See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/293654052

Implementing & evaluating diversity and inclusion principles for effective

learning

Research · February 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 809

2 authors, including:

Stephanie Eglinton-Warner
University of Adelaide
7 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Organisational purpose & its expression in policy in selected universities View project

Inclusive Practices for Teaching and Learning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Stephanie Eglinton-Warner on 09 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Implementing and evaluating diversity and inclusion principles

for effective learning

Abstract

As interaction with, consciousness of and sensitivity to the diversity of the student population

of universities continues to grow, there is a need to adopt inclusive curriculum, course design,

delivery and assessment practices which are underpinned by a belief in the value of and

meeting the individual needs of each student in their diversity, entering and understanding

students’ reality, upholding human dignity through and in the learning experience as well as

providing equal access to learning for all students.

In this field study an action research approach was used to collaborate with lecturers1 who are

the designers and deliverers of courses2 to integrate diversity focused and inclusive teaching

practices for effective student learning. The project examined the impact on the teaching

practices of this group of lecturers’ application of a set of reflective principles for effective

and inclusive teaching and learning with diverse student populations. A series of activities

including group and individual meetings and observations of teaching were conducted to

provide feedback to lecturers on course design practices and on how to use the experience of

the diverse student population as a resource to optimise the learning of all. Lecturers reflected

on this collaboration and its impact on their practice.

1
The term lecturer is used in this paper to refer to a staff member who has specific responsibilities for teaching

and for designing the course(s) they teach. Their teaching functions/practices are not restricted to delivering

lectures.
2
The term course is used in this paper to mean what might otherwise be known as a module, unit of study or a

subject.
Keywords

Diversity, inclusion, deficit, otherness, student-centred, reflective practice, collaborative

learning

Diversity as deficit and otherness

The literature predominantly considers specific, separate, singular ways of student diversity.

Some students are the focus of attention because of socio-economic status (McKay & Devlin

2015), some for their language proficiency (Briguglio & Watson 2014) and cultural

background (Leask 2011), others for their abilities (Masters 2015) or disabilities (Hockings

2010), gender or sexual orientation (Renn 2010).

However, the position taken in this paper is that diversity, simply put, is difference. Each

student is a unique individual (Singh 2013, p. x1). The student population of Australian

universities is diverse, including in their gender, experience of life and learning, language,

culture, history, religion, social practices and networks, sexual orientation, motivations for

and expectations of learning, in the meanings they bring to and interpretations they take away

from their learning experience, in their ways of knowing, of being a learner, wellbeing,

responsibilities, independence, capabilities, interests, health, disabilities, support and,

philosophies, values and beliefs.

In addition, there are more students who are entering study pathways later in life, who may

start and stop and start again before completing their educational goals and who choose or

need to work full or part time. These individual decisions on when to access university study,

how to support one’s self while studying, perceptions of ‘return on investment’, and the

staging of pathways through study, particularly beyond undergraduate degrees have been

affected by the change in funding models as the proportion of government funding has
decreased and the proportion of personal contribution has increased (Marginson & Considine

2000).

Yet, many of the systems, policies and practices in Australian universities are premised on the

assumption that the majority of the population largely share a common language, culture and

have taken a pathway from an Australian secondary school directly to University (Devlin

2010a). They further assume that where this is not the case that person is the exception: they

are missing/lacking something, they are in deficit in respect to ‘traditional’ students. Devlin

defines ‘non-traditional’ as “those who do not conform significantly to the assumed majority

of the student body at a time when universities were elite” (2010 p. 2).

A common response to this deficit model of thinking about diversity is to require special

additional treatment for students’ problems so they can eventually fit in with the ‘norm’. This

situation leads to heightening and reinforcing the sense of ‘otherness’ (Gu, Schweisfurth &

Day 2010) for people who do not fit the mould of the ‘average’ student envisaged by

university systems, policies and practices. With an increasing sense of otherness, commonly

comes fear of the other, a sense of privilege or advantage being given to the other, a sense of

obligation and burden attached to providing additional and different support, and a potential

for animosity against, and segregation and isolation of those that are seen as being other

(Prieto 2014).

