22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Teachers and Students on Inclusive Higher Education: a Questionnaire and Interview Study in the Netherlands
Tisja Korthals Altes1, Martijn Willemse1, Sui Lin Goei1, Melanie Ehren2
1Windesheim University, Netherlands, The; 2VU Amsterdam, Netherlands, The
Presenting Author: Korthals Altes, Tisja
The student population in Higher Education (HE) is becoming increasingly diverse, with the Netherlands being no exception (van Middelkoop et al., 2017). This changing student population raises the question of how to provide education for current and future student populations (Noppe et al., 2018). Therefore, it is no surprise that (international) governments and scholars are focusing on increasing inclusion in education (EECEA, 2022; Ainscow, 2020). HE-teachers play an important role in realizing inclusive HE (O’Shea, 2016; van Middelkoop et al., 2017). However, studies on HE-teachers’ views, images, and opinions on inclusion, in short, their understanding, are almost absent in the academic literature (Authors et al., [under review]; Stentiford & Koutsouris, 2021; Shaeffer, 2019). Consequently, the following research question was developed to address this gap in knowledge:
How do teachers understand inclusive higher education in the Netherlands?
The primary objective of this paper is to report on a study that aims to gain more insight into HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusive education, while simultaneously considering their institutional context. By doing so, this research aims to offer valuable insights that can guide HE institutions (HEIs), researchers, and governments in their efforts to promote and support inclusive HE.
Currently, students that differ from the norm associated with HE students, the “traditional student” (white, male, cis-gendered, able-bodied, neurotypical, straight, following education in their home country, and recently out of secondary education), often experience more barriers for student achievement (Meerman et al., 2018). The growing diversity in HE thus does not one-on-one result in inclusive HE programs.
Besides the moral imperative for ensuring student achievement of a diverse population to decrease inequity in HE and society (Shaeffer, 2019; Lister, 2020), there are multiple educational and societal rationales. Including, but not exhaustive: the need for more HE graduates (see Council of Europe’s ‘Lisbon recognition convention’ 1997, 2016), the facilitation of critical thinking by challenging hitherto unchallenged norms in HE (Harless, 2018; Callan, 2016; Moriña, 2016), and it prepares students for the diverse and international society they will work/live in (Palfrey & Ibargüen, 2018), e.g. education adjusted to the changing society in the future.
To realize an environment in which the likelihood of student achievement is equal for everyone in the diverse student population, e.g. inclusive HE, it is essential that HEIs and HE-teachers see diversity as an asset rather than an issue (Moriña, 2016). Fortunately, HE-teachers have a positive attitude toward inclusive HE (Authors et al. under review). Because there is currently a lack of research examining the understanding of inclusive HE among HE-teachers (Authors et al., under review; Stentiford & Koutsouris, 2020; Shaeffer, 2019), it remains unclear what specific aspects of inclusive HE HE-teachers hold positive attitudes toward.
In contrast to HE-teachers’ understanding, research has shown, the influence of the institutional context on the possibilities HE-teachers feel to realize inclusive HE (Authors et al., under review; Authors et al., under review). HEIs increasingly recognize their responsibility for accessibility and equal opportunities for student achievement (Glastra & Van Middelkoop, 2018). However, HE-teachers still experience challenges in their HEI due to a felt lack of support in resources, information, and training (Authors et al. under review).
To support HE-teachers in improving inclusive learning environments, more knowledge is needed on HE-teachers’ understandings of inclusion (Stentiford & Koutsouris, 2020), while paying attention to their institutional context (Authors et al., under review).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedContext and Participants
The participants in this study were HE-teachers and last-year students from eight study programs spread across four HEIs in the Netherlands. Including HEIs from less researched areas in the field of inclusive HE (van Middelkoop et al., 2017) and research- and teacher intensive universities. The difference between them could influence the degree of confidence, time, resources, and interest HE-teachers have in creating inclusive HE. Per HEI, two bachelor level study programs were selected: one teacher-education program and one computer science program. Similar study subjects across the HEIs were selected to minimize the effect of the study subject on the results.
