Much of the discourse around inclusion in higher education has thus far been grounded in scholarship on disability and impairment. As a result, inclusion in this sector has been defined and discussed mostly in terms of an ‘accommodation vs. universal design’ dichotomy – or retrofitting after the fact versus proactive inclusive design ahead of the class. The COVID pandemic has forced, around the world, an overnight online pivot, as well as many other periods of pedagogical innovation and disruption over a two-year duration. The overall outcomes of this period of transformation in teaching and learning has been mixed with scholars and practitioners showcasing both new opportunities and continuing hurdles for students with disabilities. The most unexpected outcome, however, of the emergence of the tertiary sector from the pandemic is the realization that issues of accessibility and inclusion which have been energized by the pivot are now discussed widely by the student body and are no longer restricted to issues of disability and impairment. This presentation will draw from qualitative data collected within the student body on a campus in Western Canada about the way their expectations about accessibility, inclusion and student-centeredness have evolved during and post-COVID in their experiences of their progression through their degree. It explores the emerging advocacy that surrounds these topics. The discussion and outcomes section of the presentation will lead participants on a reflection about the ways the pandemic experience and the online pivot have radically transformed: (i) learner expectation with regards to inclusion and accessibility, (ii) blurred the delineations between students with disabilities and the rest of the student body, and (iii) created the need for a new conceptualization of inclusion in the tertiary sector in the post-pandemic landscape. One of the assertions developed in the presentation is that this redefinition of inclusion for the post-pandemic tertiary sector presumes a reflection on being together in/with place in the way teaching and learning redefines presence, connection, and engagement for fuller accessibility.

1. Reimagininginclusionin highereducation in
transformationalpost-pandemictimes.
PESA 2023: Being together in/ with place: Reimaging educational
philosophies and pedagogies in transformational times
Dr. Frederic Fovet, Thompson Rivers University
Auckland, Saturday December 9th 2023.

2. Land Acknowledgement
• Thompson Rivers University
campuses are on the traditional
lands of the Tk'emlúps te
Secwépemc (Kamloops campus)
and the T’exelc (Williams Lake
campus) within
Secwépemc'ulucw, the
traditional and unceded
territory of the Secwépemc. The
region TRU serves also extends
into the territories of the
St’át’imc, Nlaka’pamux,
Tŝilhqot'in, Nuxalk, and Dakelh

3. Personal lens
• Multifaceted interest in this topic
• Faculty perspective, including past roles supporting contract sessionals within
MEd programs which I have led (focus on student-centeredness and inclusion
within T&L)
• Three years as a Program head within a university offering exclusively online
graduate programs (focus on T&L in online delivery)
• Extensive experience as head of accessibility on a large Canadian campus
(focus on accessibility of T&L)
• Extensive experience as a UDL and inclusion consultant in tertiary (strategic
dimension of inclusion in T&L and sustainability in development)

4. Gauging the room – Introduction and context
• By show of hands, do you feel
that:
- it has become easier to cater for
the accessibility needs of diverse
learners during the pandemic and
to improve accessibility?
- it has become much more
challenging to address
accessibility and inclusion on our
campuses during the pandemic
years?

5. Introduction – Topical relevance
• The COVID pandemic has been the great
disruption on the 21st century in
education
• Inclusion which was only begin to emerge
as an area of focus in tertiary education
has been massively impacted by the
pandemic.
• In many ways, the inclusion of diverse
learners has deteriorated during this
period.
• In other specific ways, the development
of inclusive mindsets has improved.
• But beyond this troubling dichotomy in
experiences lies a much more profound
phenomenon: inclusion as a construct in
the post-secondary has changed
irreversibly.

