Content uploaded by Inma Rodriguez-Ardura
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Inma Rodriguez-Ardura on Feb 09, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: #########
A Handbook
of e-Inclusion
Building Capaci for Inclusive Higher
Education in Digital Environments
Marieke Slootman, sja Korthals Altes, Ewa Domagała-Zyśk,
Inma Rodríguez-Ardura, Ivana Stanojev
e-Inclusion
education in digital environments
1
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: A handbook of e-inclusion
Impressum
The Handbook of e-inclusion supports educators in developing expertise in inclusive education and
digital learning, to provide equitable education opportunities for every student in online, blended,
and hybrid learning environments.
This handbook has been written in the context of the EU-funded project ‘e-Inclusion. Building Capaci-
ty for Inclusive Education in Digital Environments’ (project number 2020-1-NL01-KA226-HE-083100),
co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Commission.
The knowledge developed in this project is also distributed through e-learning modules for teach-
ers, an Awareness Raising Tool, and the e-Inclusion course, piloted at the Universitat Oberta de
Catalunya in 2022. For additional information, the modules, the tool, and an open-access course
outline, see the project website: https://einclusion.net.
Authors
• Marieke Slootman, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
• Tisja Korthals Altes, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
• Ewa Domagała-Zyśk, Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
• Inma Rodríguez-Ardura, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya
• Ivana Stanojev, Knowledge Innovation Centre
Contributors
• Mary Tupan-Wenno, Expertise Centrum Diversiteitsbeleid
• Erik van Halewijn, Expertise Centrum Diversiteitsbeleid
• Glenpherd Martinus, Expertise Centrum Diversiteitsbeleid
• Bie Nielandt, Universiteit Hasselt
• Kathia Reynders, Universiteit Hasselt
• Siema Ramdas, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
• Amrita Das, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
E-inclusion consortium
In this project, four universities and two policy-focused organisations with leading expertise in in-
clusion policy and online learning, collaborated on inclusion in digital education. Participating part-
ners are Expertise Centrum Diversiteitsbeleid ECHO, Knowledge Innovation Centre Malta, Katolicki
Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Universiteit Hasselt, and Vrije
University Amsterdam (project leader).
2
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: A handbook of e-inclusion
Published by Knowledge Innovation Centre
Designed by Tina Cajnkar
ISBN: 978-99957-79-09-2
February 2023
The European Commission’s support for the production of this publication does not constitute an en-
dorsement of the contents, which reect the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be
held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
3
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Table of Content
Table of Content
e-Inclusion in one glance 5
7General introduction to e-inclusion
15
Chapter 1. Why e-inclusion
26
• 1.1 The need for inclusive pedagogies in general
• 1.2 From emergency remote teaching to inclusive digital pedagogies
15
20
• 2.1 A novel framework of inclusive digital education
• 2.2 Inclusion Knowledge (or IK): enhancing awareness on
diversity and equity
26
29
• 2.2.1 Diversity and inclusion in relation to students
• 2.2.2 Diversity and inclusion in relation to teachers
• 2.2.3 Diversity and inclusion in relation to course content
• 2.2.4 Diversity and inclusion in relation to contextuity
31
33
35
37
40
• 3.1 Technology use and accessibility: diversication and exibility
• 3.2 Technology use and engagement: belonging and agency
• 3.3 Other points of attention: ethics and organisation
41
48
53
Chapter 2. How to understand e-inclusion:
the I-TPACK model
Chapter 3. Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK):
how technology use shapes equi
4
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Table of Content
55
• Guideline 1. Develop awareness and practice self-reection
• Guideline 2. Get to know and adapt to the needs of students
• Guideline 3. Diversify pedagogical practices and ensure accessibility
• Guideline 4. Diversify content
• Guideline 5. Create an inclusive digital learning climate with belonging and
agency
• Guideline 6. Collaborate with organisational allies
59
64
68
74
78
86
Chapter 4. What to do: inclusion knowledge
applied in six guidelines for e-inclusion
References 89
100Appendix A. Use of empirical data
Appendix B. The Universal Design for Learning
Guidelines 102
103
Appendix C. The VU Mixed Classroom Educational
Model
5
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: e-incluson in one glance
6
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: e-incluson in one glance
7
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
General introduction to e-inclusion
The relative novelty of digital education for most higher education institutions, and the ex-
acerbated inequalities in the wake of the COVID-19 lockdowns, underscores the need for
expanded knowledge: that of how digital tools and online learning impact on the accessi-
bility and engagingness of higher education. Knowledge on e-inclusion.
We, as educators, envision higher education institutions to oer excellent education for
everyone, so that every student can actively participate and thrive in higher education,
regardless of one’s identity, background, or body.
Inclusion or equity in digital educational contexts requires a purposeful design that makes
the most of the opportunities and overcomes potential challenges associated with the
use of technology, paying particular attention to the challenges aecting underserved stu-
dents. This requires a new pedagogy.
With the e-Inclusion project, we contribute to building equitable education in online,
blended, and hybrid learning environments, by empowering teachers with skills for
inclusive digital education.
Acknowledgements
We like to thank all consulted experts, including those from the European Access Network
and the GAPS network (Global Access to Postsecondary Education) who participated in
our expert meetings. Our gratitude also extends to all researchers and participants in the
studies that informed our project. Without your expertise, dedication, and frankness, we
could not have developed this handbook!
Relevance
Today more than ever, ensuring inclusive and quali education and training that re-
sponds to the lifelong learning need to develop the competences necessary for future life
and employment requires that education and training institutions use digital technolo-
gies in a critical, purposeful, and eective way.
-European Commission (2020, p. 3)
8
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
As educators, we are all familiar with the transformative potential that higher education
can have on lives. This is where the importance of inclusive education reveals itself, urg-
ing us to consider the manners in which education can fully benet students from all walks
of life. The urgency of this call also resonates on a European level. It is for a good reason
that diversity, equity, and inclusion are important core values for the European Union (EU).
Inequity persists all throughout higher education. Who you are, inuences your chances in
education (OECD, 2018; UNESCO, 2020). The increasing diversity in society in combination
with unequal opportunities and systematic exclusion urges higher education institutions,
local authorities, and supranational institutions to promote and develop inclusive policies
and practices, and to move towards inclusive excellence through organisational trans-
formation. Despite the opportunities that digital technologies provide for inclusion, the
global switch to online education during the COVID-19 pandemic appeared to have only
exacerbated inequalities (Blaskó & Schnepf, 2020).
The EU underscores the sense of urgency to increase equitable opportunities to high-qual-
ity education (European Commission, 2016) and to provide ‘high-quality, inclusive and ac-
cessible digital education’ (the Digital Education Action Plan 2021-2027), European Com-
mission, 2022). Promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizenship is one of the main
objectives of the strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training
(European Commission, 2021).
This project is funded by the EU within the call for Digital education readiness, which sup-
ports projects in education to enhance online, distance and blended learning. The call aims
to support teachers and safeguard the inclusive nature of digital learning opportunities.
(European Commission, 2020).
e-inclusion
In the context of higher education, we conceive e-inclusion as a practice. It refers to
a continuous process of making education, supported by digital means, inclusive.
Like in oine, physical classrooms, the question of how to make education more inclusive
in online settings is pressing. Digital learning environments bring with them their own
unique set of opportunities, demands and challenges in relation to diversity and inclusion.
On the one hand, technology use provides numerous opportunities for diversication of
teaching methods and content, exibility, student’s agency, and participation. On the other
hand, the sometimes-perceived anonymity and lack of social presence in online education
9
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
settings might hamper the sense of belonging and the creation of learning environments
in which students feel both safe and brave enough to participate. Furthermore, digital
barriers, such as failing technology or inadequate digital skills, can reduce accessibility and
engagement online.
Although these challenges aect all students, they can have more detrimental eects for
underserved students – who are less connected with the educational system because their
talents are less acknowledged, their views are less represented, or their special needs are
not met. Digital education is not necessarily inclusive, as the accelerated move of in-person
higher education institutions towards online education during the COVID-19 pandemic has
underscored. Developing inclusive online education is not only a pressing issue, but also
requires new ways of thinking.
There are many commentaries and reports concerning inclusive education and on digi-
tal education, but the issue of inclusive digital education is still largely unexplored. With
the e-Inclusion project, we seek to ll this gap by developing a new pedagogy that helps
teachers and higher education institutions build capacities for inclusive education within
digital environments. This pedagogy is based on the interplay of knowledge on pedagogy,
content, and technology in the light of inclusion and we suggest a new conceptual model,
which we have coined I-TPACK. By doing so, we aim to achieve the following goals:
• to support educators and higher education institutions in implementing inclusive
practices of digital education in fully online, hybrid and blended learning environ-
ments;
• to assure that the accelerated transition to digital education prompted by the
COVID-19 lockdowns does not exclude groups from participation in higher educa-
tion or exacerbate existing inequalities; and
• to leverage the opportunities of digitisation to reduce barriers for inclusion.
In the e-Inclusion project, we integrate and oer knowledge to teachers and higher edu-
cation institutions about what inclusive education means in the relatively new contexts of
online, blended or hybrid higher education. This is based on literature, our combined ex-
periences in online education, input from experts, the pilot online e-Inclusion course,1 and
eldwork conducted for this project – consisting of qualitative interviews with students
and teachers, participant observation and focus groups (e.g., Domagała-Zyśk, 2020, 2021a;
Korthals Altes, 2021). Furthermore, we provide guidelines for teachers to create and prac-
_________________________
1 The pilot online course e-Inclusion: Moving from diversity to inclusion in online higher education environments was oered at
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya between October and December 2022. For those who want to teach the course, the course
design is accessible at our website https://einclusion.net/project-outputs/digital-inclusion-course/
10
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
tice inclusive digital education (hereinafter e-inclusion) in their courses. The knowledge
and guidelines are made accessible in various forms, which include this handbook, e-learn-
ing modules for teachers, an awareness raising tool and an online course – all available on
the project’s website (https://einclusion.net).
The structure of the handbook
As the actual shape of education – and of inclusion – depends on time, place, discipline,
teacher, and students, inclusive education is in a continuous state of evolvement. There-
fore, there is no one-size-ts-all solution, nor a checklist for e-inclusion. Nevertheless, we
can oer knowledge and guidelines for reection and change, and give concrete examples
that can be a source of inspiration.
The handbook can be read chronologically, which will most strongly strengthen the
reader’s understanding and awareness of processes of e-inclusion, and of their own
role in shaping e-inclusion. Chapter 3, which zooms in on the how the use of technol-
ogy in education shapes equity, forms the core of the handbook. The guidelines in
Chapter 4 can also be read standalone, for readers who want to spend less time or
who (initially) only seek practical suggestions for practicing e-inclusion.
In this introductory section, we have briey presented e-inclusion, and we will conceptually
delimitate relevant key terms.
In Chapter 1, entitled Why e-inclusion, we further explain why inclusive digital education
matters and why a specic pedagogical framework for digital inclusive higher education is
needed.
In Chapter 2, How to understand e-inclusion: the I-TPACK model, we depict the main com-
ponents of inclusive digital higher education. Based on the pedagogical triangle and the
TPACK model, we propose a novel conceptual model for inclusive pedagogies in digital
environments which we call I-TPACK. Teacher’s knowledge on Technology, Pedagogy and
Content needs to be extended by knowledge about Inclusion. Chapter 3 zooms in on the
Inclusive Technological Knowledge (or I-TK): how technology use shapes equity, explaining the
specic opportunities and challenges in digital education in terms of inclusion.
11
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
In Chapter 4, What to do: equity knowledge applied in six guidelines for e-inclusion, we pro-
pose six guidelines for teachers and higher education institutions to put e-inclusion into
practice. These six guidelines build on the principles of Chapter 1 and integrate the knowl-
edge presented in Chapter 2 and 3. These guidelines are:
• Guideline 1: develop awareness on inclusive digital education and practice self-re-
ection in relation to your own position and role.
• Guideline 2: get to know the students and adapt to their needs, including their
digital needs.
• Guideline 3: diversify pedagogical practices (delivery methods, learning goals and
assessments), seizing the many opportunities that technology oers to do so.
• Guideline 4: diversify content, using the online possibilities to nd and access re-
sources outside the mainstream canon (in terms of region, language, format, etc.),
involving the input of students to further extend the realm.
• Guideline 5: create an inclusive digital learning climate, based on social presence,
dialogue and student agency, and inclusive language, using the digital possibilities
for student participation and co-construction.
• Guideline 6: build organisational alliances for encouragement, knowledge, and or-
ganisational impact for e-inclusion.
Who is the handbook for?
In the rst place, this handbook is written for teachers in higher education who want to
make their digital education more inclusive or who want to use digital educational tools to
(further) strengthen inclusion. In addition, we believe that the knowledge and guidelines
provided are also relevant for teachers outside of the higher education context.
As we consider the creation of inclusive digital education as an integral endeavour, the
second audience, educational leadership and management, is equally important. Af-
ter all, teachers are cogs in a larger machine. When departments and institutions do not
transform, all endeavours of individual teachers to make digital education more inclusive
remain isolated initiatives. Without emotional and practical support (in terms of knowl-
edge and time) teachers burn out. This particularly applies to teachers who experience
exclusion. We hope with this handbook to also contribute to awareness of educational
leadership and management, and to strengthen leadership’s motivation and persistence
to invest in e-inclusion.
12
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
Dening the terms
e-inclusion refers to the process of making education, supported by digital means, inclu-
sive.
The concept of e-inclusion is closely tied to other concepts, which are related to either
inclusive education or to digital education. Due to their relevance, we describe various
concepts in the following subsections.
Concepts related to inclusive education
Inclusion is a state in which all individuals, regardless of their identities, backgrounds or
needs, can actively participate, and belong, in a setting. Rather than integrating individu-
als into the existing system, working towards inclusion requires a systematic change that
adapts the mechanisms that (re)produce inequalities. As inclusion gets shape through sys-
tems and actions in everyday settings, we see inclusion as work-in-progress, not as a de-
nite phenomenon.2
Inclusive education refers to equitable and high-quality education, which is accessible and
engaging for every student, regardless of their social background, identities, or disabilities.
This implies that every student is engaged in a cognitive, emotional, and behavioural way,
without any barriers for access or engagement, and that every student is acknowledged,
stimulated, and supported in their talents and needs. Inclusive education gets shape in the
setting of a particular moment and should thus be seen as an ongoing process. As inclu-
sive education is inuenced by the physical, digital, cultural, and social contexts aecting
every participant, no checklists can be oered – only guidelines and ideas for inspiration.
Equity. We understand equity as the situation in which all individuals have access to the re-
sources they need to achieve similar outcomes regardless of their identity or background.
Equity refers to a deliberate approach, which is sensitive to societal mechanisms of exclu-
sion and to the specicities of individual contexts. In contrast with the term equality, equity
is not based on oering similar treatments to everybody, but on equality in the outcomes
achieved by people.
_________________________
2 We actually prefer the term equity to inclusion because inclusion is easily understood as helping minorities to adapt to the
current system and as providing equal opportunities instead of striving for equal outcomes and compensating for unequal
preparation and resources. However, hoping that our ideas resonate as broadly as possible, we align with terminology that
is common in educational policies and adopt the term inclusion. We use it as a synonym to equity, referring to the changes
that are needed in educational institutions to make them more equitable.
13
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
Sense of belonging. A sense of belonging refers to the experience when individuals feel
that they are acknowledged as full-edged members of a community. In education, be-
longing is related to having good and constructive relationships with teachers and student
peers, to feeling valued and acknowledged as a person and to feel connected to the course
content. Belonging is positively associated with study success (see section 2.2.1).
Social presence. Social presence is the individual’s ability to establish social and emotion-
al connections, and to present oneself as a real person to group members in online con-
texts. In a virtual education environment, social presence is related to the degree to which
students feel emotionally connected to other community members and their willingness
to help and contribute to the group (see section 3.2).
Underserved students. Under-served students diverge from the students that tradi-
tionally have made up the majority of the student population – because of their identity,
background or special needs – and experience exclusion because the system is less well
tailored to their situation or their educational needs. They are often underrepresented in
the student population. We use the term underserved to stress that their position is not a
consequence of their abilities, but because the system fails to meet their needs.
Holistic approach. In the context of inclusion, a holistic approach considers individuals as
a whole; as multifaceted individuals within their specic context. The aim of this perspective
is to avoid thinking in categories, stereotypes and narrow foci that reduce people to only a
single characteristic and to stand-alone entities that are detached from their environment.
Colour-brave approach. In a colour-brave approach, race is not ignored, like in co-
lour-blind approaches. Rather, it is acknowledged, understood, and embraced that we are
all racial beings, which shapes our position and experiences (Tuitt et al., 2018). Addressing
social identities instead of rendering them invisible (which strengthens inequity) can also
be applied to other identities.
Concepts related to digital education
Digital education lets individuals accomplish their educational needs by way of a broad
range of digital technology-supported services and learning resources – including digital
tools, platforms, systems, and applications (Rodríguez-Ardura & Meseguer-Artola, 2016), in
a digital learning environment. Digital education allows for distance education mediated
by digital technology. The use of asynchronous ways of teaching and learning enables
education to take place when the teacher and the students are separated in both time and
distance. This contrasts with the more conventional education that is largely conducted
14
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: General introduction to e-inclusion
in oine or in-person settings, where teacher and students are physically present at the
same time in the same place (synchronous teaching and learning).
Digital education is not uniform; many variations of the concept have emerged:
Fully online education. Also known as online learning, e-learning, virtual education and
planned online learning, fully online education is a modality of distance education that is
ran through digital technologies – typically via the internet and learning management sys-
tems (like Blackboard, Canvas, or Google Classroom). In most purely online education that
is designed as such, the teacher delivers an online course that is planned and designed
in advance, usually with instructional design support, and which is mainly asynchronous.
Ideally, the course integrates a range of online learning strategies and educational technol-
ogies that let students dynamically interact with fellow classmates, the teacher and online
learning resources while building knowledge self-directly and with exibility. As evidence
shows, there is no signicant dierence in learning outcomes achieved by university stu-
dents in fully online education settings and students in o-line contexts (for a review, see
Skledar Matijevic, 2022).
Hybrid education. This is an education mode increasingly adopted by conventional ed-
ucation institutions that translates into a dual-channel organisational strategy: while an
in-person education channel is oered to students – so they can follow the course in phys-
ical settings – an online education channel is also deployed, often in the form of videocon-
ference live broadcasting, so some other students can take the course remotely.
Blended education. Blended education is a mode of education that combines digital and
in-person educational elements. It often refers to education that takes place largely oine,
through synchronous in-person means, embracing some digital elements – e.g., while in a
physical classroom, students are asked to perform some learning activities online.
Emergency remote teaching. Emergency remote teaching emerges in in-person educa-
tion settings in response to emergencies that abruptly inhibit or interrupt oine educa-
tion (e.g., a pandemic, a snowstorm, or a war). As a result, teaching activities are merely
moved from in-person classes to online settings, deploying the same educational strate-
gies, methods, and assessments the teacher uses in oine education, yet now in the digi-
tal context. Therefore, emergency remote teaching lacks a deliberate online course design,
based on the specic possibilities and challenges of online teaching environments. This is
what frequently happened during the COVID-19 pandemic (Hodges et al., 2020; Knopik &
Domagała-Zyśk, 2022).
15
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
Chapter 1. Why e-inclusion
Building inclusive higher education in digital environments starts with understanding why
education systems in general fail to deal with the growing diversity and increasing ineq-
uities in society (paragraph 1.1). As explained, this knowledge however is insucient to
create inclusive higher education in digital environments. We need new, inclusive digital
pedagogies (see section 1.2).
1.1 The need for inclusive pedagogies in general
Higher education institutions are not inclusive. Inequities in higher education are reected
in the underrepresentation of many groups of students in tertiary education, and in struc-
tural gaps in educational outcomes (Dolmage, 2017; Sánchez-Gelabert, 2020; Taylor et al.,
2020; Wekker et al., 2016). Furthermore, underrepresented students experience lower lev-
els of belonging. This is double worrying, as feelings of belonging inuence study success.
Clearly, many students are underserved (OECD, 2018; UNESCO, 2020).
The current educational systems fail to cater to the specic needs of many university stu-
dents. For instance, many underserved students experience barriers to entry because of
the associated nancial costs or the lack of exibility oered to combine their study with
other obligations, such as work or care tasks. Some (prospective) students lack the nan-
cial, cultural, and social capital that smoothens the path to and through higher education.
Similarly, educational spaces are often poorly equipped to provide for the needs of stu-
dents with special physical or mental abilities – turning these dierences into impairments.
