2. Learning outcomes
• To consider the breadth of equality, diversity and inclusion
and the issues which relate to curriculum and practice (V1)
• To engage in reflective, collaborative activities enabling
discussion about philosophical standpoints and practical
actions relating to inclusive practice (V2, V3, V4, A2)
• To analyse ways in which you are inclusive as a practitioner,
and how this might develop (V1, V2, A1, A2)
• To review the TPiHE course and completing the e-portfolio of
evidence.
8. Inclusive Teaching is…
Inclusive teaching recognises and accommodates the diverse
learning needs of students. This method of teaching is:
good practice and will benefit all learners
involves acknowledging the different learning needs and an
awareness of the different communities that students are
from
encourages the avoidance of stereotyping
promotes an anticipatory and proactive approach
matches provision to meet the diverse range of student
needs.
9. Accessibility
• Accessibility is a general term used to describe the degree
to which a product, device, service, or environment is
available to as many people as possible. Accessibility can
be viewed as the "ability to access" and benefit from some
system or entity.
• Accessibility is strongly related to universal design when
the approach involves "direct access". This is about making
things accessible to all people (whether they have a
disability or not).
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessibility
11. Models of Disability
See Oliver (1990) The
Politics of Disablement
and Oliver and Barnes
The New Politics of
Disablement (2012)
Medical model
• Person is faulty
• Diagnosis is made
• Person is labelled
• Impairment is the focus of attention
• Person is assessed and monitored
• Segregation/alternative services
• Re-integration if ‘normal enough’
• Society remains unchanged
Social model
• Person is valued
• Strengths and needs defined by self and
others
• Barriers identified; solutions developed
• Outcome-based programmes designed
• Training provided to others
• Diversity welcome
• Society evolves
12. Re-framing the curriculum
“There is a world of difference between, on the one hand,
offering courses of education and training and then giving
some students who have learning difficulties some additional
human or physical aids to gain access to those courses, and,
on the other hand, redesigning the very process of learning,
assessment and organisation so as to fit the objectives…of
the students.”
Tomlinson, Inclusive Learning, FEFC, 1996
17. Format / Presentation Choices
• Making materials available in a number of formats
(e.g. printable handout, podcast, slideshow).
• Offering a choice of method to achieve the same
learning outcome (e.g. video recording, electronic
mind map etc).
• Using formats which are accessible and promote
readability (e.g. font choice and size, screen
definition etc).
• Ensuring materials work with other accessibility tools
(e.g. screenreaders).
18. Presentation Considerations
•Speak slowly and clearly in
lectures and seminars.
•Use visual images to embed
and anchor concepts and
theories.
•Consider the basics: 1) First tell
students what you are covering
in that session. 2) Second, go
through the session. 3) Finish
by reminding the students of
key learning points.
19. Accessible Text
TRY TO AVOID PRODUCING LARGE
AMOUNTS OF TEXT IN UPPER CASE, BOLD
AND
UNDERLINED.
23. ‘Pedagogies of discomfort’
• Studying in HE can bring students into contact with themes
which may challenge them, emotionally and morally.
• Growing body of literature (origins: Boler, 1999) looking at
the potential benefits of exposing students to conflicting or
traumatic themes in order that they can use this to support
new emotional/cognitive understandings.
• Encouraging students to be mindful of their discomforts,
avoid ‘them and us’ stance, engage in subjectivity in learning
and confront ‘the other’, in order to negotiate a shared
understanding.
26. Gender and Unconscious Bias
• Research finds that much less dramatic i.e. favouritism toward ‘in-groups’
can be responsible for much workplace discrimination.
Greenwald, A. G. et al (2014). With Malice Toward None and Charity for Some: Ingroup Favoritism
Enables Discrimination. American Psychologist, Mar 24.
• Science faculty from research-intensive universities (N=127) rated the
application materials of a student— randomly assigned a male / female
name—for a lab manager position
• → Male applicant was viewed as significantly more competent and
hireable, was offered a higher starting salary and offered more career
mentoring vs….the woman applicant viewed as less competent.
• Crucially, BOTH ♀ and ♂ faculty equally exhibit bias against the ♀
student.
Moss-Racusin et al (2009). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 109 no. 41.
27. Gender Role Acculturalisation?
Studies indicate that people’s behaviour is
shaped by implicit or unintended biases e.g.
implicit or unintended biases portray women
as less competent .
Stereotypes and bias reinforced by implicit
educational content?
Repeated exposure to pervasive cultural
stereotypes that portray women as “less
competent but simultaneously emphasize
their warmth and likeability compared with
men.”
“
28. Self and Peer Evaluation
•Amount and quality of the work contributed to the team by the
individual, the support offered to others and the ability/willingness
to complete tasks on time.
Contributing to the
team’s work
•Communication skills and the ability/willingness to give and receive
feedback.
Interacting with
teammates
•Individual’s contribution to the overall progress towards
completion of the task; tracking progress and being aware of what
others are doing.