6. Objectives of the Session
• Examine the context
• Explore the literature
• Acknowledge the theoretical and methodological stances
• Examine the assertions
• Consider the outcomes

7. Context
• Ongoing impact of the COVID pandemic online pivot
• Pressing realization that many diverse students have been massively impacted by the online pivot
• Focus on accessibility has centered on learners with impairments
• The barriers culturally diverse learners (International Students, second language learners,
Indigenous students, immigrant first generation students) have experienced have been
monumental and mostly unreported/ under-researched. The socio-economics have as also been
widely ignored during COVID.
• Seismic societal disruptions that place simultaneous pressure on the tertiary sector
• #MeToo, Black Lives Matter, Calls for Action of the TRC Report, SOGI demands for recognition have
all created large societal disruptions that ripple into the post-secondary landscapes
• The T&L tertiary sector is finding challenging to keep up and to integrate these values into
classroom practices (Bhopal, 2022)
• Mounting neoliberal pressure on search for greater efficiencies
• The focus is not just philanthropic and centered on social justice. EDI had become a key concern
in a tertiary landscape which has entered a shrinking phase and faces unprecedented business
models pressures of competition, visibility, branding, and financial efficiencies.
• There is an urgent search for sustainable models that positions institutions favourably

8. An overview of the literature
• Original body of scholarship around Civil Rights and legislative duties towards
students with disabilities (Fernández-Batanero et al., 2022)
• Reframing of inclusion and diversity as concepts to include race, cultural and
linguistic diversity, SOGI, socio-economics and class (Madriaga, 2023)
• Mounting urgency around the inclusion of diverse learners in tertiary education
(Zhao & Watterston, 2021). Existing structures are seen as cracking at the seams
(Borkin, 2023)
• Growing body of scholarship around diverse leaners’ voices (Resch, 2023)

9. An overview of the literature (contd.)
• Emergence of various models for inclusion that seem more promising than
retrofitting or ‘accommodations’ approach: differentiated instruction (Moallemi,
2023), UDL (Alqarni, 2022), but also critical pedagogy (Ghatak et al., 2023) and
culturally responsive pedagogy (Kieran & Anderson, 2019)
• Format of teaching and learning within which this inclusion must take place is ever
changing. Notion of online pedagogy or hybrid teaching has been revolutionized by
the pandemic. No longer the realm of a few select online institutions. Now the
norm for all institutions. An ambivalence, however, is very tangible (embrace or
return to old status quo?) (Witze, 2020)
• A post-pandemic urgency where learner expectations/ learner voice with regards to
T& L format is ever more present (Quinn, 2023)

10. Theoretical and methodological stance
• Theoretical stance
• Broad interpretivist stance (Krmac, 2022): ‘meaning making’ of higher ed professionals
navigating fast changing reality and rapidly evolving phenomena around inclusion
• Critical pedagogy backdrop (Knoetze, 2023): examining the inclusion of diverse learners
inevitably involves examining perpetuated power inequities within classroom settings
• Methodological process
• Auto-ethnography as a process in management of change in higher education (Higson-Bliss,
2023; McAllister & Brown, 2023)
• Positionality (unique perspective as faculty and ex accessibility manager)
• Consultant with frequent engagement with the field. Exploration of this data
• Ongoing projects with student groups around learner voice within inclusive policies and UDL
implementation
• Examining one’s own journey within a changing landscape of needs from the field

11. Assertions
• Incapacity of existing frameworks, structures and policies to adequately address the
needs of diverse learners. A literal systems erosion and exhaustion.
• A ‘systems issue’ in terms of absence of comprehensive funding models, lack of
interdisciplinary approaches and practices, siloed service provision, hyper-
fragmentation of the advocacy discourse for change.
• Challenges in translating to the classroom values that are frequently now floated in
terms of campus culture (full implementation of EDI objectives in T&L)
• Faculty difficult grappling with the sustainability of the teaching practices. Constant
feeling of tension and unease. Some talk about a culture clash in terms of T&L
expectations
• Inadequacy of a voluntary model for PD on inclusive pedagogy in a sector where
academic freedom is mistakenly seen as a limitation on the possible impact of
transformative practices. Urgent need for clarity with faculty associations, and in
collective bargaining, collective agreements, etc.