Furthermore, for many students, educational settings are socially unsafe environments,
due to the presence of various explicit and implicit forms of discrimination and/or micro-
aggressions. As racism, sexism, hetero-sexism, and ableism are present in society, they
are also present in our higher education institutions. These societal inequalities are also
reected in the curricula, which are often tailored to the students who are the traditional
majority (often white, middle-class heterosexual, able-bodied men) – mirroring their im-
ages, interests, ambitions, communication styles and experiences. This means that the
course content is less engaging and less armative for underserved students.
16
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
These exclusionary mechanisms not only aect students, but also faculty members from
underrepresented groups: they are underserved and regularly encounter instances of ex-
clusion based on their skin colour, migration background, religion, gender, or disability
(Ladson-Billings, 1996; Taylor et al., 2020; Tuitt et al., 2009; Wekker et al., 2016).
Making higher education more inclusive is a matter of providing chances for equal out-
come, and the presence of diversity in people, perspectives, and approaches. As not every
student has the same starting points and conditions, equity (i.e., the achievement of equal
outcomes) is actually a better goal than equality, which is often understood as providing
equal treatment.
Inclusive, or equitable, education is good-quality education for everybody. It is edu-
cation that is accessible and engaging for everybody as it taps into a wide range of
talents and meets diverging needs and interests. This results in education that is
enriching and edifying to every student.
Underlying inclusive education is the need for every student to feel represented, valued,
acknowledged, and have a sense of belonging; and also, their need for self-actualisation
(i.e., realizing one’s full potential). But none of this is achieved by merely integrating un-
derserved students into the established education system, as this system is not attuned to
every student to the same extent. Therefore, making higher education inclusive involves
institutional transformation towards inclusive excellence, which is academic excel-
lence for every student.
Inclusion starts with awareness and student agency
The mechanisms that reproduce inequality are hard to change because they are deeply en-
grained in the system, as it happens, for example, when most senior-professor-role-mod-
els in an institution are white men. Changes require high levels of awareness of one’s own
position, biases, and interactions and of how power relations have shaped our knowledge
production and teaching (Salazar et al., 2010).
Added to this, inclusive pedagogies are needed to make our educational institutions more
equitable; pedagogies that are critical towards the exclusionary mechanisms present in
society (which are reected in the educational system) and that counter these processes.
These critical, engaged, or inclusive pedagogies are built upon a critical awareness about
mechanisms of exclusion and power imbalances between groups and between teacher
and students (Danowitz & Tuitt, 2011; Freire, 1996; hooks, 1994; Tuitt, 2016).
17
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
Because of these implicit norms and power hierarchies, student agency is crucial to
inclusive education, as well as a vulnerable and personal stance of the teacher (see
hooks, 1994). Well-being, armation, and self-actualisation are at least as import-
ant as the transfer of chunks of knowledge.
The -isms, such as racism, sexism, hetero-sexism, and ableism, refer to historically shaped,
deeply rooted (often implicit and unconscious) norms and presumptions about who is
seen as a full-edged, deserving, multifaceted individual and who is regarded inferior.
Norms are reected in expectations, assumptions, attitudes, practices, and sometimes in
physical, nancial, and legal barriers. In many societies and institutions, people of colour,
women, people with a non-binary gender identity, people with non-heterosexual orienta-
tion, people with diverging religions, and people with disabilities, are regarded as inferior.
A lack of role models in position of authority strengthens this inequality.
Many people are unaware of inequality mechanisms because they lack awareness about
exclusion. They do not recognize how the implicit norms shape exclusion. This can re-
sult in microaggressions, which are everyday actions or utterances that exclude some
individuals on a daily basis and that are hard to address because they are not perceived
as oensive by the senders – sometimes they appear in the form of everyday sexism, ev-
eryday racism, everyday ableism, and everyday heterosexism (Essed, 1984; Sue, 2010). There
are numerous acts of microaggression, mostly taking place unconsciously; like not being
ready to share the same space (sitting a bit more far away than usual; ignoring some-
one’s chat-contribution while responding to others’), giving the other slightly less time for
answering a question, making subtle unpleasant gestures or mimics (like rolling eyes or
frowning eyebrows), etcetera. Jokes that use stereotypes are hurtful and are hard to count-
er without being regarded as a whiner. Even well-intended compliments or questions out
of interest can be forms of microaggressions – this is the case of routine remarks such as
“you are so good at maths, for a woman!” or “your English is very good, for a hard of hear-
ing student”, and tokenism like “can you, as a Muslim, explain what Muslims think about
Muslim politics?” When we want to make higher education inclusive online – and establish
an educational system that is geared towards the needs of every online student and has
a broader representation of people, perspectives, and approaches – we need awareness
and knowledge of inclusive education.
When we seek to avoid and counter inequality, it is not eective to ignore mechanisms of
exclusion, as is the case in colour-blind approaches, where people avoid articulating dier-
ences between people, in this case, in relation to race – typically expressing ideas such as
18
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
“I don’t see skin colour, for me everybody is equal.” Although this might be based on good
intentions, for example out of fear to activate stereotypes, ignoring inequality strengthens
it because inequality is rendered invisible and can therefore not be challenged.
To address and counter racism, we need to acknowledge, understand, and embrace that
we are all racial beings (Tuitt et al., 2018). Instead of colour-blind approach, that avoids
race as a theme, we need a colour-brave approach and have conversations about race,
with honesty, understanding and courage (Hobson, 2014). As this can be dicult, it is con-
structive to become comfortable with being uncomfortable. Colour-brave is an approach
to the subject of race and ethnicity, but one that can also be applied to other elements of
our identity.
Inclusion involves balancing between holistic and focussed approaches
Making education inclusive requires a sometimes-complicated balance between a holistic
approach and focussed strategies. Under a holistic approach, individuals are seen as a
whole within their specic context: avoiding categories, stereotypes and narrow foci that
reduce them to only a single characteristic and to stand-alone entities that are detached
from their environment. This is also why we prefer to speak of making education inclusive
to every student instead of to all students – as the latter implies a uniformity that hides the
enormous diversity among students (Domagała-Zyśk, 2018).
The acknowledgement that individuals are not dened by one single aspect of their iden-
tity (e.g., for being black), should be accompanied by the awareness that individuals have
multiple identities that intersect and shape each other (e.g., being a black, heterosexual
working mom of two children). In other words, there is a need for an intersectional lens
that pays attention to how dierent structures and hierarchies work together.
At the same time, to avoid the reproduction and strengthening of inequality – in line with
the colour-brave thinking – higher education institutions and teachers need to employ
intentional and focussed strategies that help understand the positions of particular un-
derserved groups of students.
Making education inclusive requires adopting a holistic approach while paying attention
for specics. Teachers should make their teaching broadly accessible and engaging to in-
clude every student but also to adapt to the needs of particular individual students (mainly
underserved students), for all students to benet. Clearly, this is not easy and requires a
lot of introspection and change on part of the educational institutions and teachers them-
selves.
19
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
Inclusion is a joint endeavour
However, there are many internal and external barriers that educators experience to im-
plement inclusive practices (see Salazar et al. 2010, pp. 209-210). Teachers sometimes feel
incompetent to implement inclusion or deal with conict, or they fear the unknown; they
encounter oblivious students or resistance. They worry that they contribute to isolation
and tokenism when they pay attention to diversity. They feel unsupported and large class-
room sizes inhibit constructive dialogues. Some educators are concerned that they are
labelled as radicals when they promote inclusion.
We can imagine that technology use in online educational contexts adds to these barriers
for many educators, as many might feel they lack digital skills or cannot trust technological
equipment to function well, and that online environments make it harder to get to know
the students.
Put dierently, the shift towards realising inclusive excellence goes far beyond the recog-
nition of diversity in the classroom and requires a reformulation of quality and a change
of the entire institution – including into “recruiting, admissions, and hiring; into the curric-
ulum (…); and into administrative structures and practices” (AAC&U, 2005, p. ix), including
the attitudes of the students. This requires changing the existing structures that implicitly
or explicitly exclude some people more than others; it entitles a transformation of the
mechanisms of everyday racism, sexism, hetero-sexism, and ableism within our higher
education institutions.
We consider the creation of inclusive digital education as an integral endeavour: inclu-
sion is not seen as connected with a certain type of population with hidden, unrecognised,
special or additional needs, but is understood as involving all participants in the online
learning process – teachers, students, and management. Hence, digital inclusion is only
practiced if every person engaged in the educational process feels welcomed and respect-
ed and takes their responsibility in creating an inclusive online environment.
Teachers need to be willing to let go some of their authority and be more vulnerable
in online environments, so students can feel more in control of their own learning
experiences. One point of relief to deal with diversity might be that creating inclu-
sive (digital) education is more about the ongoing process than about achieving set
goals.
20
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
1.2 From emergency remote teaching to inclusive digital
pedagogies
Although we will describe the opportunities and challenges of digital education in more
detail in Chapter 3, in this section we shine a light on experiences during the COVID-19
pandemic. The sudden worldwide switch from in-person to online education, for many
teachers and students in in-person institutions marked their rst experiences with digital
education and educational technologies. These experiences were partly positive and partly
negative.
We stress that these experiences should not be taken as best practices of digital educa-
tion. The instant online education during the COVID-19 lockdowns was often not based on
a deliberate online teaching approach, but was a form of emergency remote teaching,
in which in-person education was transferred to the online context, using the same edu-
cational concepts, working methods, and assessments of analogue education. (Hodges et
al., 2020; Knopik & Domagała-Zyśk, 2022). Of course, no one is to blame here, as entire
societies found themselves in an emergency, in which all traditional higher education insti-
tutions and teachers had to instantly switch to approaches that were often new to them.
This was a survival situation with little room for careful reection.
Now thatthe emergency has waned in many places, we can reect on these experiences
and learn from them. They underscore the need for a purposeful design of digital educa-
tion, and for digital educational pedagogies that t the chosen educational mode (either
blended, hybrid, or fully online).
Educational experiences during the COVID-19 Emergency Remote Teaching
On the positive side, we observed that the sudden introduction to online teaching during
the COVID-19 pandemic partially led to positive experiences, such as “We can do it! It is ac-
tually quite ecient”, “I feel more comfortable in class, when I participate from the safety
of my home”, and “Considering my disability, I now have more autonomy and exibility.”
The emergency remote teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic made higher education
institutions, teachers and students practice with digital approaches that have the potential
to increase the quality and inclusiveness of education (see Chapter 3).
However, negative experiences piled up. Most of all, the lack of social connection severely
impacted students’ motivation and engagement.
21
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
In the interviews conducted for this project about students’ educational experiences during
the emergency remote teaching, many students indicated that they felt like an anony-
mous crowd to the teacher and to fellow students. They had the impression that they
were not acknowledged as individuals and not valued for their individual input. It makes
a dierence when, in-physical classes “the teacher looks at you and asks things directly at
you. (…) [Then] you feel way more present” (Korthals Altes, 2021, p. 27). They missed infor-
mal talks, and the brief personal questions such as “How are you today?”. Students also felt
they did not get to know their fellow students in the same way they were used to at their
in-person campuses. On-site education means not only classes – but also time before and
after them, when students gather in front of the classroom and chat, commute together,
use crowded cafeterias, lecture rooms and social spaces. All these social situations allow
for students to get to know one another. This was missed in emergency remote teaching,
when students were expected to log into their classes and participate in formal teaching
moments, with no time and (virtual) space for informal interaction.
These feelings of anonymity reduced the students’ motivation, their sense of belonging,
and their active participation. Subsequently, the reduced engagement inhibited them from
feeling like a student. As one student expressed:
(…) you can never really… people can never know what you look like or who you are. You
don’t have to even say anything. (…) You just kind of feel like you’re there to do what you
have to do. But as a person, you don’t maer much because you’re not going to interact.
-Korthals Altes (2021, p.24)
They refrained from active participation, and sometimes switched o their cameras, be-
cause they were unsure of what was expected of them and found it hard to anticipate how
their contributions would be received by the teacher and their fellow students. They lacked
the trust that at least someone in class would support their argument, which they had ex-
perienced in their in-person classes. Students felt they did not know each other and that
the teachers did not know them, nor recognised their abilities. In addition, students felt in-
secure about the codes of conduct online, for example, how to pose a question (speak up,
raise a hand on camera, raise a virtual hand or use the chat-function), which made them
hesitant to contribute (Grygierzec, 2021). They expressed little awareness about having a
shared responsibility for the group dynamics and for contributing to an eective educa-
tional environment.
22
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
Many teachers struggled with the lack of visible engagement from their students in their
online courses. In interviews, conducted at VU and Hasselt University during the COVID-19
lockdown, teachers expressed they indeed felt they did not know their students to the
same levels as they did in their conventional in-person classes, and that they and struggled
with the severely reduced student participation. They missed the interaction with students
and often spoke to entirely black screens when students participated with their cameras
switched o.
Although these demotivating factors aected all students who shifted into emergency
remote teaching during the COVID-19 lockdowns, many underserved students were
aected disproportionately (Slootman, 2020; see also Domagała-Zysk, 2020, 2021a;
Korach, 2021; Lewandowska, 2021; Skoczyńska, 2021). For those students who already ex-
perienced barriers before the COVID-19 pandemic, obstacles increased and accumulated.
Some of them had insucient access to good technical facilities (e.g., they did not have
good internet connection or a high-tech laptop).
Others lacked a quiet study place because they lived in homes with many family members
and had to share their study space with others, or experienced nancial stress because
of study delays or because their income dropped. Many saw a reduction of social connec-
tions in the academic context – which might have already been weak before the pandemic.
And when students did not attend classrooms and visit the university campus in-person
it further complicated the deciphering of the academic codes and norms, which is more
urgent and complex for students who are raised in migrant families or are rst-generation
university students. Altogether, the switch to emergency remote teaching exacerbated so-
cial inequities and increased the risk of exclusion precisely for those groups that were
already struggling.
Although online education potentially oers many advantages for students with special
needs (as we will explain in Chapter 3), the experiences of students with special needs
showed that in the emergency remote teaching, these opportunities were not seized. In-
stead, even more than before, the special needs of numerous students were neglected
(Domagała-Zyśk, 2020). Services like teaching assistants or technical assistants sometimes
stopped being oered (Gulati, 2020). Often, teaching materials were delivered in non-ac-
cessible formats (Lewandowska, 2021). Deaf and hard of hearing persons found that many
classes, in remote teaching modes, were not equipped with subtitling service and the qual-
ity of broadcasts made it dicult to lip-read (Skoczyńska, 2021). When classroom partic-
ipants communicated with their cameras switched o, this created a serious barrier for
these students to lip-read eciently. Hour-long teaching sprees, poor time-management
and poor digital skills of teachers aected all students, but this particularly impacted on
23
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
the well-being of students with extra challenges in participation and adjustment. Teachers
and other professionals tended to take care of the class rather than of the individual stu-
dents. As one of the students concluded: “The lack of my accommodations being ignored
(…) is equally poor online and in-person’ (interview in Skoczyńska, 2021, p.271).
(…) technology specialists speak widely that IT is to help students with disabilities
– but online classes now are a complete failure. I have problems with my hands and I
cannot pe quickly and use keyboard quickly. I have a computer and internet connection
– and then what? I have to operate it quickly in online classes – and I cannot do it quickly.
When the internet connection fails, I have to repeat it. I am so tired.
- Korach (2021, p. 254)
Besides the disregard of special needs, for many students their special needs also intensi-
ed the negative eects on condence and participation:
Not speaking face to face causes a certain amount of tension and lack of motivation and
condence to speak up, I have an anxie disorder and low self-esteem, so when I had to
answer or give a presentation I got terribly stressed. In live classes this stress was less.
- Skoczyńska (2021, p. 271)
Paradoxically, in synchronous online classrooms, the anonymity goes hand in hand with
hypervisibility, particularly when students actively participate with their cameras switched
on. Names are visible all the time, chat contributions are tagged, and in conference tools
the active speaker pops to a central place on the screen (which can give students the
feeling that they suddenly stand prominently in front of the class when just asking a ques-
tion or making a remark). The possibility that others record camera images or contribu-
tions and make them public scares many students (and teachers) and make some refrain
from switching their cameras on and visibly participate. This can be particularly frightening
for students with psychological diculties like social anxiety or depression (Grygierzec,
2021) or students who already feel dierent. In her research among university students,
Grygierzec (2021) found various factors that can frighten students: looking not the way
they usually look when in public space; having their image recorded on a crazy moment
and uploaded online on social sites for a joke; showing their private space and sharing
home-noises, like voices of family members; interrupting other people when starting speak-
ing; being recorded when discussing their views on sensitive topics; and more. In Korach’s
research (2020), students with motor impairment expressed the concern that their speech
24
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
disorders or motor dysfunctions might be recorded or negatively commented upon by the
group. It needs pedagogical skills to manage these fears, understand them, and to create
a safe space in online education where every person feels welcomed and respected.
I know there is a possibili to record the meetings. I have some problems with speaking
and I am really afraid to take part in the discussions. I feel insecure knowing it may be
recorded and people might laugh at me.
- Korach (2020, p.54)
The need for a pedagogical framework for e-inclusion
These experiences, however, should not make us dismiss digital education as ineective
and inaccessible, since emergency remote teaching is not representative for the possibil-
ities of online learning. Digital education, as it happened in many in-person higher edu-
cation institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic, resulted from a sudden change from
brick-and-mortar contexts to distance teaching modes and consisted of merely moving the
classes online. In that period, in many institutions, including many of our own institutions,
in-person lectures were often replaced by synchronous lectures and tutorials using confer-
ence software such as Zoom or Teams.
This contrasts with open distance education models that are designed as such from the
outset, such as that of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (the Open University of Cat-
alonia or UOC). The UOC model is based on online communication that is mainly asyn-
chronous, yet continuous, dynamic, and immersive. Both teachers and students are en-
couraged to communicate intensively via dierent online communicators. For example,
students use a forum platform where they can express their reections on the learning
resources and comment on their peers’ reections. It functions as a discussion platform
for sharing formal content, which is enriched with personal experiences. Some of the tasks
include audio or video recording of teachers and students’ entries, which personalize the
learning process even more. Such strategies make the most of educational technologies
and learning strategies to create accessible and engaging education.
These experiences in emergency remote education modes reveal the need for careful con-
sideration of what inclusive digital education is. Even now much of the conventional higher
education has moved back to oine physical spaces, digital teaching elements have been
increasingly integrated.
25
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Why e-inclusion
Just like in-person education, digital education can enable immersive learning experiences
that are accessible, and are cognitively, emotionally, and socially engaging to every stu-
dent. Yet, the understanding of these experiences requires a shift in approach: to recog-
nise that traditional pedagogic practices are not readily transferable to digital education
environments, and to adopt an integrative view that highlights the specicities of the in-
dividual learning experiences elicited by digital technology (Delahunty et al., 2014). The
contrast of emergency remote teaching with open, fully online education that is carefully
designed as such is stark.
To purposefully design inclusive digital education, we need to take into consider-
ation a digital pedagogical framework, fully adapted to digital education environ-
ments. This focal framework should consider the opportunities and challenges of
technology use and online learning strategies in relation to equity.
26
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
Chapter 2. How to understand
e-inclusion: the I-TPACK model
We invite teachers to practice e-inclusion, not to achieve e-inclusion. In line with
others (see e.g., EASNIE, 2015, 2017; UNESCO, 2003, 2008, 2009), we see inclusive edu-
cation as a continuous process, not as a denite phenomenon.
In the following two chapters, we oer the background knowledge that supports teachers
in developing their own inclusive approaches in digital learning environments. To do so, in
section 2.1, we rst describe the TPACK, a well-known model that suggests that eective
digital education requires the teacher to combine knowledge on technology, pedagogy,
and content. We argue that for eective inclusive digital education – for e-inclusion –
teachers also need to acquire knowledge about equity, and how equity is interrelated with
the other knowledge dimensions. The inclusion knowledge that contributes to teachers’
awareness of equity and hidden inequalities in education in general (in relation to stu-
dents, teachers, content, and the broader context) is explained in section 2.2. The interre-
lation of inclusion and technology use in education, the Inclusive-Technology Knowledge,
is described in Chapter 3.
2.1 A novel framework of inclusive digital education
The TPACK model, designed by Punya Mishra and Matthew Koehler (2006), postulates that,
for teachers to be eective in digital education environments, they need to possess var-
ious kinds of knowledge that helps them integrate educational technology in the course
in eective ways (Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Developing eective digital education involves
three interrelated knowledge dimensions of teaching and learning (see Figure 1), which
are:
• Technological Knowledge (or TK): teacher’s knowledge about technology and its
possibilities.
