This document discusses inclusive teaching and assessment practices. It describes a Higher Education Academy project involving 16 universities to develop an inclusive culture with a focus on feedback and assessment. The project aims to create an inclusive assessment and feedback toolkit through staff and student engagement. Several case studies are presented that demonstrate both inclusive and non-inclusive assessment approaches. Next steps discussed include gaining senior management support, a two-phase research project, and evaluating the impact of inclusive practices through student and staff involvement.

1. Feedback and Assessment:
Embracing Diversity

2. Project Team
• Heather Davidson
• Leslie Robinson
• Sue Braid
• Gill Molyneaux
• Helen Stafford
supported by
• Chrissi Nerantzi
• Donna Berwick

3. What is inclusive Teaching?

4. • The Higher Education Academy defines ‘inclusion' as ‘the enabling of
full and equitable participation in and progression through higher
education for all prospective and existing students'.
• Inclusive teaching means recognising, accommodating and meeting
the learning needs of all your students. It means acknowledging that
your students have a range of individual learning needs and are
members of diverse communities. Inclusive teaching avoids
pigeonholing students into specific groups with predictable and fixed
approaches to learning.
• Range of individual learning needs in relation to international
students, students with learning difficulties, students with disabilities.
Is there a typical student?
What is inclusive teaching?

5. Higher Education Academy Project
• Overall aim – to develop an inclusive culture in
Higher Education
• 16 Universities
• Initially a year long project
• 9 strands – feedback and assessment has been
selected as UoS focus
• Task : to develop inclusive feedback and assessment
across the University

6. Structure of the Project
• Vision statement and Abstract
• Staff and Student Engagement
• Staff
• Representative from each school to assist with identifying
existing good practice
• Discuss with project team assessment options appropriate
to each school to form content of an inclusive assessment
and feedback toolkit
• Assist with disseminating toolkit
• Audit of impact
• Student Involvement

7. Inclusive practice
• takes a coherent approach
which is anticipatory and
proactive
• has a strategy for delivering
equal opportunities and
diversity policies
• involves the whole institution
• matches provision to student
needs
• incorporates regular reflection,
review and refinement of
strategies and methods that
actively involve all students

8. What is inclusive...
• Assessment?
• Feedback?
• Why Salford?
• Why now?
• ASPIRE

9. Inclusive practice
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5HZRXPb
ow0
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz8heJbyo
ZM I see what you mean... from
my point... we should...
This is interesting.... I could

10. Models of Inclusivity
Assimilation Alternative Inclusive
provision culture
Limited Transformative
institutional Reactive approach.
response. approach. Inclusive &
Student Separate flexible
integration policies and policies,
into an practices for procedures and
existing particular practices focus
system. individuals or on success for
groups. all.

11. Concepts to consider
• Medical model of
disability/difference
• Social model of
disability/difference
• Power difference
between
Staff/Student

12. Practice Examples
Teaching
• All students receive lecture notes 1 week
prior to lecture
• Lecture information provided in range of
formats – audio, PowerPoint, Podcast
Assessment
• Choice of assessment format for all
students
Feedback
• Personalised feedback in a format that is
meaningful for the student
• Audio, podcast
• Traditional? Innovative?

13. Case studies

14. Case Study 1: Is anybody out there?
A student who uses a wheelchair, and who has slow keyboarding skills, uses assistive technology (eg a one-handed
keyboard) and is required to participate in on-line discussions via a Virtual Learning Environment as a part of the
assessment, at a designated time during the week.
However, the slow keyboarding skills of the student means that by the time he has typed a response to a thread, the
conversation has moved on, and he is unable to engage in any dialogue. The highly dynamic nature of this assessment
process means that the student is being placed at an unfair disadvantage, and this becomes clear to the tutor when he
looks at the results of the discussion
The tutor identifies several options:
1. Offer a scribe who can type out the student’s
responses;
2. Ask for the student to write a reflection on the
discussion, rather than contribute to it;
3. Remove the on-line discussion from the assessment
process, returning instead to a conventional seminar
format
4. Alter the ‘chat’ function to something more akin to a
notice-board, whereby thoughts and responses can be
posted on a limited number of topics throughout the ?
assessment process.
Questions
1. Which option is most suited to the
principles of inclusive assessment and
why?
2. Do you see any barriers with this option?