12. Assertions (contd.)
• Wider ambivalence and tension at institutional level where diverse learners are seen
as a market share and as revenue generating, while there is little evidence of
genuine commitments to channel some of that revenue towards creating equitable
and congenial T&L conditions for these students.
• Tipping point in the loudness and eloquence of student voices. Learners have been
emboldened by the pandemic. The ‘great quit’ is not just about demanding fairer
employment terms, it is also about renegotiating all power dynamics with the
corporate world – including academia as a neo-liberal institution
• Dangerous tension between Human Rights protection mechanisms and emerging
progressive pedagogies. Fear from field practitioners of being ironically ‘doing less’
while attempting to do much more. Backlash effect of HR complaints processes.
• Uneasy dead end in the form of out of court settlements, NDA, and mediation-based
compensations: rectifies some wrongs but silences the urgent need for change.

13. Assertions (contd.)
Traditional
retrofitting
targeted at
students with
disabilities
Pandemic +
societal tumult
re social justice
+ mounting
competitiveness
in tertiary
Mounting student advocacy
Desire for change among
learner population
Growing expectations with
regards to inclusion
Faculty search for user-friendly
frameworks and T&L models to
support wider approach to
inclusion. UDL?
Institutional policy scramble to secure (i)
top-down EDI discourse and (ii) hands on
classroom practices that translate these EDI
policies into practice

14. Outcomes
• Creating Multidisciplinary Collaborations:
• Supporting the full spectrum of diverse learners requires a break-down of institutional silos.
Must bring together stakeholders who have not thus far collaborated (instructional
designers, staff who support various segments of the diverse learner population, inclusion
advocates who usually position themselves within Accessibility)
• Supporting faculty and exploring creative approaches to PD
• Striking gap between scholarship and practice. There are promising user-friendly models for
the inclusion of diverse learners, but little effort is placed on sustainable professional
development. Only existing momentum is left to sole classroom practitioner initiatives,
faculty led communities of practice, and publication driven experimentation.
• Widening the inclusive design and UDL discourses:
• Most inclusive frameworks, including UDL, have thus far overfocused on disability and
impairment. To gain relevance in this emerging field, it will need to be restructured to invite
in scholars and practitioners who have not to date been familiar with this discourse (bridge
to culturally responsive pedagogy, sustainability, social justice, etc.). This needs to be a
proactive and strategically planned process.

15. Outcomes and Caveat
• Enriching the Reflection on Online and hybrid Pedagogy:
• Post pandemic teaching is inherently virtual to some degree. The scholarship of online pedagogy has been
preoccupied for some time now in evidencing quality, the ability to deliver authentic and collective learning
experiences, the potential to be fully transformative for learners. The focus has been constructivism, social
constructivism, experiential learning, open education, active learning. There is a need now to create an
explicit overlap between these preoccupations on one hand, and the inclusion of diverse learners on the
other. This bridge building will be challenging because of disciplinary siloing.
• Strategic Implementation Challenges
• There are many factors that come into play within UDL implementation in the tertiary sector
• It is not a simple or linear process
• Post-secondary institutions are complex, multi-layered, siloed organizations.
• Change can be challenging. An ecological overview is essential
• Funding Implications
• The Funding model in place and many of the current funding practices and processes are grounded in deficit
model approaches.
• They are not congenial to the development of UDL
• There is therefore a concurrent reflection required on the transformation of funding for diversity in the
tertiary sector

16. Synthesis:Reimagininginclusionin higher educationin
transformationalpost-pandemictimes
• Conceptualizing a model to reflect this rapid changes in perceptions, mindsets and
expectations
• While we grapple with a return to the ‘old normal’, tertiary the T&L landscape has
shifted irreversibly
• Need to disentangle ourselves from an old obsolete discourse. Time to shed it with
intentionality
• Face head on the growing contradictions between Human Rights approaches and
new wave of inclusive practices (accommodations versus. UDL for example)
• Shift from a culture of referral to a culture of ownership by all tertiary stakeholders
• Adapt to a new economic reality and embrace sustainability within inclusion
strategies
• Be bold and imagine possibilities rather than grief about the break down of past
constructs

