Trinity Inclusive Curriculum Annual
Report (July 2009 – July 2010)
Michelle Garvey
Inclusive Curriculum Development Officer
Trinity College Dublin
September 2010
This document is available in alternative format upon request from
include@tcd.ie
Seomra 3.06
3-4 Plás Foster
Fón / Phone: +353 (1) 896 3666
www.tcd.ie/capsl/tic
Room 3.06
3-4 Foster Place
Contents
Introduction............................................................................. 3
What is Inclusive Curriculum? ................................................. 3
The Rationale for, and benefits of, Inclusive Curriculum .............. 4
TIC Structure and Oversight ...................................................... 5
Objectives 2009-2010 ............................................................... 6
Detailed review of the Year 2009-2010 ....................................... 7
Objective 1: .......................................................................... 7
Objective 2: .......................................................................... 9
Objective 3: ........................................................................ 10
Objective 4: ........................................................................ 11
Areas for further work and Objectives 2010-2011 ....................... 12
Issues and Areas for further work ............................................. 13
2
Introduction
In October 2008 the SIF II funded Trinity Inclusive Curriculum (TIC) initiative
was initiated, tasked with embedding inclusive principles within the
mainstream curricula of College. TIC was developed in partnership between
CAPSL, College access initiatives and the academic community. The TIC
project was developed in response to the growing diversity of the student
population, and through TIC College has asserted its commitment to the
creation of an inclusive teaching and learning environment. TIC aims to
establish inclusive curriculum via:

the raising of awareness of inclusiveness amongst College staff;

the introduction of online guidelines and resources to help staff create a
more inclusive learning environment;

Aim:
the introduction of an inclusive curriculum evaluation tool.
Enhance support for learner diversity by mainstreaming
inclusive practices in the teaching, learning, and assessment
environment of College through guidelines and audit tools for
universal design-proofing programme curricula.
What is Inclusive Curriculum?
There are three central principles of Inclusive Curriculum:
1.
Students should be viewed holistically, taking account of social and
cultural backgrounds.
2.
Multiple approaches to teaching methodology, teaching materials, and
assessment are necessary to meet the needs of a diverse student body.
3.
Curriculum should be designed to be student centred, and proactive in
dismantling barriers to learning.
Clear communication and flexibility are central to inclusive teaching and
assessment practices. It involves:
-
flexible modes of representation: using varied sources of information,
-
flexible modes of engagement: using varied teaching methods, and
-
flexible modes of expression: providing alternative assessment.
3
The Rationale for, and benefits of, Inclusive Curriculum
Students enter College from diverse backgrounds. Over recent years there
has been a great increase in the numbers of mature students, students with
disabilities, students from lower socio-economic backgrounds and
international students. College acknowledges that it has a commitment to
support this increasingly diverse student population. The central principle of
inclusive curriculum is that clear and flexible approaches to teaching
methodology, materials, and assessment are necessary to meet the needs of
a diverse student body.
Because inclusive curriculum design involves the creation of curricula
accessible to all the students in a diverse student body it is of benefit to all
students, both traditional and non-traditional. Inclusive curriculum involves
reflection on, and reorganisation of, curricula so as to create clear,
comprehensive, and varied teaching methods and tools. This, furthermore,
leads to stronger third level teaching, which benefits students, academic staff,
and the institute as a whole.
4
TIC Structure and Oversight
There is one Inclusive Curriculum development employed full time on the
project who operationally reports to the Director of College Disability Service.
An Inclusive Curriculum Steering Group was created to oversee the
development, activities, and objectives of the TIC project. Membership of the
Steering Committee in 2009-2010 included:

Clodagh Byrne, Mature Students’ Access Officer

Ashley Cooke, Education Officer, Students’ Union

Brian Foley, Director of CAPSL

Michelle Garvey, Inclusive Curriculum Project Officer

Jen Harvey, External

Ronan Hodson, Graduate Students’ Union President

Claire Laudet, Undergraduate Director of Teaching and Learning for
the School of Languages, Literatures and Cultural Studies

