Delivering an inclusive curriculum — challenges and opportunities in higher education settings

Prof. Tahir Abbas
6 min readNov 1, 2021

--

The world changes before us at an ever rapid pace. Sometimes it is hard to keep up with all that goes on across the globe, and, crucially, what this means for our understanding of it. As an educator working with university students, and that of others like me, we face an even greater challenge. Not only do we have a professional duty but also a moral responsibility to help develop the next generation of thinkers, professionals, movers, and shakers. We have a particular care of duty concerning students that flows way beyond the idea of us teaching them content to pass a course. In university education, we seek the highest possible level of performance and critical thinking, and this is the reason we need to be open to inclusive teaching to achieve this goal.

To break down the constituent parts of what is needed to develop a curriculum that contains the full range of debates, all the essential elements need to be understood in their separate terms. In general, it is sometimes difficult to think about an inclusive curriculum in teaching 101 accountancy or banking, but it makes absolute sense when thinking about courses such as sociology, anthropology, or political science, and it matters even more when thinking about issues of ethnic studies, global studies, or related interdisciplinary themes. The intention should be that all who are learners, i.e. all of us, should feel that we have a stake in the knowledge that is being communicated. No knowledges exist in a vacuum. No ideas exist without preceding concepts. There are no universals. Truths are contingent. All knowledge is contextual. Knowledge is not the same as information, although knowledge is a precursor to wisdom. And this is no less the case when thinking about the teaching content of an undergraduate or postgraduate programme.

Much of what happens in the classroom reflects on who is in that room, specifically the nature of the instructor delivering the content and the mixture of the students. People have different experiences of education, culture, religion, language, or heritage as well as personal and professional outlooks that define who they are or who they are not. Should this educator, therefore, need to think hard about the content of what they are teaching? Absolutely. But it should also refer to the teaching style and teaching method, including the idea of active learning. And this needs to be carried out in a way to ensure that the content is channelled to every single individual in the room. Undoubtedly, we are all positioned in some way. Whoever the instructor is, they curate the content; they are the owners, producers, and disseminators of this knowledge construction. Not only does the instructor shape the content but they also influence how content is received, the mechanisms through which it is derived, and how it is internalised by those on the receiving end. But there may also be genuine resource issues to consider in terms of the access instructors have to materials that are relevant to help broaden the content. One simple solution here is guest lectures. Teaching awards could also be introduced to reward innovation and sophistication. There may also be an attempt to reward interdisciplinarity or the introduction of non-Western knowledges.

Knowing that no one can ever truly be neutral, it is the role of the instructor to ensure that what they provide reflects an appreciation of their lack of neutrality but that students also need to develop critical learning skills so that both instructor and learner have an inclusive state of mind based on common ground. Introspection, reflexivity, subjectivity, ontology, and epistemology are all factors of knowledge production, but they are also important in thinking through content.

Despite our best efforts, some structural imbalances need to be understood on their own terms. Western university academic content is largely Eurocentric because it reflects on the demographics of those who teach, work, participate in, and run such institutions. But while there is an implicit understanding that if the internationalisation of students can be achieved it naturally encourages instructors to branch out to include content that reflects this diversity, this is very much an illiberal solution to a neoliberal problem. The underrepresentation of ethnic minorities and first-generation university students is about class and access, which is not a consideration for many international students who tend to be elites in their own countries. If we think that education is for all, not for the few, this line of thinking needs to be enhanced.

Without actually talking about race, racism, racialisation, and other constituent themes in the underrepresentation of ethnic minority or disadvantaged groups in higher education, there is a tendency for most to focus on the needs and wants of largely white liberal scholars who are filled with the angst of wanting to do the right thing but do not have enough confidence or self-belief to push forward, especially if they believe that they would face harsh consequences, including from their immediate peers, for either going too far or for their apparent insensitivities. However, this does not restrict the actions of right-wing scholars who feel that the right to academic freedom is a right to free speech, which is a right to say what they like, irrespective of whom they harm. A concentration on the angst facing those who do not want to go too far or believe that they do not go far enough leads to stagnation.

Some scholars will continue to resist or, at best, struggle to make the fundamental changes necessary. But most want to get it right. This note is a call to my esteemed majority colleagues who want to try their best but struggle to understand their changing role in an ever more complex and critically thinking society. This is a message to you too to remain steadfast in the face of uncertainty. It is a call to you to reach beyond your comfort zones. It is also to emphasize that we should think about all our students and their needs first and last. After all, this is why teach, do we not? The realisation that no one is objective questions our legitimacy and the loss of power that comes with being seen as a fallible knowledge provider (and seeker). For too long, knowledge has been constructed through dominant paradigms; whiteness, masculinity, and heterosexuality are seen as synonymous with purveyors of truth. Anti-racism, decolonising, feminist, and LGBTQ movements are all about challenging that automatic assertion. Most scholars have not yet obtained the tools to deal with having to be humbled in this way. But do not let this deter you. The opportunity to get it right is now!

Acknowledgements: I would like to thank my colleagues DM, LV, and TM for valuable comments on an earlier version of this blog.

--

--

Prof. Tahir Abbas
Prof. Tahir Abbas

No responses yet