International students, full fee paying, on a student visa, taking a degree program in a

language and culture that is not their first, are othered as well. Singh (2013, p. 84 ) notes that

several “prominent scholars in the field of international education (Marginson 2011, Sidhu

2006, Leask 2006) express concern that students’ are othered.” In some parts of the literature

“where aspects of the experience of learning and teaching is the focus, international students

are often represented as being in deficit, that is, as not having the appropriate skills,
knowledge and experience to be successful in a western academic context” (Singh 2013, p.

67).

There is a tension therefore between the diversity of the student populations of Australian

universities and the systems, policies and practices that do not treat this diversity as normal or

common place. There is a need to take the focus off treating difference as a way to categorise,

control or manage students and accept the individuality of students, value what they bring,

“normalise, rather than pathologise” (Devlin 2010b slide 46), and enable all students to learn

from each other, from their rich and different experiences. “This has created an imperative to

rethink and rework curricula and pedagogies….in an often deeply conservative profession”

(Marginson 2000, p. 26) resistant to change in these aspects.

Change to pedagogy to adapt and respond to the diverse learning needs of students has been

slow in the past fifty years (Guild 2001). In the main, teaching methods continue to treat all

students as if they are the same. Most students use the same text books, the same learning

materials and do the same assessment. It is neither practicable nor possible to have a specially

designed program, tailored for each individual student. Guild (2001) does, however, suggest

that there should be a balance between “uniformity and diversity… [where] the individual

learning styles of students [are accommodated because] all learners do not fit a single

mould…” (Guild 2001 pp. 1, 3, 16).

Lecturers need to explore and implement a range of pedagogical approaches to meet the

learning needs of diverse students. To support staff in this initiative and to counter arguments

that this will necessarily entail increased workloads for time poor lecturers, institutions of

higher education need to adapt their systems, policies, professional development programs

and resources to the reality of the diversity of students and of their complex learning needs.

Surprisingly, not much progress has been made in staff development to meet the diverse
learning needs of students (Briguglio & Watson, 2014). This is an area of high need. The

literature highlights the need to provide professional development to support lecturers

implement effective teaching practices (Briguglio & Watson 2014, Marginson 2000).

However, practical, individually focused mentoring and coaching of staff is rarely

implemented or the focus of study. To address this gap through this project and in

collaboration with lecturers a set of diversity and inclusion (D & I) principles were developed

and then translated into a checklist. The impact on the teaching practice of lecturer’s

application of these principles to meet the diverse and complex needs of learners was

examined. The project leaders provided individual feedback to lecturers on course design,

developing student learning outcomes, course content, delivery ( both online and face to face),

observed the classroom practices, provided feedback individually to lecturers. This feedback

was informed by the principles which enable students to have a more effective learning

experience including Vygotsky’s concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD) where

student learning is supported by a range of scaffolded activities as well as approaches that are

student centred, which support students to make meaning in a variety of ways, are highly

interactive, promote learning through discovery, and is aligned to the assessment and

learning outcomes of the course (McKay & Devlin (2015), Briguglio & Watson (2014), Leask

(2011), Masters (2015), Hockings (2010), Renn (2010)).

Diverse ways of mediating meaning

Vygotsky’s concept of the Zone of Proximal Development or ZPD (1978) provides an

interpretation of the diverse ways in which learners mediate meaning and higher cognitive

development. The ZPD provides further insights of how mental development can be

understood; offering an awareness of learners’ diverse accomplishments in their learning and

the range of processes being formed and developed. Each learner is unique and comes to the

learning environment with diverse learning attainments. “The ZPD permits us to identify the
[unique and diverse learner’s] immediate, future and … dynamic developmental state,

allowing not only for what has already been achieved developmentally but also for what is in

the course of maturing” (Vygotsky 1978, p. 87) which is different for every learner.

With this understanding appropriate, scaffolded learning activities can be designed to support

the diverse needs of learners and their progress in identified learning areas. In this way

“teaching is thoroughly relational, and many of its goods are relational: the feeling of safety in

a thoughtful teacher’s classroom, a growing intellectual enthusiasm in both teacher and

student, the challenge and satisfaction shared by both in engaging new material, the

awakening”(Nodding 2003, p. 249). The learner and the more knowledgeable collaborators

come together as learning partners.

