Clarifying the definitions of Inclusion we use in Higher Ed

1. Exploring and clarifying the definitions of
Inclusion we use in Higher Ed: moving
towards a common discourse
AHEAD2019Conference–JourneytoOz:Travellingtogethertowardsinclusiveeducation
Dr. Frederic Fovet,
Associate Professor, School of Education & Technology, Royal Roads University
UDL and Inclusion Consultant

2. Where does my interest in ‘unpacking’ the
concept of Inclusion come from?
• Multiple perspectives on Inclusion:
• Associate Professor. School of Education and Technology, Royal
Roads University
• Have taught MEd Inclusion courses to in-service teachers for three
years in my previous position
• Teacher and principal for 15 years
• Focus on Social, Emotional and Behaviour Difficulties
• Also Director of the Office for Students with Disabilities at McGill
for four years over the period of my PhD, and in charge of a UDL
implementation drive accross campus

3. Objectives of the session
• Explore the complexity that surrounds the notion of Inclusion we use in
Higher Education
• Examine the different theoretical assumptions we make as HE practitioners
when we use this term
• Explore the impact our theoretical stance has on the work we seek to achieve
in HE
• Acknowledge the multiple dimensions of Inclusion that take us beyond the
notions of Impairment and Disability
• Conceptualize new collaborative & interdisciplinary practices towards
Inclusion in Higher Ed

4. What do we mean when we use the word
‘Inclusion’?
• Interactive Exercise
• Take a few minutes to discuss with your peers how you
understand and interpret the notion of ‘Inclusion’ in a
Higher Ed context

5. What are the various concepts we include
in our definitions of “Inclusion”?

6. Conceptualizations of “Inclusion”
• There is more complexity in this concept than just the ‘inclusion
vs. mainstreaming’ dichotomy.
• Here are some notions we also need to ‘unpack’:
- Personalized Learning
- Individualized Leaning
- Differentiation
- UDL

7. Where are we trying to go? Why?
Whatis our‘yellow brickroad’?

8. What are the intentions we have when
embracing Inclusion?
• It is difficult to clarify our construction of “Inclusion” before we
explore and identify our intentions in embracing this notion.
• Interactive exercise:
• Take a few minutes in think pairs to examine what you seek to
achieve as practitioners when embracing ‘Inclusion’.
• What are you wishing to see occur?
• What is your theoretical approach/
presumption?

9. The various justifications for “Inclusion”
• Philosophical argument
• Human Rights lens
• Cognitive argument
• Social Capital
• Pedagogical argument
• Operational argument

10. The reality of our current experience
with Inclusion in Higher Ed
Wehavedrasticallydivergentagendas

11. What is the impact of these divergences of
perspective on the work we do in Higher Ed?
• As I go through these again, ask yourself (i) whether we
acknowledge these perspectives in Higher Ed; (ii) to what
extent they frame our work.
• Philosophical argument
• Human Rights lens
• Cognitive argument
• Social Capital
• Pedagogical argument
• Operational argument

12. Unpacking the various intentions we have when
seeking to implement inclusive practices
• Philosophical argument
• Classes should be microcosms that offers the same
diversity we are likely to encounter in the outside world
• The Salamanca Statement
• Classrooms prepare learner for diversity
• Human Rights lens
• Discriminating in access to learning is illegal
• Canadian Charter of Rights, ADA, the Equality Act 2010

13. Unpacking the various intentions we have when
seeking to implement inclusive practices
• Cognitive argument
• A continuum of thinkers that has expanded Gardner’s original
claims. We are all diverse in our learning + also adopt diverse
approaches as learners at different stages of our learning
process. More recently: Todd Rose and the Myth of the
Average
• Social Capital
• Classroom are not just a locus for knowledge acquisition; they
are primarily in fact spaces that allow the development of
social capital (size, scope and richness of networks)

14. Unpacking the various intentions we have when
seeking to implement inclusive practices
• Pedagogical argument
• The benefits of inclusion are not limited to students.
Educators stagnate and underperform when placed in
homogeneous environments. Professional growth
requires exposure to a mixed ability classroom
• Operational argument
• Segregating diverse learners or retrofitting the curriculum
to meet their needs is extremely expensive. It represents
a burden on resources that is economically unustainable.