• Pedagogical Knowledge (PK): teacher’s knowledge about how to teach, including
specic teaching methods.
• Content Knowledge (CK): teacher’s specic knowledge about the course’s subject.
27
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
The three knowledge dimensions of the TPACK model overlap in an area known as the
technological pedagogical content knowledge (or TPACK), which refers to the teacher’s
knowledge about how the technology can support learning pedagogies in a specic course’
content domain.
Though at the beginning the TPACK model was used as an approach to support mainly
the use of the educational technology in classroom, nowadays it is a powerful tool for ed-
ucation in general, as an equilibrium has to be found in any learning context between the
content to be learned and the strategies to support the content learning, with pedagogical
and technological tools.
Creating inclusive digital education, which requires the educational system to open up
and become more accessible, meaningful, and engaging to a broader range of students,
involves a new equilibrium. Teachers need to also gain knowledge about inequality and
equity. They need to develop knowledge and awareness of how practices and approaches
in education reproduce inequalities; in particular of how pedagogy, content, and technol-
ogy impact equity.
Accordingly, we suggest extending and adapting the TPACK model to the requirements for
inclusive digital education and suggest a novel I-TPACK model that includes an ‘I’ element
– which stands for an inclusion or equity knowledge domain (see Figure 2)3 . The new in-
clusion domain is interrelated with the three other knowledges and functions as an added
_________________________
3 Although we prefer, for our model, using the term equity to inclusion, we adopt the ‘I’ of inclusion to avoid any confusion
with the ‘E’ being associated with electronic.
Figure 1: The TPACK model: three interrelated knowledge dimensions
28
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
layer. Overall, the I-TAPCK model reects that making education inclusive requires from
the teacher deep understanding of how pedagogical approaches (PK), technology use (TK),
the selection and presentation of content (CK), couple together with equity knowledge (IK),
shaping the learning processes and outcomes for a diversity of students in digital educa-
tion environments.
1. Inclusion Knowledge (or IK): teacher’s knowledge about how mechanisms of in-
clusion and exclusion work and how the teacher can create equitable education.
2. Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (or I-TK): teacher’s knowledge about how to
use technology to create equity for every student, so they experience cognitive,
emotional, and social engagement.
3. Inclusive-Pedagogical Knowledge (I-PK): teacher’s knowledge about how teach-
ing can be implemented to promote inclusion and minimise the barriers to equity
in education.
4. Inclusive-Content Knowledge (I-CK): teacher’s knowledge about how to broaden
the existing knowledge base on the course’s subject and change power inequali-
ties, by embracing marginalised perspectives and challenging the stance that has
been traditionally taken by teachers in the discipline.
Figure 2: The I-TPACK model: with the added layer of inclusion/equity knowledge
29
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
As a result, we propose that teachers build knowledge in a new overlapping area
where technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, content knowledge and in-
clusion knowledge interact. This novel inclusive-technological pedagogical content
knowledge (or I-TPACK) refers to how to move towards inclusive education in a spe-
cic content domain by adopting adequate pedagogies in digital learning environ-
ments, while leveraging opportunities for equitable online learning – while oset-
ting possible downsides.
2.2 Inclusion Knowledge (or IK): enhancing awareness on
diversi and equi
As the I-TPACK model suggests, practicing inclusion in digital education requires teacher’s
knowledge about equity in education. Awareness about equity is partially related to tech-
nology use (as is the dedicated theme of Chapter 3), but it starts with awareness about
diversity and equity in education in general.
Although inclusive education is often seen as education that ts the various needs of a
diverse student population, developing inclusive education should not only focus on the
diversity amongst the students, since it requires the teacher’s awareness of diversity and
equity in the entire pedagogical triangle formed by the student, their teacher, and the
course content (Kansanen, 1999), as well as the triangle’s surrounding context (see Figure
3).
Figure 3: The pedagogical triangle in context
30
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
As seen in the pedagogical triangle, the student’s learning process is inuenced by the
student, teacher, course content and context. This means that the student’s learning out-
comes are aected by the various positionalities. Teachers are not ‘neutral’, objective
actors, nor are students. Personal values and perspectives, shaped by social identities and
experiences, inuence how a teacher or student perceives a situation and acts in that
situation (see also Warf, 2010). Also, knowledge has a positionality. What is seen as the
hegemonic canon in the discipline being taught is shaped by historical developments and
power dynamics, as are the norms and organisational arrangements that are dominant in
the broader context.
Unfortunately, in many educational environments, particularly in higher education, indi-
viduals’ positionalities are ignored, so teaching, the teacher, and the course’s subject are
seen as neutral, objective, and de-personalised while they are not. Rather, diversity and in-
clusive education need to be examined through the various angles suggested by the ped-
agogical triangle (as summarised in Figure 4 and 5).
Figure 4: Inclusive education through the lens of the pedagogical triangle
31
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
2.2.1 Diversi and inclusion in relation to students
Too often, higher education is tailored to the needs and interests of the kind of students
who traditionally have made up the majority of the student body. For example, in many
universities in Western countries, most students have been white, native, middle-class,
able-bodied, heterosexual students, without other consuming obligations such as nancial
or care responsibilities. By contrast, students with migration backgrounds, ethnic/racial
minority identities, a disability or a non-heterosexual orientation, students of lower so-
cioeconomic backgrounds, working students, and students with children or other care-re-
sponsibilities, have diverging experiences, worldviews, communication styles, bodily and
mental abilities, and resources and therefore hold diverging interests and needs.
Because of this, the minority students’ conditions and ambitions are overlooked. Their con-
tributions can be undervalued when they are not expressed in “smooth academic writing.”
Their experiences are ignored, or seen as invalid or incidental, and do not resonate with
the mainstream curriculum – which in turn feels less relevant to them. These underserved
students encounter microaggressions that are dicult for them to criticise, as senders
are unaware of the eects of their behaviour and have no explicit exclusionary intentions.
They nd themselves not represented in the curriculum’s texts, examples, imagery and
assignments, nor do they have role models in positions with authority. Sometimes, the
norms, codes of conduct, positions and worldviews of their upbringing dier from those
of the educational context (the habitus of the institution). And many of these underserved
students have shown immense amounts of perseverance to get into higher education; are
masters in switching between dierent cultural contexts and have a broad range of expe-
riences. Nevertheless, their skills, achievements, and normative frameworks are often not
acknowledged, let alone respected. Instead, they are seen as lacking and get little arma-
tion. In addition, students with disabilities sometimes are faced with spaces that physically
inaccessible, learning resources that are hard to read, listen to or watch, or that are too
intense for those with concentration problems or other challenges.
Students bring a range of experiences, perspectives, and ambitions to class. If they are
properly addressed and acknowledged, students’ condence, engagement, and self-ac-
tualisation increase. This is particularly important for non-traditional students, who are
underserved in our current educational systems, and whose connection with the system is
often weaker than that of traditional students. Unsurprisingly, many of underserved stu-
dents have lower levels of self-condence than those of traditional students (Ramos-Sán-
chez & Nichols, 2007).
32
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
Students do not seek “compartmentalized bits of knowledge” and want to be seen as
“whole human beings with complex lives and experiences” (hooks, 1994, p. 15). There-
fore, education would become more inclusive and holistic when their voices are seen
as valuable information source and their perspectives are taken more seriously, so they
are not dismissed as irrelevant forms of knowledge. When all students are recognised as
knowledgeable individuals with valuable experiences and perspectives, and when they are
granted agency, they feel that they are invited to participate in education as full-edged,
multifaced individuals. Learning processes are strengthened when students are encour-
aged “to personalize subject matter with examples from their own lived experiences” (Tuitt
et al., 2018, p. 67). It is empowering and arming for underserved students to tell and hear
more diverse stories, or “counterstories”, which balance or challenge majority perspectives
(Berry, 2010). It is empowering for students when they can “make connections between
the ideas they are learning in our classroom and the world as they understand it” (Tuitt et
al. 2018, p. 5).
Clearly a student’s engagement and agency enhance learning. Above all, education
is enriched for all students when the diversity in students’ experiences, talents and
perspectives is invited and used in courses, and when the curriculum is expanded to
broaden its relevance (Ramdas et al. 2019).
In inclusive, equitable education, every student experiences a sense of belonging, which in
turn inuences academic success4 . Belongingness is related to having benecial and con-
structive relationships with teachers and with fellow students, and feeling valued and ac-
knowledged (Tinto, 1993). Students who feel like they belong in the classroom, who are in
a course free from microaggressions, stigmatisation and stereotyping, who feel acknowl-
edged, and have good contact with fellow students and teachers are likelier to successfully
participate in and complete the course. Sense of belonging is also related to being famil-
iar with codes of conduct, which underscores the relevance for teachers of being explicit
about expectations and norms.
_________________________
4 For research supporting these claims on feeling of belonging in education or for more information on belonging in higher
education, see Homan et al. (2002); Johnson et al. (2007); Master, Cheryan & Meltzo (2016); Meeuwisse, Severiens & Born
(2010); Thomas (2002); Freeman et al. (2007); Steele & Aronson (1995); Marchesani & Adams (1992); Zumbrunn et al. (2014);
Tinto (1993); Owens & Massey (2011); Harrison et al. (2006); Spencer & Castano (2007); Spencer, Logel & Davies (2016); Spen-
cer, Steele & Quinn (1999) and Steele & Aronson (1995).
33
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
2.2.2 Diversi and inclusion in relation to teachers
Like students, also teachers have diverging talents, skills, interests, perspectives, and
needs, which are shaped by their social identities. Although teachers, particularly in higher
education, are sometimes seen (or see themselves) as neutral professionals, they are per-
sons who bring their bodies, communication styles, preferences, experiences, talents, and
needs into the classroom. Teachers’ social identities, who-they-are, shape their strengths
and comfort zones, as well as their implicit and explicit preferences, judgements, and blind
spots.
For instance, some teachers feel more comfortable in discussing sensitive topics than oth-
ers; some teachers are more aware which topics are sensitive to whom; and some nd the
discussion of these topics more important than others (Jabbar & Hardaker, 2013; Stout et
al., 2018; Willner Brodsky et al., 2021). Some teachers are very sensitive to mechanisms of
inclusion and exclusion – perhaps because they have experienced exclusion themselves
– whereas for others it takes conscious eort to develop awareness. Some teachers also
adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances, while others like to be more in control.
Not all teachers conceive their pedagogical role in the same way: some see their role in a
broader way than others and feel that they are equipped to take on this role. Not all teach-
ers have the same technological skills.
Similar to students, teachers’ social identities shape how teachers are judged and ap-
proached by others, including students. Put dierently, who-they-are shape whether they
are seen as knowledgeable and authoritative, and how condent they are about them-
selves in their profession. Also, as people, teachers are not free from exclusion, discrim-
ination and microaggressions, and many groups are still underrepresented in higher ed-
ucation faculty, particularly in higher positions (like women, people of colour, and people
with disabilities). Research shows that female faculty members are consistently evaluated
lower and are seen as less credible than male faculty (Mengel et al., 2019; Mitchell and
Martin, 2018). Likewise, sta members with migration backgrounds and with disabilities
more often experience exclusion in their universities (Wekker et al. 2016). Situations in
which female and colour scholars with doctoral degrees and professorship positions are
introduced to their colleagues with no indication of their academic position are also abun-
dant in the literature (see e.g., Tuitt et al., 2009; Wekker et al., 2016).
Unsurprisingly, teachers of underrepresented groups have lower levels of condence. For
example, students question their academic credentials, expertise or fairness, and the im-
postor-feeling is pervasive amongst faculty of colour in university systems (Tuitt et al. 2009:
71). Brown and Ramlackhan describe challenges experienced by academics with a disabil-
34
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
ity: they feel devalued, as they do not fall within the normalised conception of “everybody
being healthy and well” (2022, p. 1231); and when a disability is invisible, they are often
seen as “less productive, underachieving, and failing in their roles as academics” (p. 1232).
As a result, students with a disability internalise these norms, so they come to believe that
an academic career is an unlikely career option (Saltes, 2022).
Above all, these experiences of exclusion call for institutional measures to reduce in-
equality for teachers. Teachers need to get to know their students to accommodate to
their needs and, by the same token, institutions need to get to know their faculty and sta
to accommodate to their needs.
Due to the diversity and distinct positionality of teachers, there is no one-size-ts all ap-
proach to reach eective and inclusive education. Instead, inclusion requires awareness
and continuous self-reection from the teacher’s part. hooks describes how the class-
room should be a place where not only students, but also teachers grow and are empow-
ered by the process (1994, p.21). When the teacher has the courage to be vulnerable and
to share personal experiences, and to break with the role of the all-knowing, superior,
distant instructor, this creates a safe environment where also students can be vulnerable.
Making digital education more inclusive requires not only teacher’s knowledge and aware-
ness but also teacher’s willingness and intrinsic motivation to become aware and to
make changes. Creating inclusive online education is not always easy. It entails dedication
of teachers to remain open to learn and to keep re-evaluating their courses and class-
rooms’ dynamics, and their own roles. Creating inclusive education requires awareness
of how their established practices and approaches – which are often broadly accepted in
their respective disciplines – reproduce inequalities. This goes hand in hand with continu-
ous self-reection and feelings of vulnerability.
For many teachers, this is out of their comfort zone, and sometimes it requires a shift in
what they always have regarded as good teaching. Here, the support they receive from the
higher education institution becomes critical: without that support, teachers’ initiatives will
remain isolated and marginal, so transformative teachers might ultimately become demo-
tivated and drained.
35
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
2.2.3 Diversi and inclusion in relation to course content
Diversity and inclusion should not only be about the classroom participants, but also about
the course content; the subject of the course. In all disciplines, certain knowledge is con-
sidered as academic and valuable, while other perspectives and approaches – from other
individuals, from other regions, communicated through other media – are seen as lesser,
and are often ignored and excluded (Jabbar & Hardaker, 2013; Nieto, 1999; Sabry & Bruna,
2007). When courses actually include experiences and information outside of the main-
stream, this knowledge is often only a sidenote or afterthought to the mainstream theory
(e.g., one week with readings from outside of Europe or North America, as a separate
theme, and not incorporated within the base of the course).
What is considered the canon in a certain discipline in a specic country is not a natural giv-
en. That canon has been shaped by historical societal developments and power structures.
The academic mores, which determine what is legitimate and thus academic education, are
formed by the groups who historically held positions of power in society and academia. In
many Western countries, canons predominantly contain the thoughts of white, Western
men, whose work is predominantly known through written texts. The presumption that ac-
ademic knowledge is objective, and that perspectives and experiences are just perspectives
and experiences, invalidates knowledge and approaches outside of this knowledge frame-
work. These alternative perspectives and experiences are seen as lesser, not legitimate, or
not academic (Small 2018 in Tuitt & Stewart, 2021). For instance, knowledge based on lived
experience or open interviews, or that reects indigenous epistemologies, is often seen as
less legitimate than quantiable outcomes following the Western enlightenment ideal of
rationality.
The call for decolonisation of the curriculum refers to acknowledgement of these power
imbalances and suggests a change toward more equitable systems, with equitable repre-
sentation at the individual and system levels (Tuitt & Stewart, 2021). This is not only import-
ant in terms of geography and race, but also when it comes to gender, able-bodiedness,
etcetera
Inclusion of marginalised perspectives in the curriculum – perspectives outside of the Euro-
centric, male mainstream – and serious engagement with them, makes education more in-
clusive and more enriching. The experiences and perspectives of non-traditional students,
because of their dierent backgrounds, positions, and experiences, is often not seen as
valuable knowledge by higher education institutions and is not connected with courses’
content either. However, inviting and including diverse perspectives and approaches, as
well as welcoming perspectives and student voices acknowledges non-mainstream ex-
36
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
periences and can make education more engaging for non-traditional students (see e.g.,
Wekker et al. 2016, p.72). Therefore, inclusive pedagogies are inherently dialogical and
discursive (Tuitt & Stuart 2021, p. 108).
In addition, the widening of topics and perspectives elevates the quality of education for
all students. Instead of the curriculum predominantly reecting and reinforcing the worl-
dview of one group, a decolonised curriculum enhances critical thinking and broadens
perspectives because diverse knowledge is included and there is more awareness of the
history and position of the canon. The inclusion of diverse knowledge in the curriculum, in
colour-brave ways, can challenge established perspectives and strengthen critical thinking.
Diversication of the curriculum helps a wider range of students to identify more
with the course and perceive their own contributions to the classroom as valued
and relevant. In the end, the presence of diverse topics and perspectives reduces
dropout and enhances the study success of non-traditional students (Freeman et
al., 2007). In addition, diversication of the course content enriches learning for all
students and strengthens critical thinking.
A critical perspective about the curriculum leads to raise important questions on the dis-
cipline and the dynamics in academia, including the following: why we have come to see a
certain body of knowledge as the main knowledge?; who nances research in academia?; who
determines the research areas, and who benets from the outcomes?; what kind of publications
are stimulated?; which scholars get visa for which visits?; and arguably most importantly: who
is valued in academia and why? These reections shine a light on the role of academia, its
relevance to society, who benets and who is left out. Consequently, they help to make
science even more valuable for the wider society, and to make education more relevant –
and hence more appealing and engaging – for more students.
37
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
2.2.4 Diversi and inclusion in relation to context
Teachers and classrooms do not exist in a vacuum. They are part of course programmes,
institutions, and broader societies, which together shape overall learning goals, codes of
conduct, languages and discourses, images, and nancial, social, and cultural opportuni-
ties and barriers (see Figure 5).
All the aspects of education that are not explicated in the curriculum, but nevertheless
shape the students, are called the hidden curriculum. These aspects include the commu-
nication styles (e.g., speaking politely to some but not to others), behaviour that is praised
or punished (e.g., speaking up in certain ways at certain moments), encouragements (like
“you did well, for a woman”), arguments that are taken for granted (such as “everybody is
free to follow one’s own ambition”) or need explanation (such as “I take the wishes of my
parent into account when choosing a job”), jokes and the layout of virtual spaces. These as-
pects all radiate specic cultural norms and worldviews, although they – to many – remain
unnoticed because to them these are so normal.
Figure 5: The context of the pedagogical triangle through the lens of
inclusive education
38
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
These norms also include conceptions of talent, excellence and quality and are not primarily
dened in the classroom but are shaped in broader society and replicated in higher educa-
tion institutions’ norms. This also applies to notions of good teaching, a good teacher, and a
good student which are also shaped in society, and materialised in educational institutions’
regulations, policies, training programmes, evaluation criteria, and communication and
leadership styles and hence also are reected in the faculty and sta composition. Ideas
about valuable knowledge and skills are shaped and reshaped within the various academic
and professional disciplines (O’Shea et al., 2016; Thomas, 2002).
These conceptions all inuence which attitudes and contributions are valued, and whose
attitudes and contributions are valued, and hence impact who is addressed and ac-
knowledged, whose needs and interests are met, who feels invited to participate and con-
tribute, who feels inspired to learn, and who feels capable of educational and societal
success. Higher education institutions thus reproduce existing inequalities (see for exam-
ple the works of Bourdieu, 1974, 1986 and Freire, 1996), but can also in return play a role
in reecting on and changing existing inequalities. As agents of educational institutions,
teachers have a role to play in the reproduction of existing inequalities but can also facili-
tate reections on and changes in existing inequalities (Bourdieu, 1974, 1986; Freire, 1996).
The arrangements of higher education institutions inuence the opportunities of students
and teachers alike. Financial regulations and physical locations determine students’ access
to education. Evaluation criteria, sometimes in combination with a competitive climate,
aect priorities of teachers and students. Time constraints too often lead to pragmatic, ef-
cient, opportunistic approaches that leave little room for deep immersion, reection, and
real interpersonal contact. Often, at universities, teaching is undervalued in comparison
to research endeavours. Consequently, many teachers have strong research ambitions
and often develop an academic prole that is strongly research oriented. They work in
environments with certain images of professionalism and expertise, which traditionally
have a cognitive orientation and depersonalised attitudes. Work pressure is high, teaching
responsibilities ght for priority with research activities, and not all teachers have an ex-
tensive pedagogical training. This adds to the challenge of making education inclusive. The
principles of inclusive education can conict with how teachers perceive the role of educa-
tion and their role as a professional, academic, and teacher. In academic settings, there is
often little acknowledgment that personal characteristics – of teachers and students alike
– matter in teaching and learning, and that education is not only about cognitive skills, but
also about social skills and personal development (see Biesta, 2020).