Instruments
Data on HE-teachers’ understandings of inclusive education was obtained through a written survey and semi-structured follow-up interviews. The use of written surveys was deemed appropriate due to the potentially sensitive nature of the topic, as it may allow participants to express their thoughts more freely in written format (Salant & Dillman, 1994).
The survey was designed for this study and consisted of both open- and close-ended questions. It is based on existing surveys in the field of inclusive education (Miesera et al., 2019; Authors et al.,under review;Wekker et al., 2016), which were adapted to the Dutch higher education context and a broad definition of inclusive education, and on the outcomes of a systematic literature review of the same subject. This resulted in 33 questions divided into five parts: (1) connection to their HEI; (2) images of inclusive HE; (3) implementation of inclusive practices; (4) responsibility of their HEI; and (5) background information. All HE-teachers and last year students of the selected study programs in the academic year 2023/2024 were invited to participate in the survey through an invitation by email and through their internal communication platforms.
Topic lists for the semi-structured follow-up interviews were designed based on the results of the survey and an earlier literature review by Authors et al.(under review). Participants of the survey were invited to participate in the interviews. A selection was made based on a spread among the different study programs.
Analysis
The survey results were transferred to SPSS and assessed for missing data and data division. The open-ended questions were first coded before comparisons between the participating groups and HEIs were made. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and subjected to a member check (Merriam, 1998). The first author coded the transcripts in two-phases, which were reviewed by the second author.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe outcomes are on HE-teachers’ and their students’ understanding of inclusive HE and inclusive educational practice. The findings on the understanding of inclusive education in these groups were compared to one another. It is expected that the student population of the study program in question, the geographical area, and the HE-teachers previous experiences influence their understanding of inclusive HE.
The support felt by HE-teachers from the study program where they teach and their higher education institution was considered in the analyses of the identified understandings. In a systematic literature review of the same topic (Authors et al., under review) and an explorative study (Authors et al., under review), we found that HE-teachers often felt a lack of support from their higher education institution. Furthermore, HE-teachers were often isolated and had limited knowledge of one-another’s educational practices (Authors et al., under review). With this study, more insight is gathered on the felt support at the specific higher education institution, but also, through follow-up interviews, more in-depth knowledge on the connection between higher education institution’s policy and communication, HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusive HE, and HE-teachers’ students’ experience of inclusive HE is presented.
With these outcomes, we aim to reduce the knowledge gap on HE-teachers’ understanding of inclusive HE and to contribute to realizing inclusive HE for their students. The latter aids in more equity in HE (Shaeffer, 2029; Lister et al., 2020), while also preparing students to work together in a diverse society (Palfrey & Ibargüen, 2018). Follow-up research based on the outcomes are on interventions at the specific HEIs participating in this study and generalizability of the designed instruments in wider European contexts.
ReferencesAuthors et al., under review
Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587
Callan, E. 2020. “Education in Safe and Unsafe Spaces.” Philosophical Inquiry in Education 24 (1): 64–78. doi:10.7202/1070555ar.
Glastra, F & van Middelkoop, D. (2018). Studiesucces in het hoger onderwijs: van rendement naar maatschappelijke relevantie. Eburon.
Harless, J. 2018. “Safe Space in the College Classroom: Contact, Dignity, and a Kind of Publicness.” Ethics and Education: 1–17. doi:10.1080/17449642.2018.1490116.
Lister, K., Pearson, V. K., Collins, T. D., & Davies, G. J. (2020). Evaluating inclusion in distance learning: a survey of university staff attitudes, practices and training needs. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 34(3), 321–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2020.1828048
Meerman, M., de Jong, M., & Wolff, R. (2018). Studiesucces en etnische diversiteit. In F. Glastra, & D. van Middelkoop (Eds.), Studiesucces in het hoger onderwijs: van rendement naar maatschappelijke relevantie (pp. 89-139). Eburon.
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case learning applications in education. Jossey-Bass.
