Striving for inclusivity in curriculum and practice

1. Striving for inclusivity in curriculum and practice Professor Pauline Kneale PedRIO and Teaching & Learning Support University of Plymouth pauline.kneale @plymouth.ac.uk https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/your-university/teaching-and-learning

2. Change • Who can be against excellence in teaching? • TEF Opportunities? • We can control how we engage with excellence; • How do we engage equitably, is congruent with scholarly teaching practices and meeting students needs?

3. Students are changing The next generation (K) will be different from millennials (Gen Y, born 1980 and 1994) who tend to be more optimistic, versatile and success orientated. (K- Smartphone generation, Katniss Everdeen, Gig, snowflakes) NoreenaHertze (interviewing 2,000 teenagers) found: • 86% worried about getting a job • 77% worried about debt • 66% worried about climate change • 65% worried about terrorism • 17% have considered suicide • 4% trust corporations (cf60% of their parents).

4. Gen K value authenticity, connection and co-creation ‘Members of Generation K increasingly value things they can actively co-create. It is a generation of makers, creators and inventors. Sarah builds her own computers, ... Jake loves making horror films with his pals on his iPhone, today’s teenagers don’t only want to buy stuff, they want to imprint their voice on products... Producing something themselves has value for this generation. It resonates with their desire to be self-sufficient, and to have physical experiences in a digital world – as well as their desire to have agency and impact.’ ‘Selfie-taking yet unselfish, connected yet lonely, anxious yet pragmatic, risk-averse yet entrepreneurial, Generation K is a distinct cadre, a generation very different from those that preceded them’.

5. The world of work is changing The world’s largest taxi firm, Uber, owns no cars. The world’s most popular media company, Facebook, creates no content. The world’s most valuable retailer, Alibaba, carries no stock. And the world’s largest accommodation provider, Airbnb, owns no property. Frey and Osborne have ranked jobs by how likely they are to be automated in the next 20 years… Factors include whether jobs require skills such as creativity and social intelligence beyond robots’ capabilities…[they conclude ]…47 per cent of jobs in the US are “at risk” of automation… accountant, taxation expert and financial technician have at least a 95 per cent chance of automation. Employees of the future are changing - ‘they increasingly seek jobs which give a sense of purpose, operate meritocraticaly, harness their insights, ideas and curiosity, embody their values and celebrate diversity’. PetterNylander CEO of Universum

6. Businesses (including Universities) seek graduates that are: • adaptable, • multi-skilled • responsive to change, • able to take on new tasks, • able to work to tight deadlines • willing to keep abreast of technical innovations, • meet the challenge of unforeseen events • able to operate seamlessly in different cultural contexts • prepared for and welcoming of career changes (in essence) life-long learners.

7. Equality is giving people the same thing(s)Equity is fairness in every situation

9. A challenging journey: addressing myths and developing approaches to inclusion • Difficult territory • Powerful myths about disability, diversity and difference • Concerns about reducing academic standards • Challenges of ‘reasonable adjustments’ given resource restraints • Moving the culture away from a ‘deficit’ notion • Engaging staff and countering resistance • ‘Aiming for transformational inclusive learning that is equitable’

10. Plymouth issue - Disabled student numbersMental health Polar Racial Attainment gap Just one aspect of equality Fairness, equity, in all aspects of delivery HESA 2015/16

11. Drivers of change • Legal duties –Equalities Act, Anticipatory reasonable adjustments( 2010) • Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) • QAA: Quality Code B1 • Diverse student population –increasing numbers of disabled students • Student experience, progression, retentionand the attainment gap • Reduction in the Disabled Student Allowance • Cost of individual adjustments versus inclusive practice • Student voice

12. Approaches / Models of Disability • a disadvantage caused by the way society and education is organised ( Hughes & Paterson, 1997) • a normal part of diversity (Swain& French, 2000) • should no longer be seen as problematic but fall along the continuum of learners that share similar challenges to all students in HE (Healey et al., 2006).

13. Inclusive Teaching, Learning & Assessment –is just good practice! • ‘Good teaching and learning is inclusive’ (Thomas et al, 2005; Hockings, 2010) • ‘ Good teaching should be everyday practice’ (May &Bridger 2010) • ‘Teaching which engages students in learning that is meaningful, relevant and accessible to all, embracing the view of individual difference as a source of diversity that can enrich the lives and learning of others’ (adapted from Hockings 2010 )

14. Inclusive practice is not new SWANDS Project, Waterfield and West (2002)SPACE Project, Waterfield and West (2006)

15. Flexible inclusive assessment? Through inclusive design wherever possible, and through individual reasonable adjustments wherever required, assessment tasks provide every student with an equal opportunity to demonstrate their achievement. (QAA (2013) UK Quality Code for Higher Education, Ch B6) Traditional assessment practices that were once dominated by the unseen examination and the standard essay…have proved unable to capture the range and nature of the diverse learning outcomes now sought from courses.” (Boud& Falchikov,2006)

16. Inclusive student journey • Admissions-realistic (fitness to study/practice issue) • Early identification,communicationabout students support needs, reasonable adjustments and the Reasonable Adjustment Review Panel (RARP). • Consistent & effective personal tutoring • Effective teaching and post session support • Inclusive assessment& feedback • Field trips/off campus activities, laboratoryand practicalwork • Locating and supporting placements • Employment and advice about further study

17. Student voice: assessment and feedback ‘Feedback is often provided within a matter of hours after sending work off for formative marking, meaning students can improve and work on skills needed continuously’ ‘The coursework was outdated, and difficult because it lacked industry relevance’ ‘The assessments were vague and unclear leaving me puzzled and confused- I have no idea what makes an A, B or C’. We need formative assessment at the beginning so we can improve in summative assessments’ ‘The coursework guidance was ambiguous’ NSS Comments

18. Reasonable Adjustment Review Panel • The purpose of the panel is to ensure equitable, academically sound and financially viable judgements are made about the levels of additional support funding to be provided for students with disabilities. • The panel considers and makes recommendations on cases where support recommended by a needs assessment would either not be covered by, or would cost more than funding provided by the Disabled Students Allowance ('over and above'), or may be above a level that the University may regard as reasonable.