39
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: How to understand e-inclusion
Teachers have an incredibly important role to play in providing equal access to every stu-
dent, by inviting every student to learn and to recognise, use and develop every student’s
individual talent and learning possibilities. Nevertheless, they are only one of the little cogs
in the entire social machinery aecting students and, without institutional support from
the higher education institution and broader implementation of institutional eorts to cre-
ate inclusive and equitable environments, their endeavours will have only marginal im-
pact. In their teaching, teachers must deal with the structures of this broader context. They
interact with this context, consciously or unconsciously. Even though they often have little
inuence on the structure, teachers can reect on, investigate, and challenge or strength-
en these broader structures.
40
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
Chapter 3. Inclusive-Technological
Knowledge (I-TK): how technology
use shapes equi
The use of educational technologies impacts inclusion in various ways, oering opportu-
nities to enhance equity but also posing challenges. In this chapter, we discuss the oppor-
tunities, challenges, and strategies regarding the impact of technology use on accessibility
and engagement.
• Technology & accessibility (section 3.1):
• Technology use oers numerous opportunities to enhance accessibility,
through diversication and oering exibility in time and place.
• Technology use can hamper accessibility, in case of failing technology or
inadequate digital skills.
• Technology & engagement (section 3.2):
• Technology use oers numerous opportunities to enhance student agen-
cy and participation.
• Technology use can seriously hamper belonging and participation, when
social presence is lacking.
• Other points of attention regarding technology and inclusion (section 3.3):
• Ethical aspects
• Organisational aspects
We identied these aspects based on literature review, our everyday experiences in digital
education, the pilot online e-inclusion course, and interviews with students and teachers
in emergency remote teaching modes during the COVID-19 lockdown (see appendix A on
the use of empirical data).
These factors require teachers’ attention, so teachers and higher education institutions
can deliberately use educational technology to strengthen the accessibility and engage-
ment of their courses and minimise potential negative eects. Both the opportunities and
challenges raised by educational technologies are most pressing in courses that are fully
online (or in hybrid courses that some students attend only online). In blended education,
teachers have the possibility to combine the strengths of educational technologies with
the benets of oine education modes.
41
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
3.1 Technology use and accessibili: diversication and
exibili
Among the main advantages of technology use in education is the availability of numerous
options to diversify education (either in fully online, hybrid or blended education modes)
and the exibility in time and place that it can provide to both students and teachers, par-
ticularly when fully online modes are implemented. This has particular advantages for stu-
dents with special needs. Special attention is needed to avoid digital barriers that hamper
accessibility.
Opportunities of technology use: enhancing diversication and exibili
Students dier in how they can be engaged or motivated to learn, how they perceive and
comprehend information, and how they can navigate a learning environment and express
what they know (CAST, 2022). Underlying these dierences can be sensory disabilities (like
blindness or deafness), learning disabilities (e.g., dyslexia), language or cultural dierenc-
es, dierences in learning styles, or varying technological skills.
Inclusive education is designed in line with the principles of Universal Design for Learn-
ing (UDL) (CAST, 2011)5, UDL is a research-based framework that advocates proposes the
use of multiple goals, methods, materials, and forms of assessment to provide eective
learning for all students, regardless of their identity, background, or disability. In this way,
education is designed to be accessible, exible, and easy to use to every student, without
individual adaptations. Instead of creating learning resources, assignments and learning
environments with the imaginary average student in mind, they should be designed to be
used by the largest possible group of people and to t every student, including those with
exceptional abilities and learning diculties, and those with demanding family or nancial
responsibilities.6 Going from one-size-ts-all to multi-faceted-ts-everybody education,
in UDL it is only by exception that individual adaptations are made.7
_________________________
5 See also Domagała-Zyśk, 2018; Edyburn, 2010; Meyer & Rose, 2005; Meyer, Rose & Gordon, 2014; Rose & Meyer, 2002; 2006
6 See also Rose T. 2013. A myth of average. TED talk.
7 Universal design is regarded as a solution for inclusive education, for example in the Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities (CRPD, 2006)
42
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
The use of multiple formats and media for communication, for presenting informa-
tion and course content, as well as for student participation, assignments and as-
sessment not only enhances the accessibility and engagement for a greater number
of students, but also broadens learning for all students. For more details, see the
UDL guidelines sheet in Appendix B.
For example, in the case of an assignment to record an argumentation as a public speech,
deaf students would generally be advised to prepare a written report, which outcasts them
from the group. Better is to oer the assignment in multiple formats to the whole group
(e.g., a public speech recorded on video, or an essay, an infographic, recorded lm material
that includes slides, photos, and texts, etcetera). Only in exceptional cases, it is then neces-
sary to provide specic support to some students (reasonable adjustments, modications,
and accommodations).
Digital education allows for increased exibility in time and place, which can en-
hance eciency and accessibility.
Digital asynchronic learning methods oer time-exibility. They facilitate access for stu-
dents and teachers with multiple responsibilities (work, care), with higher levels of fatigue,
or who nd it hard to attend in-person classrooms for other reasons.
Digital teaching also enhances place-exibility (except when a societal lockdown pins ev-
erybody to their homes), providing educational access to students and teachers who re-
side far away or are less mobile. The following quote of a student with motor challenges
illustrates how this can broaden horizons:
With this online pandemic education possibilities to stay at home and have the learning
materials delivered online, I have the impression I can study at any universi in the
world.
- Korach (2020, p.55)
Many students and teachers appreciate the time eciency, convenience, and cost reduc-
tion resulting from the vanished need to commute to class. For many who live in rural, dis-
tant areas or have familial or professional obligations, the exibility that digital education
provides allows them to access higher education.
43
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
This exibility in space and time has specic benets for students with special needs
who encounter many barriers to participating in in-person classes. For them, the disap-
pearance of physical barriers increases accessibility and autonomy. They experience that
studying from home allows for bigger independence in everyday situations. Korach (2020)
found that for students with motor disabilities the time-exibility enabled them to take
better care of their rehabilitation. Asynchronous learning modes increased the exibility
that some needed for their exercise, medicine use, eating or drinking patterns (Lewand-
owska, 2021; Skoczyńska, 2021). Some of the students needed special toilet equipment or
meal adjustments (like they eat only blended food or drink using special cups). They did
not feel comfortable enough to have a meal at the university and eat only while at home
before and after classes. While studying online, they felt comfortable to have a meal or un-
limited drinks during the day. In addition, some students felt less embarrassed for diverg-
ing physical features, because they could choose to be less visible. Lewandowska (2021)
shows how deaf and hard of hearing students also pointed out numerous advantages of
online learning. For instance, the ecient use of study time:
At the universi I had to spend many hours just siing in the classes. I did not under-
stand anything as I cannot lip-read so eciently, but the universi stressed, I ‘have to
be present’ at lectures. Then, aer geing the notes from the notetaker, I was coming
home and spent additional time learning the content.
- Lewandowska (2021, p. 293)
In addition, students with hearing impairment experience a lot of strains and stress during
on-site learning. Being in acoustically uncomfortable and noisy environments, trying to lip-
read and make sense of the speech around, is exhausting when practiced for many hours
a day. Online, these students often experienced less stress connected with communication
and language issues:
In online learning the sound – the lecturers’ voice – comes straight to you, you do not
have to ‘sh for’ the sound, it comes in a way ‘straight to your brain’. It is not so stressful
and tiring as using CI [cochlear implant]8 , hearing aid and lip-reading. I felt safer and
more comfortable and I understood the content beer.
- Lewandowska (2021, p. 294)
_________________________
8 Cochlear implant: prosthetic device to improve hearing
44
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
Additionally, the exibility in time and space opens up new opportunities for internation-
al education, in which students participate online in international programmes. Online
education signicantly lowers the nancial and structural barriers for international study,
which makes international study accessible for students from more families and regions.
Online education increases the contribution of internationalisation to society (Branden-
burg et al., 2019) and makes internationalisation more carbon neutral (De Wit & Altbach,
2021).
Online learning also enhances the possibilities for personalised learning. Online educa-
tion provides possibilities for a platform that – in combination with diversied content,
assignments, and assessments – gives students the possibility to shape dierent learning
paths or journeys. Depending on the course design, they can choose between various pac-
es, various forms of participation, assignments, and assessments. Furthermore, it creates
the option for students to engage with their own selection of subjects within the course
content, namely those they are most interested in.
Challenges of technology use: digital barriers
As we described in Chapter 1, many of the opportunities that digital education oers to
enhance accessibility were not seized during the emergency remote teaching models that
conventional universities resorted to during the COVID-19 lockdowns. In emergency re-
mote teaching, the needs of students with disabilities even faded into the background.
These experiences underscore the relevance of a purposeful course design aligned with
the UDL principles, so educational technology is used in ways that stimulate learning for
every student – as many open distance universities actually have put in place.
This purposeful course design should pay attention to how the accessibility of digital ed-
ucation can be severely hampered when teachers or students lack good equipment or
technological skills. Eective learning with the use of technological tools requires good
technological equipment and digital connection. Particularly synchronous lectures – large-
ly used in emergency remote teaching and hybrid education – can be severely impacted by
technical issues such as poor quality of the equipment and services (low sound or picture
quality), technical problems in connections (e.g., frozen screens), black screens (when par-
ticipants do not use their cameras), and disturbing noises (e.g., if several microphones are
on) (Best, 2021).
Like teachers, students dier in the availability of technological equipment, software, and
internet connection speed. Particularly, nancially insecure students might have problems
with the equipment and connectivity needed to access digital education (Katz et al., 2021).
45
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
“A subset of undergraduates always struggles with being under-connected: their internet
access is slow, they have gaps in connectivity because of an overdue bill, their computer
needs repairs, or they are completing schoolwork on their smartphones” (Katz, 2020).
Like teachers, students also dier in their technological skills and condence. Despite
the widespread assumption that students who are from a younger generation than most
teachers, automatically will have adequate digital skills, many students feel insecure about
technology use in education. Even when students have broad digital skills, this does not
automatically mean that they have the digital skills necessary for the digital classroom,
that they know how to use the online platforms and tools in a specic educational context.
Whereas higher education institutions and teachers shape the course and the technology
use, students often do not have a say in this design. They simply have to adapt to the insti-
tution’s and teacher’s choices, no matter if they are unfamiliar with the technological tools
used, lack the skills to work with them, feel uncomfortable using them, or are insecure
about what is expected of them.
Online international programmes involve additional challenges regarding accessibility,
as international students also diverge in terms of language prociency (in the instruction
language) and accent, and live in a wide range of time zones. There is a risk that some
students, particularly those with lower language prociency in the instruction language,
accents that diverge from the norm, or who live in dierent time zones, are underserved
in comparison to other students.
Strategies
That during emergency remote teaching the opportunities of digitalization for accessibility
were not seized underscore the deliberate attention needed for accessibility and spe-
cial needs. The popularity of online distance education, which is purposefully designed as
online education to be accessible and exible, shows the potential.
Open distance universities show that purposeful online educational design allows for
greatly enhanced accessibility. Generally, open distance education – with fully online, open
distance models – strive to ensure that every student can ttingly use the learning man-
agement system and the multimedia learning materials regardless of their physical, sen-
sory, or intellectual capacities, their home context, and the technical conditions (internet
connection speed, software used, etcetera). The main purpose of open distance educa-
tion is to make higher education accessible to everybody, wherever they live, whatever
their disabilities are, etcetera (the term “open” refers precisely to this). It is not a coinci-
dence that most students with disabilities or special needs chose to enrol in open distance
46
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
universities with quality education, when this option is available for them (Melián et al.,
2022). And that the dropout at online universities does not dier between traditional and
non-traditional students, contrary to in-person universities (Sánchez-Gelabert, 2020). The
international UK-based Open University, which is one of Europe’s largest universities, with
208,308 students, is the largest provider of higher education for people with disabilities:
37,078 students declaring a disability studied at the Open University in 2021/22 (Open Uni-
versity, 2022). Furthermore, 25% of their UK undergraduates live in the 25% most deprived
areas, and the OU states that their open admissions policy ‘helps thousands of people who
failed to achieve their potential earlier in life’ (Open University, 2022). These open univer-
sities form an inspirational example for conventional universities.
Furthermore, the time eciency, as well as the exibility in time and space, is a critical
motive that leads many students choose online educational models used by open distance
universities. Most of these students are adult students who enter higher education when
they are older and have more working experience, and who often combine their study with
a near-to-fulltime job. For most of them, the social and personal learning goals are less
important during this educational phase.
Technology can greatly facilitate making learning environments and learning resources
diversied, accessible, and easy to use. Digital education oers many opportunities to
deliver information, exercises, assessments, and feedback in multiple formats, modes, and
resolutions (including html, html5, ordinary audiobook, daisy audiobook, videobook, mob-
ipocket, ePub, pdf). Text, images, and sound can easily be combined; subtitles and written
transcriptions can be added to broadcasted video lectures; translation tools can be em-
bedded; and it is easy to include videos and audios of all kinds and origins in didactic mate-
rials. Multimedia learning resources can include subtitles or a text version of audio accom-
panying every video or animation, so students with hearing loss have direct access to such
information. Braille transcriptions of didactic materials can be provided to students with
sight diculties. Online meetings that use conference software provide accessible options
to write down comments and questions, instead of having only verbal interactions – and
this creates a great chance to participate for students who feel uncomfortable speaking
up, either due to some personal characteristics (like extreme shyness or lack of self-con-
dence), negative experiences with speaking up in class (like microaggressions due to an
accent or use of speaking vocabulary) or speech disorders. Posting platforms provide the
opportunity to introduce oneself not only synchronously and verbally, but also to post a
recorded audio or video, or to share images or videos from the web. Translating thoughts
into images or video, and including materials from diverging language regions, not only en-
hances accessibility and engagement for underserved students, but also appeals to other
kinds of skills and invites dierent perspectives.
47
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
Besides the purposeful diversication, it is important that higher education institutions
and teachers, particularly those who adopt fully online learning models, strive to lower or
remove technological barriers for access and participation. They can do so with the help
of instructional designers and media support, for example by ensuring that every student
can access online help services to respond or solve technological concerns or queries. Or
by explicating expectations and providing detailed instructions regarding technology use
in the context of classroom dynamics and learning processes. Or by delivering multimedia
learning resources in XML formats – from which versions can be made available in PDF,
HTML, karaoke, audiobook, and e-book formats. Furthermore, accessibility is enhanced by
designing the learning management system and the entire virtual education environment
(including communication spaces in classrooms, library services, register’s oce services,
etcetera) according to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) of the World Wide
Web Consortium9 , as to provide universal access to everyone, regardless of the device,
software, and connection speed. These guidelines also make digital content more accessi-
ble for students who are blind, deaf, colour-blind, or dyslexic, and students with cognitive
or learning challenges, students with diverging language prociency, and students who are
technologically savvy or inexperienced. The WCAG guidelines are incorporated in Chapter
4, Guideline 3.
In the context of international education, for students living in dierent time zones, it is im-
portant that deadlines are clear and synchronous virtual meetings and exams take place at
moments that convenient for every student (Maat, 2020).
Purposeful design of the course requires deliberate use of technology. As the I-TPACK
model argues, institutions and teachers should make deliberate choices not only in terms
of content and pedagogy, but also regarding technological tools and platforms. For in-
stance, why is a certain platform, tool or media format used? Why not use others? Why not
more or less? It helps students to understand why and how to use this particular platform,
and to what ends, in their motivation and learning. Alignment with colleagues can help to
balance between diversity in tools (to keep the use varied and playful) and uniformity in
the programme (so students have the time to get familiar with the specic tools).
Our experiences with the online e-Inclusion pilot course illustrate the importance of these
deliberate choices, and of explaining them to students. The students were hesitant to re-
cord introduction videos, which was a part of the introduction assignment. The explana-
_________________________
9 Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2016 establishes all public sector
bodies’ websites and apps (including those of public universities) must meet the accessibility requirements included in stan-
dard EN 301 549 V2.1.2, which are based on the WACG.
48
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
tion from the teachers that this recording was important to (a) enhance social presence
and belonging, (b) become familiar with new approaches, and to (c) experience discomfort
as it is part of everyday life for some students, helped to convince and motivate the stu-
dents to participate and get the most out of this assignment.
3.2 Technology use and engagement: belonging and
agency
Opportunities of technology use: supporting agency and belonging
Educational technologies oer multiple possibilities for participation, collaboration,
and co-construction, in anonymous and named, in synchronous and asynchronous
ways.
As explained in Chapter 1 and 2, inclusive education relies on student participation and
knowledge co-construction. Inclusive education grants students agency and sees them as
knowledgeable people whose input and experiences form valuable sources for learning.
An inclusive course invites and engages with their experiences and perspectives, which
contributes to students’ self-actualisation and learning. This is particularly important for
underserved students, as their perspectives and experiences are less represented in the
mainstream course content and teaching. In a broader sense, agency and active engage-
ment is important for all learning, and increases the course’s relevance. It is for a good rea-
son that current trends in education include active learning, collaboration, peer feedback,
ipped-classrooms, and student-led learning.
Although online teaching that lacks social cues can pose a challenge in terms of belonging,
as we have seen in Chapter 1, the relative anonymity can also oer advantages to some
students. Interviews showed that some students enjoyed the comfort of studying from the
safety of their homes, or experienced more autonomy to present themselves. The lack of
face-to-face interactions veils some characteristics of identities or disabilities that would
be visible in an in-person context, like a transgender student explained (Korthals Altes,
2021, p. 28). Online participation with switched-o cameras allows students with motor
disabilities to participate in more comfortable positions – for example, students can use
armchairs, change body position to the most comfortable one or lie down (Korach, 2020).
Also, deaf and hard of hearing students might appreciate invisibility during online educa-
tion, as this student expressed (Skoczyńska, 2021, p.271): “People do not see my hearing
aid, they just listen or read what I want to share”.
49
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
Although it is not desirable that individuals need to hide parts of their identity to be treated
like full-edged persons, for many students and teachers this is the reality. This is why, be-
ing able to make an otherwise noticeable characteristic invisible in an online context, can
have an empowering eect.
Challenges of technology use: belonging requires more deliberate aention
Perceived anonymity and a lack of social presence can hamper belonging and the
creation of a save learning environment in which every student feels brave enough
to participate.
The physical separation of students from their teachers, peers, and the higher education
institution is one of the most challenging aspects of online education, which needs to be
carefully dealt with. As we have described in Chapter 1, the invisibility of many social cues
(body language and detailed facial expressions) and the absence of in-person interactions
as they happen on-campus (at informal moments during breaks and before or after class)
made it harder for students, in the emergency remote teaching situation, to establish so-
cial presence, to get to know each other, which for many had a negative impact on their
motivation and participation.
Social presence is the ability to establish social and emotional connections, and to present
oneself as a real person to group members (Garrison et al., 2003).10 It refers to the degree
to which participants feel emotionally connected to other participants, and to a willingness
to help others and contribute to the group dynamics (Balboni et al., 2018). This lack of
social presence can potentially reduce the sense of connection and belonging, which are
both crucial for enjoyment, willingness to participate, and openness to gaining a deeper
understanding of the course content (Pilotti et al., 2017) – and eventually for well-being
and study success (Balboni et al., 2018; Freeman et al., 2007; Kaufmann & Vallade, 2020).
Clearly, a sense of anonymity, sometimes even in combination with hypervisibility, makes
it harder to establish a safe and inclusive environment in which every student feels recog-
nized as a person and feels safe to participate. This is undesirable, because when students
refrain from participation and do not contribute to the learning dynamics, this not only has
implications for the individual students, but negatively impacts the entire class. A lack of
social presence not only forms the toughest challenge in emergency remote teaching, but
also in purposefully designed online learning (Delahunty et al., 2014; Martin et al., 2020).
_________________________
10 For more about social presence, see the Community of Inquiry framework (COI). https://coi.athabascau.ca/
50
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
While applies to all students, a lack of belonging is particularly pertinent for underserved
students. As for them, the connection with the educational system is already weaker than
for traditional students, and their experiences and views are less incorporated in the main-
stream teaching, and they might be extra hesitant to expose themselves given their previ-
ous experiences of exclusion.
Although a lack of bodily cues, which veils students’ and teachers’ special needs, can oer
more freedom in how to present oneself, it can also be inconvenient when individuals
have to explicitly articulate their characteristics and special needs, and have to ask for help
more explicitly. A student with a physical disability explains:
I started my studies at the universi and my condition was obvious to everybody – I am
one-handed since birth and my second hand is not working quite properly. When I was
at the uni, I even did not have to ask for help – people oered to bring me books from the
library, shared notes etcetera They were really kind and understanding. Now I am in my
at in another town and I am totally alone with my studies. I cannot make notes – the
lectures are too quick for me. Even if we work with texts, it is dicult for me to turn the
page or scroll the page quickly and I cannot follow the analyses. Nobody is oering me
help – there are some new courses now and people might not know I am disabled. I am
considering quiing the studies.