Miesera, S., DeVries, J. M., Jungjohann, J., & Gebhardt, M. (2019). Correlation between attitudes, concerns, self-efficacy and teaching intentions in inclusive education evidence from German pre-service teachers using international scales. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 19(2), 103–114. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1471-3802.12432
Moriña, A. 2016. “Inclusive Education in Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities.” European Journal of Special Needs Education 32 (1): 3–17. doi:10.1080/08856257.2016.1254964.
O’Shea, S., Lysaght, P., Roberts, J., & Harwood, V. (2015). Shifting the blame in higher education – social inclusion and deficit discourses. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(2), 322–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1087388
Palfrey, J. and A. Ibargüen. 2018. Safe Spaces, Brave Spaces: Diversity and Free Expression in Education. Reprint ed. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Shaeffer, S. (2019). Inclusive education: a prerequisite for equity and social justice. Asia Pacific Education Review, 20(2), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-019-09598-w
Stentiford, L., & Koutsouris, G. (2020). What are inclusive pedagogies in higher education? A systematic scoping review. Studies in Higher Education, 46(11), 2245–2261. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020.1716322
van Middelkoop, D., Ballafkih, H. & Meerman, M. (2017). Understanding diversity: a Dutch case study on teachers’ attitudes towards their diverse student population. Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training, (9)1. DOI 10.1186/s40461-016-0045-9
Wekker, G., Slootman, M., Icaza, R., Jansen, H., & Vázquez, R. (2016). Let's do diversity: Report of the Diversity Commission University of Amsterdam. University of Amsterdam. Geraadpleegd op 16 januari 2024, 178892_Diversity_Commission_Report_2016.pdf (uva.nl)
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Counselling and Guidance Actions for Attention to Diversity at Spanish Universities
Yaiza Viñuela, Diego González-Rodríguez, Javier Vidal
Universidad de León, Spain
Presenting Author: Viñuela, Yaiza
In the university context, there has been an increase in the enrollment of a highly diverse student profile, including students with disabilities, educational support needs, or socio-educational disadvantages (Davis et al., 2021; Stanwood & Mittiga, 2022). In this regard, this study defines diversity-support students as those who, during the teaching-learning process, require ordinary or extraordinary actions to optimize their learning experiences (Vázquez Varela et al., 2020). These interventions, conceived from an inclusive perspective, must address the student's needs, whether they are specific or permanent, thus ensuring an equitable and accessible educational environment (Vázquez Varela et al., 2020; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO], 2023).
Considering this student profile, it is necessary for universities to establish action plans aimed at promoting the inclusion of students within the university system (Banerjee, 2018; Ramos Santana et al., 2021). On the one hand, the services offered by universities to address the needs of diversity-support students have increased with the goal of enabling them to play an active role and succeed in their academic trajectory (Banerjee, 2018; Cesarano et al., 2018; European Commission, 2022). Among these services, the provision of psychological counseling stands out in European universities to ensure the holistic development of students, offering both psychological and health-related counseling (European Commission, 2022).
On the other hand, specific actions have been implemented to respond to the needs of diversity-support students. The provision of tutorials is a widespread practice in universities as they positively impact the student's retention in the university (Nardacchione & Peconio, 2021). Tutorials are considered key actions because of the important role of teacher-tutors in addressing the needs of diverse students (European Commission, 2022). Linked to the tutor concept, mentorship programs are being implemented, especially to assist students with disabilities in acquiring skills for academic success, such as learning strategies (Stanwood & Mittiga, 2022). Another noteworthy action is focused on interpersonal counseling with the aim of ensuring that students with specific needs, whether temporary or permanent, succeed within the academic sphere (Cardinot & Flynn, 2022).
In summary, it is essential for universities to have personnel with specialized training to address the needs of both university students and the challenges they may face during their academic journey (Bishop, 2016). This is aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 agenda, as it helps reduce inequalities among students by offering quality education (UNESCO, 2016, 2023). Therefore, by implementing actions in the university to address the specific needs of students, it contributes to achieving SDGs 4 and 10 (UNESCO, 2023). Taking into account the SDGs, diversity support is approached from an inclusive perspective, grounded in equity, and enabling students to actively participate in the teaching-learning process (UNESCO, 2016).