Dimitri Paraskevas, Office of the Vice Provost

Kathleen, O’Toole, TAP representative

Michael Shevlin, Head of the School of Education

Declan Treanor, Director, Disability Service

John McPartland, Head of International Student Affairs
Director of CAPSL, Dr. Brian Foley acted as Chairperson of the Committee.
The Committee met three times (once a term) over the academic year 20092010.
5
Objectives 2009-2010
The following objectives were identified for phase two of TIC, which ran over
the academic year 2009-10 (July 2009-July 2010):
Aim – To embed inclusive practices within the mainstream college curriculum
via the creation of online resources for use within curriculum design and
review procedures.
1. To design and pilot an inclusive curriculum teaching, learning and
assessment self-evaluation tool.
a. Embed the use of this tool within the college systems that presently
exist.
2. To design a national resource via a TIC website, incorporating inclusive
resources, advice on creating, and the rationale for, inclusive curriculum.
3. To continue to promote Inclusive Curriculum within Trinity College via
contributions to staff training and the dissemination of the results of phase
one activities.
4. Strengthen the links between TIC and the other institutions of the DRHEA
ensuring TIC has a presence in future developments of the Enhancement
of Learning strand.
a. To contribute to the AHEAD Charter for Inclusive Teaching and
Learning.
6
Detailed review of the Year 2009-2010
Work commenced on phase II of the SIF II TIC project over the academic year
2009-10. Phase II aimed to: begin embedding inclusive practices within the
mainstream college curriculum via the creation of online resources for use
within curriculum design and review procedures. Four objectives were
identified for 2009-10.
Objective 1: To design and pilot an inclusive curriculum teaching,
learning, and assessment self-evaluation tool.
b. Embed the use of this tool within the college systems that
presently exist.
First draft of the inclusive curriculum teaching, learning, and assessment selfevaluation tool was created over the summer 2009. This tool was then piloted
across ten programmes and two modules over the academic year 2009-10.
Throughout this process the tool was amended and refined in response to
user feedback.
The pilot two place in two phases:
Phase 2.1 took place in Semester 1 and involved:
-
Msc in International Management (School of Business)
-
TR071 (Common Entry Science)
-
Bsc in Geology (School of Natural Sciences)
-
Batchelor in Nursing Studies (School of Nursing and Midwifery)
-
Msc in Mental Health (School of Nursing and Midwifery)
Phase 2.2 took place in Semester 2 and involved:
-
BSS in Social Studies (School of Social Work and Social Policy)
-
H. Dip in Midwifery (School of Nursing and Midwifery)
-
Bsc in Nursing (School of Nursing and Midwifery)
-
Postgraduate Diploma in Education (2nd Level) (School of Education)
-
Occupational Therapy (School of Medicine)
And the following Modules:
-
SS1760: The Irish Welfare State (School of Social Work and Social
Policy),
7
-
EE2E6: Analogue Electronics (School of Engineering).
The pilot involved the following stages:
-
Classroom observation,
-
Resource review,
-
Staff and student feedback,
-
Completion of the TIC self-evaluation teaching and learning tool.
-
Creation and presentation of an action report.
The content of the TIC self-evaluation tool has now been piloted and is ready
to be put online. The creation of a web-based version of the tool will be
completed over the summer 2010 and will be piloted in 2010-11.
The option to discuss the inclusive nature of your teaching was added to the
revised Provost Teaching Awards application form this year. And in response
to feedback from the TIC project, the Quality review guidelines were revised to
comply with clear print guidelines and to raise questions regarding the
diversity of teaching and assessment methods used on programmes. This
version of the guidelines will be used by schools completing their quality
review in the academic year 2010-11.
As we move into the next academic year we will seek to further incorporate
TIC within current College processes.
8
Objective 2: To design a national resource via a TIC website,
incorporating inclusive resources, advice on creating, and the rationale
for, inclusive curriculum.