17. Questions

18. References & Resources
• Al-Azawei A., Serenelli F., Lundqvist K. (2016). Universal design for learning (UDL): A content analysis of peer-
reviewed journal papers from 2012 to 2015. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(3), 39–56.
https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/19295
• Alqarni, T.M. (2022) Applying Universal Design for Learning to Address the Challenges of Postsecondary Students
with Learning Disabilities: A Review Study. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(5), 1004–1010.
https://journalppw.com/index.php/jpsp/article/view/5947/3927
• Altowairiki, N.F. (2023) Universal Design for Learning Infusion in Online Higher Education. Online learning, 27(1).
https://olj.onlinelearningconsortium.org/index.php/olj/article/view/3080
• Asino, T. I., Giacumo, L. A., & Chen, V. (2017). Culture as a design “next”: Theoretical frameworks to guide new
design, development, and research of learning environments. The Design Journal, 20, S875–S885.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1353033
• Barden, O., Bê, A., Prtichard, E., & Waite, L. (2023). Disability and Social Inclusion: Lessons From the Pandemic. Social
Inclusion, 11(1), 1-4. doi: https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v11i1.6612
• Bashir, A., Bashir, S., Rana, K., Lambert, P., & Vernallis, A. (2021) Post-COVID-19 Adaptations; the Shifts Towards
Online Learning, Hybrid Course Delivery and the Implications for Biosciences Courses in the Higher Education Setting.
Frontiers in Education, 6. DOI=10.3389/feduc.2021.711619
• Bhopal, K. (2022). ‘We can talk the talk, but we’re not allowed to walk the walk’: The role of equality and diversity
staff in higher education institutions in England. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00835-7
• Borkin, H. (2023, July 13) Disability staff are overwhelmed and exhausted. WONKHE.
https://wonkhe.com/blogs/disability-staff-are-overwhelmed-and-exhausted/
• Dickson-Deane, C., Bradshaw, A. C., & Asino, T. I. (2018). Recognizing the inseparability of culture, learning, and
technology. TechTrends, 62(4), 310–311. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11528-018-0296-3

19. References & Resources (contd.)
• Farley, I. A., & Burbules, N. C. (2022). Online education viewed through an equity lens: Promoting engagement and success
for all learners. Review of Education, 10, e3367. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3367
• Fernández-Batanero, J.M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., & Fernández-Cerero, J. (2022) Access and Participation of Students with
Disabilities: The Challenge for Higher Education. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191911918
• Fovet, F. (2023) Examining the practicalities of accessibility and inclusion in post-pandemic hybrid post-secondary teaching
and learning. Emerging best practices for fully inclusive blended teaching and learning. Paper presented at the Sixteenth
International Conference on e-Learning & Innovative Pedagogies, University of Malta, April
• Fovet, F (2023b) Getting the message across silos: exploring the difficult art of involving multidisciplinary campus partners in
UDL implementation and growth. Plenary session offered at the ATU 2023 National Conference. Climbing the Ladder:
Building a Culture of Inclusion in Higher Education. Overcoming Obstacles to Enhance and Sustain UDL Collaboration in
Tertiary Education. Sligo, June
• Fovet, F. (2021) Addressing the needs of diverse learners in online and blended learning with Universal Design for Learning in
the post-pandemic Academy: opportunities, new alliances, hurdles, shifting ground, U turns, quick sands, and other surprises
of the journey. Keynote presented at the TINEL Conference on universal design for blended and e-learning in higher
education, University of York, December
• Fovet, F. (2021b) Developing an Ecological Approach to Strategic UDL Implementation in Higher Education. Journal of
Education and Learning, 10(4). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1309836
• Ghatak, N., & Chaudhary, R. (2023). Beyond the Classroom: A Case Study on the Relationship Between Education as a Public
Good, Social Justice and Critical Pedagogy. Journal of Development Policy and Practice.
https://doi.org/10.1177/24551333231201255