In light of all the above, the research question is: What are the profiles of students addressed in diversity support by Spanish public universities? This leads us to define the general objective of this study, which is to understand the profiles of students framed in diversity support attended by Spanish public universities. This objective has been specified in the following specific objective linked to a research question: to develop a classification of the type of diversity addressed in Spanish public universities, what are the predominant categories and dimensions of diversity being addressed by Spanish public universities in their initiatives and diversity support programs?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study is part of a broader research project aimed at identifying actions designed to address individual students through interviews. To achieve this, a semi-structured interview was designed as the data collection technique. The script development process comprised three phases. In the first phase, a review of reports, legislation, and scientific articles was conducted to understand what is being done in universities to address the diversity of students. In the second phase, areas of interest were identified, and the interview script was developed. In the third phase, the clarity and relevance of the questions were evaluated by two experts. Ultimately, the interview script consisted of four questions addressing the attention to different student profiles: a) students with neurodevelopmental disorders; b) students with physical or sensory disabilities; c) students with high abilities; and d) students with socio-economic/personal circumstances.
Participants were selected through two phases. In the first phase, 4 participants were obtained from 4 Spanish public universities. In a second phase, a sample of n=20 Spanish public universities was obtained, resulting in a total of 29 interviews and 29 participants. Consequently, a total sample of 33 interviews from n=26 Spanish public universities was achieved. In each university, 1 to 3 experts participated.
The sociodemographic profile of the participants includes experts working in disability services and equivalents. These experts have decades of experience in guidance services, with 9 participants having 1 to 10 years of experience, 13 with 10 to 20 years, and 11 with 20 to 30 years. Regarding their education, 19 have degrees in psychology or education, 6 in social sciences, 4 in humanities, and 3 in other fields.
The interviews were conducted in 2023, lasting between 30 to 50 minutes, all conducted online. Three researchers, experts in the subject, participated in the interviews. The initial interviews were conducted jointly by the three researchers to ensure uniform procedures when conducted individually, aiming to guarantee the reliability and validity of the obtained data. The interviews were audio-recorded, and notes were taken for transcription once completed.
The interviews were analysed using the MAXQDA 2022 software as an aid for content analysis. A content analysis was conducted, delineating initial categories according to the student typology. After coding the information, the frequency of each code's appearance was calculated. These categories were grouped into four clusters: Socio-economic/personal situations, physical or sensory disabilities, high abilities, and neurodevelopmental/psychological disorders.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsInterviews results reveal diverse challenges and guidance needs among university students in the diversity framework. Interventions for physical or sensory disabilities or neurodevelopmental/psychological disorders are more developed than those for socio-economic/personal situations. Broadening student attention is advisable to ensure no one is unsupported. Main results are presented below, with reference to the number of interviews in which each typology of student was mentioned, represented with the letter n. Likewise, the main conclusions will be presented.
Concerning students with socio-economic/personal situations (n=25), these individuals have needs that may not be initially diagnosable. These include balancing work and study (n=12) or dealing with bereavement (n=8). Primary guidance involves administrative and psychological support, recognising the complexity for the academic success.
Students with physical or sensory disabilities (n=18) receive administrative and methodological support, including financial assistance and classroom adaptations. Mentoring and tutoring play crucial roles in aiding their adaptation to the university system.
Students with high abilities (n=6) often lack specific attention, relying on disability services and seeking psychological support due to related circumstances or comorbidities. Specific programs for high-ability students are limited.
In the realm of neurodevelopmental/psychological disorders (n=29), attention is more developed for specific disorders such as learning disorders (n=10), autism spectrum disorders (n=9) and anxiety (n=9). Prevalence highlights the need for personalized support services, considering individual complexity. Robust mental health services are crucial in the university, requiring integrated clinical and academic/social support strategies.
