Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Strategic Visions & Values: Inclusive Curricula and Leadership in Learning and Teaching

744 views

Published on

Presentation for the Leadership in Learning and Teaching event at Durham University on 1 May 2019.
Project resources:
Universal Design for Learning: Evaluation Interim Report: https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/handle/2086/17106
A Literature Review of Universal Design for Learning: https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/handle/2086/17059
Freedom to Achieve: Project Evaluation Report: https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/handle/2086/16793

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Strategic Visions & Values: Inclusive Curricula and Leadership in Learning and Teaching

  1. 1. Strategic Visions & Values: Leadership in Learning and Teaching Richard Hall ¦ @hallymk1 rhall1@dmu.ac.uk ¦ richard-hall.org
  2. 2. • Managing the dialectics of innovating around education and technology in schools and HE [HEA, Jisc, KTP] • Whole-institution curriculum re-design [C2004] • Ongoing accredited/non-accredited professional development [PGCHE] • National networks [NTFS, OE] • Radical/decolonial/co-operative pedagogies [#radped, Coop Uni, SLRC] • Institutional inclusivity programmes [Universal Design for Learning; Freedom to achieve] • Integrating research and teaching [research-engaged teaching/developing researchers’ effectively]
  3. 3. • A movement of policy and practice • The management of tensions in innovations that materially affect labour rights • A flow toward risk-based management of curriculum relationships • A risk of a reduction or forgetting of our QE past for our QA future • Where do risky or alternative pedagogies sit? What do we value? • Inclusivity as a means of silencing • Is it possible to overcome separations? • What of management, governance and partnerships?
  4. 4. I was asked to share my experience of working to embed inclusivity in the curriculum. What are your experiences of working to embed inclusivity in the curriculum? Think about people, activities, resistances, flows, feelings.
  5. 5. Note to self: remember to add some notes based on what participants say about people, activities, resistances, flows, feelings. Add them here. Now.
  6. 6. autonomy does not mean the absence of accountability   where markets are dysfunctional, we should be prepared to intervene University means University for lender and purchaser
  7. 7. •our country’s future depends more than ever on the success of our HEIs; •we will not forget the underlying values of HE… joy and value of knowledge pursued for its own sake; pursuit of the good, the true and the beautiful; •uncompromising in our protection of students’ interests… insist on value for money for the student [and] also for the taxpayer. Barber, Foreward, in DfE, 2017, pp. 8-9.
  8. 8. Effective competition compels providers to focus on students’ needs and aspirations, drives up outcomes that students care about, puts downward pressure on costs, leads to more efficient allocation of resources between providers, and catalyses innovation. The higher education sector in England is well suited to market mechanisms driving continuous improvement. DfE, 2017, pp. 43-5.
  9. 9. Do these issues of governance, regulation and funding affect your ability to deliver inclusive learning and teaching? How do they affect: the deployment of resources; prioritisation of activities; people and relationships; workloads; curriculum design, delivery and assessment?
  10. 10. Note to self: remember to add some notes based on what participants say about the living death of competition. Add them here. Now.
  11. 11. Visions and values, some matters arising: •relationships conditioned by competition and metrics; •performance management and metrics; •learning and teaching as service-driven innovation; •finance capital and the need for efficiencies; •USPs, brand, risk; •tensions between vocation and business; •accountability, autonomy and authority.
  12. 12. Some DMU stuff
  13. 13. Some DMU context •4 faculties •19k UG; 4k PG •158 programmes (c. 1800 modules) •HEC: corporate governance •Innovation via Programme/Project Management: Strategic Management Group; Theme Boards; Project Boards •BAU: committee structure
  14. 14. Some DMU context •ULTAS: co-creation, universal design for learning, building (student) capability •CAI; festival; conference; staff development (UKPSF); AIP/£ •TEF: employability; #DMUSquareMile; personalization; student support; resources linked to outcomes; culture of enhancement •Research Strategy: includes societal impact; RET; new Institutes
  15. 15. Two DMU Cases: UDL2 and FTA
  16. 16. DSA + OfS + TE(SO)F + HERA + Equalities Act HESA data for 2016/17: 16.6% of DMU students had a declared disability compared with a sector average of 12%.
  17. 17. Student engagement – through including multiple avenues that effectively capture student interest as well as sustaining deep, meaningful interactions with core material Representation of content – through using a variety of methods to represent content and information with options for perception, language & symbols and comprehension Action & expression – through including multiple ways for demonstrating knowledge and understanding
  18. 18. 1. Flexible ways of learning rooted in participation 2. Flexible study resources with a technological focus 3. Flexible ways of testing learning, including different methods