Vygotsky (1978, p. 86) defined the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as the difference

between a learner’s “actual developmental level as determined by independent problem

solving” and the higher level of “potential development as determined through problem

solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers [sic].” Vygotsky

argued that it is through the support of and in collaboration with more experienced, skilled

and knowledgeable partners that learners discover the tools and symbols of their culture and

how these can be used for thinking (Rogoff 2003; Lantolf 2000). It is by working with others

that learners then adapt the cultural tools of thought for their own purposes. These scaffolded

learning interactions occur in the zone of proximal development. They allow learners to

immerse themselves into complex activities that they would otherwise not have done alone

(Rogoff 2003, pp. 50-51).

Vygotsky’s ZPD according to Lantolf (2000, p. 17) is a metaphor for observing meaning

making in learners, which is “the difference between what a person can achieve when acting

alone and what the same person can accomplish when acting with support from someone else
and/or cultural artefacts”. He warns against construing the ZPD literally as one in which an

“expert” imparts a skill to a “novice.” He posits the ZPD as a collaborative, interactive, shared

learning experience in which individual participants within a group have a diverse range of

expertise which is called on at different points in the problem solving process. To Lantolf

(2000) the novice/expert construction of the ZPD, as in a formal classroom context, can

suggest the position of the novice as passively mimicking the expert without mediating

meaning; rather than one in which the novice actively “transforms what the experts offer them

as they appropriate it” (p. 17). The danger of this view is that within the formal classroom it is

possible that the expert, in this case the teacher may require the novice, in this case the

student, to reproduce an imitation of the teacher’s example of the learning activity (p. 18).

This is not what Vygotsky meant. Vygotsky’s “actual level” of development will be unique

for each student which is the core of diversity. Students have diverse experiences of life, of

learning, of ways of learning which must be taken into account in curriculum and course

design.

Action learning approach

This project used an action research approach: a sustained, intentional, recursive and dynamic

process of inquiry (Dick 2000), driven by the reflexive practices of the practitioners involved,

focused on how to improve practice. This approach suited the needs of this project where

there was a driving question; “How do we integrate diversity and inclusion teaching

principles and practices for effective student learning?” - but it needed to be examined and

applied to determine whether it was the main or only questions that had to be addressed. It

was important for the project leaders that the lecturers could identify the questions and issues

to be raised as an effect of examining the initial question. As a result the following questions

emerged as the project progressed:

  How are good learning and teaching practices different from good learning and

teaching practices for D & I?

 How do we design and create inclusive learning environments which meet the learning

needs of diverse students?

 How can student diversity be used as a resource to the benefit of all?

 How can we ensure that we, as educators are at all times engaged in critical evaluation

and self-reflection and not operating through the lens of deficit and otherness?

Action research, led and driven by the practitioners themselves, is solutions focused and

therefore well suited to identify and implement effective change, as required and/or necessary.

In this way throughout the project we were able to remain focused on what can be done now,

within the available resources, for immediate effect. This action research approach, in which

lecturers took on the role of practitioner researchers allowed the project leaders to mentor

and coach lecturers and for the lecturers to focus on practical solutions that met their

individual and immediate needs.

The lecturers were able to apply and review their actions and decisions as the project

progressed while still engaging with big picture philosophical ideas that underpin practice.

As a first step, a project team consisting of six lecturers from different disciplines each with

teaching and course development responsibilities in undergraduate (UG) and postgraduate

(PG) programs was established (see table 1).

Table 1

Course UG/PG Class size

 Intermediate Financial PG 200+ Lecture & 20/Tutorial
Reporting (IFR)
Introduction to Mathematics UG 35 Workshop
Economics (IME)
Global Food & Agriculture PG 25 Workshop
Markets (GFAM)
Planning Policy & Regulation PG 40 Workshop
(PPR)
Family & Small Business UG 150 lecture & groups of 5 for
Perspectives (FSBP) assignments
Understanding Consumers (UC) PG 70 lecture & 20/tutorial & groups of 5
for assessment

Consistent with an action research approach, the project leaders realised that in order to have

meaningful discussions with practitioners a shared understanding of diversity and inclusion

was required. In discussions with lecturers both individually and in groups, it was evident that

they had a range of understandings of the term ‘diversity’, for example “a mix of domestic

and international students”, “ a mix of genders”, “a mix of languages” or “a mix of preferred

learning styles”. A definition of diversity, (diversity only as difference) was therefore

developed in consultation with the lecturers. This definition deliberately avoids categorising

or segregating students in terms of the ways in which they are diverse so that lecturers can

focus on the diverse and complex needs of all students rather than emphasising deficit or

otherness.