In summary, the conclusions emphasize the urgency of adopting an inclusive and personalized approach in addressing diversity within universities, recognizing the unique characteristics of each student and ensuring an educational environment that promotes equity and academic success for all.
Research subsidised by the Aid for University Teacher Training, granted by the Ministry of Universities (Order of 15 November 2021), Spain.
ReferencesBanerjee, P. A. (2018). Widening Participation in Higher Education with a View to Implementing Institutional Change. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 22, 75–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2018.1441198
Bishop, J. B. (2016). A wish list for the advancement of university and college counseling centers. Journal of College Student Psychotherapy, 30(1), 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/87568225.2016.1105651
Cardinot, A., & Flynn, P. (2022). Rapid Evidence Assessment: Mentoring Interventions for/by Students with Disabilities at Third-Level Education. Education Sciences, 12(6), 384. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12060384
Cesarano, V. P., Capo, M., Papathanasiou, M., & Striano, M. (2018). Guidance Models and Practices Adopted Internationally to Promote the Exploration of Skilss Relating to the Employability of Students with Disabilities. A first Meta-Analysis. In V. Boffo & M. Fedeli (eds.), Employability & Competences. Innovative Curricula for New Professions (pp. 327-340). Firenze University Press. https://cutt.ly/dL1p9cp
Davis, M. T., Watts, G. W., & López, E. J. (2021). A systematic review of firsthand experiences and supports for students with autism spectrum disorder in higher education. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 84(101769), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2021.101769
European Commission (2 de febrero de 2022). Eurydice. https://acortar.link/Dxvo0B
Nardacchione, G., & Peconio G. (2021). Peer Tutoring and Scaffolding Principle for Inclusive Teaching. En P. Ponzio (eds.), Elementa. Intersections between Philosophy, Epistemology and Empirical Perspectives (pp. 181-200). https://dx.doi.org/10.7358/elem-2021-0102-nape
Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (2016). Educación 2030: Declaración de Incheon y Marco de Acción para la realización del Objetivo de Desarrollo Sostenible 4: Garantizar una educación inclusiva y equitativa de calidad y promover oportunidades de aprendizaje permanente para todos. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245656_spa
Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (2023). Informe de los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible 2023: Edición especial: Por un plan de rescate para las personas y el planeta. UNESCO. https://acortar.link/iX57Vc
Ramos Santana, G., Pérez Carbonell, A., Chiva Sanchis, I., & Moral Mora, A., (2021). Validation of a scale of attention to diversity for university teachers. Educación XX1, 24(2), 121-142. https://doi. org/10.5944/educXX1.28518
Stanwood, J., & Mittiga, A. (2022). Faculty attitudes toward inclusive instruction: Then and now. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2022(172), 79-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20527
Vázquez Varela, E., Portela Pino, I., & Rodríguez, V. D. (2020). Attention to Diversity in Compulsory Secondary Education. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 10, 1176-1185. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe10040082
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Crafting Innovative Faculty Development towards Inclusive Student-centred Pedagogy (I-ScP)
Elena Marin1, Kallia Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts2, Roeland van der Rijst3, Elia Maria Fernandez4, Meeri Hellsten5, Irina Presnakova6
1University of Bucharest, Romania; 2University of Crete; 3Leiden University; 4University of Cantabria; 5Stockholm University; 6Daugavpils University
Presenting Author: Marin, Elena
The COALITION Erasmus Plus Higher Ed project has allowed for the creation of a collaborative environment to map teaching competencies, following needs analysis, towards the implementation of inclusive teaching practices as well as virtually develop participatory inquiry processes for the transformation of teaching practice. Using a comparative dimension among six European universities, we advocate for a transition towards faculty development (FD) processes that prioritize sustainability. This shift is essential to empower academics as self-regulated learners, enabling them to cultivate competencies conducive to the creation of effective Inclusive Student-Centered Pedagogy (I-ScP) lessons within their specific educational contexts. I-ScP as a prevailing approach in higher education (HE) has garnered acclaim from students, educational researchers, and policymakers alike (Council Recommendation, 2017). As a catalyst for fostering self-directed learners, I-ScP positions learners at the core of the learning experience.