Keeping the team on
track
•Motivational skills; encouraging others and being committed to
producing the best group output possible.Expecting quality
•Applying existing knowledge and skills to the task in hand, or being
willing to gain new knowledge and skills if required.
Having relevant skills,
knowledge and abilities
34. Discussion Point
• Take 5 minutes to talk about your experiences of
these dimensions of behaviour.
• What do you think about these scales? For
example….
• Useful or applicable?
• Limitations or potential problems?
34
35. Team Conflict and Self / Peer Evaluation
1. Groups and teamwork used by management
as means of ‘concertive control’? Barker
(1993) on teams used by management as
mechanism to monitor and control each
other’s behaviour.
Barker, J.R., 1993. Tightening the iron cage: Concertive control in
self-managing teams. Administrative science quarterly, pp.408-
437.
1. Diverse teams rate each other lower than
homogenous teams.
Chatman, J.A. and Flynn, F.J., 2001. The influence of demographic
heterogeneity on the emergence and consequences of
cooperative norms in work teams. Academy of Management
Journal, 44(5), pp.956-974.
36. Principles
Accessible and inclusive teaching and learning is....
• Accounting for a range of individual learning styles and
preferences and offering a choice.
• Using tools and approaches which are enabling and
compatible with learners’ specific needs and/or equipment.
• Using readily available resources and materials or adapting
them where they are less accessible.
• Building flexibility into curriculum design and delivery.
• A strong relationship between the learning outcomes and the
tools/methods used.
• Taking a lead from students as to what helps them to learn.
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=2014-09886-001
With Malice Toward None and Charity for Some: Ingroup Favoritism Enables Discrimination. By Greenwald, Anthony G.; Pettigrew, Thomas F. American Psychologist, Mar 24 , 2014, No Pagination Specified.
Greenwald et al (2014) conclude that in-group favouritism is plausibly more significant as a basis for discrimination in contemporary American society than is outgroup-directed hostility.
Corinne A. Moss-Racusina,b, John F. Dovidiob, Victoria L. Brescollc, Mark J. Grahama,d, and Jo Handelsman. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Accedmy of the Sciences (PNAS). October 9, 2012 vol. 109 no. 41
Studies indicate that people’s behaviour is shaped by implicit or unintended biases, stemming from repeated exposure to pervasive cultural stereotypes that portray women as less competent but simultaneously emphasize their warmth and likeability compared with men.” Moss-Racusin et al (2009).
|Judith Butler: American Philosopher: In her best-known work, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990), and its sequel, Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of ‘Sex’ (1993), Butler built upon the familiar cultural-theoretic assumption that gender is socially constructed (the result of socialization, broadly conceived) rather than innate and that conventional notions of gender and sexuality serve to perpetuate the traditional domination of women by men and to justify the oppression of homosexuals and transgender persons.
One of her innovations was to suggest that gender is constituted by action and speech—by behaviour in which gendered traits and dispositions are exhibited or acted out. In particular, gender is not an underlying essence or nature of which gendered behaviour is the product; it is a series of acts whose constant repetition creates the illusion that an underlying nature exists. Gender, according to Butler, “is performatively constituted by the very ‘expressions’ that are said to be its results.” She stressed, however, that individuals do not exist prior to or independently of the genders they “perform”: “gender is always a doing, though not a doing by a subject who might be said to preexist the deed.” Indeed, “the ‘doer’ is variably constructed in and through the deed.” Individual identity (the subject) is itself performatively constituted. It follows that individuals do not “choose” their genders and cannot assume or discard or radically alter them at will simply by behaving (or not behaving) in certain ways. At the same time, small deviations from established patterns of gendered behaviour are possible and indeed inevitable, and it is through such occasional variations that the socially constructed character of gender is revealed.
Each student may have a different view on what a valuable/poor contribution is. Focussing on specific behaviours reduces this subjectivity.
Assessing each other’s team-working behaviours, rather than the quality of their work (often called peer review).
This initiative is driven by student requests
Will discourage free riding?
What about self mark inflation?
Evidence that students are poor or weak judges of own quality of work
Evidence that physical appearance influences judgement
Bias based on assumptions about valuable character traits? Cultural misunderstandings? Friendship groups or the opposite?
Negative impact on those with low self esteem / low self efficacy / vulnerable students
Invites cooperation or competition (who will be the ‘best’ team member)
Invites blame game / judgemental vs. judgement
an organization's control system evolved in response to a managerial change from hierarchical, bureaucratic control to concertive control in the form of self-managing teams. The study investigates how the organization's members developed a system of value-based normative rules that controlled their actions more powerfully and completely than the former system. I describe the organization and its members and provide a detailed account of the dynamics that emerged as concertive control became manifest through the members' interactions. This account depicts how concertive control evolved from the value consensus of the company's team workers to a system of normative rules that became increasingly rationalized. Contrary to some proponents of such systems, concertive control did not free these workers from Weber's iron cage of rational control. Instead, the concertive system, as it became manifest in this case, appeared to draw the iron cage tighter and to constrain the organization's members more powerfully.