Lecturers also expressed a desire to understand the needs of their students better. They asked

for practical strategies that they could implement that would benefit students and create a

more inclusive and effective learning environment with some not knowing where to start.

This project assumed that these were the common views and experience of lecturers. The

project was designed to develop a more sophisticated and shared understanding of the
diversity of students and their needs and to develop resources that supported practical, easily

implemented and effective strategies for inclusive teaching and learning practices which meet

the diverse and complex needs of students.

The project leaders developed a glossary of terms to ensure a common language for further

discussion. It included a set of broad working definitions of diversity and inclusion (and

associated terms) in a glossary of terms as applied within the context of the University for

consistency when implemented in teaching and research. An account was developed, by no

means exhaustive, of the ways in which students are different which may or may not be

apparent. This prompted a discussion on whether these individual differences could be

implied or assumed in any instances and their implications for learning.

Based on the work of Griffith (2010) and in collaboration with the lecturers the project

leaders developed a set of principles for diversity and inclusion to inform the design of

courses for effective learning to focus on good teaching and course development practices

with an explicit focus on diversity and inclusion. These principles were then translated into a

checklist i.e. a series of reflective questions for lecturers when designing their courses. The

purpose of these questions was to support lecturers’ reflecting purposefully on their practice.

They were used by the project leaders to guide feedback and discussion with individual

lecturers. A template for peer review and feedback was also developed for use in observation

for classroom visits.

The lecturers provided detailed feedback on the glossary and principles documents, ensuring

there was a common understanding of the principles and their application by the end of the

project. Group meetings were held to discuss the project, its purpose and design. Individual

meetings with lecturers were held to advise on course design, student learning outcomes,

learning activities, teaching practice, assessment and teaching practice. Observation of

teaching practice in action to provide peer review and feedback (both written and verbally)

were undertaken with four lecturers. The diversity and inclusion principles and the self-

reflection guide to provide feedback to lecturers.

Each lecturer identified a course to specifically consider which gave the opportunity to focus

on a range of different aspects of course design – preparing assessment , designing group

work as peer learning, course outline and learning outcome design, design of learning

activities, classroom interactions and discussions, using simulations and providing support

and instruction. Four of the six lecturers invited the project leaders to observe their classroom

practices and to provide feedback based on those observations. The other two lecturers chose

to focus on the course design.

The project leaders also shared resources they developed for other purposes which were

compatible with the intention of this project and can be used for designing assessment,

rubrics, course outlines, learning outcomes and learning activities. The conclusions and

discussion of ideas arising from this project are based on data collected from interviews with

these lecturers, peer review of teaching practice, and analysis of course documentation,

including assessment criteria and learning outcomes.

The data collected was then evaluated, and analysed with reference to the theoretical

framework grounded in Vygotsky’s work. This was not a linear process but rather cyclical

and iterative so that there can be an ongoing pattern of collecting, analysing, evaluating and

interpreting the data until a meaningful end is arrived at (Kemmis and McTaggart 1988).

As action research is grounded in rigorous critical reflection, as are the practices of effective

lecturers, the capabilities of the project team were leveraged, ensuring the research could be

easily accommodated within workloads. This methodology also contributed to the lecturers

developing a heightened awareness of themselves as both learners and teachers.

Outcomes

The purpose of this project was to provide professional development to equip lecturers to

effectively and continuously improve their practice to meet the diverse and complex needs of

their students and to develop inclusive learning environments that were focused on valuing

students and their contributions rather than on operating through the lense of deficit or

otherness. The project participants were motivated to do this as they were experiencing the

effect of the gap between the reality of working with increasingly diverse student populations

and opportunities to develop the capabilities they needed to design and create inclusive,

supportive learning environments. The outcomes of this project are explained in respect of

course review, the process of peer review, observation and feedback, feedback on feedback

and responses to the questions raised by this project

Course review

The project leaders provided feedback to the lecturers on all aspects of course design,

including on the development of student learning outcomes (SLO) aligning them with

assessment , making explicit the learning sequences that preceded achievement of the SLO,

reviewing and revising assessment. Feedback was offered on face to face and online course

delivery to create more opportunities for student interaction and collaboration within the

classroom.

