Presentation for the Leadership in Learning and Teaching event at Durham University on 1 May 2019. Project resources: Universal Design for Learning: Evaluation Interim Report: https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/handle/2086/17106 A Literature Review of Universal Design for Learning: https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/handle/2086/17059 Freedom to Achieve: Project Evaluation Report: https://www.dora.dmu.ac.uk/handle/2086/16793

1. Strategic Visions & Values:
Leadership in Learning and Teaching
Richard Hall ¦ @hallymk1
rhall1@dmu.ac.uk ¦ richard-hall.org

3. • Managing the dialectics of innovating around education and
technology in schools and HE [HEA, Jisc, KTP]
• Whole-institution curriculum re-design [C2004]
• Ongoing accredited/non-accredited professional development
[PGCHE]
• National networks [NTFS, OE]
• Radical/decolonial/co-operative pedagogies [#radped, Coop
Uni, SLRC]
• Institutional inclusivity programmes [Universal Design for
Learning; Freedom to achieve]
• Integrating research and teaching [research-engaged
teaching/developing researchers’ effectively]

4. • A movement of policy and practice
• The management of tensions in innovations that materially
affect labour rights
• A flow toward risk-based management of curriculum
relationships
• A risk of a reduction or forgetting of our QE past for our QA
future
• Where do risky or alternative pedagogies sit? What do we
value?
• Inclusivity as a means of silencing
• Is it possible to overcome separations?
• What of management, governance and partnerships?

6. I was asked to share my experience of working to
embed inclusivity in the curriculum.
What are your experiences of working to embed
inclusivity in the curriculum?
Think about people, activities, resistances, flows,
feelings.

7. Note to self: remember to add some notes based
on what participants say about people, activities,
resistances, flows, feelings.
Add them here.
Now.

10. autonomy does not mean the
absence of accountability
where markets are
dysfunctional, we should be
prepared to intervene
University means University for
lender and purchaser

11. •our country’s future depends more than ever on the success of our
HEIs;
•we will not forget the underlying values of HE… joy and value of
knowledge pursued for its own sake; pursuit of the good, the true
and the beautiful;
•uncompromising in our protection of students’ interests… insist on
value for money for the student [and] also for the taxpayer.
Barber, Foreward, in DfE, 2017, pp. 8-9.

12. Effective competition compels providers to focus on students’
needs and aspirations, drives up outcomes that students care
about, puts downward pressure on costs, leads to more
efficient allocation of resources between providers, and
catalyses innovation.
The higher education sector in England is well suited to market
mechanisms driving continuous improvement.
DfE, 2017, pp. 43-5.

13. Do these issues of governance, regulation and funding
affect your ability to deliver inclusive learning and
teaching?
How do they affect: the deployment of resources;
prioritisation of activities; people and relationships;
workloads; curriculum design, delivery and assessment?

14. Note to self: remember to add some notes based
on what participants say about the living death of
competition.
Add them here.
Now.

15. Visions and values, some matters arising:
•relationships conditioned by competition and metrics;
•performance management and metrics;
•learning and teaching as service-driven innovation;
•finance capital and the need for efficiencies;
•USPs, brand, risk;
•tensions between vocation and business;
•accountability, autonomy and authority.

16. Some DMU stuff

17. Some DMU context
•4 faculties
•19k UG; 4k PG
•158 programmes (c. 1800 modules)
•HEC: corporate governance
•Innovation via Programme/Project Management: Strategic
Management Group; Theme Boards; Project Boards
•BAU: committee structure

18. Some DMU context
•ULTAS: co-creation, universal design for learning, building
(student) capability
•CAI; festival; conference; staff development (UKPSF); AIP/£
•TEF: employability; #DMUSquareMile; personalization; student
support; resources linked to outcomes; culture of enhancement
•Research Strategy: includes societal impact; RET; new Institutes

19. Two DMU
Cases:
UDL2 and FTA

20. DSA + OfS + TE(SO)F + HERA + Equalities Act
HESA data for 2016/17: 16.6% of DMU students had a declared
disability compared with a sector average of 12%.

21. Student engagement – through including
multiple avenues that effectively capture
student interest as well as sustaining deep,
meaningful interactions with core material
Representation of content – through using
a variety of methods to represent content and
information with options for perception,
language & symbols and comprehension
Action & expression – through including
multiple ways for demonstrating knowledge
and understanding

22. 1. Flexible ways of learning rooted in
participation
2. Flexible study resources with a
technological focus
3. Flexible ways of testing learning,
including different methods

23. DMU Disability Enhancement Project (2015)
•Developing measures to ensure accessibility for all students to all learning
and teaching activities within the university
•The development of a DMU disability assessment centre
•Reviewing specialist accommodation provision
•Increased availability of lecture-capture technology across the University
•Extending the provision of accessible software
•Widening the use of multimedia as an enhancement to teaching and learning
resources
•Enhancing digital access to published academic content
•Providing relevant staff and student training and development opportunities