19. Engaging staff - needs multiple routes • Senior leadership commitment and support • champions in schools and faculties • University-wide procedures (e.g off -campus activities) • Collaboration with academics, Disability Assist & TLS • Presentations at faculty and school meetings, T&L committees and away days • Open workshops, conferences • New staff sessions • Comprehensive resources

20. Monitoring and accountability Possibly: • Senior member of staff (school / faculty) accountable reporting to an appropriate committee • Retention, progression and achievement data analysis • DLHE data for disabled students • Student voice (NSS, PTES, PRES etc.) • Quality assurance processes – monitoring reasonable adjustments, outcomes of reasonable adjustment review panel. • Complaints and appeals data

21. Feed-in, feed-forward, feedback model of assessment Student engagement and learning in assessment can be enhanced through:- Feed-in Well designed assessment, briefing & preparation , DLE assessment resources practice papers & sessions, assessment & marking criteria Feedback Learning Space end of task & exams, written, verbal, mp3, YouTube, constructive legible feedback use of DLE marks/grades Feed-forward Formative ‘feedback’, cues, discussion, mid-way reviews, tutor, peer & self review and feedback

22. Planning and implementing flexible, inclusive and innovative assessment • Support at faculty, school, programme & individual level at forums, meetings, away days & events, and with external examiners. • Targeted intervention in programmes and schools with low NSS scores • Working closely with SU, student parliament and course reps • Staff resources

23. Module level: mapping learning outcomes, professional requirements & assessment methods Learning outcomes Professional requirements Formative assessment Summative assessment Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline Assessment methods Feedback methods Deadline

24. Programme mapping: assessment methods Rating - Red – Amber– Green

25. Examples of changed practice. ‘authentic’ Education – offers choice of 2 assessment methods Law– fewer traditional exams: a move to open book & seen exams, and short answer. Marine Science – formative peer review of coursework raised marks by one grade Dental School – same day feedback after exams & assessment History– outward-facing authentic assessments Marketing– no traditional exams, authentic assessments e.g. group reports, plans and presentations Navigation & Maritime Science – thorough assessment briefing, revision sessions, 8 hour assignment with a 27 hour time limit; 1.5 hour class tests with the room invigilated for 3hours.

26. Examples of impact of intervention on NSS scores assessment and feedback (2013 -15 )

27. Conducting inclusive exams • Weighting of exams– no more than 50% • Use a range of exam methods (e.g seen, open book, take home etc.) • Signpost support for exam technique sessions • Prepare students for exams -feed-in / feed-forward • Taking the anxiety out of exams through opportunities to practice and rehearse • Ensure students receive feedback after each exam • Offer students the opportunity to type exams and use assistive software (Mogey 2013)

28. Improved design • Assignments aligned to learning outcomes & assessment criteria • Content: Authentic / Real / Topical • Style: Engaging / engrossing / fun • Style: A range of assessment methods - authentic / work related / few modification implications • Schedule assessments evenly across the year • Offer detailed pre-assessment activities • Offer progression and opportunities to practice • Design inclusive examinations with 50% max weighting • Well written and clearly structured questions • Consider a choice of assessment methods (maximum of 2)

29. Resources to support students and staff

30. Students are changingHE landscape is changing • Difficult territory • Powerful myths about assessment • Disciplinary defences • Pockets of resistance • Transformational learning that is equitable.

31. Where are the inclusivity issues for your programme? Disability Mental health Polar Racial Attainment gap ?

32. References Healey, M., Bradley, A., Fuller, M. and Hall, T. (2006) Listening to students: the experiences of disabled students of learning at university. In Adams, M and Brown, S.(eds) Towards Inclusive Learning in Higher Education: developing curricula for disabled students. Abingdon. Routledge. Hockings . C. (2010) Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education: a synthesis of research. EvidenceNet . HEA York Hughes,B& Paterson,K. (1997) The Social Model of Disability and the Disappearing Body: Towards a sociology of impairment. Disability& Society Volume 12 Issue 3 May, H. and Bridger, K. (2010) Developing and embedding inclusive policy and practice in higher education. HEA Thomas, L; May, H; Harrop, H; Houston, M; Knox, H; Lee, M, F; Osborne, M; Pudner, H, & Trotman, C (2005).From the Margins to the Mainstream: Embedding Widening Participation in Higher Education. Disability & Society .Volume 12 Issue 3. Swain,J& French,S. (2000) – Towards an affirmation model of disability. Disability & Society,  Volume 15 Issue4.

33. Resources DfE: ( 2017) Inclusive teaching and learning in Higher Education as a Route to Excellence. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inclusive-teaching-and-learning-in-higher-education HEA(2012) A Marked Improvement; transforming Assessment in higher Education. https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/a_marked_improvement.pdf Waterfield,J., & West,B.,(2006) Inclusive Assessment in Higher Education: A Resource for Change. Plymouth University. https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/uploads/production/document/path/3/3026/Space_toolkit.pdf University of Plymouth – Inclusive Teaching, Learning & Assessment https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/your-university/teaching-and-learning/inclusivity