In collaboration with the lecturers the project leaders focused on how teachers could use the

diverse expectations, experiences, knowledge and ways of making meaning, and capabilities

to create a rich, collaborative environment in which students and lecturers learn with and from

each other as both learners and teachers.

The lecturers in this project initially wanted a ‘checklist’ or ‘strategies’ that they could refer to

for ideas about what to do in their classrooms to make them more inclusive given the diverse

needs of their students. Early discussions included comments like ‘how can I fix the

challenges I have with my students’. Their focus was on the day to day practical challenges

all lecturers encounter. By the end of the project, while still wanting practical tips and ideas,

their focus, as evidenced by their feedback, had shifted to ‘how can I provide a more valuable

learning experience for all my students’.

Peer review, observation and feedback

The project leaders attended the classrooms of four lecturers to observe, review and provide

feedback.

Several existing good practices in course design and delivery were identified. One lecturer

used a workshop instead of a lecture format using a range of resources, including online

exercises and videos and in class quizzes to identify student learning and aspects for her to re-

teach. The results of the in-class quiz were used to plan each week’s tutorial specifically

focusing on issues with which students were having difficulty. Another lecturer deliberately

called the names of students to elicit response to questions and used assignments as learning

activities with students working through group projects in tutorials where the tutors, including

the lecturer, could address students’ specific and immediate questions and challenges. Both of

these examples illustrate the application of effective ‘assessment for learning’ practices

(Boud, 2010).

Reciprocal learning and teaching relationships and collaboration were promoted by the

lecturer who reminded students “I can learn a lot from you, you might learn a thing or two

from me, and we will learn a lot from each other” (Lecturer PPR). Students were frequently
asked to refer to examples from their own experience, e.g. “This was the solution found in

this example, what other solutions might work in other contexts based on your experience?”

Common feedback provided to the lecturers on teaching practice was the need to increase

student to student collaboration for effective learning. A range of simple to implement

strategies were offered which focused on creating learning environments in which students

learn from and with each other, enabling them to share their prior experience of learning and

of life. This is vital practice in a diverse and inclusive learning environment. Students need

ways in which they can share their knowledge, skills, perspectives, opinions and experiences

without feeling threatened by having to speak to the whole class or feeling they are being

asked to speak on behalf of whatever category(ies) they may belong to or may be perceived as

belonging to (Griffiths 2010). Collaborative and peer-to-peer learning reduces these risks

while not emphasising otherness (Leask 2011).

Drawing on the process of peer review, observation and feedback, the project leaders in

collaboration with the lecturers developed a set of practical learning activities for diversity

and inclusion. These included practices could be adapted to suit large and small class sizes,

different delivery formats, physical spaces, courses, in lectures, tutorials,

workshops/seminars, online/blended. They required little additional resources, if any, to

implement. They were things lecturers could “do on Monday”, as Geoff Scott (2015) is often

heard to say.

These practical activities represent small actions that enable big changes. While by no means

‘new,’ they can have the effect of meeting students’ diverse learning needs and enabling

inclusion. These formative, brief, in-class activities require minimal planning to implement

and have limited impact on workload and resources, particularly where their adoption is

managed one change at a time, allowing time for reflection on its efficacy. They can, though,
provide continuous and quick feedback to the lecturer on how individual (and the group of)

students are learning and experiencing learning in their courses. They can be used to identify

issues in student learning in the course and provide immediate feedback. The lecturer can

adapt and make changes where necessary to meet the needs of students during the course.

Adoption of these practices normalises individual difference: they recognise it, value it and

use it by establishing adaptable, student centred, active and reflective practice as the standard

for all students as promoted by Vygotsky, Leask, Biggs, Boud and others. This is in contrast

with practices that focus on making exceptions for or ‘accommodating’ those who are seen as

‘non-standard’. These practices assume there is no ‘standard’ student.

Feedback on feedback

The lecturers provided written feedback on the impact on their teaching practice of the

feedback provided to them by the project leaders. All the lecturers unanimously agreed they

found the feedback to be “useful,” “comprehensive,” “encouraging,” “constructive.”