20. References & Resources (contd.)
• Goering, A. E., Resnick, C. E., Bradford, K. D., & Othus-Gault, S. M. (2022). Diversity by design: Broadening
participation through inclusive teaching. In E. M. D. Baer, K. M. Layou, & R. H. Macdonald (Eds.), Catalyzing change:
STEM faculty as change agents. New Directions for Community Colleges, 199, pp. 77–91. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20525
• Guo-Brennan, L. (2022). Making Virtual Global Learning Transformative and Inclusive: A Critical Reflective Study on
High-Impact Practices in Higher Education. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 28–49.
https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v16i2.6947
• Gurjar, N., & Bai, H. (2023) Assessing culturally inclusive instructional design in online learning. Education Technology
Research & Development . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10226-z
• Higson-Bliss, L. (2023) “I’m my own biggest critic”: an autoethnographic reflection on an early-career researcher’s
first year as a lecturer in law. The Law Teacher. DOI: 10.1080/03069400.2023.2281765
• Kieran, L., & Anderson, C. (2019) Connecting Universal Design for Learning with Culturally Responsive Teaching.
Education and Urban Society, 51(9), 1202–1216. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245187850
• Knoetze, R. (2023) Cultivating criticality in a neoliberal system: a case study of an English literature curriculum at a
mega distance university. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01084-y
• Kumi-Yeboah, A., Dogbey, J., Yuan, G., & Smith, P. (2020). Cultural Diversity in Online Education: An Exploration of
Instructors’ Perceptions and Challenges. Teachers College Record, 122(7), 1–46.
https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012200708
• Madriaga, M. (2023) Reframing race and widening access into higher education. Higher Education, 86, 1455–1470.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00981-y
• McAllister, Á., & Brown, N. (2023). Competition and Collaboration in Higher Education: An (Auto)Ethnographic Poetic
Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004231176278
• Moallemi, R. (2023) The relationship between differentiated instruction and learner levels of engagement at
university. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-07-2022-0041

21. References & Resources (contd.)
• Quinn, K. (2023, August 16) A Brand-New Look: Higher Education in the Post-Pandemic Era. Psychology Today.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/nz/blog/optimized/202308/a-brand-new-look-higher-education-in-the-post-
pandemic-era
• Resch, K. (2023) Student voice in higher education diversity policies: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 8.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2023.1039578
• Sanger, C.S. (2020). Inclusive Pedagogy and Universal Design Approaches for Diverse Learning Environments. In:
Sanger, C., Gleason, N. (eds) Diversity and Inclusion in Global Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_2
• Smith, F. (2012). Analyzing a college course that adheres to the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework.
Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(3), 31–61. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ992116.pdf
• Tavares, V. (2023). Teaching International Students in a Difficult Time: The Importance of Empathy. Canadian Journal
for the Study of Adult Education, 34(2), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.56105/cjsae.v34i02.5648
• Tosto, S. A., Alyahya, J., Espinoza, V., McCarthy, K., & Tcherni-Buzzeo, M. (2023). Online learning in the wake of the
COVID-19 pandemic: Mixed methods analysis of student views by demographic group. Social Sciences & Humanities
Open, 8(1), 100598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100598
• Witze, A. (2020). Universities will never be the same after coronavirus crisis. Nature, 582, 162-164.
https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01518-y
• Zhao, Y., & Watterston, J. (2021) The changes we need: Education post COVID-19. Journal of Educational Change, 22,
3–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09417-3
• Bannister, B., Cornish, L., Bannister-Tyrrell, M., & Gregory, S. (2015). Creative use of digital technologies: Keeping the
best and brightest in the bush. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 25(1), 52–65.

22. Contact details
• Frederic Fovet (PhD.)
• Assistant Professor, School of Education, Thompson Rivers University
• ffovet@tru.ca
• UDL and Inclusion Consultant
• Implementudl@gmail.com
• @Ffovet
• www.implementudl.com