Work populating the Trinity Inclusive Curriculum website (www.tcd.ie/capsl/tic)
commenced early in the 2009-10 academic year. The website was launched
on December 2nd at the Accessible Information and Inclusive Practice
workshop coordinated by TIC and the Centre for Learning Technology.
The website holds guidelines, resources and templates to help staff involved
in teaching and learning to enhance the inclusivity of their practices. The
website also holds information regarding the project, latest news and events.
As the project progresses the website is developing and expanding. As the
project moves forward it is planned to locate the online version of the teaching
and learning self-evaluation tool within the website. Work has also
commenced to create audio-visual materials to further the usability and scope
of the guidelines and information held on the website.
9
Objective 3: To continue to promote Inclusive Curriculum within
Trinity College via contributions to staff training and the dissemination
of the results of phase one activities.
Throughout the academic year three TIC newsletters were circulated to
relevant stakeholders within and outside of College.
Phase one activities were disseminated at the 2009 AISHE international
conference in NUIM in August 2009 in a paper titled ‘Trinity Inclusive
Curriculum: Surveying and Responding to Diverse Student Needs’.
Training workshops and presentations were organised within College
throughout the academic year including a CAPSL lunchtime seminar in
November, TAP tutor inclusive teacher training in October, and a series of
Accessible information workshops throughout March. Information on inclusive
teaching was presented at various CAPSL events, including the module for
post-graduates who teach, the three day workshop for new academics and a
workshop on creating a teaching philosophy.
In December 2009, TIC and the Centre for Learning Technology collaborated
in the organisation of a day long workshop on Accessible Information and
Inclusive Practice, facilitated by Simon Ball from Jisc TechDis.
10
Objective 4: Strengthen the links between TIC and the other
institutions of the DRHEA ensuring TIC has a presence in future
developments of the Enhancement of Learning strand.
c. To contribute to the AHEAD Charter for Inclusive Teaching and
Learning.
In November 2009 the AHEAD charter on inclusive teaching and learning was
launched. The TIC project officer contributed both to the final draft of the
charter and spoke at the launch regarding the experiences of Trinity College
as it works to create an inclusive curriculum.
The results of phase one and two of the project were further disseminated
outside of College through the following activities:
d. The project officer met and spoke to representatives from the IUQB,
the HEA Access Advisory group, and the DAWN network regarding
project plans and possibilities for external collaboration.
e. The steering committee chairman presented the TIC annual report
08/09 to the DRHEA for consideration in future developments.
f. The project officer presented papers at the AISHE international
conference in NUIM in August 2009 and the Pathways: Are we Making
the Right Connections Conference in Cork in April 2010.
11
Areas for further work and Objectives 2010-2011
Statistics were collated from TAP, the Mature Students’ Office and
the Disability Service in a follow up of statistics collated in 08/019.
Statistics showed:
-
685 students registered with the Disability Service (4.1% of
total population, 5% of level 8 students)
-
604 students registered with TAP (3.6% of total population,
4.2% of level 8 students)
-
1270 students registered with the Mature Students’ Office
(7.5% of total population, 10.1% of level 8 students)
TIC has collaborated with the library to further the reading list
guidelines created as part of the reading list audit in phase one of
the project. In consultation with library staff a set of guidelines for
ensuring clear communication between academic areas and the
library were created. These guidelines have since been circulated to
a selection of academic areas for feedback and will be brought to
the Undergraduate Studies committee meeting for noting next
academic year.
12
Issues and Areas for further work
TIC is now entering phase three. In phase three TIC aims:
A.
Create and pilot an online version of the TIC Self-evaluation tool.

