"We can’t really know what works in the inclusive curriculum domain because we don’t find out!" say Stella Jones-Devitt and Alan Donnelly
“We were tasked recently with doing a review of ‘inclusive curriculum’ by Advance HE for the higher education sector. Detailed findings can be found elsewhere but something obvious came through from our critique which surprised us within the literature. We want to share this surprise with policymakers at all levels.
Please note that this blog is the view of the authors, not that of Advance HE.”
Elusiveness of evaluation
Despite finding a plethora of undoubtedly well-meaning interventions and initiatives aimed at making a real difference for students, talk about evaluation is scarce. This is a crucial point to note. We can’t really know what works in the inclusive curriculum domain because we don’t find out! It could therefore be assumed that in the never-ending quest for higher education austerity, policymakers could question whether doing nothing could actually have the same affect?
Given the absence of meaningful evaluation, demonstrating impact becomes even harder. Without knowing what outcomes are being addressed in work on inclusivity, it becomes impossible to show progress. You can’t meet or exceed targets and expectations if you don’t have them.
All-encompassing concepts
So, everybody’s doing it, but what? And most importantly, why? Unpicking the term inclusive curriculum through the found sources reveals notable variations in how both ‘inclusion’ and ‘curriculum’ are defined. There is no shared understanding of inclusion. Different meanings and interpretations can be a strength, but only if they are applied critically in practice. We urge practitioners and researchers to critique inclusion for their own context. What and who is being included in inclusion? What and who is subsequently excluded?
Differences are also observed concerning whether approaches to inclusion are being designed for all students or recognise students’ unique needs and individual differences. Despite an ongoing association with ‘other’ or ‘specific’ student groups, inclusion should be promoted as the foundation of quality teaching and learning. Policymakers need to highlight that all students ‘matter,’ if they are genuinely trying to build students’ confidence, agency and sense of belonging; all crucial factors which can assist in shaping inclusive policymaking and practice.
Similar variations are found with notions of ‘curriculum.’ Sources refer to ideas of knowledge, pedagogies, course content, teaching approaches, and assessment methods. Yet the term ‘curriculum’ can downplay the interconnectedness needed between all facets of institutional experience for enhancing inclusivity. With the importance of whole institution approaches being recognised in the review, we suggest policymakers use the term ‘inclusive organisation’ rather than ‘inclusive curriculum.’ The evidence suggests these things matter.
Rays of light
Despite these difficulties, there are some real nuggets of prevailing policymaking and practice, which specific institutions are instigating, which need sharing as they are making a positive difference. One obvious area concerns the importance of establishing cohesion between learning and teaching practices, leadership and overarching policies. Recognising the possible impact on all students is essential. This demonstrates the clear need for senior university leaders to assume responsibility for driving an inclusive culture, rather than placing the onus on staff or students. It requires addressing siloed ways of working, by deliberately working across existing boundaries which remain to some extent untouchable and sacrosanct.
This review highlights that the hidden curriculum – the unspoken norms and values that students are presumed to understand in higher education but are not taught – should be made explicit if real transformation is to be achieved. Failure to notice, challenge and address the hidden curriculum will inevitably disadvantage students. An inclusive curriculum design should be implemented that does not rely upon assumptions about the learners’ ability to go the ‘extra mile’ or to learn hidden rules to navigate higher education successfully. Being compassionate about how students learn is integral to an inclusive organisation. Inclusive cultures of learning and teaching can become more dynamic by anticipating and welcoming difference, and in adapting approaches based on evolving contexts.
Way out West
Is it any wonder that much research about inclusion in higher education remains untapped and unknown when access to evidence sources is skewed? Many of the most renowned databases, drawn upon by policymakers, adopt a Western-centric lens, and the often undivided focus on sources written and published in English also means that evidence in other languages is excluded. That doesn’t detract from the importance of what is found, but surely it leaves us wondering what else is out there? We urge commissioners of research in this domain to seek out more work with parallel voices, dissenting or otherwise, from the widest possible areas of the globe to offer insightful, non-Westernised perspectives of what is meant and experienced as the inclusive curriculum.
Problematic ownership?
Throughout doing this work, we have reflected on our own position as privileged enquirers, inevitably applying a dominant Western-centric perspective. We are aware of it yet are inevitably immersed in it. To reduce this impact and to raise the bar on producing meaningful inclusivity work, we have fed these evidence-informed thoughts into the Framework for Inclusive Learning and Teaching. We also suggest that anyone involved in policymaking in this area needs to adopt a reflexive stance throughout the process. We must acknowledge that the existing privileged higher education sector cannot be the sole custodians of work in this area; either in commissioning, researching and/or experiencing inclusivity. Until this occurs, alongside recognising that the sector has a dearth of meaningful evaluation methods, prevailing approaches for the ‘inclusive curriculum’ will continue, possibly unknowingly, to let our students down.
Professor Stella Jones-Devitt, Independent HE practitioner and Alan Donnelly, Sheffield Hallam University