24. Universal Design for Learning
Mark II
WORK STREAM ONE
DMU Replay Roll Out (WS 1)
Teaching,LearningandCurriculum
ThemeBoard
The Disabled
Student
Operational
Strategy Group
(DSOG)
Student Experience and
Employability Theme Board
WORK STREAM TWO
Technology to Enhance UDL (WS 2)
WORK STREAM THREE
UDL Teaching Practise (WS 3)
WORK STREAM FOUR
UDL Quality and Enhancement (WS 4)
WORK STREAM FIVE
Evaluation and Impact of UDL (WS 5)
University Internal
and External
Marketing and
Communications
Indirect Reporting
Direct Reporting
ULTC:
BAU

25. Note to self: hand out UDL handouts
Ask participants:
what are your thoughts of this framework, in relation to
your curricula?
what are your thoughts of this framework, in relation to
your practice?

26. • Literature Review headlines:
– Gaps – scope, scale and geography
– Qualitative vs quantitative data
– Descriptive studies
– Focus on disability and technology
• What we know from previous projects:
– TIP Scheme, ‘Towards Equitable Engagement: the Impact of
UDL on Student Perceptions of Learning’
– Disability Enhancement Programme (DEP)

27. 1. Scoping interviews with UDL champions and project
board members
2. Literature Review
3. Collection and analysis of Good Honours, Continuation
and NSS data
4. Analysis of quality assurance documents e.g. external
examiners reports
5. DMU Replay data
UDL2 Evaluation

28. Into a world of institutional, hegemonic power
•The point of UDL?
•UDL for whom?
•Performative or non-performative systems and
structures?
"The wall gives physical form to what a number of
practitioners describe as ‘institutional inertia,' the lack of
an institutional will to change" (26)
“Diversity is regularly referred to as a ‘good’ word precisely
because it can be used in diverse ways, or even because
it does not have a referent.”

29. 1. The institution should be clear about the deep interconnections between UDL, and
FTA, Athena SWAN, ULTAS and research-engaged teaching, in order to create an
enhancement-focused, pedagogic environment.
2. The development of an on-line mechanism for sharing good practice and case studies
across the University will amplify engagement.
3. The co-created implementation of a strategy for understanding student perceptions of
UDL, focused upon academic practice and the student experience should underpin
these case studies.
4. An integrated evaluation of technology that supports UDL, combining an analysis of
DMU Replay with the employment of other assistive technologies, should be
undertaken, in order to shift the focus of UDL away from the former towards
enhancement.
5. A strategy for external communication and internal branding should be developed to
give a clear message about what UDL at DMU is, aimed at specific stakeholder
groups.

30. FTA focuses on reducing the BAME attainment gap.
DMU as CI on an OfS project to address barriers to student success.
Embedding KU’s value-added metric and an inclusive curriculum framework. ICF:
•Create an accessible curriculum
•Enable students to see themselves reflected in the curriculum
•Equip students with the skills to positively contribute to and work in a global and
diverse environment
DMU ULTAS/UDL and FTA: co-creation, participation and diversity, with a focus
upon the student’s relationship to herself, her curriculum and her institution.
A critical issue is ensuring the clarity of these connections for staff and students in
the design, delivery and assessment of the curriculum.

32. • Year One: understanding KU’s VA metric and ICF and how they can
be integrated into existing DMU pedagogic practices. Disseminating
these approaches across the 40 programmes and working with
programme teams to explore their attainment gap data.
• Year Two: beginning to implement curriculum change across the 40
programmes and more widely across the institution. Engaging in co-
creation with our students to ensure that their voice is heard throughout
this process.
• Year Three: embedding changes in practice at both an institutional
and programme level to ensure that culturally inclusive practice is
considered ‘business as usual’ at DMU.

33. Co-creation events with 142 students: Relationships, Teaching & Learning,
Community, Development, Employability and Exclusion.
Student baseline survey with 233: 45% unaware of the attainment gap; 54%
unaware of the project; 75% felt reflected in their learning experience.
Students of Pakistani, Caribbean and ‘Other White’ heritage were most likely
to feel unrepresented within their learning experience.
55% felt they had not experienced changes that had resulted in greater
inclusivity: content; methods; materials; assessment; feedback.
Staff baseline with 44: 77% heard of the attainment gap; 80% made changes;
64% use the UDL review template; differential engagement with FOC.

34. Programme-level co-creation
Student Curriculum Advisors (SCAs) :
•Providing BAME students’ perspective on course materials
•Collating BAME student voice via small group sessions
•Creating best practice curriculum co-creation guides
Read to Debate
Colour Full Reading Club (LLS)
Ongoing evaluation: project; curriculum; staff; students

35. In terms of form, content, structure,
organisation, issues, politics, whatever…
Do these cases resonate in any way?
Are there any possibilities in your work?
Are there any resistances?

36. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.