- Domagała-Zyśk (2021, p.56)
Establishing social presence not only requires deliberate attention in purely online educa-
tion, but also in hybrid classes where online students are only oered live broadcasted
lectures. During these synchronous lectures, which some students attend in-person and
others online, teachers often forget to involve online students. Often, the online students
cannot follow the entire conversations or have less possibilities to engage. These students
who attend online run the risk to be known less well by their lecturer and get less atten-
tion, and to become second-class participants. Under these conditions, it is hard to avoid
this inequality, and takes a preparation and continuous attention to engage online and
in-person students to the same level.
Strategies
First of all, we like to mention that the impact of the lack of social presence depends on
the students’ preferences and expectations. Students who deliberately choose a fully on-
line programme (for example at an open distance university) dier in their expectations
from students who subscribe to an in-person programme and unexpectantly participate in
emergency remote teaching. In fact, some students prefer digital education programmes
51
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
precisely because of its apparent lack of personal interaction, which reduces the chances
of painful social exclusion (Korthals Altes, 2021; Peacock et al., 2020). This can be particu-
larly relevant for underserved students who do not really recognise themselves in teach-
ers, fellow students, or the course content. This also helps to explain why most students
with disabilities choose open online universities rather than in-person universities, if they
are aordable and available for them (Melián et al., 2022).
However, with deliberate educational design, it is very well possible to elicit a sense
of social presence amongst students and teachers in online education. As decades of re-
search in e-learning have shown (see e.g., Rodríguez-Ardura & Meseguer-Artola, 2016), ad-
vanced learning management systems and well-designed learning strategies can prompt
subjective feelings of immersion in the virtual educational environment evoked by the
technology, which lead to an intense sense of being inside such a virtual environment, sur-
rounded by real people (real teachers, real students, real librarians, etcetera). As a result,
the virtual education environment becomes the student’s or teacher’s reality.
There are several strategies that higher education institutions and teachers can use to
prompt feelings of social presence in online classrooms. At the beginning of the semester,
teachers can encourage students to upload personal photos and proles in which they
describe their interests, ambitions, or pastime. Such initiatives can act as ice breakers and
help students getting to know each other, which in turn makes them feel more emotionally
connected and contributes to social networking. Throughout the semester, teachers can
regularly promote students to open up and share their emotions, personal experiences,
and personal ideas to the class. In addition, they can strengthen social bonds through
more informal conversations, or for example by providing feedback through videos, which
besides content contain non-verbal cues, such as tone of voice, facial expressions (smiling)
or eye contact.
Interviews with students about their educational experiences during the COVID-19 lock-
downs, showed that students appreciated teachers’ strategies to personalize their online
teaching. Even if it was not possible for the teacher to chat with every single student, short,
and seemingly simple, warming-up activities like “Could you please raise your (virtual) hand
– who drank your rst coee today? And who prefers tea?” were valued by the students.
Students perceived them as humanising online learning. When teachers are proactive in
their communication and deliver frequent and timely messages, they can show themselves
as constructive, trustworthy, and caring members of the community, who are responsive
to every student’s social and educational needs. It also helps when teachers use high-qual-
ity multimedia learning resources and advanced learning management systems, and when
they receive support of knowledgeable instructional designers. Altogether, this helps stu-
52
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
dents nd meaning in the information and content oered in the class and feel close to
their teacher and peers. Read more about establishing social presence in online teaching
environments in Chapter 4, in Guidelines 1, 2 and 5.
To reduce uncertainty and enhance trust, clear communication rules – which can be joint-
ly formulated in the classroom – reduce uncertainty and enhance trust in online settings
(Walther & Bunz, 2005).
As we also pointed out in section 3.1, it helps to explicitly explain the value of certain ap-
proaches or assignments. As many experienced during the emergency remote teaching
period during the COVID-19 pandemic, students often preferred to stay in their comfort
zone and keep their cameras o (see section 1.2). They refused switching on their cameras
because they feared being judged by fellow students, or recorded with unfavourable mim-
ics, etcetera (Grygierzec, 2021). Students explained that often they felt little encouraged by
their teachers to actively participate in the classes. They praised teachers who consequent-
ly stimulated (and sometimes required) active participation, for example by demanding
that students switched on their camera while speaking, by using virtual systems for voting,
using chat options to collectively share answers to some questions, and so forth. Students
admitted that although they hesitated to comply with these rules, they appreciated the
eects of these rules in the long run. This underscores the importance of the teacher, who
is expected to take on a leading role in online learning.
A range of educational technologies exist that invite active participation and collabo-
ration, in named or anonymised form – which include serious games, wiki activities, mul-
timedia learning resources, survey tools, collective brainstorm platforms, multiblogs, and
instruments for peer feedback. Students can participate in serious, formative games and
simulations, and ll out and conduct (anonymous) real-time surveys. Students can vary
in their forms of contribution, ranging from text to graphs, audio, and video, in synchro-
nous or asynchronous ways. There are numerous tools that facilitate collaboration and
peer feedback. The online context also facilitates co-construction: a course manual can be
transformed into a dynamic multimedia learning resource, and a literature list can easily
be converted into a collaboration project on critical review. Students can also collaborate
on handouts and detailed lesson plans. The possibility to easily record and edit knowledge
clips enables teachers to transfer knowledge in asynchronous ways and make synchro-
nous (online or in-person) classes engaging and interactive. In these ipped classrooms,
the teacher is not the centre (and primary sender) during class meetings but guides the
interactions and problem-solving activities.
53
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
3.3 Other points of aention: ethics and organisation
Point of aention: digital ethics
Technology use requires new ethical considerations, particularly regarding privacy. This
for example relates to the possibility of (open or secretly) recording contributions of class-
room participants, which requires clear guidelines and rules. Institutions and teachers are
responsible for choosing educational technologies and learning management systems
that are safe to use and do not harm privacy.
In addition, they should be aware of how the choice for a search engine, an email system
or a learning management system can shape what education and knowledge looks like
(see Krutka et al., 2021).
The use of articial intelligence (AI) for learning deserves careful consideration. In AI, hu-
man intelligence is simulated by computers based on patterns in large amounts of data.
Although outcomes are often regarded objective, they obviously reect existent societal
structures as they are engrained in the data or reected in the analytical processes (algo-
rithms), including social biases and other inequalities. Often, data even produce societal
inequalities by the technological design. At the same time, when employed carefully, AI
can contribute to making education more equitable, for example by transforming text into
(uent) speech, or the use of intelligent tutoring software. Read more about how to use
AI in education in the UNESCO brochure AI and Education (Miao et al., 2021); particularly
Chapter 3 that discusses how AI can be leveraged to enhance education and how to ensure
ethical, inclusive, and equitable use of AI in education.
Point of aention: organisation of digital education
For teachers, technological barriers can be discouraging. Teachers often have less digital
knowledge than their students, and many teachers do not feel condent using technology
in their teaching. In addition, many teachers feel insecure about how to create inclusive
education. Getting to know how to use technology and purposefully apply it in teaching,
in ways that enhance accessibility and engagement for every student, can involve a large
investment in time and energy.
Institutional support in the form of instructional designers and media support is very
important here, as is teamwork, so individual teachers do not need to discover technolog-
ical tools and inclusion-knowledge by themselves. Alignment within teaching teams is also
54
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Inclusive-Technological Knowledge (I-TK)
important to create consistency in the programme, so students are not confronted with a
haphazard assortment of digital tools and demands, and varying conceptions of inclusion,
but with a coordinated, purposeful inclusive educational technology package.
Inclusive online (synchronous) education, which is based on exibility requires thorough
course preparation in advance of the course. Although this might sound paradoxical,
thorough course preparation gives teachers more room to adapt to classroom dynamics
in the moment as they occur and enhances exibility. Course preparation includes (but is
not limited to) a detailed course communication plan, with partly pre-prepared messages
for pre-planned moments. As explained earlier in this chapter, thorough preparation is
particularly important in the context of technology use, and in online courses that have
primary asynchronous communication, as the instructions need to be more detailed and
more accurate than in in-person and synchronous education. Thorough preparation is
also particularly important in inclusive courses that are built on student agency. Although
teachers in these courses let go of the control, and embrace the unplanned, un-orchestrat-
ed character of these courses, it requires a lot of attention from teachers to navigate and
steer the classroom dynamics as they evolve.
55
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Chapter 4. What to do: inclusion
knowledge applied in six
guidelines for e-inclusion
We have explained the importance of making education more inclusive, or equitable. The
attention for digital educational contexts is urgent, as digital education (whether in fully
online, hybrid or blended settings) is here to stay, and the online education during the
COVID-19 lockdowns has shown that the shift to online education, if unplanned and not
purposefully designed, can exacerbate societal inequalities. Practicing e-inclusion requires
a deliberate course design, which makes deliberate use of digital tools. When digital tools
are applied in purposeful ways, they can even contribute to making education more acces-
sible and engaging for every student.
The purposeful design of equitable education that makes use of technology requires
knowledge on how technology use shapes inclusion. The previous chapter described four
ways of how technology interacts with inclusion:
• Technology & accessibility (section 3.1):
• Technology use oers numerous opportunities to enhance acces-
sibility, through diversication and oering exibility in time and
place.
• Technology use can hamper accessibility, in case of failing technolo-
gy or inadequate digital skills.
• Technology & engagement (section 3.2):
• Technology use oers numerous opportunities to enhance student
agency and participation.
• Technology use can hamper belonging and participation, when social
presence is lacking, as well as save learning environment in which
every student feels brave enough to participate.
Although these challenges apply to all students, their eects are more consequen-
tial for underserved students (who are less connected with the educational system
because their talents are less acknowledged, their views are less represented, and
their special needs are not met).
56
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
We like to again emphasise that eorts to create inclusive education are always work-in-
progress. We understand inclusive education as a process that is in a continuous state of
development; a process that gets shape on a particular moment, in a particular class, in a
particular institution and discipline, with particular students and a particular teacher. As
e-inclusion depends on the context, there is no one-size-ts-all checklist. We can only oer
guidelines – and some concrete suggestions that serve as illustrative examples – which
hopefully will inspire teachers (and others) to continue thinking about how to further de-
velop their education towards e-inclusion.
In this chapter, we formulate six guidelines for practicing e-inclusion; for creating inclu-
sive digital education, whether in fully online, hybrid or blended settings. These guidelines
resonate with various insightful resources – which include the ve dimensions of Inclu-
sive Excellence of Salazar, Norton and Tuitt (2010) and the Inclusive Excellence Scorecard
framework of Williams, Berger and McClendon (2005) –, which we combined with our own
experiences in online education and empirical research.
1. Develop awareness on inclusive digital education and practice self-reection in
relation to your own position and role.
2. Get to know the students and adapt to their needs, including their digital needs.
3. Diversify pedagogical practices (delivery methods, learning goals, and assess-
ments), seizing the many opportunities that technology oers to do so.
4. Diversify content, using the online possibilities to nd and access resources
outside the mainstream canon (in terms of region, language, format, etc.), in-
volving the input of students to further extend the realm.
5. Create an inclusive digital learning climate, in which:
• teachers are engaged with students’ input – and engagement of stu-
dents is facilitated by diversied pedagogical practices and content
and digital tools;
• language, examples, and images are inclusive;
• moments of tension are seen as possibilities for learning; and
• with purposeful approaches to establish social presence and belong-
ing for every student.
6. Build organisational alliances for encouragement, knowledge, and organisa-
tional impact for e-inclusion.
57
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
As Figure 6 schematically depicts, these guidelines relate to the four areas of the didactic
triangle-in-context (teacher, student, content, and context), and zoom in on the pedagog-
ical practices of the course (which include the diversity and accessibility of learning goals,
delivery methods and feedback & assessment).11 The social climate is so important that
we granted it is worth a separate guideline. Obviously, all areas and guidelines are inter-
related.
Figure 6: Equity knowledge in six guidelines
_________________________
11 This follows the educational principle of constructive alignment, which states that teaching and assessment should be
aligned with the outcomes we intend students to learn (Biggs & Tang, 2011)
58
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
See also
• Our e-Inclusion e-learning modules with information, tips, resources, and re-
ective assignments for teachers who want to make their online/blended/hybrid
teaching more inclusive
• Our e-Inclusion awareness raising tool, for teachers who want to enhance aware-
ness about how their own position and role shapes inclusion in their digital cours-
es.
• Our e-Inclusion open access course design, for institutions or departments that
want to oer a course on e-Inclusion to teachers in higher education.
• Our e-Inclusion poster, with a visual overview of the content of the handbook.
What to do? How to use digital tools in education?
Digital tools oer many possibilities to organise various educational activities and ob-
jectives, including personal introductions, interaction, input, presentation, ex-
pression, discussion, collaboration, evaluation, feedback, monitoring, testing,
and organization.
The use of digital tools in education enables participation in various modes:
• Anonymous / named
• Synchronous / asynchronous
Please, note:
• Select tools that are adequate and relevant to your educational objectives.
• Make sure that all students know how to use the tool or platform in ade-
quate ways (otherwise the tool becomes a barrier).
• Consider that digital tools not only support learning, but that they also shape
learning (see Krutka et al., 2021).
• Choose digital tools that are safe to use and do not harm privacy. Give pref-
erence to digital tools that your institution facilitates.
59
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Guideline 1. Develop awareness and practice self-reection
For most teachers, creating inclusive learning – and especially in online settings –
will be a process of trial and error, which is probably out of their comfort zones. Like
every learning process, creating inclusive (digital) education requires commitment,
exibility, and self-reection. This is particularly the case because practicing inclu-
sive education requires an increasing awareness of how dynamics of power aect
the classroom (interpersonal awareness), and what role the teacher’s own position
and assumptions play here (intrapersonal awareness) (see e.g., Salazar, Norton &
Tuitt 2010).
Digital media oers access to numerous tools and resources that enhance aware-
ness about implicit biases and positionality. At the same time, the use of education-
al technology creates new forms of exclusion and bias, and adds to the vulnerability
of teachers with less digital condence.
Recognizing mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion
The foundation for creating inclusive – or equitable – digital education is inclusion-knowl-
edge. Teachers can only practice e-inclusion when they are aware of mechanisms of inclu-
sion and exclusion. Put dierently, e-inclusion requires from teachers to be aware of the
mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion in education and in society as a whole.
This includes awareness of assumptions (explicit or implicit biases) that are dominant in
society, in the education institution, in the discipline in which the teacher has been trained,
and of teachers themselves, and how these aect education, for example through under-
representation of many groups in the organisation (particularly in positions of power); ev-
eryday racism in the form of microaggressions that are often subtle or even well-intended
(like reducing minorities to one identity dimension, mentioning of stereotypes, or tokenis-
ing); the use of learning resources that only represent society’s majority; or a colour-blind
approach, after all, when inequality is ignored, it is strengthened.
As we explained in detail in the previous chapters, mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion
are also shaped by the educational mode. It is important for teachers to understand how
technology use can create specic barriers in online, blended or hybrid settings, but how
it also has the potential to level the playing eld, when purposefully used. In online envi-
ronments, particularly the establishment of social presence requires deliberate attention.
60
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Awareness about positionali
Inherent to these mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion is positionality – the fact that our
societal position shapes our perspectives and actions. As explained in Chapter 2, position-
ality is about the role(s) we take on in certain social situations. In the context of digital edu-
cation, positionality refers to the awareness about how our own experiences and personal
background inuence the way we interact with and perceive the digital learning environ-
ment and the students, and our views on what is good teaching, a good teacher, a good
student, and good technology use. This shapes how we approach and evaluate people.
To practice positionality involves constant reection on how our own perspective is shaped
by our personal background and experiences, and how it impacts our actions (e.g., our
teaching). Part of a teacher’s positionality is the power imbalance in the educational con-
text, as a teacher has much more inuence than individual students in shaping the course,
technology use, and classroom dynamics (Salazar, Norton & Tuitt, 2010). The asymmetry of
power between teacher and student in shaping the digital classroom means that students
are dependent on their teacher to create a safe, educational, and inclusive environment.
The importance of vulnerabili
Being aware is not enough: e-inclusion also entails a willingness and intrinsic motivation to
critically review and challenge some of these assumptions. This is a personal process that
can make teachers feel very vulnerable, particularly in an environment where the ideal of
a “good teacher” is still an all-knowing, objective, neutral, distant individual. In addition,
for teachers who like to be in control, and feel insecure when unexpected dynamics occur,
inviting diversity and addressing exclusion may be extra challenging. Unfamiliarity with
digital tools only adds to this vulnerability.
A teacher’s learning process can form a great source of inspiration for students and col-
leagues. Students see that there is no such thing as a faultless, perfect approach. They
learn that it is acceptable to pause and reect in the moment, or even to reect on a situa-
tion in hindsight, and learn from it together (see Willner Brodsky et al., 2021).
61
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Reective questions on your own positionality as teachers
• What are my own assumptions?
• Why do I hold particular people in high esteem?
• Why do I feel more intended to help this person than that person?
• Do I speak with a certain judgement about certain perspectives (politicians, meth-
ods, situations) and what norms do I radiate?
• What barriers did/do I encounter?
• When and where do I feel condent and insecure? Why?
• How do people see me? Why? How does this impact me?
• What factors have been helpful to me during my career?
• How do I use technology and social media myself, and what do I consider construc-
tive and unproductive technology use? When am I comfortable with technology?
• Am I familiar/comfortable with technology, how are my digital skills?
Reective questions on your digital course12
• How do I see my role and responsibility as a teacher?
• What kind of attitude and behaviour do I value in students?
• What kind of students do I feel most/least connection with?
• What do I expect of my students, in my (fully online, hybrid or blended) courses?
Do I make this explicit? Why (not)?
• How do I see the use of technology for teaching purposes in my (fully online,
blended or hybrid) classes? How can I employ digital tools that can support my
inclusive teaching?
• Provided the equity knowledge above, what barriers could students experience in
my (fully online, hybrid or blended) classes?
• Do I have an accurate understanding of the digital skills of my students?
_________________________
12 For examples of reective questions about the curriculum, see Guideline 3.
62
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
What to achieve?
• Educate yourself to enhance your awareness about mechanisms of inclusion and
exclusion, particularly regarding digital education. Reect on your positionality
and the positionality of others.
• Be open, curious and practice self-reection on e-inclusion. Become (more) com-
fortable with feeling vulnerable.
What to do?
• Reading this handbook is a great start.
• Use the e-Inclusion awareness raising tool.
• Use a questionnaire to examine your own openness or implicit associations, such
as the Harvard Implicit Association test.
• Reect on yourself and your digital course, using the reective questions in the
text box above.
• Monitor and evaluate inclusion in your courses. You can ask for anonymous and/
or identiable input, in more open and/or more structured ways. For example,
through an online discussion board or polling tool. (Also see Guideline 5).
• Share with colleagues! Create teacher peer groups to discuss challenges with col-
leagues in a safe setting. Invite an expert to guide these groups.
Further inspiration
• Colorblind or colorbrave? (video) Mellody Hobson, TED Conference, 2014.
• Microaggressions in the classroom (video) Yolanda Flores Niemann, University of
North Texas, YouTube, 2017.
• Purposeful steps away from ableism (video) Alyson Seale, TED Conference, 2019.
• Critically evaluate online tools (e-learning module) Edu-Hack Erasmus+ project.
This module explains how human biases are engrained in technology.
63
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
See the following e-Inclusion e-learning modules for more information, resources,
and reective assignments:
• Explore your position and biases, and the ways in which these aect digital
learning
• Develop and integrate an inclusive language for digital learning purposes
64
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Guideline 2. Get to know and adapt to the needs of
students
Instead of integrating every person to an existing static system, the learning con-
text, whether online or oine, should be made responsive to the various learning
needs, talents, and ambitions of every student (and teacher). Student learning is
optimal when the digital course meets the students’ individual needs, appeals to
their individual talents, and feels relevant to their lives, and when students are ac-
knowledged as multifaced individuals with multiple, intersecting identities, who
navigate complex contexts and come with a repertoire of experiences, perspectives,
and skills.
This means that the teacher rst needs to get to know the students, and that the
teaching and learning process is based on a participatory, exible curriculum, so it
can be accommodated and modied to answer to the diverse needs of the student
population, applied to the particular educational mode (online, blended or hybrid).
Digital tools oer numerous possibilities to get to know the students. At the same
time, technology use in teaching also requires dierent (digital) skills from students.
When teaching occurs in a fully online context, a special eort should be made to
elicit social presence, so students feel the virtual environment is safe enough to
participate.
