This document discusses inclusive teaching practices in higher education. It defines inclusion and diversity broadly to encompass all students and teaching approaches that fully include all students. The document advocates for a student-centered approach and discusses moving from a pedagogical to andragogical teaching model. It also provides examples of inclusive assessment and feedback practices and suggests that the most effective inclusive practices are essentially invisible because they are fully embedded in the teaching approach.

1. Inclusive teaching
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License -
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

2. Why seek to teach inclusively?
• Teaching is one of the most rewarding activities
you can undertake – as long as it is done well. And
good inclusive teaching is good teaching per se.
• The quality of undergraduate teaching can bear a
good deal of improvement.
• Teaching ability is becoming increasingly important
in promotions criteria for academic staff. Inclusive
teaching is increasingly seen as a part of this.
2

3. Time to reflect
• What is the purpose of university teaching?
• Please spend five minutes discussing this
with the person next to you.
• „To enable student learning‟ (Ramsden,
2003).
3

4. How do we enable learning for all students?
• Adopting „inclusive‟ teaching practices that cater to
a diverse range of students.
• Question: What do we mean by „inclusion‟ and
„Diversity‟? Please spend five minutes discussing
this with the person next to you.
• “Terms used in broadest sense to mean issues
relating to all student and to types of teaching and
learning that fully and equitably include everyone in
the classroom or in the programme cohort” (Grace
and Gravestock, 2009).
4

5. Rationale for inclusive teaching
“Harkening back to the time when coalminers took canaries into
mines to monitor air quality, if the canaries died, they knew that
the atmosphere threatened the miners‟ well-being too. We are
also at a „coalface‟. The international student „canaries‟ thankfully
show us their difficulties in less dramatic ways but nevertheless
point out aspects of our teaching that all students will probably
experience as challenges. By paying attention, we can change
conditions to make sure that everyone can thrive in the higher
education environment. If we improve conditions for international
students, we improve them for all learners”.
Ryan and Carroll (2005)
5

6. Some key considerations
How should we understand „inclusive teaching‟? Some
considerations:
• Good teaching for diverse groups is good teaching per se.
• Inclusion and diversity are fluid concepts
• A student-centred approach.
• Good teaching cannot exist in a vacuum; support from above
and appropriate university structures are important.
• The scholarship of learning and teaching are important.
• Flexibility of approach and avoidance of stereotyping are
paramount.
• Take 10 minutes to discuss with the person sitting next to you.
6

7. Approaches to learning (Ramsden, 2003).
• Structural aspect of learning (Act of
organising and experiencing).
• Holistic approach: Preserves the structure,
focuses on the whole in relation to the parts.
Relating the components of a given task in a
connected structure.
• Atomistic: Distorts the structure, focuses on
the parts, segments the whole. Keeping the
components of a given task isolated.
7

8. Approaches to learning cont.(Ramsden, 2003)
• Meaning aspect of learning. Attaching
significance to the task.
• Deep approach: Focuses on what the task is
about (e.g. authors intention in writing an
academic paper).
• Surface approach: Focuses on the „signs‟
(e.g. the word-sentence level of the text, such
as memorising passages rather than
understanding the meaning of text).
8

9. Approaches to teaching
A note on approaches to learning and
teaching: the same student or teacher often
takes different approaches in different
subjects and/or different contexts.
9

10. Stereotyping
• OED describes stereotyping as: „Something
continued or constantly repeated without change‟.
• In pairs, consider:
– What is your own ethnicity?
– How do you react to stereotypes based on your
ethnicity?
– Do you conform to the stereotypical view? If not, how
not?
– How do you think making assumptions about your
students would affect their learning?
10

11. Fluidity of inclusion and diversity
Progression of thinking about diversity:
• Multiculturalism (Three S model). Danger of stereotyping
(Cousin 2006).
• Cultural hybridity (our mongrel selves) recognises
diversity in the individual (Hall 1992).
• Critical Race Theory (Gillborn 2008).
• Cosmopolitanism (linked with global citizenry). Sees
diversity as a strength and recognises shared humanity
of all (Fine 2007, Gilroy 2000, Kant 1965)
11

12. General principles of inclusive teaching practice
• Constructivist theory of learning (NOT
constructivism about knowledge).
• Transformative education. Student experience
goes beyond the transfer of skills/knowledge.
• Reflective practice involving interrogation of our
own learning processes.
• Move from pedagogic practice to andragogic
practice (Knowles, 1990).
• Internationalised curriculum and sensitivity to
different points of view.
12

13. General principles of inclusive teaching practice
cont.
• Student-centred approach; student
experience is focus of teaching strategy
• Learning experience goes beyond
classroom activities
• Diversity in programme and curriculum
design: Representation, expression, and
engagement.
13

14. Example: Assessment and Feedback
Good inclusive practice includes:
• Offering a range of (innovative) assessment
methods
• Offering “practice” assessments throughout the
year
• Offering peer assessment
• Encouraging students to write about their own
contexts
• Assessors finding out about assessment practices
elsewhere
• Giving clear, unambiguous feedback
14

15. From pedagogy to andragogy
Hallmarks of pedagogic practice:
• Dominant form of teaching in HE is pedagogy: Didactic,
traditional, and teacher-centred. (Knowles, 1990; Nelson,
2007).
• In pedagogic practice the teacher decides what is learned,
how it is learned, and when it is learned (Knowles, 1984).
• Pedagogic practice places learner in submissive role to
teacher.
• Pedagogy actively encourages the learner to become
dependent upon the teacher (Knowles, 1984).
• Pedagogic approaches may well be appropriate for children.
15

16. From pedagogy to andragogy cont.
Underpinnings of an andragogic approach to teaching:
• Learners are encouraged to move from dependency to
self-directedness in their learning.
• Adult learners have a wealth of life experience that can
be used a resource for developing learning.
• Engagement with learning is driven by complex factors
such as career aspirations and problems encountered
in real life.
• More focus on learner development and performance
(rather than being subject centred).
16

17. Andragogy and inclusive practice
• There are a number of overlaps between andragogic
teaching practice and „inclusive‟ teaching practice.
• Student-centred learning sits at the heart of both
andragogy and inclusivity.
• As well as accommodating „diverse‟ student
populations, inclusive practice also accommodates
intra-group differences (E.g. differences in learning
styles).
• Inclusive practice/andragogy is not about „dumbing
down‟ or lowering standards.
17

18. Levels of inclusivity
Leicester (1996) identified four categories of equal
opportunity practice:
• Promoting equal opportunities as removing
unfair/irrelevant barriers
• Promoting equal opportunities as increasing ability
and motivation
• Promoting equal opportunities as the development
of „respect for all‟
• Promoting equal opportunities as social
engineering
18

19. Depth of inclusivity
We make a (tentative) claim:
The more effective inclusive practice is, the more
invisible it is
19

20. Three levels of embedding
• Surface embedding: active encouragement across
university for staff to engage with issues of inclusion
and diversity.
• Intermediate embedding: procedures for removing
barriers to learning identified and specific policies and
guidelines for practice have been developed.
• Deep or „invisible‟ embedding: Issues of inclusion and
diversity rarely arise because teaching and learning
practices are developed to such a degree that good
(inclusive) practice is part and parcel of what the
university does.
20

21. Suggested reading
• Ramsden, P. (2003) Learning to Teach in
Higher Education (2nd edn) Routledge,
Abingdon.
• Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2007) Teaching for
Quality Learning at University (3rd edn) SRHE
and Open University Press, Buckingham.
• Race, P. (2006) The Lecturers Toolkit (3rd
edn) Routledge, London.
21