FD Programs focusing on I-ScP can serve as an innovative approach to enhance the knowledge and skills of faculty members. According to Doménech et al. (2023), faculty members can play a decisive role and “can provide decisive help to prevent students from dropping out of the university and guarantee their academic success (Lombardi, Murray & Kowitt, 2016)”. Intentional syllabus redesign employed as a self-regulatory FD method (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2022) showed academics feel accountable for their teaching choices. Carballo et al. (2019) confirmed that adopting an inclusive social model helps academics realise that they can be held accountable by how they design courses that are proactively inclusive and appropriately align learning environments, processes, and resources. I-ScP FD programs can also contribute to fostering a robust and enduring collegial work environment, ensuring that faculty members are prepared and consistently advancing in their strategies and competencies (Zahedi & Bazargan, 2023). Perceived as a tool to cultivate effectiveness among early-career faculty members, and enhancing the quality of their teaching, research, and counseling capabilities (Rahman, 2023), peer-coaching and peer-observation are considered as effective development tools that utilise collaborative and reciprocal reflective input between teachers in non-intimidating and non-hierarchical systems (Netolicky, 2016). Moreover, if FD activities contribute to students’ learning outcomes in positive way (Gutierez & Kim, 2018; Yee, 2016), they are likely to be effective.
Despite the pivotal role attributed to I-ScP in HE, there exists a gap in systematic understanding of its practical implementation. A comprehensive systematic review of empirical research unveils the varied applications of I-ScP within classroom settings, beyond-classroom scenarios, and at institutional levels in HE institutions (Grøndahl Glavind, et. al., 2023). Aiming to encourage engagement, self-awareness and self-regulation, and building upon Hockings' (2001) framework, we characterize I-ScP in HE as a deliberate and forward-looking approach to teaching and learning. Seeking to proactively meet the needs of all students and considering the potential requirements of all stakeholders without resorting to labeling (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023), we strategically crafted FD activities promoting equity as learner-centered opportunities.
Recent advancements in FD favor approaches leveraging 1) informal peer discussions, 2) peer coaching sessions before or after peer-observation protocols, 3) self-regulation tasks aligning syllabus components with I-ScP principles following the work of Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts on intentional syllabus re-design as a reflective process (2022) and 4) action research. However, a substantial disparity exists between teaching practices and policies, with limited attention given to the pedagogical acumen of academics’ post target FD modes (Castillo-Montoya, et al., 2023; Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023). In light of this shift, the COALITION partners aim to address this gap by systematically documenting academics' reflections and assessments of various reflective FD modes.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFollowing needs analysis (Savva, 2012) and mapping of emerging needs in terms of academics' pedagogical acuity and overall readiness to adopt I-ScP pedagogies, we employed two survey methods, i.e. semi structured interviews and faculty reflective reports, to collect data. Adopting a learner-centred FD approach with academics as learners, through a “methodological approach that foregrounds plurality and contestation, orienting research frameworks towards inclusiveness, tensions, unpredictability and complexity” (Khoo et al., 2019: 182), the study has a comparative dimension among six universities in six European countries (Greece, Latvia, Spain, Netherlands. Sweden, Romania) involved in this consortium. The view promotes a concept of non-dominating and reflexive ‘strong objectivity’ (Rosendahl et al., 2015) that derives its strength from a rigorous appreciation of social situatedness, informed by a standpoint perspective (Wilmes et al. 2018) that involves both expert and non-expert actors in co-producing knowledge as equal partners.
Based on insights attained in the initial stage of the project (needs analysis & mapping competencies), we developed participatory inquiry processes for the transformation of teaching practice within a community of practice that favors formative scaffolding and integrates different tools that expand learning beyond the initial context of action.
To provide a comparative analysis of effective FD processes suggested by academics, thirty semi-structured interviews (5 from each university) collected during the needs analysis stage of this study and eighteen faculty reflective reports (3 from each university) were undertaken to delve deeper at identifying ways of optimising alignment with I-ScP.