Underserved students
The deliberate eort to get to know the students and their digital barriers is particularly
important in the case of underserved students, because their positions, views and needs
diverge from what is most standard (from what is seen as normal) and what teachers gen-
erally are most used to. They are underserved because higher education institutions and
teachers are unaware of their needs and the education is often tailored to the students
who traditionally constitute most of the student body. It is important that teachers not
only create awareness of their own positionality, but also of the positionality of the dif-
ferent students, whether they participate online or oine, so they can better understand
students’ actions, reactions and needs, and can better accommodate them.
Attention for the needs of underserved students is critical because their discomfort and
insecurity often makes them less visible in the classroom, often even more so in online
65
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
classrooms. Students who do not know their fellow students and have experienced unfair
treatment will be more hesitant to participate and to interact in online education settings.
Many students can become passive observers instead of active participants.
A skill that often is overlooked is language prociency, which is crucial for learning. Stu-
dents who are not native speakers in the instruction language, like many international
students or students in international programmes taught in English, immigrant students
or students with immigrant parents, experience extra barriers for understanding.
Digital barriers and opportunities
The use of technology in teaching adds a dimension that is relevant for students’ learning:
it is important for teachers to know about students’ needs, talents, and experiences in re-
lation to the technology use in the course. Important is the communication with students,
the explicit of assessment of specic needs (such as access to technology), and exibili-
ty in the course structure (Garcia-Vedrenne et al., 2020, p. 12620). After all, many digital
barriers exist that can hamper access and engagement. “Presume that your students are
under-connected” is the pressing advice (Katz, 2020, based on a survey conducted among
3000 in-person university students in the United States). Furthermore, do not overesti-
mate students’ digital skills, and realize that digital skills in general do not automatically
imply that students understand how to use the digital tools in a specic educational set-
ting; and know what are the expectations and learning goals.
Fortunately, digital technologies provide manifold ways to get to know the students and
collect personal information in safe and engaged ways. Learning management systems
that support digital education oer extensive academic, usage and achievement data about
online students, at individual and course levels. This can also make available data analytics
to help understand patterns or pathways to persistence and academic performance and
help identify barriers in the virtual environment and pathways towards engagement and
academic success. This behavioural information can be complemented with quantitative
and qualitative information shared by students about themselves via forums and polling
tools, in named or anonymous forms (Pacansky-Brock et al., 2020). Fully online courses al-
low for considerable autonomy for students in how to present themselves. This is the case
when certain bodily features that are visible in real-life are invisible in the online context,
such as is the case with some disabilities.
66
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Reective questions on the student’s digital barriers
• Who feels insecure in the online classroom, or when using certain digital tools?
• What are reasons for reluctance to switch on the camera or participate in other
ways?
• Can everybody receive the lecture well enough to follow it (e.g., adequate sound
quality)?
• How are students aected by hampering technology or connection, or by lack of
a quiet space when participating in synchronous lectures? How does this impact
assessments?
What to achieve?
• Identify students’ aspirations, talents and needs (including digital barriers and
needs) to personalise teaching and make your teaching accessible and engaging
to every student.
• Educate yourself on the backgrounds of special needs and minority identities,
what is required to make your (fully online, hybrid, blended) teaching inclusive
and how technology can facilitate these needs.
• Enable yourself to adapt your educational approach to students’ evolving needs
during the course.
What to do?
• Use the digital tools to the fullest extent.
• Inventorise needs, interests, knowledge, skills and talents, including digital and
language skills.
• Have students introduce themselves to the group and the teacher.
• Pay attention to gender identities; ask students for their preferred pronouns
(she/her, he/him, they/them, …) and indicate your own pronouns.
• Oer a range of options for expression and interaction (text, image, video).
• Set an example by sharing personal details that illustrate that diversity and
vulnerability are accepted.
67
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
• Survey students at the start of the semester, either in anonymous or named
ways. Poll them regularly about their abilities to participate in the course. If
engagement levels drop, reach out to them individually.13
• Involve students in shaping the course, employing technology to facilitate their
participation and collaboration.
• In international settings: communicate the required language prociency.
• Encourage students to contact you.
Further inspiration
• The danger of a single story (video) Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, TED Conferences,
2009.
• TED playlist about ablism and the power of disability
• Seven research-based principles for smart teaching (video) Susan Ambrose,
Northeastern University, 2018. How to make your teaching more inclusive and
get to know your students?
• Students as human beings (38:15 min)
• How stereotypes reduce ambition and lead to fall out (40:00-41:00 min)
• Students don’t leave their selves when entering the classroom (42:00 min)
See the following e-Inclusion e-learning modules for more information, resources,
and reective assignments:
• Get to know your students’ backgrounds, perspectives and learning journeys
• Recognize the specicities of digital learning that hamper or strengthen e-in-
clusion
_________________________
13 https://inclusivepedagogy.uchicago.edu/remote-inclusion
68
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Guideline 3. Diversi pedagogical practices and ensure
accessibili
Inclusive (digital) courses are designed to oer diversication and exibility to en-
hance the accessibility and engagement for every student, in alignment with the
UDL principles. This is preferrable to singling out students with special needs. It is
important to get to know the students’ barriers, including their digital needs, and
accommodate to them. It helps students to provide clear instructions; and to test
and introduce technological applications in low-key ways. Teaching and learning ac-
tivities, and assessment and feedback can be oered in various formats (text, audio,
video). Learning goals can be broadened to intentionally include social and personal
development goals.
As is clear by now, the current one-size-ts-all education, which is designed with the imag-
inary average student in mind does not t every student. Digital education that is really
inclusive responds to the principles of Universal Design for Learning, UDL (see section 3.1).
The goal of UDL is to oer education that does not need to make exceptions for students
with special needs (for example when a deaf student is allowed to make a written exam
instead of an oral test), but to oer education that is accessible, exible, and easy to use
for every student.
The UDL approach responds to the diversity among learners in digital education by di-
versication. Oering multiple means of representation, engagement, and expression,
increases accessibility for every student as it oers exibility in format, approach, time
and place. This means that information, assignments or tests are presented in multiple
accessible formats (e.g., oral and written; as a public speech and recorded lm material, or
in the form of an essay, vlog, poster, website, etcetera). This diversication also broadens
learning, as it engages with diverse knowledge perspectives, and accommodates and stim-
ulates varying needs.
Technology greatly facilitates the diversication for pedagogical practices. For example, in
online synchronous meetings, students can choose to participate verbally or in the chat,
which might lower barriers for engagement. Digital tools facilitate translation, add subti-
tles, transfer texts to audio, which increases accessibility for students with visual or audi-
tive impairments, or students with dierent language prociencies. Asynchronous online
learning activities increase the accessibility for students with special needs who are less
mobile, students who live far away from, students who live abroad, and students with oth-
er responsibilities, such as work of care tasks.
69
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Beyond digital barriers
As explained in 3.1 and 3.2, the use of technology involves challenges in the form of digital
barriers and a potential lack of social presence. Insecurity about digital skills and failing
technology can severely hamper accessibility. Furthermore, a lack of social presence in on-
line education settings not only might impact feelings of belonging, but also make it harder
to perceive the preferred codes of conduct and communication styles, which can make
students hesitant to contribute. They might feel insecure about what is expected of them;
for example, how to pose a question or what is needed for them to do in an assignment.
These experiences reveal the importance of clear articulation of instructions and ex-
pectations. In online asynchronous settings, this is even more important than in in-person
settings, where it is easier to detect confusion and clarify instructions on the spot. It is im-
portant that instructions are clear and well prepared, and that students know how to work
with the technology chosen by the teacher. They need to understand the assignment in
the context of the digital tool or platform and not just the assignment as such. It helps stu-
dents when they understand why a particular tool of platform is chosen, and understand
how its use facilitates their learning process. Also, it is advisable that the technology
has been tried and tested in advance of important (assessment) moments.
The accessibility of digital educational content (whether activities, assignments or learning
resources) starts with the design. Content should be perceivable, operable, understand-
able, and robust (POUR)14 to make digital education accessible for every student, regard-
less of their abilities, technological skills and digital condence.
The combination of multiple approaches requires teachers to pay attention to various
groups of students who participate in dierent ways, to avoid that technology use cre-
ates second-class students. It is important that all students are acknowledged and en-
gaged, including students who attend online while other students attend in person (in
hybrid classes), students who do not attend synchronous meetings but participate in asyn-
chronous learning activities, international students who live in dierent time zones, or
students for whom the course is hard to follow because of bad connections or because of
concentration disorders.
_________________________
14 https://aem.cast.org/create/designing-accessibility-pour
70
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
What to achieve?
• Reduce barriers for access by providing materials, communication and assign-
ments that are perceivable, operable, understandable and robust, so every stu-
dent can participate to their full ability, regardless of their exceptional abilities or
learning diculties, identity, background, family situation or nancial situation.
• Lower the digital barriers for your particular students, including students with
special needs in terms of vision, hearing, concentration, dyslexia or mental health,
and students with less-than-optimal equipment (e.g., bad Wi-Fi, slow computer) or
inconvenient home locations (e.g., shared rooms).
• Oer student-centred, inclusive learning activities in multiple, exible forms, in
which students are co-producers.
• Organise inclusive (peer-) feedback and assessment in multiple, exible forms.
• Set inclusive, holistic learning goals that include not only cognitive aspects of
learning but also social and personal ones.
What to do?
Provide materials that are perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust.
• Present digital content in multiple formats, so that it can be perceived in dierent
ways (also by students who are blind, deaf, colour-blind, or dyslexic):15
• Add text descriptions to your images.
• Use descriptive lenames.
• Include closed captions and transcripts.
• Provide enough colour contrast, and do not use colour alone.
_________________________
15A checklist with web content accessibility guidelines can be downloaded from: https://learn.essentialaccessibility.com/
wcag-2.1-checklist
See more information on the CAST website (Centre on Accessible Educational Materials).
https://aem.cast.org/create/designing-accessibility-pour;
https://aem.cast.org/create/perceivable;
https://aem.cast.org/create/operable;
https://aem.cast.org/create/understandable;
https://aem.cast.org/create/robust;
https://www.essentialaccessibility.com/compliance-overview/wcag-web-content-accessibility-guidelines;
https://vu.nl/en/about-vu/more-about/accessibility-checklist-for-events.
71
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
• Provide multiple options for navigating and interacting with the digital content
(via mouse, keyboard, touch gestures or voice comments):
• Provide a clear structure (table of contents, title, headings).
• Create descriptive link names.
• Check for keyboard accessibility.
• Avoid content that ashes.
• Prepare digital content that is intuitive to access and easy to navigate (also for
learners with cognitive or learning challenges, and limited prociency in virtual
environments):
• Provide clear instructions.
• Identify and use language(s) that everybody understands well.
• Use plain language.
• Explain your use of technology, and test and introduce technological appli-
cations in low-key ways.
• Design the digital content so that it works in a variety of web browsers and devic-
es (including tablets and smartphones) and check its accessibility by entering the
address in the evaluation platform available at https://wave.webaim.org/.
Oer inclusive (digital) learning activities.
• Deliberately design the use of technological tools in alignment with the learning
goals, and communicate the learning purposes to students.
• Oer teaching that is aligned with the students’ talents, needs and interests.
• Oer students multiple forms of activating/participatory learning activities, sup-
ported by technological tools that enable diversication, participation and collab-
oration. Include (peer-) evaluation or cooperation to ensure that students take
collaboration seriously.
• Make the setup of the course dynamic, so it can be adapted to the circumstances.
• Make the student co-producers of the course, supported by technological tools
that enable (anonymous and identiable) collaboration.
Oer inclusive (digital) feedback and assessment.
• Make feedback accessible, understandable and constructive to every student.
• Prioritize formative (feedback oriented) assessments over summative assess-
ments (grade oriented).
• Regularly provide (group-) feedback on the classroom dynamics.
• Make online assessments accessible and avoid unnecessary barriers through the
assessment form:
• Ensure that every student at the oset of the course understands the as-
sessment.
72
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
• Ensure that every student understands and can meet the technical condi-
tions for the assessment.
• Oer multiple forms of assessment (writing, verbal, video, etcetera).
• If the assessments cannot be designed to be inclusive for every student,
adapt it to the special needs of individual students or oer individual sup-
port.
• Have anonymous grading (evaluate and grade assignments without knowing
which student made the assessment), with the support of technology.
Formulate inclusive learning goals.
• Include in the course’s learning goals: learn to critically engage with multiple per-
spectives; develop self-awareness about one’s own positionality; develop social
interaction skills, and sensitivity of power dynamics and subtle processes of inclu-
sion and exclusion in interactions.
• Ensure that every student knows and understands the learning goals.
• If a goal cannot be made inclusive for every student, adapt it to the special needs
of individual students.
• Involve underserved students in the process of formulating learning goals. Dis-
cuss how the students would meet the expectations.
Further inspiration
• Exploring learner diversity beyond Disability: What are the challenges and why
is UDL immediately appealing? Part of a webinar series organised by SIHO, the
Belgium Support Centre Inclusive Higher Education. Scroll down to webinar 1 and
watch Frederic Follet’s presentation (minutes 16:18 till 32:51).
• Tools for educators to gain Digital Competence (e-learning modules) Edu-Hack
Erasmus+ project.
• Use video resources in teaching
• Use games in teaching
• Technology & assessment
• Technology & formative assessment
• Accessibility of platforms & resources
73
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
See the following e-Inclusion e-learning modules for more information, resources,
and reective assignments:
• Universal design for online inclusive learning environment
• Identify inclusive digital resources for online learning
• What about inclusive online internationalisation in higher education?
• Assessment as online inclusive learning
74
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Guideline 4. Diversi content
Inclusive (digital) courses actively engage with perspectives of non-mainstream re-
gions and non-mainstream thinkers, and raise awareness about the positionality of
the canon. Inclusive courses also include a broad range of examples, illustrations
and visuals. For instance, real-life examples are included, and contributions from a
more personal perspective are invited and used.
Internet, databases and open educational resources facilitate the access to
non-mainstream knowledge from various parts of the globe, from channels beyond
accredited journals, in media formats other than text, and in various languages, in-
cluding languages that the teacher does not speak. The use of digital tools increases
the possibility for expression, participation, and co-construction, also through anon-
ymous contributions.
Engagement with marginalised perspectives and a critical reection on the canon enriches
education for every student and enhances critical thinking, and it makes education more
inclusive and appealing to underserved students in particular.
Diversity in perspectives widens the hidden curriculum. It signals to every student that
knowledge is not only created in the West from a white male perspective, but that also
other perspectives and other people count. When non-mainstream experiences and per-
spectives are integrated, this validates the experiences and identities of underrepresented
students, increasing the relevance of the content for them. This also applies to examples,
thought-provoking questions, assignments, and visual material. These should include var-
ious groups and perspectives (and not in stereotypical ways, like only referring to people
with immigrant backgrounds in the context of language deciencies, poverty, or particular
diseases), should have relevance for a broader audience (instead of using only scenarios
that resonate with heterosexual experiences or political leftist ideals) and should not ra-
diate implicit norms (e.g., “Where did you all go for your summer holidays?”). (See more
about inclusive language in Guideline 5).
Learning is strengthened when the course feels relevant to the student’s personal life or
relates to societal issues that they nd important (Tuitt et al., 2018). To make the course
equally relevant to underrepresented students, it is important that a range of real-life sit-
uations are included and personal experiences are seen as relevant knowledge and valu-
able contributions to the course.
75
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Online educational settings oer extended opportunities to nd, access, include and en-
gage with non-mainstream perspectives and approaches, for teachers and students alike.
This, for instance, includes materials that are not based on written texts in the form of
articles or books, but rely on blogs, images, or lms. As mentioned in Guideline 3, the
online context also oers direct translation possibilities, which facilitates the inclusion of
materials in various languages. The accessibility of online resources facilitates co-creation
with students. Translating thoughts into images or video, and including materials from
diverging language regions, also appeals to a broader set of skills and invites dierent
perspectives.
Teachers do not have to broaden the curriculum by themselves. Students are knowledge-
able actors, with diversied perspectives, backgrounds, knowledges, language skills. It en-
riches their learning and the broader course when they are invited to nd and engage with
non-mainstream materials and can contribute to the course. Digital platforms can facili-
tate this process of collaboration and co-construction – this joint knowledge construction.
76
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Reective questions on the course content
• How come that we generally read literature from some kinds of authors (e.g.,
male, Western, white authors) and not from others in the discipline?
• What do we signal when we only show white, thin, extravert, heterosexual,
able-bodied, middle-class people in visuals and examples?
• How do we have come to see certain approaches as the preferred (or only) way to
research, measure or calculate a specic problem?
• Why do we know everything about certain groups and not others?
What to achieve?
• Reect on the source and consider the positionality of any learning resource that
the course engages with: whose perspectives are represented in the course, and
whose are not?
• Create diverse and inclusive content, which includes multiple perspectives and
has relevance to every student. Recognise the value of personal experiences.
Make use of the possibilities that internet, databases and digital tools oer for
accessing a variety of knowledge sources, expression, and participation.
What to do?
• Include diverse perspectives in the course material that are discussed throughout
the course, making use of the potential of online channels to identify relevant
perspectives outside the dominant (language/geographical/text-based) areas:
• Be aware of the origin of the bulk of the course material and be honest about
the learning resources to students and explain why these sources were se-
lected.
• Actively engage with marginalised perspectives by including them in the
learning resources as much as possible.
• Be aware of the historical or societal importance, and potential sensitivity of
the materials in classroom discussions.
77
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
• Include visual material that is relevant to diverse people, pay attention not
only to the presence of diversity, but also to the role of people in the images
and textual examples. Who is the actor? Who has the active (authoritative)
role in the image, and who has the passive, receptive role? For example, a
picture where a white male professor explains something to a woman of
colour arms existing hierarchies.
• Build on input from students who share their worldviews, expertise, experiences,
or source materials in the course:
• Have students contribute to the course, oering content, and take their
contributions seriously. For instance, by explicitly assigning a specic online
space where students can share their additional material.
• Connect with experiences and worldviews of every student by giving stu-
dents room to explain their view on a topic without stigmatisation (before
and during the course).
• Explore and explain the positionality of the canon to your students through reec-
tive questions such as those mentioned above.
• Communicate with experts on the topic of your course. Involve guest lecturers
with expertise in marginalised perspectives you do not feel apt to lecture on.
Further inspiration
• Black Student Voices: What Does It Mean To Decolonise the Curriculum? (video)
University of Southampton Students’ Union, 2021.
• Decolonise the curriculum (video) Pran Patel, TED Conferences, 2019.
• The Uprising. A guide for educators to engage students in decolonizing the mind.
(online educational toolkit) Pravini Baboeram.
• Seven Forms of Bias in Instructional Materials (blog) David Sadker, Myra Sadker
Foundation.
• Algorithms of oppression (video) Saya Umoja Noble, Annenberg School for Com-
munication, 2018. About how search engines misrepresent a variety of people,
concepts, types of information and knowledge.
See the following e-Inclusion e-learning modules for more information, resources,
and reective assignments:
• Using multiple media to nd and include a diverse range of non-mainstream top-
ics and perspectives for your digital course
• Identify learning methodologies and digital tools that let students collaborate on
content co-creation and Equity responsive teaching and inclusive online learning
78
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Guideline 5. Create an inclusive digital learning climate
with belonging and agency
The previous guidelines are interwoven with this fth guideline: create a digital
inclusive learning climate in which every student experiences belonging as a full-
edged person, and feels safe to learn and participate. An inclusive learning climate
is, of course, characterised by inclusive language and absence of stigmatisation and
stereotyping, and other microaggressions; it grants agency to every student and re-
lies on participation and co-construction. Educational technologies oer extensive
possibilities to organise this. However, in online environments, it requires extra ef-
fort to establish a sense of social presence, which facilitates an inclusive climate and
helps turning moments of tension into moments of learning.
It is important that students feel like they belong, that they feel like a member of the learn-
ing community and feel that their contributions matter. When students experience the
classroom environment as unsafe, they are reluctant to interact and their study success
will be aected negatively (Ambrose et al., 2010; Freeman et al., 2007; Marchesani & Ad-
ams, 1992; Steele & Aronson, 1995; Zumbrunn et al., 2014). To learn, students need to feel
known, acknowledged and appreciated, and to play an active role in the learning process
and the shaping of the classroom dynamics.
Social presence in the virtual education environment
As described in 3.2, social presence – the feeling that you get to know one another – is a
prerequisite to experience belonging and to feel safe to contribute to the classroom. In on-
line learning environments, where many social, non-verbal clues are obscured, this social
presence formation requires extra deliberate attention.