As a result of the use of the diversity and inclusion checklist, the course review, observation

and peer review discussions, the lecturers reported that they had made changes (or will do so

in the next iteration) to their course design and teaching practice. They reviewed and revised

their student learning outcomes to ensure they explicitly aligned with assessment. One

lecturer revised his assessment explanation sheets and criteria while another planned to do

more work on breaking up long lecture periods with interactive learning activities. In all cases

there was an intention to move from predominantly teacher to student and student to teacher

interactions to increasing student to student participation and interaction, small group and

student-to- student collaboration in class time so students learn with and from each other.
Several of the lecturers in particular commented on how the use of the self-reflection guide to

question one’s assumptions and one’s own lifeworld, frameworks and engage at a deeper

level with diversity and inclusion allowed them to now see their practices and their

engagement with students with a new perspective.

“The diversity and inclusion principles and self-reflection guidelines made me more

aware of student’s diversity. I was an international student when I first came to

Australia in 2004 and always thought that I had this in-built awareness of diversity in

my teaching.” Lecturer GFAM

“The diversity and inclusion principles and self-reflection guidelines simply made me

aware of different things to consider. Some things I already did but this made me aware

that I was doing it.” Lecturer IFR

“Having studied and work in four different countries, although I do design my course

with my own beliefs and views of the world, my approach also incorporates a lot of

different views from other cultures. I believe challenging students should be the core of

any course, and careful notation and logical arguments must be an integral part of

learning.” Lecturer IME

One also noted that this new perspective is also now influencing his work as a researcher.

“In examining the findings of our research I identified the positive impact of diversity

on the make-up of boards. I don’t think I would have noticed or considered this

characteristic previously.” Lecturer SFBP

One lecturer notes she now felt empowered to take more risks with her students and give them

the opportunity to exercise more control over how they engaged with each other and with the

learning process.
 “I did not realise that, unlike in my other courses, I did not let students learn from each

other. When this was pointed out to me, I realised that it was the lack of confidence in

my students, due to the fact that they were First Year that led me to always be involved

in everything they do.” Lecturer IME

The project leaders were particularly delighted to receive an email this lecturer who was

motivated to try out a suggestion to have students explaining that week’s topics to each other.

“The verdict? It works!!”

Responses to the questions raised by this project

This project has illustrated that good learning and teaching practices for diversity and

inclusion are grounded firmly in good practices in teaching and learning generally. Therefore

there it is not necessary to reinvent the wheel or make massive, extreme changes to course

design. However, a deeper level of critical self-evaluation and reflection on one’s own

practices, one’s assumptions about students, and one’s knowledge of students as individuals is

needed. Through this heightened consciousness of the individuality of students simple actions

can have greater positive effect. This mindful practice can create opportunities for deeper

levels of engagement with students’ life and learning experiences, so they can become

genuinely integral to both the learning and teaching process.

The project leaders in collaboration with the lecturers developed a set of practical learning

activities which can be adapted for use to create inclusive learning environments which meet

the learning needs of and use student diversity as a resource to the benefit of all. These

activities build interactive learning environments in which students collaborate and learn with

and from each other.

By developing a deeper level of self-reflection, understanding your own and your students’

reality, and developing sensitivity to students’ diverse learning needs teachers are able to not

only model the behaviours of reflective, independent, and collaborative learners they want in

their students, they can create an environment where individuals can feel welcomed and

valued (Griffiths 2010). There is a need to make a deliberate and conscious shift from

stereotyping and the deficit model of students (Gu, Schweisfurth, & Day 2010) (Singh 2013).

Rather we need to honour and value students for their prior learning experience, inviting them

to work collaboratively, to share and learn with us as equal partners (Boud 2010; (Leask

2013; Vygotsky 1978; Lantolf 2000). In this way we can ensure that as educators we are at

all times engaged in critical evaluation and self-reflection and not operating through the lens

of deficit and otherness.

Conclusion

While accepting that good practice for diversity and inclusion is grounded firmly in good

practice in teaching and learning, diversity and inclusion requires deeper levels of critical self-

evaluation and reflection on such questions as ‘how can I get to know my students better,

who they are as people as learners?’ and on the assumptions we make about students. That

this difference was the lived experience of the lecturers involved in this project is evidenced

by their reflections. Through this process the lecturers identified that they developed higher

levels of consciousness of themselves, how students learn, their students’ prior life and

learning experience, how to engage with new and different knowledge frameworks, ways of

knowing and ways of being, and achieving equality in the learning and teaching relationship:

students and lecturers as both learners and teachers.

