The University of Liverpool is committed to ensuring that all students have access to a high quality, world-class education and remains determined to further develop an inclusive culture that is of benefit to all staff and students. Inclusive practice is institutionally defined as “acknowledging people with differing approaches to life, work and study as members of diverse communities. The evolution of an inclusive approach is underpinned by change processes that impact strategic and day to day activities across local, national and international contexts. The University of Liverpool aims to establish a culture where diversity is considered a distinct strength and viewed as a valuable resource for all, thus promoting education as a transformative process” (adapted from Booth and Ainscow, 2000).

1. 1
Institutional Case Studies: University of Liverpool
Contact information:
Sarra Saffron Powell, Educational Developer (Inclusive Learning and Teaching)
University of Liverpool, 128 Mount Pleasant, Liverpool, L69 3GW, email:
sarrsaf@liv.ac.uk, tel:0151 294 1148.
Name of initiative: Inclusive Cultures Programme at the University of Liverpool.
Key words: Inclusion, Curriculum review, Institutional change, Student engagement
Inclusive Cultures at the University of Liverpool
The University of Liverpool is committed to ensuring that all students have access to
a high quality, world-class education and remains determined to further develop an
inclusive culture that is of benefit to all staff and students. Inclusive practice is
institutionally defined as “acknowledging people with differing approaches to life,
work and study as members of diverse communities. The evolution of an inclusive
approach is underpinned by change processes that impact strategic and day to day
activities across local, national and international contexts. The University of Liverpool
aims to establish a culture where diversity is considered a distinct strength and
viewed as a valuable resource for all, thus promoting education as a transformative
process” (adapted from Booth and Ainscow, 2000).
The continued creation of an inclusive culture is now locked into strategic aims and
is reflected in structural reconfigurations that aim to improve the student experience.
Through the adoption of a student journey model mapped across a range of
initiatives, our work aims to ensure that activities are responsive to the pedagogic
principles and practices of inclusivity.
Aims:
 To meet HEA project requirements in a meaningful, measurable and
sustainable way;
 To have impact on managerial/strategic decision making processes in
relation to curriculum review activities;

2. 2
 To promote relevant ownership and to make informed recommendations in
developing institutionally-wide inclusive culture;
 To build on existing UoL developments (primarily resulting from our
involvement with the HEA Summit programme - Mulberry Project);
 To stimulate engagement by staff and students at Faculty, School and
individual levels;
 To deliver change in a timely fashion;
 To review and evaluate change processes.
To achieve these aims our activities within the Inclusive Cultures Programme have
specifically focused on the following areas:
 Informing the four key Learning and Teaching institutional activities
(Undergraduate Curriculum Review, Student Representation, Induction and
the Student Experience);
 Scoping and developing resources that assume an inclusive approach in
the quality enhancement framework, via programme approval procedures
and annual programme monitoring;
 Extending and developing support for staff in inclusive (e)learning and
digital literacies, teaching and assessment practice; specifically, accredited
learning and teaching programmes and the CPD provision for academic
staff alongside the development of appropriate guidance and resources in
these areas;
 Employing evidence-based measures (that identify needs as well as
existing relevant practice);
 Drawing on the expertise of existing networks and groups, and utilising
them to disseminate findings and further promote the work of the
Programme.
Strategies and Practices
The above activities reflect the outcome of a review of our initial action plan at an
early HEA start-up meeting during which it became apparent that the original scope
of the Programme was too wide, and therefore realistically unachievable. During the

3. 3
meeting, it also became evident that UoL is particularly well placed in comparison to
other HEIs in terms of its investment and commitment to the development of
inclusivity, especially in the context of enhancing the student learning experience.
Institutional management and co-ordination
Internal base-lining exercises (utilising the Embedding equality and diversity in the
curriculum - Self-evaluation framework, May and Thomas, 2010) at the outset of the
Programme have shown that institutionally UoL has, historically, effected positive
engagement with the agenda of inclusivity and has extensively resourced
progression through human, financial and physical resources1. Current inclusivity
work builds on the significant advancements made by the Mulberry Project (2010) a
previous HEA SUMMIT inclusivity enterprise. The legacy of the Mulberry Project has
been of considerable benefit to current work, particularly the inheritance of:
 an evidence base of inclusive best practice across UoL;
 iTeach - an online resource of in-house best practice case studies and
teaching advice;
 iLearn – an online student facing study skills resource;
 an established set of University-wide networks;
 a readily available list of individual inclusivity “champions”;
 conceptual development of an online curriculum (module and programme
specification) planner.
A key aim of the Programme has been, therefore, to continue to build on this work:
this has involved re-establishing and further extending the range of networks to
promote and disseminate progress and provide consultancy on inclusivity.
Establishing new and maintaining existing networks is ongoing; to date we are
actively engaged with the following stakeholders:
 Departmental Disability and Dyslexia Contacts;
 Diversity and Equality team;
 Student Support Services;
 Educational Opportunities;
1 This includes funding three dedicated roles: an Equality and Diversity Officer and two Educational
Developers with expertise in Curriculum Review and Inclusive Learning and Teaching.