Further develop web resources to enhance the usability of the
online tool.
B.
Consider how to fully automate, and embed the self-evaluation
process within College so as to ensure sustainability after the end of
the project.
C.
Collaborate with external higher level institutions to pilot the selfevaluation tool outside of College so as to assess its applicability
across the third level sector in Ireland.
Phase three of the pilot will require buy in from stakeholders within and
external to College.
Within College:
In phase three we will seek to blend the use of the self-evaluation tool into
existing college systems such as: the school/ discipline quality review
systems, Bologna, learning outcomes and new course design. For this project
to succeed there is a need for synergies to be developed with core quality
control systems in College such as Bologna, departmental review systems
and course reviews.
Externally:
In phase three we will seek to extend the use and applicability of the selfevaluation tool beyond College. This will involve the time and collaboration of
colleagues within the other higher level institutions of Ireland. In a climate of
funding and staff cuts getting this level of collaboration may prove more
difficult.
13
Appendix – Processes and outcomes of the TIC Pilot.
Introduction .................................................................................................... 14
Background and Objectives of the TIC project ............................................... 15
TIC Pilot of the Teaching and Learning Self-Evaluation Tool. ........................ 15
Pilot Methodology ....................................................................................... 16
Pilot Stages ................................................................................................ 16
Stage one: Teaching Observation .......................................................... 17
Stage two: Resource Review .................................................................. 17
Stage three: Stakeholder Feedback ....................................................... 18
Stage four: Tool Completion ................................................................... 20
Stage five: Creation and presentation of an action report ....................... 21
Outcomes and Lessons Learnt ...................................................................... 22
Lesson 1: Importance of visible buy in ....................................................... 22
Lesson 2: Design the tool to be quick, easy, and informative ..................... 24
Lesson 3: Ensure the process is collaborative in nature ............................ 24
Lesson 4: Highlight the progress to date .................................................... 25
Future Work on the TIC project ...................................................................... 26
Appendix – Example of Key Suggestions template......... Error! Bookmark not
defined.
Works Cited ................................................................................................... 27
Introduction
In October 2008 the Strategic Innovation Funded (SIF II) Trinity Inclusive
Curriculum (TIC) project was established in Trinity College Dublin (TCD) with
the aim of embedding inclusive practices within the teaching, learning and
assessment environment of TCD. This was a response to the increase in
students entering TCD from non-traditional routes. The TIC project recognises
that while non-traditional access routes have enhanced the opportunity of
non-traditional students to enter TCD, it has not addressed inequalities in the
teaching and learning environment. TIC addresses this issue, aiming to
enhance the accessibility of the teaching and learning environment, thereby
levelling the playing field for students from a variety of backgrounds.
14
This paper looks at the work done by Trinity Inclusive Curriculum project in
phase II, which ran between October 2008 and June 2010. It reports on the
progress made in embedding inclusive practices within the teaching and
learning environment in TCD, and shares the lessons learnt along the way.
Background and Objectives of the TIC project
In 2008 Trinity College Dublin (TCD) obtained funding from the HEA to
embark up a three-year project aimed at embedding inclusive practices within
the mainstream curriculum of College. The Trinity Inclusive Curriculum (TIC)
project was thus created with the following objectives:
-
identifying actual and potential barriers to teaching, learning and
assessment.
-
identifying enabling strategies for overcoming these barriers.
-
introducing these enabling strategies into the mainstream curriculum
via
o
the creation of teaching and learning self-evaluation tools to be
embedded into College policies and procedures,
o training and awareness activities,
o creation of resources: www.tcd.ie/capsl/tic
-
collaborating, and disseminating information externally to other higher
level institutions.
Following a period of research; in which the current teaching and learning
environment in TCD was examined, and the TIC project officer engaged in
consultation with key stakeholders (e.g. students, academic staff and access
staff); a draft teaching and learning self-evaluation tool was created.
TIC has been engaged in a pilot of this self-evaluation tool over the academic
year 2009-10, and will take this opportunity to report on this pilot.
TIC Pilot of the Teaching and Learning Self-Evaluation Tool.
The TIC pilot incorporates two phases, phase 2.1 and phase 2.2. Phase 2.1.
15
ran from October to December 2009, with action reports produced in January
2010, and involved five programmes representing all three faculties in TCD,
and included both level eight and level nine programmes. Phase 2.2 ran
through semester two with action reports produced over early summer and
involved five programmes and two individual modules.
The aims of this pilot are to:
•
Develop a user-friendly self evaluation system that can blend into
design, review and quality enhancement systems ,
•
Ensure that recommendations arising from the tool are realistic and
attainable considering resources available through consultation with
staff and students.
The pilot therefore sought to assess the content and format of this selfevaluation tool, the process through which it is used, and the feasibility of
suggested actions within the resulting action report along with the process
through which they are enacted.
Pilot Methodology
Pilots included the following stages:
1. observation of teaching and learning by the project officer,
2. resource review,
3. staff and student feedback,
4. tool completion and feedback, and
5. creation and presentation of an action report.
Stages one to four, the data gathering stages, ran concurrently. The final
stage followed the data gathering.
Each stage will now be described in detail, including lessons learnt along the
way.
Pilot Stages
16
Stage one: Teaching Observation
A sample of classes and events were observed for each participating
programme / module. On average, three or four lectures were observed per
programme. Where students engaged in a variety of teaching methods, (e.g.
lectures, labs, seminars) the TIC project officer endeavoured to attend these.
A selection of other events, including orientation events and committee
meetings were also attended where possible.
The project officer engaged in teaching observation with the aim of:

Getting a sense of the physical environments that students within the
programme/ module learn in from the perspective of students so as to
discover any difficulties faced (e.g. lighting, acoustics, temperature,
available IT equipment).

Getting a sense of the variety of teaching and learning methods used
across College so as to better match up suggested future actions to
promote inclusion with real world practice, and

To observe good practices that can enhance the advice offered to
programmes / module moving into the future.
Stage two: Resource Review
A selection of resources were reviewed for each programme and module
involved within the pilot. Resources included programme handbooks, reading
lists, handouts, WebCT and programme webpages.
The project officer engaged in resource review with the aim of:

Gauging the level of compliance with the Revised College Accessible
Information Policy: http://www.tcd.ie/about/policies/accessible-infopolicy.php

Getting a sense of the information conveyed to students through
different media in College, and

To observe good practices that can enhance the advice offered to
programmes / modules moving into the future.
17
Stage three: Stakeholder Feedback
Feedback was sought throughout the pilot from both staff and students within
the pilot programmes and modules.
The project officer engaged in stakeholder feedback with the aim of:

Ensuring that the questions asked within the self-evaluation tool were
relevant and grounded in the real experiences and concerns of
stakeholders,

Ensuring that the suggestions arising within the action report were
feasible and relevant considering the academic environment and
resources available,