  19. 19. DMU Disability Enhancement Project (2015) •Developing measures to ensure accessibility for all students to all learning and teaching activities within the university •The development of a DMU disability assessment centre •Reviewing specialist accommodation provision •Increased availability of lecture-capture technology across the University •Extending the provision of accessible software •Widening the use of multimedia as an enhancement to teaching and learning resources •Enhancing digital access to published academic content •Providing relevant staff and student training and development opportunities
  20. 20. Universal Design for Learning Mark II WORK STREAM ONE DMU Replay Roll Out (WS 1) Teaching,LearningandCurriculum ThemeBoard The Disabled Student Operational Strategy Group (DSOG) Student Experience and Employability Theme Board WORK STREAM TWO Technology to Enhance UDL (WS 2) WORK STREAM THREE UDL Teaching Practise (WS 3) WORK STREAM FOUR UDL Quality and Enhancement (WS 4) WORK STREAM FIVE Evaluation and Impact of UDL (WS 5) University Internal and External Marketing and Communications Indirect Reporting Direct Reporting ULTC: BAU
  21. 21. Note to self: hand out UDL handouts Ask participants: what are your thoughts of this framework, in relation to your curricula? what are your thoughts of this framework, in relation to your practice?
  22. 22. • Literature Review headlines: – Gaps – scope, scale and geography – Qualitative vs quantitative data – Descriptive studies – Focus on disability and technology • What we know from previous projects: – TIP Scheme, ‘Towards Equitable Engagement: the Impact of UDL on Student Perceptions of Learning’ – Disability Enhancement Programme (DEP)
  23. 23. 1. Scoping interviews with UDL champions and project board members 2. Literature Review 3. Collection and analysis of Good Honours, Continuation and NSS data 4. Analysis of quality assurance documents e.g. external examiners reports 5. DMU Replay data UDL2 Evaluation
  24. 24. Into a world of institutional, hegemonic power •The point of UDL? •UDL for whom? •Performative or non-performative systems and structures? "The wall gives physical form to what a number of practitioners describe as ‘institutional inertia,' the lack of an institutional will to change" (26) “Diversity is regularly referred to as a ‘good’ word precisely because it can be used in diverse ways, or even because it does not have a referent.”
  25. 25. 1. The institution should be clear about the deep interconnections between UDL, and FTA, Athena SWAN, ULTAS and research-engaged teaching, in order to create an enhancement-focused, pedagogic environment. 2. The development of an on-line mechanism for sharing good practice and case studies across the University will amplify engagement. 3. The co-created implementation of a strategy for understanding student perceptions of UDL, focused upon academic practice and the student experience should underpin these case studies.  4. An integrated evaluation of technology that supports UDL, combining an analysis of DMU Replay with the employment of other assistive technologies, should be undertaken, in order to shift the focus of UDL away from the former towards enhancement.  5. A strategy for external communication and internal branding should be developed to give a clear message about what UDL at DMU is, aimed at specific stakeholder groups.
  26. 26. FTA focuses on reducing the BAME attainment gap. DMU as CI on an OfS project to address barriers to student success.   Embedding KU’s value-added metric and an inclusive curriculum framework. ICF: •Create an accessible curriculum •Enable students to see themselves reflected in the curriculum •Equip students with the skills to positively contribute to and work in a global and diverse environment DMU ULTAS/UDL and FTA: co-creation, participation and diversity, with a focus upon the student’s relationship to herself, her curriculum and her institution. A critical issue is ensuring the clarity of these connections for staff and students in the design, delivery and assessment of the curriculum.
  27. 27. • Year One: understanding KU’s VA metric and ICF and how they can be integrated into existing DMU pedagogic practices. Disseminating these approaches across the 40 programmes and working with programme teams to explore their attainment gap data. • Year Two: beginning to implement curriculum change across the 40 programmes and more widely across the institution. Engaging in co- creation with our students to ensure that their voice is heard throughout this process. • Year Three: embedding changes in practice at both an institutional and programme level to ensure that culturally inclusive practice is considered ‘business as usual’ at DMU.
  28. 28. Co-creation events with 142 students: Relationships, Teaching & Learning, Community, Development, Employability and Exclusion. Student baseline survey with 233: 45% unaware of the attainment gap; 54% unaware of the project; 75% felt reflected in their learning experience. Students of Pakistani, Caribbean and ‘Other White’ heritage were most likely to feel unrepresented within their learning experience. 55% felt they had not experienced changes that had resulted in greater inclusivity: content; methods; materials; assessment; feedback. Staff baseline with 44: 77% heard of the attainment gap; 80% made changes; 64% use the UDL review template; differential engagement with FOC.
  29. 29. Programme-level co-creation Student Curriculum Advisors (SCAs) : •Providing BAME students’ perspective on course materials •Collating BAME student voice via small group sessions •Creating best practice curriculum co-creation guides Read to Debate Colour Full Reading Club (LLS) Ongoing evaluation: project; curriculum; staff; students
  30. 30. In terms of form, content, structure, organisation, issues, politics, whatever… Do these cases resonate in any way? Are there any possibilities in your work? Are there any resistances?
  31. 31. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

×