How can teachers support the creation of social presence in an online course? This is en-
twined with Guideline 2: getting to know the students. Teachers can use introductory ac-
tivities, preferably in smaller groups. To create an inclusive environment where diversity is
welcomed and used, these introductory activities invite the classroom participants to bring
out their diversity (in skills, experiences, expertise, approaches, worldviews and perspec-
tives). In addition, collaborative learning strengthens perceptions of social presence (So
& Brush, 2008). Furthermore, to create an atmosphere in which personal reections are
welcomed and taken seriously, it is important that teachers set an example and present
themselves as multifaceted people, by explicating their own background and articulating
their own positionality and perspectives.
79
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
As explained in 3.2, and mentioned in the previous guidelines, teaching in hybrid class-
rooms requires explicit attention to establish social presence for the online participants, or
for course-participants who follow the course through recordings in asynchronous ways.
Students who physically participate in the classroom reap the benets of in-person social
presence, which easily reduces the other participants to second-rank students.
Moments of tension as moments of learning
The aim of providing an environment in which everyone feels safe to contribute, can con-
ict with the discomfort that comes with learning. As learning is about expanding knowl-
edge, navigating diverging perspectives, and stretching frames of reference, learning can
involve uncertainty and even discomfort. Ideally, there is space for intellectual discomfort
while protecting dignity safety, so every classroom participant can feel “free of any rea-
sonable anxiety that others will treat one as having an inferior social rank to theirs” (Callan,
2020, p. 65). This nuance makes that some prefer the term brave spaces, or accountable
spaces, to safe spaces (Ahenkorah, 2022). Having communication rules appears to reduce
uncertainty and enhance trust (Walther & Bunz, 2005).
In practice, however, this balance can be complex, as intellectual debate can be personal,
and stances are rarely neutral. Often, there is a hierarchy in stances. The majority position
is seen as the neutral position, which does not need argumentation (e.g., “it is good to
make your own choices” or “a good student is a student that actively participates in discus-
sions”) while other positions require legitimization (e.g., “it is good to follow the wishes of
your parents” or “it is better to not speak up immediately and to delay opinions”). Often,
the classroom functions as an echo chamber for majority opinions (Willner Brodsky et al.,
2021). Clearly, representing a minority position makes one vulnerable, especially for un-
derserved individuals.
Moments of tension are inherent to classroom dynamics, particularly in settings where
students engage with dierent perspectives. These moments of friction, where dignity and
safety can be under threat, are so-called hot moments. A hot moment can occur, for in-
stance, when a student (unknowingly) uses a derogatory term or points out a stereotype
in the course material, or when a minority perspective or personal experience is rashly
dismissed, which then leads to discomfort with one or more of the classroom participants.
Hot moments are important opportunities for learning. In hot moments, students (and
teachers) can learn to dissect their own perceptions of what they presumed to be a neu-
tral stance and become more aware of stereotypes or stigmatisation. Nevertheless, hot
moments can be scary for both teachers and students and can be dicult to deal with in
80
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
constructive ways. When moments of friction are ignored, this strengthens the status quo.
For education to become more inclusive, teachers and students need to learn to be more
comfortable with discomfort and unexpected situations. Teachers (and students) will have
to become comfortable with pausing and reecting in the moment, or even to reect on a
situation in hindsight, and learn from it together (see Willner Brodsky et al., 2021). Dealing
with hot moments can be even harder when social presence is meagre.
Agency and participation
As described in Chapter 1 and 2, in an inclusive classroom, teachers do not have the
all-knowing position. Students, including underserved students, are seen as knowledge-
able participants whose experiences, perspectives and questions are valuable contribu-
tions to the learning setting. When students actively participate and are recognized as
co-constructors of the classroom, or even the course, this enriches everyone’s learning.
Being granted more agency, is not only important for student to learn the course con-
tent, but also validates the experiences and identities of students, and strengthens their
self-condence in learning. This is particularly important for underserved students, who
generally experience less conrmation and validation. Building the course on student’s
input can be challenging for teachers, as this often requires a changing view on teaching
and letting go of control. This can be challenging to students as well, who often expect the
teacher to play the all-knowing role.
Inclusive communication
An inclusive climate is free from microaggressions, stigmatisation, stereotyping, and
tokenism and uses inclusive language. This requires awareness of teachers and students
on how everyday interactions can (unconsciously) exclude individuals (see section 1.1).
Racism, sexism, ableism, heteronormativity, etcetera are deeply engrained in our norms
and practices, and thus in our hidden curriculum. For example, stereotyping and micro-
aggressions can hide in well-intended expressions (“for a woman, you do great in maths!”)
and seemingly neutral expressions can reect dominant positions and habits (“where did
you all travel to during the summer holiday?”). Even casual references to minority identities
(female, black, Asian, poor, disabled) can trigger the underlying stereotypical images and
81
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
function as self-fullling prophecies (Spencer, Logel & Davies, 2016). An example of this
stereotype threat is that when students are told that women underperform to men on a
specic maths test, this lowers the actual performance of female students (Spencer, Steele
& Quinn, 1999).
To avoid arming the male norm, and to create a safe and welcoming space for people
with non-binary gender identities, it is important to use gender inclusive language. Gender
inclusive language avoids using he/him in neutral examples (“The citizen, he…” can better
be reformulated as “Citizens, they…”). When using gender inclusive language, one avoids
the automatic assumption that one can tell how they identify by someone’s appearance,
and uses they/them pronouns to refer to persons with a non-binary gender identity who
express this preference.
As mentioned in Guideline 4, inclusive images and texts not only include diverse people,
but also avoid the reproduction of existing hierarchies. Avoid portrayal of white, able-bod-
ied men who instruct a diverse group of students, and has the authority. Vary the person
who has the active (teaching) role, and who has the passive (receptive) role.
82
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Good practice: Social presence at the Universitat Oberta de
Catalunya
The Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, an open university that oers fully online educa-
tion, forms an example of how to structurally establish social presence, while making
comprehensive use of the opportunities of asynchronous online education in terms of
diversication and exibility. Their approach contains the following elements:
• Course coordinators design the courses, ensure their quality, and select, train
and coordinate the instructors who will be teaching the students. Also, they
dene the student assessment strategies, methods, and criteria.
• Course instructors monitor the students’ activity individually, proactively as-
sist and guide them, and assess their progress throughout the courses.
• Tutors guide students in their choice of their individual academic pathway
and closely accompany them throughout their journey at the University.
• Students are aware that all instruction will happen online, so they have ac-
cess to the technology that enables them to actively engage in the learning
experience.
• Students are trained, and expected to be, self-directed.
At the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, courses:
• are mainly asynchronous, include multimedia learning resources that en-
able students to study regardless of their personal circumstances, where
they are based, the device they use, and their individual characteristics,
• have been fully developed and are accessible by the beginning of the term,
• make use of various educational strategies that facilitate a self-directed
learning experience,
• contain interactive learning activities virtual laboratories and learning spac-
es for social interaction,
• make advanced use of multiple educational technologies that support par-
ticipation and social interaction of class and learning activities, and
• involve regular check-ins by instructors who monitor progress and provide
both group and personalised feedback, using purposefully designed com-
munication strategies.
Course instructors and tutors receive personalised training on online communication
and learning strategies from the university before courses start. Course coordinators
are assisted by multidisciplinary professional teams that provide them with technolog-
ical and pedagogical guidance and support before, during and after each term.
83
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Good practice: Engaging with diversity using the VU Mixed
Classroom Model
The VU Mixed Classroom Educational Model provides a framework through which stu-
dents learn how to engage with diverse perspectives (Ramdas et al., 2019). The model
identies three phases in a group learning process: sensitizing, engaging and optimis-
ing.
This means that a course contains activities to:
1. sensitize students to existing diversities and their own positions, through intro-
duction activities that aim to get to know one another and establish an inclu-
sive (digital) learning climate;
2. have students engage with diverse perspectives and learn to deal with mo-
ments of tension;
3. have students integrate and combine perspectives to formulate creative solu-
tions.
Examples of practical teaching activities can be found in the two Mixed Classroom bro-
chures: The VU Mixed Classroom Educational Model (Ramdas et al. 2019) and The VU
Mixed Classroom Educational Model in blended learning (Ramdas et al. 2022). See Ap-
pendix C for an overview of the elements of the model.
What to achieve?
• Create an inclusive learning climate, in which every student feels safe to learn
and participate, where students feel like they belong as members of the online
learning community and their contributions matter.
• Establish social presence.
• Encourage student participation, and engagement with multiple perspectives and
personal experiences.
• Protect human dignity while allowing for academic discomfort. Perceive hot mo-
ments as opportunities to learn and turn them into moments of learning.
• Engage and promote inclusive communication – free from stereotypes, stigmati-
sation, tokenism, and other microaggressions.
• Be open to discomfort and unexpected situations. Learn to be vulnerable.
84
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
What to do?
Create an inclusive climate with social presence.
• Introduce yourself early in the course, preferably even before the start, using
video. Share personal details that illustrate that diversity and vulnerability are
accepted. Share your own pronouns (signal them in in your display name), and ask
others to indicate their pronouns. Be open to your students about your expertise
and experience.
• Set up introductory assignments in such a way that students can choose what
kind of information they reveal, and use group-assignments (breakout-rooms) so
students can get to know each other in smaller groups and dyads. Invite active
participation/communication from the start.
• Explicitly establish ground rules for interaction. Specify how you respond to each
other’s input. Explicitly acknowledge you have read/seen/heard other partici-
pants’ input. Acknowledge and appreciate that students from dierent regions
have dierent accents.
• Monitor the learning climate, for example through an online discussion board or
polling tool that enables students to give anonymous and/or identiable input, in
more open and/or more structured ways.
• Try to look beyond the language skills and not only appreciate the valuable con-
tributions of students with good academic writing skills, but also of students with
less developed academic writing skills.
• Actively stimulate students to have their cameras on during synchronous meet-
ings. Explain the relevance, and (jointly) formulate ground rules for camera use;
including valid reasons to have cameras switched o.
• In hybrid courses, also explicitly address and engage students who attend class
online or via recordings on a later moment.
Encourage participation and engagement with diversity.
• Explicitly invite input and diversied contributions from students, and make them
co-constructors of the course (e.g., through peer-to-peer initiatives, peer feed-
back). Have designated spaces or tools for feedback.
• Compose working groups in such a way they are diverse but avoid that minority
students are the only non-traditional student within a group.
85
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Promote inclusive communication.
• Become aware of how microaggressions work (see Guideline 1).
• Use person-rst language instead of identity-rst language, so you emphasise
one’s personhood to not reduce someone to a minority identity dimension and
create otherness (e.g., use expressions such as people with disabilities instead of the
disabled, or students instead of guys or ladies and gentlemen).16
• Use gender inclusive language:
• If the pronouns of the person being described are unknown, reword the sen-
tence to avoid a pronoun or use the pronoun they.
• Use singular they as a generic third-person singular pronoun to refer to a
person whose gender is unknown or irrelevant to the context of the usage.
• Use a person’s self-identied pronoun, also when the person uses the singu-
lar they as their pronoun17.
Further inspiration
• Activation Education. The Mixed Classroom (video) Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam,
2021.
• How to create an inclusive virtual learning environment, (webinar) Alexandra Sed-
lovskaya, Harvard Business School. In English, Spanish, Catalan and Sign language,
2021.
• Inclusive language (video) Camelia Bui, TEDxYouth talk, 2019.
• How to foster knowledge co-creation among students (e-learning module). Edu-
Hack Erasmus+ project.
• Online discussions for problem based learning (video) Maastricht University, 2020.
See the following e-Inclusion e-learning modules for more information, resources,
and reective assignments:
• Create and monitor an inclusive online learning climate
• Turning moments of friction into moments of learning
_________________________
16 For extensive inclusive language guidelines, use American Psychological Association. (2021). Available at https://www.apa.
org/about/apa/equity-diversity-inclusion/language-guidelines.pdf and in Words Matter. An unnished guide to Word Choic-
es in the Cultural sector. https://www.materialculture.nl/en/publications/words-matter
17 https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/grammar/singular-they
86
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
Guideline 6. Collaborate with organisational allies
Practicing e-inclusion should not be an individual endeavour. First, because shar-
ing experiences with colleagues about successes and discomfort can be enlighten-
ing and empowering. Second, because developing knowledge about inclusion and
technology in education is an enormous task, which can better be shared. Third, be-
cause a well-balanced course programme with consistent ideas about inclusion and
technology use, requires close coordination between courses and teachers. Lastly,
because creating inclusive education requires institutional support – in terms of
knowledge, digital resources, expert advice, time, and appreciation.
It can be inspiring and encouraging to share experiences with colleagues, and to grow to-
gether. Colleagues’ stories can give a sense of recognition and when teachers “recognize
that their situation is reected in a case and they hear what their colleagues have tried in
similar circumstances, they feel more condent saying or doing something they have not
said or done before” (Hughes et al., 2011, p. 9). Collaboration can lighten the endeavour
of practicing e-inclusion because tasks can be divided, and knowledge and skills can be
shared.
Furthermore, collaboration is a prerequisite to design a well-balanced educational pro-
gramme in which individual courses contribute to larger learning goals and together con-
stitute an educational environment with consistent values and codes of conduct.
In a broader sense, making digital education inclusive requires a collaborative eort of
multiple actors, both in- and outside educational institutions, who set structural and inten-
tional goals, organise dedicated resources, and set up monitoring, data collection, and ex-
tracurricular intervention programmes. Providing time and support is even more import-
ant in the case of digital education or when using digital tools, as e-inclusion requires not
only awareness about mechanisms of inclusion and exclusion, but also about technology
use, and the availability of good technological tools and equipment.
87
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
We make a pressing call to institutions. We too often see that particularly those teachers
who feel the urge to make changes to education, are often relatively new and short-ten-
ured, and therefore are often still in a precarious employment situation. Particularly in in-
stitutional cultures that do not encourage critical change, this prevents them from actually
pursing educational innovation (Ahmed, 2012; Wekker et al., 2016). Obviously, this is an
undesirable situation. Please recognise the indispensability of critical stances for organi-
sational change. Do not only encourage, but also protect and explicitly back up innovative
teachers. Provide these front-runners with extra time. Cherish them!
What to achieve?
• Teachers: nd, mobilise and collaborate with allies, for your personal develop-
ment and wellbeing, as well as for institutional anchorage.
• Teacher teams: formulate shared goals and approaches regarding diversity and
inclusion, and align (diverse) course content and technology use.
• Higher education institutions: encourage and support endeavours for inclusion,
by supporting teachers and teacher teams.
What to do?
• Teachers:
• Organise intervision sessions (peer coaching sessions), in-person or online,
with colleagues to share experiences and develop approaches, for example
using the critical incident approach (see the video Critical Incident Tech-
nique, Ellen Cordeiro).
• Collaborate with colleagues who co-create or co-review your course.
• Teacher teams: create a shared vision on inclusion and technology use, and a
well-balanced programme using (online) reection tools such as those mentioned
in the box below.
• Educational institutions:
• Seize moments of educational change, such as innovative shifts towards on-
line/blended learning, to also strengthen inclusion.
• Anchor the pursuit of inclusion in policy and practice. See for a range of tips
88
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: What to do
the report Let’s do diversity (Wekker et al., 2016). For more inspiration on ap-
proaches and interventions that promote inclusion, see the Diversity Policy
Toolkit (Slootman 2020).
• For the structural integration of educational innovations, such as blended
learning, see the European Maturity Model for Blended Education developed
in the Erasmus+ project EMBED (Van Valkenburg et al., 2020).
• Facilitate and protect equity frontrunners in the organisation, providing
teachers and teacher teams with time, knowledge, practical (digital) support,
acknowledgment, and protection.
Further inspiration
• The Team Teacher Reection Manual developed in the Erasmus+ project I-Be-
long to empower teacher teams to strengthen inclusion (Baboeram, Meeuwisse
& Wol, 2021).
• The Curriculum Reection Tool of the Utrecht University, which elicits reec-
tion on how a course can be made more inclusive.
• Self-assessment tool on the use of digital tools in education, based on the Euro-
pean Digital Competence Framework for Educators (DigCompEdu).
See the following e-Inclusion e-learning modules for more information, resources,
and reective assignments:
• In the know: current trends and policies of inclusive digital education
• Identify organisational key players in inclusive digital education and nd strat-
egies to collaborate with them
89
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
References
AAC&U. (2005). ‘Introduction to the series’ by Clayton-Pedersen and McTighe Musil. In:
D.A. Wiliams ea. Toward a Model of Inclusive Excellence and Change in Postsecondary Institu-
tions. Association American Colleges and Universities.
Ahenkorah, E. (2020, 21 Sept). Safe and Brave Spaces Don’t Work (and What You Can Do
Instead). Medium. https://medium.com/@elise.k.ahen/safe-and-brave-spaces-dont-work-
and-what-you-can-do-instead-f265aa339a
Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included. Duke University Press.
Ambrose, S., Lovett, M., Bridges, M., DiPietro, M., & Norman, M. (2010). How learning
works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching (First ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Baboeram, P., Meeuwisse, M., & Wol, R. (2021). Team Teacher Reection Manual. Ibelong
project. https://ibelong.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2021/04/IBelong-TTR-nal-1.pdf
Balboni, G., Perrucci, V., Cacciamani, S., & Zumbo, B.D. (2018). Development of a scale
of Sense-of-Community in university online courses. Distance Education, 39, 317–333. doi:1
0.1080/01587919.2018.1476843
Berry, T. (2010). Engaged pedagogy and critical race feminism. Educational Foundations,
24(3–4), 19–26.
Best, L. (2021, February 14). Masters in multitasking. SeeHearInclusion. https://seehearin-
clusion.com/2021/02/14/masters-in-multitasking/
Blaskó, Z. & Schnepf, S. V. (2020). Educational inequalities in Europe and physical school
closures during Covid-19. European Commission Fairness policy brief series: 04/2020.
Biesta, G. (2020). Risking ourselves in education: qualication, socialization, and subjecti-
cation revisited. Educational Theory, 70(1), 89–104. doi:10.1111/edth.12411
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does
(4th ed.). Open University.
Bourdieu, P. (1974). The school as a conservative force: Scholastic and cultural inequal-
ities. In J. Eggleston (Ed.), Contemporary Research in the Sociology of Education (pp. 32–46).
Methuen.
90
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
Bourdieu, P. (1986). Distinction. Routledge.
Brandenburg, U., de Wit, H., Jones, E., & Leask, B. (2019). Internationalisation in higher
education for society. University World News, 20 April 2019, issue 548.
Brown, N., & Ramlackhan, K. (2022). Exploring experiences of ableism in academia: A
constructivist inquiry. Higher Education, 83(6), 1225–1239.
Callan, E. (2020). Education in Safe and Unsafe Spaces. Philosophical Inquiry in Education,
24(1), 64–78. doi:10.7202/1070555ar
CAST (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines (version 2.0). CAST. https://wvde.state.
wv.us/osp/UDL/4.%20Guidelines%202.0.pdf
CAST (2022). The UDL Guidelines. CAST. Retrieved 1 December 2022, from https://udlguide-
lines.cast.org/
CRPD (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. United Nations. https://
www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-dis-
abilities.html
Danowitz, M.A., & Tuitt, F. (2011). Enacting inclusivity through engaged pedagogy: A high-
er education perspective. Equity & excellence in education, 44(1), 40–56. doi:10.1080/10665
684.2011.539474
De Wit, H. & Altbach, G. (2021). Internationalization in higher education: global trends
and recommendations for its future. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 5(1), 28–46, DOI:
10.1080/23322969.2020.1820898
Delahunty, J., Verenikina, I., & Jones, P. (2014). Socio-emotional connections: identity,
belonging and learning in online interactions. A literature review. Faculty of Social Sciences
- Papers. 925. https://ro.uow.edu.au/sspapers/925
Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic ableism: Disability and higher education. University of Mich-
igan Press.
Domagała-Zyśk E. (2018). Integral development of students with special educational
needs in inclusive education from a personalistic perspective. Paedagogia Christiana, 2(42),
181–194. doi:10.12775/PCh.2018.023
91
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
Domagała-Zyśk E. (Ed.). (2020). Zdalne uczenie się a specjalne potrzeby edukacyjne. Z doświ-
adczeń pandemii Covid-19. Lublin: Episteme.
Domagała-Zyśk E. (2021a). Włączmy kamerki. Z doświadczeń edukacji zdalnej w szkole I na
uczelni. Lublin: Episteme.