To request instances of good practices that can enhance the advice
offered to programmes moving into the future.
As the structure, size and organisation of each programme / module varies
greatly, there was no universal method of feedback collection. The project
officer adapted the feedback process to suit the needs of each individual
programme or module.
Staff Feedback:
The primary source of staff feedback came from personnel in senior academic
positions within the programmes involved, as these were generally the
primary liaisons within the pilot programmes (e.g. Programme (or module) Coordinators, Heads of Schools, and Directors of Teaching and Learning). These
were the individuals who completed the draft tool and so they fed back
regarding its format and content. It was through these staff members that the
majority of feedback regarding the usability and relevance of the tool was
received.
Feedback was also sought informally from other teaching staff following
lecture observations. Lecturing staff were offered the chance to offer feedback
on any issues that they felt were significant to their teaching within the
programme. Staff commonly took this opportunity to comment on issues that
18
arose within the physical environment that affected their teaching (e.g.
acoustics within the class room, the classroom layout etc).
Finally, all staff members were given the opportunity to feedback on the action
report arising from the pilot when it was presented at the programme
committee. At this committee meeting, the TIC project officer presented the
tool and action report, and explained the purpose behind the pilot. Feedback
on both form and content was then welcomed from all staff.
Student Feedback:
As each programme / module varied in both size and structure, there was no
one universally acceptable method of student feedback. Instead the project
officer used a variety of methods in response to each programme’s individual
needs.
Qualitative feedback:
For each programme / module involved in the pilot the project officer
conducted a semi-structured interview with some or all of the student
representatives. Student representatives were contacted in advance, and
asked to gather feedback from their classmates regarding their experiences of
the teaching and learning environment.
One programme involved in the pilot used peer mentoring as a source of
student orientation and support, and so the project officer arranged to meet
with peer mentors as well as representatives on this programme.
Finally, one programme, involving only eleven students, was too small to
administer a successful survey. The project officer chose to meet a sample of
students from this programme instead.
Survey data:
The TIC project officer aimed to conduct a student survey with each
programme / module involved in the pilot. Student surveys sought student
19
perspectives on teaching, learning and assessment methods along with
facilities within the College, and the physical environment.
Surveys were either conducted online using SurveyMonkey or in person
during class. Conducting surveys in class could guarantee a higher response
rate and so was the preferred method. However, while it was possible to
reach all students within modules, and some of the post-graduate
programmes in class this was not the case for undergraduate programmes as
they involved multiple year groups.
Where it was impossible to reach all target students within the one class an
online survey took place. With online surveys, a response rate of between 2030% was achieved.
There were a small number of programmes where no survey took place as
part of the pilot because these programmes had arranged their own
programme surveys during the academic year and we were anxious to avoid
survey fatigue amongst students, as this would lead to disengagement and
unreliable survey data. For these programmes, the information collated by the
programmes themselves was analysed instead.
Stage four: Tool Completion
The draft self-evaluation tool was sent to the primary liaison within each
programme / module involved in the pilot. This person was asked to either
complete the tool himself or herself, or to it send it on to the relevant
personnel within their areas.
While the liaison was given the option of dividing the sections of the selfevaluation tool between staff members, the majority chose to complete the
entire tool themselves. Exceptions to this were cases where the primary
liaison was an administrative member of staff. Administrators always chose to
pass the tool onto a more senior academic member of staff. In addition, the
completion of the placement section, was almost always completed by the
20
relevant programme placement personnel.
The tool was completed in a variety of modes. Some chose to complete it
alone and then to contact the project officer, others chose to complete it in the
presence of the project officer at a pre-arranged meeting. Of those who
completed it alone, some chose to complete the electronic version and some
chose to complete a printed version. Those who completed the tool in printed
format reported the greatest difficulty, as this method cut off access to
accompanying notes and explanations.
Once the tool was completed the project officer arranged to meet with the
liaison to obtain feedback on the process. Feedback was sought on:
-
Ease of completion,
-
Usefulness of accompanying guidance notes,
-
Areas of ambiguity where more guidance is needed.
Stage five: Creation and presentation of an action report
Once the data was gathered (stages one to four), an action report was
created for each pilot programme / module. The first task was to create a
consistent template that could be adapted for each pilot volunteer. Once the
template was finalised, reports were written for each volunteer.
Format of Action Report:
The action report began with an introduction that set the context and rationale