Participation in the study was voluntary, and the research protocol received approval from the institutional review board to ensure the ethical treatment of human subjects.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsAddressing the diverse needs of faculty regarding I-ScP, utilizing technology and implementing active learning strategies, the respondents pin pointed several initiatives that a comprehensive FD program design should embrace. The suggested FD program should encompass individualized professional development planning, incorporating elements of well-being and self-care. Also, cultural competency and diversity training, along with improving communication and collaboration skills are also integral curricular components.
By empowering faculty members towards I-ScP professional growth, participants identified ways that university teachers can adopt to align inclusive learning activities into the academic syllabus. As a result, several strategies arose, such as the need to incorporate diverse content and perspectives into course materials that can help to reflect the varied backgrounds and experiences of all students. Another key aspect was the use of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles which aims to ensure the creation of flexible and accessible learning materials, accommodating different ways of learning and learning preferences. Other relevant inputs refer to fostering collaborative learning opportunities, peer interactions, and group work that can foster an environment where all students feel comfortable participating and incorporating the received feedback and support. Last but not least, faculty members’ emphasised the need for designing FD programs that allow faculty voices to be heard and taken into account giving rise to their diverse needs.
To conclude, university teachers could contribute to inclusive and equitable learning environments by utilising their reflexive subjectivities and aligning them into teaching praxis that embraces I-ScP, while acknowledging the diverse needs of their student population.
ReferencesCastillo-Montoya, M., Bolitzer, L. A., & Sotto-Santiago, S. (2023). Reimagining Faculty Development: Activating Faculty Learning for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 38, pp.415-481. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Council Recommendation (2017). On promoting common values, inclusive education, and the European dimension of teaching, Official Journal of the European Union.
Grøndahl, G. Et al. (2023). Student-centred learning and teaching: a systematic mapping review of empirical research. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 47(9), 1247-1261.
Gutierez, S.B.& Kim, H.B. Peer coaching in a research-based teachers’ professional learning method for lifelong learning: A perspective. Alberta Journal of Education, 64(2), 214-221.
Hockings, C. (2010). Inclusive Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: A Synthesis of Research. York: Higher Education Academy.
Howlett, C., Arthur, M., & Ferreira, J. (2016). Good CoPs and bad CoPs: Facilitating reform in first-year assessment via a community of practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(4), 741–754.
Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2022). The ‘naked’ syllabus as a model of faculty development: is this the missing link in Higher Education?, International Journal for Academic Development.
Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2023). Coaching Instructors as Learners: Considerations For A Proactively Designed Inclusive Syllabus. Education Centre for Higher Education, Marijampoles Kolegija, Latvia.
Khoo, SM., Haapakoski, J., Hellsten, M. And Malone, J. (2019). Moving form interdisciplinary educational ethics: bridging epistemological differences in researching higher education internationalisation(s), European Educational Research Journal 18 (02) 181-199.
Netolicky, D.M. (2016), "Coaching for professional growth in one Australian school: “oil in water”", International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 5 (2), 66-86.
Rahman, M. H. A. (2023). Faculty development programs (FDP) in developing professional efficacy: A comparative study among participants and non-participants of FDP in Bangladesh. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100499.
Rosendahl, J. Zanella MA and Rist, S. (2015) Scientists’ situated knowledge: String objectivity in trasndisciplinarity. Futures 65: 17-27.
Sava, S. (2012). Needs Analysis and Programme Planning in Adult Education. Verlag Barbara Budrich.
Yee, L. (2016). Peer coaching for improvement of teaching and learning. Journal
of Interdisciplinary Research in Education, 6(1), 64-70.
Zahedi, S., & Bazargan, A. (2023). Faculty member's opinion regarding faculty development needs and the ways to meet the needs. Research and Planning in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-89.
Wilmes, S., Siry, C., Heinericy, S. Heesen, KT., Kneip, N. (2018). The role of Critical Reflexivity in the Professional Development of Professional Developers: A co-autoethnographic exploration. Interfaces Cientificas
|