Domagała-Zyśk E. (2021b). Attitudes of dierent age groups toward people with intellec-
tual disability during the covid-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 1–6. doi:10.3389/
fpsyt.2021.591707
EASNIE (2015). Agency position on inclusive education system. Odense: European Agency for
Special Needs and Inclusive Education. https://www.european-agency.org/about-us/who-
we-are/agency-position-inclusive-education-systems
EASNIE (2017). Inclusive education for learners with disabilities. Study for the PETI Commit-
tee. Odense: European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. https://www.
europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596807/IPOL_STU(2017)596807_EN.pdf
Edyburn, D.L. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for learning if you saw it? Ten
propositions for new directions for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly,
33, 33–42. doi:10.2307/25701429
European Commission (2016). Communication from the commission to the European par-
liament, the council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the
regions. European Commission.
European Commission (2020). Commission sta working document. 30.9.2020. Euro-
pean Commission. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX-
:52020SC0209&from=EN
European Commission (2021). Strategic Framework. Retrieved 1 September 2021, from:
https://education.ec.europa.eu/about-eea/strategic-framework
European Commission (2022). Digital Education Action Plan (2021-2027). Retrieved 22
December 2022, from: https://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital-education/ac-
tion-plan
Essed, P. (1984). Alledaags Racisme. Van Gennep.
92
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007). Sense of belonging in college
freshmen at the classroom and campus levels. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3),
203–220. doi:10.3200/JEXE.75.3.203–220
Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed (revised). Continuum.
Garcia-Vedrenne, A. E., Orland, C., Ballare, K. M., Shapiro, B., & Wayne, R. K. (2020).
Ten strategies for a successful transition to remote learning: Lessons learned with a ipped
course. Ecology and evolution, 10(22), 12620–12634.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2003). ‘A theory of critical inquiry in online
distance education’. In M.G.Moore & W.G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education,
113–127.
Grygierzec W. (2021). Lęk w edukacji zdalnej. In E. Domagała-Zyśk (Ed.), Włączmy kamerki.
Z doświadczeń edukacji zdalnej w szkole i na uczelni (pp. 153–168). Episteme.
Gulati B. (2021). English in the clouds – organizacja lektoratu języka angielskiego dla osób
niesłyszących i słabosłyszących w czasie pandemii COVID-19. In: E. Domagała-Zyśk (Ed.),
Włączmy kamerki. Z doświadczeń edukacji zdalnej w szkole i na uczelni (pp. 201–239). Epis-
teme.
Harrison, L. A., Stevens, C. M., Monty, A. N., & Coakley, C. A. (2006). The consequences
of stereotype threat on the academic performance of White and non-White lower income
college students. Social Psychology of Education, 9(3), 341–357. doi:10.1007/s11218-005-
5456-6.
Hobson, M. (2014). Color blind or color brave? [Video] TED Conferences. https://www.ted.
com/talks/mellody_hobson_color_blind_or_color_brave
Hodges, Ch., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The dierence
between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EduCause Review. https://er.ed-
ucause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-dierence-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-on-
line-learning
Homan, M., Richmond, J., Morrow, J., & Salomone, K. (2002). Investigating “sense of
belonging” in rst-year college students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, The-
ory & Practice, 4(3), 227–256. doi:10.2190/DRYC-CXQ9-JQ8V-HT4V
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York,
NY: Routledge.
93
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
Hughes, B., Huston, T., & Stein, J. (2011). Using case studies to help faculty navigate di-
cult classroom moments. College Teaching, 59(1), 7–12. doi: 10.1080/87567555.2010.489076
Jabbar, A., & Hardaker, G. (2013). The role of culturally responsive teaching for supporting
ethnic diversity in British University Business Schools. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3),
272–284. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2012.725221
Johnson, D. R., Soldner, M., Leonard, J. B., Alvarez, P., Inkelas, K. K., Rowan-Kenyon,
H. T., & Longerbeam, S. D. (2007). Examining sense of belonging among rst-year under-
graduates from dierent racial/ethnic groups. Journal of College Student Development, 48(5),
525–542. doi:10.1353/csd.2007.0054
Kansanen, P. (1999). Teaching as teaching-studying-learning interaction. Scandinavian
Journal of Educational Research, 43(1), 81-89. doi:10.1080/0031383990430105
Katz V. (2020, 21 August). How Do We Make Remote Learning Better? Listen to the Stu-
dents? Medium. https://medium.com/left-to-their-own-devices/how-do-we-make-remote-
learning-better-listen-to-the-students-31dda6a01358
Katz V., Jordan A., Ognyanova K. (2021). Digital inequality, faculty communication, and
remote learning experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: A survey of U.S. undergradu-
ates. PLoS ONE 16(2): e0246641. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0246641
Kaufmann, R., & Vallade, J.I. (2020). Exploring connections in the online learning environ-
ment: student perceptions of rapport, climate, and loneliness. Interactive Learning Environ-
ments, Ahead-of-Print, 1–15 https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1749670
Knopik T., & Domagała-Zyśk E. (2022). Predictors of The Subjective Eectiveness of Emer-
gency Remote Teaching During the First Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic. International
Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 14(4), 525–538. doi:10.26822/iejee.2022.261
Korach P. (2020). Znaczenie wsparcia społecznego dla osób z niepełnosprawnością
ruchową w czasie pandemii. In E. Domagała-Zyśk (Ed.), Zdalne uczenie się i nauczanie a spec-
jalne potrzeby edukacyjne. Z doświadczeń pandemii Covid-19 (pp. 42–63). Episteme.
Korach P. (2021). Studenci z niepełnosprawnością ruchową: Z doświadczeń edukacji zdal-
nej. In E. Domagała-Zyśk (Ed.), Włączmy kamerki. Z doświadczeń edukacji zdalnej w szkole i na
uczelni (pp. 241–260). Episteme.
Korthals Altes, T. (2021). Sense of belonging and student engagement in online classrooms.
94
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
[Unpublished Masters Thesis]. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Krutka, D.G., Smits, R.M. & Willhelm, T.A. (2021). Don’t Be Evil: Should We Use Google in
Schools? TechTrends 65, 421–431. https://doi-org.vu-nl.idm.oclc.org/10.1007/s11528-021-
00599-4
Ladson-Billings, G. (1996). Silences as Weapons: Challenges of a Black Professor Teaching
White Students, Theory into Practice, 35(2): 79–85.
Lewandowska P. (2021). Syndrom zdalnego zmęczenia wśrod nie(do)słyszących uczestni-
kow edukacji zdalnej – doświadczenia międzynarodowe. In E. Domagała-Zyśk (Ed.), Włączmy
kamerki. Z doświadczeń edukacji zdalnej w szkole i na uczelni (pp. 279–302). Episteme.
Maat, W. (2020). Communicating across Time Zones: Some practical tips for connecting with
students in dierent locations around the world. Unpublished paper. Amsterdam: Vrije Uni-
versiteit Amsterdam.
Marchesani, L., & Adams, M. (1992). Dynamics of diversity in the teaching-learning pro-
cess: A faculty development model for analysis and action. New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 52(52), 9–20. doi:10.1002/tl.37219925203
Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online
teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers and Education, 159(104009), 1–17.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
Master, A., Cheryan, S., & Meltzo, A.N. (2016). Computing whether she belongs: Ste-
reotypes undermine girls’ interest and sense of belonging in computer science. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 108(3), 424–437. doi:10.1037/edu0000061
Meeuwisse, M., Severiens, S.E., & Born, M. (2010). Learning environment, interaction,
sense of belonging and study success in ethnically diverse student groups. Research in
Higher Education, 51(6), 528–545. doi:10.1007/s11162-010-9168-1.
Melián, E.; Mata, S., Meneses, J. (2022). La atención al alumnado con discapacidad en la
educación superior en línea: el caso de la Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Fields of Educa-
tional Psychology and Counselling, 56, 85–98.
Mengel, F. Sauermann, J., Zölitz, U. (2019). Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluations, Jour-
nal of the European Economic Association, 17(2): 535–566, https://doi-org.vu-nl.idm.oclc.
org/10.1093/jeea/jvx057
95
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2005). The future is in the margins: The role of technology and
disability in educational reform. In D. H. Rose, A. Meyer, & C. Hitchcock (Eds.), The univer-
sally designed classroom: Accessible curriculum and digital technologies (pp. 13–35). Harvard
Education Press.
Meyer A., Rose D.H., & Gordon D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice.
CAST Professional Publishing.
Miao, F., Holmes, W., Huang, R., & Zhang, H. (2021). AI and education: A guidance for poli-
cymakers. UNESCO Publishing.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A
framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record,
108(6), 1017–1054.
Mitchell, K., & Martin, J. (2018). Gender Bias in Student Evaluations. Political Science &
Politics, 51(3), 648–652. doi:10.1017/S104909651800001X
Nieto, S. (1999). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities. Trentham
Books.
OECD (2018). Equity in Education: Breaking Down Barriers to Social Mobility, PISA, OECD Pub-
lishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264073234-en
Open University (2022). Facts and Figures. Accessed 15 December 2022, from https://www.
open.ac.uk/about/main/strategy-and-policies/facts-and-gures
O’Shea, S., Lysaght, P., Roberts, J., & Harwood, V. (2016). Shifting the blame in higher
education - social inclusion and decit discourses. Higher Education Research and Develop-
ment, 35(2), 322–336. doi:10.1080/07294360.2015.1087388
Owens, J., & Massey, D. (2011). Stereotype threat and college academic performance:
A latent variables approach. Social Science Research, 40(1), 150–166. doi: 10.1016/j.ssre-
search.2010.09.010
Pacansky-Brock, M., Smedshammer, M., & Vincent-Layton, K. (2020). Humanizing on-
line teaching to equitize higher education. Current Issues in Higher Education, 21(2), 1–21.
http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/1905
Peacock, S., Cowan, J., Irvine, L., & Williams, J. (2020). An exploration into the impor-
96
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
tance of a sense of belonging for online learners. The International Review of Research in
Open and Distributed Learning, 21(2), 18–35. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v20i5.4539
Pilotti, M., Anderson, S., Hardy, P., & Murphy, P. (2017). Factors related to cognitive,
emotional, and behavioral engagement in the online asynchronous classroom. Interna-
tional Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(1), 145–153. http://www.isetl.
org/ijtlhe/
Ramdas, S., Slootman, M., & van Oudenhoven-van der Zee, K. (2019). The VU mixed
classroom educational model. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. https://research.vu.nl/ws/
portalles/portal/95377215/Ramdas_Slootman_Oudenhoven_vd_Zee_2019_Mixed_Class-
room.pdf
Ramdas, S., Das, A., Slootman, M. (2022). The VU mixed classroom educational model in
blended learning. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. https://vu.nl/en/about-vu/more-about/
mixed-classroom.
Ramos-Sánchez, L., & Nichols, L. (2007). Self-ecacy of rst-generation college students
and the relationship to academic performance and college adjustment: The relationship
with academic performance and college adjustment. Journal of College Counseling, 10(1),
6–18. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1882.2007.tb00002
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for
Learning. ASCD.
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2006). A practical reader in Universal Design for Learning. Harvard
Education Press.
Rodríguez-Ardura, I., & Meseguer-Artola, A. (2016). E-learning continuance: The impact
of interactivity and the mediating role of imagery, presence and ow. Information & Man-
agement, 53(4), 504–516. doi:10.1016/j.im.2015.11.005
Sabry, S.N., and Bruna K.R. (2007). Learning from the experience of Muslim students in
American schools: Towards a proactive model of school-community cooperation. multicul-
tural perspectives, 9(3), 44–50. doi:10.1080/15210960701443730
Salazar M.C., Norton A.S., Tuitt F.A. (2010). Weaving promising practices for inclusive
excellence into the higher education classroom. To improve the Academy, 28(1), 208–226.
doi:10.1002/j.2334-4822.2010.tb00604.x
97
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
Sánchez-Gelabert, A. (2020). Non-traditional students, university trajectories, and high-
er education institutions: A comparative analysis of face-to-face and online universities.
Studia Paedagogica, 25(4), 51–72. doi:10.5817/SP2020-4-3
Saltes, N. (2022). ‘It’s all about student accessibility. No one ever talks about teacher ac-
cessibility’: Examining ableist expectations in academia, International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 26(7), 674–700, DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2020.1712483
Skledar Matijevi, A. (2022). Planned online learning vs. emergency remote teaching im-
plemented during COVID-19 in higher education: lessons learned, NESET Ad hoc report no.
3/2022.
Skoczyńska M. (2021). Cisza w eterze. Studenci z uszkodzeniem słuchu wobec nauczania
zdalnego. In E. Domagała-Zyśk (Ed.), Włączmy kamerki. Z doświadczeń edukacji zdalnej w sz-
kole i na uczelni (pp. 261–278). Episteme.
Slootman, M. (2020). Diversiteit en ongelijkheid in het VU onderwijs in de context van Co-
rona. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (policy document). https://assets.vu.nl/
d8b6f1f5-816c-005b-1dc1-e363dd7ce9a5/fdbbf7da-9724-484f-87fc-370dadb24139/Diver-
siteitenongelijkheidinCorona-tijden_tcm289-940213.pdf
Small, S. (2018). 20 questions and answers on black Europe. The Hague: Amrit Publishers.
So, H. J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social pres-
ence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors.
Computers & education, 51(1), 318–336.
Spencer, B., & Castano, E. (2007). Social class is dead. Long live social class! Stereotype
threat among low socioeconomic status individuals. Social Justice Research, 20(4), 418–432.
doi:10.1007/s11211-007-0047-7
Spencer, S. J., Logel, C., & Davies, P. G. (2016). Stereotype threat. Annual Review of Psychol-
ogy, 67(1), 415–437. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s
math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28. doi:10.1006/
jesp.1998.1373
Steele, C., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test perfor-
mance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.
98
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.797
Stout, R., Archie, C., Cross, D., & Carman, C.A. (2018). The relationship between faculty
diversity and graduation rates in higher education. Intercultural Education, 29(3), 399–417.
doi:10.1080/14675986.2018.1437997
Sue, D.W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. John
Wiley & Sons.
Taylor, M., Turk, J.M., Chessman, H. M., & Espinosa, L.L. (2020). Race and Ethnicity in
Higher Education: 2020 Supplement. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. http://
www.equityinhighered.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/REHE-2020-nal.pdf
Thomas, L. (2002). Student retention in higher education: The role of institutional habitus.
Journal of Education Policy, 17(4), 423–442. doi:10.1080/02680930210140257
Tinto, V. (1993), Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition, 2nd ed.,
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tuitt, F. (2016). Inclusive pedagogy 2.0: Implications for race, equity, and higher education
in a global context. In F. Tuitt, C. Haynes & S. Stewart (Eds.), Race, equity and the learning
environment: The global relevance of critical and inclusive pedagogies in higher education (pp.
205– 222). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Tuitt, F., Hanna, M., Martinez, L. M., Salazar, M., & Grin, R. (2009). Teaching in the line
of re: Faculty of color in the academy. Thought & Action, 25, 65–74.
Tuitt, F., Haynes, C., & Stewart, S. (2018). Transforming the classroom at tradition-
ally white institutions to make Black Lives Matter. To improve the academy, 37, 63–76.
doi:10.1002/tia2.20071
Tuitt, F., & Stewart, S. (2021). Decolonising Academic Spaces: Moving Beyond Diversity to
Promote Racial Equity in Postsecondary Education. In D.S. Thomas & J. Arday (Eds.) Doing
Equity and Diversity for Success in Higher Education (pp. 99–115). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
UNESCO (2003). Overcoming exclusion through inclusive approaches in education. A chal-
lenge and a vision; Conceptual paper. UN Educational, Scientic and Cultural Organization.
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000134785
UNESCO (2008). Inclusive education: the way of the future; Reference document. UN Ed-
99
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: References
ucational, Scientic and Cultural Organisation. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/
pf0000162787
UNECSO (2009). Policy guidelines on inclusion in education. UN Educational, Scientic and
Cultural Organisation. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000177849
UNESCO (2020). Global Education Monitoring Report 2020: Inclusion and education: All
means all. Paris, UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373718
UNESCO (2021). AI and education: Guidance for policy-makers. https://unesdoc.unesco.
org/ark:/48223/pf0000376709
Van Valkenburg, W. F., Dijkstra, W. P., De los Arcos, B., Goeman, K., Van Rompaey, V.,
& Poelmans, S. (2020). European Maturity Model for Blended Education. EADTU. https://
embed.eadtu.eu/download/2470/European%20Maturity%20Model%20for%20Blend-
ed%20Education.pdf?inline=1
Walther, J. B., Bunz, U. (2005). The rules of virtual groups: Trust, liking, and performance
in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Communication, 55(4), 828–846.
Warf, B. (2010). Positionality. In Encyclopaedia of Geography (pp. 2258–2258). SAGE Publi-
cations, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412939591
Wekker, G., Slootman, M. W., Icaza, R., Jansen, H., & Vazquez, R. (2016). Let’s do diver-
sity. Report of the University of Amsterdam Diversity Commission. Amsterdam: University
of Amsterdam.
Williams, D. A., Berger, J. B., & McClendon, S. A. (2005). Toward a model of inclusive ex-
cellence and change in postsecondary institutions. Washington, DC: Association of American
Colleges and Universities (AAC&U).
Willner Brodsky, N., Slootman, M., Das, A., & Ramdas, S. (2021). Hot moments in class. Vri-
je Universiteit Amsterdam. https://assets.vu.nl/d8b6f1f5-816c-005b-1dc1-e363dd7ce9a5/
9672b05a-f7d6-419e-97f4-cb562de37ac1/VU%20Mixed%20Classroom%20Hot%20Mo-
ments%20in%20Class.pdf
Zumbrunn, S., McKim, C., Buhs, E., & Hawley, L. R. (2014). Support, belonging, motiva-
tion, and engagement in the college classroom: A mixed method study. Instructional Sci-
ence, 42, 661–684. doi:10.1007/s11251-014-9310-0.
100
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Appendix A. Use of empirical data
Appendix A. Use of empirical data
Numerous qualitative interviews were conducted in studies in which e-Inclusion project
partners were involved. The data and publications of these projects formed the basis for
our understanding of the challenges and opportunities regarding inclusion and exclusion
in online educational settings. The rst main study was conducted in the spring of 2021,
during the COVID pandemic, with the help of Bachelor students, 27 underserved students
were interviewed about their experience with online education at VU. Most students had
a non-Western migration background (20) and/or identify as LGBTQI+ (7), four were in-
ternational students, two students were neurodiverse and one had a physical disability.
We deliberately included interviewees with visible (for instance, non-western migration
background) and non-visible (such as neurodiversity) identity markers. Interviews were
conducted by various interviewers (all Bachelor and Master students themselves) and
transcribed verbatim. Two coders worked jointly developed a coding frame that formed
the basis for the analysis. See for more information about the methodology of this study
Korthals Altes (2021). These student interviews were complemented with interviews with
teachers about their experiences with online education during the COVID pandemic, con-
ducted in 2021 by researchers of the e-Inclusion project (ve in the Netherlands (VU) and
four in Belgium (Universiteit Hasselt)).
The second source of knowledge and data, consists of a project that studied the experienc-
es of students with disabilities in online education. This project contained various studies
that were conducted and published under the supervision of one of the project partners
and Handbook authors: Domagała-Zyśk (see Domagała-Zyśk 2020; 2021a).
• For the study “Online teaching and learning and special educational needs. Experi-
ences on Covid-19 pandemic” 30 persons with a motor disability were interviewed
in spring 2020 (21 women, 9 men). They agreed to participate in research about
their coping strategies for managing the pandemic experiences. In addition, three
in-depth interviews were also conducted (Korach 2020).
• Several months later, in 2021, the second year of pandemic, three quantitative
studies were conducted within the framework of the project “Let’s switch on your
cameras: Experiences of online education at school and university”. Students’ voic-
es have been collected in three sub-studies, from
• 31 students from 6 universities in Poland on their fear(s) in online educa-
tion (Grygierzec 2021).
• 70 students with hearing disorders from 15 countries in Europe, Asia,
North America and Africa (the study was also announced for South Amer-
ica but no participants joined), in which deaf and hard of hearing students
101
Handbook of e-inclusion 2023: Appendix A. Use of empirical data
reected on several aspects of online education, mainly these connected
with language issues in online university education of deaf and hard of
hearing students and zoom fatigue experienced by this group (Skoczyńs-
ka, 2021; Lewandowska, 2021).
• 42 university students with motor impairments from all over Poland (29
women and 12 men) took part in a study on their experiences of online
education in spring 2021. This was an online survey concentrating: chal-
lenges and opportunities regarding online learning managements for
students with motor disability, physical well-being during the online pan-
demic teaching, teacher-student relation