for the pilot and subsequent suggested actions. The main body of the report
contained, in tabular format, the questions raised in the pilot, the response
given by the programme and data collected by the project officer, and the
suggested future actions. A table of key actions was then collated. This table
had two blank columns for the programme to complete with the time frame for
actions and the person responsible.
It is important to highlight areas of current good practice as well as areas for
improvement, and as such an appendix was included that highlighted
21
examples of good practice either observed during the pilot or reported by staff
and students within the programme. The aim of this section was to encourage
and motivate staff by showing that much work had already been completed on
the path towards inclusion. This also provided an opportunity to highlight the
good practices of individual lecturers so that their colleagues could apply
these to their own teaching practices.
Once the first draft of the action report was completed a meeting was held
between the primary pilot liaison and the project officer to discuss the report.
This meeting allowed for a discussion regarding any recommendations that
could be perceived as problematic or ambiguous before wider circulation. It
also allowed for the highlighting of any misunderstandings, and the rewording
of sections if necessary. Following this meeting the project officer finalised the
report and forwarded to the programme / module liaison.
For programme the action reports were then circulated and presented at the
next programme committee meeting. This step did not occur for module pilots
as there was no corresponding committee.
Following the programme committee meeting (or the final meeting with the
project officer for modules), the two blank columns in the table of key
suggested actions at the back of the report were completed by the programme
/ module (see Appendix). These columns requested a timeline for each action
and agreed a person responsible. It has been agreed that once these key
actions are underway, the project officer and pilot liaison will meet again to
discuss the process of implementation (e.g. what was viable and what was
not. Where difficulties lay and any advice that could be passed onto future
programmes / module engaging within the tool).
Outcomes and Lessons Learnt
Lesson 1: Importance of visible buy in
The visible buy in of senior members of the academic staff was extremely
important to the smooth running of the pilot. Without visible buy in from these
22
individuals the whole process could be significantly delayed and there was
considerable disengagement.
Throughout the pilot it was noted that the level of engagement from lecturers
varied. In some pilot programmes, lecturers showed great enthusiasm to
contribute to the pilot. This included reorganising classroom observations
when the project officer could not attend initially agreed times, e-mailing
lecture handouts to the project officer and granting access to WebCT pages.
Lecturing staff on other programmes displayed less enthusiasm. Lecturers
sought to avoid classroom observation and expressed reluctance to share
resources.
When analysed, it was noted that within the programmes with more active
engagement the primary liaison was generally a senior member of the
lecturing staff (e.g. head of school / programme co-ordinator or director of
teaching and learning). These individuals liaised between the TIC project and
the programme, seeking volunteers for the classroom observation and
gathering materials for resource review. They were also often the first to
volunteer for lecture observation.
Within the programmes with more reluctant engagement, the primary liaison
was often an administrative, non-teaching member of staff. These individuals,
while seeking volunteers for the stages of the pilot, could not volunteer
themselves. This, we suspect, gave rise to reluctance amongst those
members of staff asked to volunteer for classroom observation, and possibly
to the feeling that they were being singled out unfairly for external scrutiny.
Therefore, we conclude that if you want buy in from programmes and schools
the visible enthusiasm and engagement of senior members of academic staff,
along with evidence that they are willing to hold themselves to the same
scrutiny as more junior members of staff is important.
23
Lesson 2: Design the tool to be quick, easy, and informative
A difficult, time-consuming process will lead to disengagement from the staff
involved. During the pilot primary liaisons from the different programmes /
modules approached the completion of the tool in different ways and this
affected the level of support they received. There were three main modes for
completing the tool:
1 – Some printed the tool out and completed the hard copy in their own time.
This meant that they were cut off from the hyperlinked explanations and
resources within the document.
2 – Some completed the tool electronically. These people had access to
hyperlinked explanations and resources but not to the advice of the TIC
project officer.
3 – Some completed the tool in the presence of the TIC project officer, where
they were able to ask the project officer directly for clarifications and examples
during the process.
It was found that those who completed the hard copy in their own time felt
greater levels of frustration during the process than those who used the other
two methods. Without access to the project officer, or the TIC resources the
process lacked an informative aspect and was made quite time consuming.
Thus, it is important that TIC creates quality guidance resources as we move
the tool online. These resources will provide and incentive to users to
complete the process, and will provide guidance for good practice following
the process.
In response to this, TIC intends to further enhance and simplify the completion