4. 4
 Guild of Students elected officers;
 Disability Co-ordinator Network;
 Disability Sub-group;
 English Language Unit;
 Faculty Student Support officers;
 Educational Development (particularly Programme Directors);
 Learning and Teaching Liaison Group;
 Careers and Employability Services;
 Student Experience Working Group Committee;
 Curriculum Review Co-ordinators Group;
A significant outcome of the networking activities has been formal invitation to
contribute across a range of working and action groups that have emerged since the
start of the Programme (in continued progression of UoL’s Strategy Review). The
Programme is formally represented and engaged with the following initiatives:
 Disability Equality Scheme Working Group: this aims to develop an action
plan to review the Disability Equality Policy and Action Plan 2009 – 2012;
review and analyse relevant data, statistics and research relating to disability
and develop an action plan to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote
equality on the grounds of disability;
 The Induction Working Group which aims to improve the induction experience
of all students, particularly those previously under-represented;
 The GoHigher (UoL’s Widening Participation access programme) Working
Group which is currently engaged in extensive curriculum review;
 The Developing Digital Literacies Working Group which aims to enhance the
graduate and employability profiles of all UoL students, preparing them for
the challenges of increasingly digitally literate work and learning contexts;
promoting the effective and inclusive use of technologies to support learning
and teaching;
 Curriculum Review Co-ordinators Working Group is focused on enhancing the
student experience which is one of the five key themes of UoL’s Strategic
Plan. Curriculum Review is aimed at providing students with a high quality
experience that is distinctive in the higher education sector. Curriculum

5. 5
Review enables a rethink of the student learning journey including the
procedures and systems involved in planning and delivering programmes of
study.
 Review of Student Representation to ensure that all students are equitably
represented and that process and procedure is appropriate.
Development of inclusive policies and procedure
At the outset of the Programme establishing communication and reporting
procedures was prioritised in order to both disseminate programme work and
maximize influence on strategy level decision making. It was decided that
submission of short progress reports via the Programme team’s senior members
would be effective output as well as affording a feedback mechanism that would help
identify influence of work. However, as pointed out, the process of re-establishing
networks resulted in direct engagement across a range of University initiatives and
as progress is conveyed via its own reporting structures, a separate system of
reporting to high level committees became superfluous. A short progress report,
however, will be summited to the Faculty Student Experience and Student
Experience Working Group Committees as the formal period of the Programme
concludes. This will outline and evaluate work to date and offer recommendations for
continued sustainability in inclusive practices beyond the Programme.
The Programme has sought to review and improve institutional policy and strategy:
this has involved identifying how and where inclusivity is represented within existing
documentation. Most notably, this has involved informing the development of the
online Curiculum Planner. The development of this tool has facilitated review of
documentation and currently adjacent guidance materials to support staff in their
curriculum design and learning & teaching practices are under development by the
Educational Development team. An explicit aim, here, is to encourage staff to think in
more informed, inclusive ways about their practice and the impact teaching decisions
have on the student learning experience. The guidance, upon completion, will link to
a comprehensive teaching support website, iTeach (‘i’ represents inclusivity).
The Peer Review of Teaching Policy is also currently being reviewed to ensure that it
explicitly identifies and promotes good practice in inclusivity.

6. 6
The ways in which technologies can assist inclusion are well documented (Ball and
McNaught, date unknown) and a key output of the Developing Digital Literacies
Working Group is review of the Learning and Study Skills Strategy (2008) which is
now revised as the Developing Digital Learning and Literacy Skills Strategy (this is
currently circulating through approval processes).
Curriculum design and delivery
Reviewed programmes will be ready for a 2012-13, followed by a further round
2013-14 and a PGT curriculum review. The key characteristics of curriculum review
are: (1) ‘rethinking’ the student learning journey procedures; and (2) adopting a
model of curricula, co-curricula, extra curricula to guide activities. Maximising
inclusivity for staff, a collaborative approach between central professional services
has been prioritised in order to enhance work with academic departments. In terms
of approach, developing an evidence base for curriculum review has been
established. Currently key indicators include: optional modules, student engagement
(within the process of curriculum review, engagement with subject and student
feedback), learning skills development (iLearn), research-led teaching,
internationalisation (international students and internationalising curriculum), and
employability. The activities offered by the Curriculum Review Co-ordinators team
include bespoke/ tailored events, consultancy, internal auditing, facilitation of focus
groups (programme stakeholders), intensive curriculum review workshop
programmes, and organising relevant external/guest speakers. The current status of
curriculum review is engagement with 14 programme teams, three Faculties and
contribution to short and medium-term strategies for Learning, Teaching &
Assessment at Faculty, School and departmental levels.
Academic assessment and feedback
Curriculum review initiatives have had considerable impact across programmes in
terms of aligning practice with the principles of inclusivity and key outcome indicators
suggest that several programmes are focussed on diversifying assessment practices
(particularly in terms of providing opportunity for formative assessment and
feedback). It is also anticipated that the implementation of the online Curriculum
Planner will encourage inclusivity in assessment practice.