15. Part three: Inclusion is not just about
Impairment
• Further complexity is present in our reflection: Inclusion is not just
about Impairment or Disability
• Interactive exercise:
• In pairs or small groups, examine the other dimensions of
Inclusion that should concern us in Higher Education

16. Various dimensions of Inclusion that
should concern us in Higher Ed
• Disability, Impairment, Neuro-diversity, Mental Health but also:
• Gender
• Race
• Ethnicity
• Indigenous Students
• First generation undergraduates
• Poverty vs. privilege
• International Students and Second Language Learners
• Gender and sexual orientation

17. Intersection
• In fact these delineations only exist in our ‘service provider’ or
administrator minds.
• Learners experience diversity on these multiple dimensions at
once
• Our fragmentation of our approach to inclusion makes no sense
from a user experience (UX) perspective
• There is an urgent need to blend our discourses and our practices

18. Looking ahead: devising interdisciplinary
and collaborative approaches to Inclusion
• How do we break out of silos and create successful
interdisciplinary collaborative practices that span the whole
spectrum of Diversity?
• How do we engage with colleagues who serve other populations?
• How we begin the task of creating a common language and shared
practices?
• Self-reflection and interactive dialogue: Who might be the first
colleague on your campus you should reach out to in order to
begin this journey?

19. Some solutions for UDL advocates
• Extend your efforts to other colleagues and services beyond
Disability
• Develop a momentum on your campus that capitalizes on this
overlap
• Create a scholarship that is interdisciplinary
• Ensure your formulation of UDL invites colleagues serving other
population towards the model

20. What are the changes we need to carry
out in our practices with colleagues?
• Anecdotal example:
• On a typical Canadian Campus:
• 10% of students register as having a Disability
• 25% of students are International Students and Second Language Learners
• 5% identify as Indigenous
• 33% are likely to be ‘first generation’ undergraduates (University Affairs, 2015)
• 73% are – for these reasons - likely to experience barriers in access to learning
• The voice of 73% of our campuses …. is not a ‘minority discourse’
• We will fail to fully appreciate the momentum of this phenomenon till we embrace a
common discourse on inclusive practices in the Higher Ed classroom.

21. A more hopeful use of the Oz allegory

22. A few references
• Cook, B., Gerber, M., & Murphy, J. (2000) Backlash Against the Inclusion of Students with
Learning Disabilities in Higher Education: Implications for Transition from Post-Secondary
Environments to Work. Work, 14 (1), 31–40
• Fovet, F. (2014) Navigating the delicate emerging synchronicity between inclusion and access.
LEARNing Landscapes, 7 (2), 17-24
• Gibson, S. (2015) When Rights are Not Enough: What Is? Moving Towards New Pedagogy for
Inclusive Education Within UK Universities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19
(8), 875–886
• Houghton, M., & Fovet, F. (2012) Reframing dis-ability, reshaping the provision of services.
Communiqué, 13 (1), 16–19
• Martinez-Acosta, V. G., & Favero, C. B. (2018). A Discussion of Diversity and Inclusivity at the
Institutional Level: The Need for a Strategic Plan. Journal of undergraduate neuroscience
education : JUNE : a publication of FUN, Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience, 16(3),
A252-A260.
• Ralabate, P. K. (2011). Universal design for learning: Meeting the needs of all students. The
ASHA Leader
• Tedesco, G. (2013). The Challenge of Inclusive Education in Relation to Differentiated
Instruction. Masters Thesis, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of
Toronto.

23. Contact details
• Dr Frederic Fovet
• Associate Professor, School of Education and Technology, Royal Roads University
• frederic.fovet@royalroads.ca or implementudl@gmail.com
• www.implementudl.com
• @Ffovet

24. Q&A?
• We have about 10 minutes to tackle remaining questions
• ‘Toto, I’ve got a felling we’re not in Kansas any more…’