process through the creation of informative audio-visual tools and other
resources over the summer.
Lesson 3: Ensure the process is collaborative in nature
There are two elements to this lesson; firstly seek to work with academic staff
rather than judging them, and secondly, seek the insight that members of
24
academic staff within your institution can offer you.
It is important to bear in mind that staff within your institution will generally
value inclusive, good teaching practices, and where staff do not follow best
inclusive practice it will usually be due to a lack of understanding or an
inability to implement good practice due to external constraints (e.g. a lack of
resources, time, staffing levels, the physical environment). In either situation, it
is not helpful to express disapproval with the programme / module involved.
Where there is a lack of understanding, provision of inclusive information and
practical tips can be sufficient to encourage best practice. Where it is due to
external constraints aim to work with the programme / module to find the best
possible compromise or solution.
Always take into consideration the insight possessed into good teaching
practice by the staff you are working with. Staff will have invaluable
understanding of:
-
The areas where their students experience difficulties,
-
Constraints in resources that affect inclusion in their area,
-
Techniques that work well with their students.
When conducting pilots listen to these staff members, learn from them, and
bring their ideas and solutions to the next programme / module you work with.
Staff will have a lot to share with each other regarding good practice and
strategies that work for their students.
Lesson 4: Highlight the progress to date
All programmes, modules and individual staff members will currently engage
in some inclusive practices though they may be unaware of this. Staff may
view ‘inclusion’ as a new and exotic concept, and may feel ill equipped to
tackle the needs of an increasingly diverse student population. They may view
the mantra ‘inclusive practices are good practices’ as unconvincing and may
be unaware of the myriad of actions they engage in on a daily basis that
enhances the inclusivity of their teaching.
25
Therefore, it can be very beneficial to highlight to staff where their
engagement with good teaching practices is also ensuring that they are more
inclusive. Many lecturers will be unaware of the many daily practices they
engage in that further the inclusivity of their teaching, whether that be the
range of teaching materials they use, the sample essays they distribute, the
key texts they highlight, or the summarising they do at the beginning and end
of class to ensure students understand the main learning goals.
By highlighting these current practices you can ensure that future
recommendations to enhance inclusion seem less daunting.
Future Work on the TIC project
This pilot, which was the central task of phase II of the TIC project was
necessary to ensure that the draft self-evaluation tool reflected and responded
to the realities of the academic environment, including the diversity of
disciplines within College, the resulting diversity of teaching and assessment
methods, and the limitations experienced by programmes and modules
regarding physical environment, resources etc. The pilot allowed TIC to:
-
Enhance the usability of the tool by pin pointing jargon and ambiguity in
questioning,
-
Better understand the complexity and diversity of programmes,
modules, teaching methods, assessment methods across TCD,
-
Gain a sense of the student perspective, highlighting recurring
concerns that may have been omitted from the original draft of the tool,
-
Gain a sense of the staff perspective, highlighting concerns that may
have been omitted from the original draft of the tool, and
-
Seek out, learn from, and bring awareness to, existing good practices
within the teaching and learning environment of TCD.
From the pilot feedback the draft self-evaluation tool was revised, extended
and clarified. It went through three main drafts (September 09, February 10
and May 10) and numerous interim drafts. At this point the content of the tool
26
is ready to be transferred online.
An online version of the TIC self-evaluation tool is currently in design and will
be complete by October 2010. The online version of the tool will use all the
resources the online medium offers to ensure it is usable and easy to
complete. This will include the creation of a user-friendly interface, a log in/ log
out system so that work can be saved and returned to, and the use of
audiovisual materials and website hyperlinks to ensure each question on the
tool is clear and unambiguous to users.
Over phase III of the TIC project, which will run through the academic year
10/11 TIC will seek to pilot the online version of the tool so as to further
enhance usability and scope, and to embed this tool within processes and
policies of TCD so as to ensure the longevity of the tool.
In this phase TIC will also seek to pilot the online tool within other Higher
Level institutions in Ireland in order to assess the viability of extending the use
of the tool beyond TCD during phase III of the project. Collaborators will be
sought at this point. It is anticipated that the final tool will either be open for
use by everyone involved in teaching and assessment across the Higher
Level sector in Ireland or, if this proves difficult or the final tool is too specific
to TCD, other institutions will be able to construct their own version of the tool.
This will ensure that inclusion post-registration is mainstreamed across the
Higher education sector in Ireland.
If you would like more information on the TIC project, please contact Michelle Garvey, project
officer at include@tcd.ie.
Works Cited
The Revised College Accessibility Policy: July 2009. Trinity College Dublin.
http://www.tcd.ie/about/policies/accessible-info-policy.php.
27