Further research is planned to evaluate and determine if the checklist for D & I and other

resources developed in this project are robust enough to be transferable to other contexts and
are sufficient to have noticeable effects on students’ learning experience. Ways to involve

students as participant researchers also need to be investigated.

Acknowledgements

The authors of this paper wish to acknowledge and thank the lecturers who participated in this

project. They shared their time, their passion for learning and teaching and their ideas most

generously. Without their commitment this project would not have been possible, much less

have had the impact that it did.

References

Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Berkshire

UK: Mcgraw-hill,

Boud, D. & Associates (2010). Assessment 2020: Seven propositions for assessment reform in

higher education. Sydney: Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

Briguglio, C. & Watson, S. (2014). Embedding English language across the curriculum in

higher education: A continuum of development support. Australian Journal of Language and

Literacy. 37 (1), 67-74.

Devlin, M. (2010a). Non-traditional university student achievement: theory, policy and

practice in Australia. In The 13th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference

conducted at Queensland University of Technology Brisbane Australia. Retrieved from

http://fyhe.com.au/past_papers/papers10/content/html/keynote.html

Devlin, M. (2010b). Socially inclusive higher education teaching and curriculum in the post-

Bradley era. In Student Engagement Forum. Forum conducted at Charles Sturt University,

Wagga Campus, New South Wales, Australia.

Dick, B. (2000). A beginner's guide to action research. Retrieved from

http://www.aral.com.au/resources/guide.html

Griffiths, S. (2010). Teaching for inclusion in higher education: A guide to practice. UK: The

Higher Education Academy.

Gu, Q., Schweisfurth, M. & Day, C. (2010). Learning and growing in a ‘foreign’ context:

intercultural experiences of international students, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and

International Education, 40 (1), 7-23.

Guild, P.B. (2001). Diversity, Learning Style and Culture. New Horizons. Washington: John

Hopkins School of Education. Retrieved from

http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/strategies/topics/Learning%20Styles/diversity.html

Hockings, C. (2010). Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education: a synthesis of

research. EvidenceNet, UK: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/resources/detail/evidencenet/Inclusive_learnin

g_and_teaching_in_higher_education

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research reader (3rd edn). Geelong,

Australia: Deakin University Press.

Lantolf, J.P. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J.P. Lantolf (Ed), Sociocultural

theory and second language learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Leask, B. (2006). Plagiarism, cultural diversity and metaphor-implications for academic staff

development. Assessment and Evaluation. 31 (2), 183-199.

Leask, B. (2011). Good practice report: Learning and teaching across cultures. Australian

Learning and Teaching Council: Government of Australia.

Leask, B. (2013). Good Practice Principles in Practice: Teaching Across Cultures, October

2013, Office for Learning and Teaching: Government of Australia.

Marginson, S. (2000). Rethinking academic work in the global era, Journal of Higher

Education Policy and Management. 22 (1), 23-35.

Marginson, S. & Considine, M. (2000). The enterprise university: power, governance and

reinvention in Australia, Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.

Marginson, S. (2011). Including the other: Regulation of the human rights of mobile students

in a nation-bound world. Higher Education. 63:497–512. DOI 10.1007/s10734-011-9454-7

Masters, G. (2015). Addressing the learning needs of all students. ACER Research

Developments, [adapted from keynote address by Professor Geoff Masters AO to the

International Conference on Giftedness and Talent Development in Brisbane in March 2015].

Retrieved from https://rd.acer.edu.au/article/addressing-the-learning-needs-of-all-students

McKay, J. & Devlin, M. (2015). Low income doesn't mean stupid and destined for failure:

challenging the deficit discourse around students from low SES backgrounds in higher

education. International Journal of Inclusive Education.

DOI:10.1080/13603116.2015.1079273

Prieto, M. (2014). The Other from an Educational Perspective: Beyond Fear, Dependence.

Studies in Philosophy and Education. 34 (3), 297-309.

Renn, K.A. (2010). LGBT and Queer Research in Higher Education: The State and Status of

the Field. Educational Researcher. 39 (2), 132–141.

Rogoff, B. (2003). The Cultural nature of human development. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.
Scott, G. (2015). Developing and assessing graduates who are ‘work ready plus’: addressing

the new quality agenda for higher education. 21-23 September 2015 HERGA Conference

‘Brave new world: the future of teaching and learning’. Retrieved from

www.hes.edu.au/.../Geoff-Scott-HECQN-Address-GS-4-Nov-15-v2.pdf

Sidhu, R. (2006). Universities and globalization: To market, to market. New Jersey: Laurence

Erlbaum Associates Ltd.

