et al., 2024). To contrast, allyship requires an understanding of intersectionality and reflection of internal disability biases. Allies follow the lead of disability community members to respect choices of language and terminology, recognizing the ways that disabled people have been used as “inspiration” for others, and align themselves with the issues of disability rights that are most important to the disability community. Allies understand that allyship is an action, not a label, and consistent self-reflection, listening, leveraging of privilege, and action are necessary (Lamont, 2023)
Conclusion
Updates to the 2024 CACREP standards provide an opportunity for counselor educators to revisit the ways disability shows up (and is missing) from counselor training. We recognize that educators come with a wide range of lived experience, exposure, and understanding of disability information, disability culture and identify, and the pervasive impact of ableism. To advance our collective journey toward anti-ableism and infusing disability, we have outlined and identified resources and learning opportunities that support greater awareness, information, and action as a framework for engagement in disability-conscious professional development. Anti-ableist counselor training and professional development is an evolving process that implicates educators as learners, and like other anti-oppressive praxis, requires continual reflection and engagement to result in more effective and equitable training and counseling outcomes.