15. Case Study 2: Death by Exam Questions
1. Did the tutor take the best course of
A student with dyslexia is on an English course that is action?
assessed at its conclusion on the basis on a series of
examined essays. The student’s writing skills are slow.
2. Was the approach taken an example of
Legibility and spelling/grammar are improved when the assimilating, alternative or inclusive
student uses a word processor, and this is the student’s assessment practice?
preferred method of written communication, as it also 3. Were there any alternative solutions
makes for clearer and more easily reviewed text. This which would demonstrate inclusive
method, however, is even slower than hand-writing for this practice?
student. The assessment is intended to consist of two 4
hour exams, with the students completing one long essay
question and two short essay questions in each.
Tutor’s action: It is believed that the student would not,
even with extended time, be able to fully demonstrate his
ability and understanding, and as such the possibility of
replacing the 4 hour examination with either a 7 day open
paper, or with assessed coursework, is considered. These
options, however, are rejected as the tutor is aware that
many students without disabilities may have learning styles
that are not best suited to assessment under examination
conditions, and it is felt that the dyslexic student may
therefore be gaining an unfair advantage, in these
particular circumstances.
In the end, the student is assessed via a 2 day open paper
and one 3 hour examination, in which he attempts the
same 2 short essay questions as other students. The
student is allowed to use a computer for this exam.

16. Case Study 3: Portfolio
“Study in Higher Education” is a first term, year ‘0’ module designed to assist students in
developing the necessary study skills and learning strategies required for a successful
undergraduate career.
Previously, the module was assessed by means of an extended essay but concerns about the
increasingly diverse student population, and the fact that the essay form of assessment is rarely
used in Science led to a change to a portfolio assessment.
The module is now assessed using a portfolio designed around criteria, based on the learning
outcomes of the module, but the means by which these criteria are satisfied are entirely flexible.
This provided students with some independence in selecting ways of delivery best suited to
demonstrate their strengths and abilities through articles, lab reports and coursework. Students
are strongly encouraged to use pieces of coursework completed as part of their programme of
study, which has been enhanced after marking as a result of feedback.
Questions
1. In what way does the new method of assessment address the tutors concerns
about the original approach?
2. Does the change in assessment method demonstrate inclusive practice?
3. What do you perceive to be the barriers of introducing a portfolio as a method of
assessment?
4. How might you engage staff members to try this method?

17. Case Study 4 : Decisions, decisions!
Course: MSc Health and Social Care: Module:
Methods of Enquiry
Standard assessment method: Written plans with
written formative feedback
New method: Optional oral presentation or written
draft.
Purpose of assessment method: Formative
Description
This was a formative piece of assessment. The
purpose of the assessment was to support the
students’ written research proposals. An oral
presentation was offered as a possible option to
replace the written formative assessment .
Students were given 10 minutes to present their
proposals by whatever method they preferred.
Questions
1. What do you think the strengths of this approach might be?
2. What do might be the barriers?
3. Might such an option be introduced into summative assessment processes?
4. How could you engage staff members to try this method?

18. Questions
1. Is this an example of assimilating,
alternative or inclusive assessment?
Case Study 5: Video Star
2. How might written assessments be
A student has a significant hearing impairment. As a adapted within your school to take into
consequence of this he was having great difficulty in consideration where English is not the
writing the contextual studies assignment to the students first language?
required standard as he did not have an
understanding of the English needed. The student’s 3. What would be the barriers to this?
language of communication was BSL. This meant that
he would fail his HND because of his lack of English 4. How might you engage staff members to
at the required level. design alternative assessments?
Action: Rather than try to improve his English, in co-
operation with the validating body it was felt better
if he presented his assignment in BSL. This would be
videoed, with an interpreter present and voiceover.
It would have to be of the same standard and the
marking would be looking for the same criteria as if it
was written. Therefore there would have to be the
same level of academic debate as with a written
assignment; the only difference would be in the
method of it being recorded.

19. Case Study 6: Say it out loud
As part of a pilot study, fifteen student volunteers submitted
samples of their work for formative feedback. The work
included essays, parts of dissertations and written reflections.
After reading students’ work, feedback was recorded on a
desktop PC and converted to mp3 format . The mp3 files were
then sent to the students as email attachments. Semi
structured interviews with the students took place within 3
weeks of them receiving this feedback.
Overall, the students responded very positively to this type of
feedback. Reasons cited included: it was easier to understand
because handwriting is often illegible; it had more depth
because possible strategies for solving problems were
included rather than just stating what the problems were; and
it seemed ‘more genuine’, indicating that speech is received in
a more personal way than writing.
http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/ftp/newsletters/bulletin22p5.pdf
Questions
1. In what ways might this be considered inclusive practice in providing feedback?
2. What do you perceive to be the barriers?
3. How might you engage staff members to try this method?

20. Case studies have been synthesised
from the following sources
• http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/ftp/
Resources/disability/assessingdisabledstudent
s.pdf
• http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?
page=10494
• http://www.psychology.heacademy.ac.uk/net
works/sig/ia.asp
• http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/ftp/
newsletters/bulletin22p5.pdf

21. next steps
•Where are we now?
•Getting involved
•Blackboard module
•Student representation
•Output

22. Where are we now?
• Senior Management Support
• University wide developments
• Research project
• 2 phases
• Student volunteers
• Staff champions
• Evaluation of practice
• Report

23. Focus
• Inclusive feedback and assessment as defined
by students
• Student engagement
• Authentic/Meaningful
• Impact

24. How can you help?
• Blackboard module
• Student focus groups
• Examples of good practice
• Engagement with project developments