Singh,N. (2013). “I am here now and I want to be part of here”: A study of international

students’ experience of learning and teaching in higher education, unpublished thesis

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

editors M Cole, V J Steiner, S Scribner & E Souberman. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard

University Press.
Designing with Diversity for Inclusion Checklist

Know yourself/Challenge yourself

 Are my own values, beliefs, ways of knowing, biases, assumptions and world-view

reflected in the student learning outcomes, course content, delivery, assessment,

organisation, learning activities and teaching strategies of the course?

o Is it appropriate to do so?

o How could I adapt the course design and materials?

o How can I ensure that I am at all times engaged in critical self-evaluation and

reflection?

o How can I ensure that I am at all times not operating through the lens of deficit

and otherness?

 Are alternative values, beliefs, ways of knowing, biases, assumptions and world –

views included in the student learning outcomes, course content, delivery,

assessment, organisation, learning activities and teaching strategies of the course?

o Is it appropriate to do so?

o How could I adapt the course design and materials?

Learners as collaborators and co-learners

 How can I build and sustain positive relationships with learners to optimise their

learning?
 How can I manage and address experiences which challenge, perhaps even threaten

the teacher –student relationship?

 What do I know and how can I find out about these learners’ strengths, challenges,

capabilities, expectations and motivations?

o What do I know and how can I find out about the expectations and motivations of

these learners?

o What do I know about and how can I find out about the linguistic, social, cultural,

geographic, historical backgrounds of these learners?

o What do I know about and how can I find out about the experiences and prior

learning of these learners’?

o Do I know and how can I find out if any of these learners need additional or

different support to enable them to have equal access and opportunity to learn?

o Where/how can the support they need be provided?

 How can I use the diversity of these learners as a resource in the learning environment

to the benefit of all?

o How can I use my knowledge of these learners to create effective and relevant

learning experiences?

o What strategies can I use to value and use the prior knowledge and experiences,

strengths and capabilities, and diverse perspectives of learners?

o Are these strategies appropriate for the context and these particular learners?
 o What strategies can I use to enable and support peer learning?

o Are these strategies appropriate for the context and these particular learners?

o Have I designed learning activities and assessment to be suitable for the range of

learning needs represented in this group of learners?

 How will I incorporate current local, national and world events into my teaching

practice to enhance learning?

o How can I respond to current local, national and world events that might impact on

student learning?

 What strategies can I use to manage controversial issues, heated discussions, opposing

strongly held points of view/beliefs?

o Which of these strategies are appropriate to this particular group of learners and

the context?

 How can I model and reinforce appropriate behaviours and language for expressing

controversial or strongly differing position

Language use and communication

 Am I always conscious of the language I use with learners?

o Do I avoid unnecessary jargon/technical language?

o Do I explain necessary jargon/technical language?

o Do I ensure my body language, tone and pace, and the words I use are consistent

and appropriate for the context?

 o Do I monitor the language used by learners and suggest ways they can express

themselves more clearly and/or appropriately for the context?

Learning and assessment design, and feedback

 How can I provide feedback to learners about their learning?

o How can I ensure feedback is timely, relevant and constructive?

o How can I develop students’ to commonly practice critical self-evaluation and

reflection?

o How can I develop students’ practices in seeking, receiving and providing

constructive feedback?

o How can I develop students’ practices in using feedback in their current, future

learning and in their lives?

 What resources will I need to support and enable learning for this particular group of

learners?

o What online tools and technology can be used?

o Is it fit for purpose?

o Is it accessible by all learners?

o What university services or resources can I use?

o Do they meet the needs of learners?

o Are they fit for purpose?

o Are they accessible to all learners who need them?

 Intercultural learning

 How can I engage with knowledge frameworks, theory and philosophies and histories

of learners from Indigenous backgrounds?

 How can I engage with knowledge frameworks, theory and philosophies and histories

of learners from diverse linguistic, social, cultural, geographical and historical

backgrounds?

 How can I acknowledge my and these learners’ expectations and ways of learning in a

supportive and constructive way?

View publication stats