7. 7
Student engagement and student representation
It has been a priority to consult with students across all initiatives with which the
Programme is involved. In consultation with the Guild a review of the processes for
student representation was identified as a priority. Consultation is ongoing and aims
to:
 Improve the dialogue with students concerning the quality of learning and
teaching
 Revise training offered to ensure students are better prepared to engage in
discussions and also equitably represented;
 Improve processes of engaging students;
 Introduction of new procedure to maximise inclusivity;
 Employ the use of technological opportunities to enable wider range of
student contribution;
 Increase flexibility to enable students to engage with ‘representation’
 Increase support at Faculty level so that discussions Student
Representatives have with the student body are taken forward more formally
and dealt with.
Staff engagement
Engagement by key stakeholders across the University has proven very positive.
The Programme not only drew on the work of the Mulberry Project but was also able
to make the most of the excellent working relationships that Educational
Development enjoys with a wide range of services, departments and colleagues.
Staff engagement has been further boosted by the institutional emphasis on
improving the student experience and curriculum review.
Learning resources, sites and environment
UoL’s online learning portal, iLearn (‘i’ represents inclusivity) has received
considerable resource for redevelopment and is a major output of the Programme.
The design of the site has observed TechDis recommendations regarding content
creation and accessibility (JISC TechDis, 2011) and provides users with links to an
extensive range of free inclusive AccessApps resource software (EduApps, 2011)

8. 8
that offer digital solutions to writing, reading and planning as well as sensory,
cognitive and physical challenges. iLearn supports students with an online skills
diagnostic, which links to relevant interactive skills development resources designed
to include the full range of learning modalities/styles (Flemming, 2011). Ensuring
student engagement, iLearn was developed in collaboration with the University of
Liverpool Guild of Students (LGoS) and all students are encouraged to continue to
collaborate through the site's feedback mechanisms where students can request
development of new resources and/or recommend further resources. To ensure
synergy, iLearn is supported by its sister site iTeach, which provides staff support in
developing and evaluating inclusive practice within their teaching through advice,
case studies and relevant pedagogy (currently under redevelopment and the new
version will be launched in August 2012).
Overview of Evaluation
Evaluating impact proves to be challenging: this is, in part, due to unavoidable
uneven time-lag of work that one aspect of a wider range of initiatives across the
University; it is also partly due to the lengthy time-cycles required for approval
processes in any large institution. Additionally, it is inherent in the nature of
institutional culture change that impact and influence often only emerges over a
period of, often considerable, time. Having recognised these factors, we were aware
of the necessity for both short term output evaluation (did we actually achieve what
we intended to?) and longer term evaluation. Having used the institutional self-
evaluation during the base-lining exercise, we decided to continue to use this
framework to identify both an immediate measure of improved ratings, as well as
anticipated outcome indicators. Consequently, the Working Action Plan includes
outcomes/outputs, time lines and impact/evaluation. The lead for each area,
identified according to expertise and level of contribution, took personal
responsibility for collating evidence. In the longer term, it is anticipated that
evaluation, to a large extent, will be conducted through the relevant initiatives (for
example improved student experience will be identified through the evaluation
mechanisms of curriculum review). Outputs are considered below.
Outputs, impact and evidence

9. 9
 Curriculum review activity: explicitly improving inclusivity in curriculum design
and delivery through consultative and staff development processes; the
Programme’s contributions are logged within curriculum review
documentation and included in evaluation processes;
 Review of the Learning and Study Skills Strategy which is now revised as the
Developing Digital Learning and Literacy Skills Strategy (this is currently
circulating through approval processes);
 Symposium on Student Representation: a University-wide consultation led by
the Guild as a targeted activity within the Programme;
 Updated Code of Practice Student Representation;
 Established as formal agenda item and contribution to the work of the
Induction Working Group, including a poster presentation on inclusive
induction practices to support learning;
 Informing the development of the Online Curriculum Planner;
 Increased use of inclusive resources for staff and students (iTeach, iLearn)
and enhancement of learning and teaching experiences;
 Evaluation of accruing feedback of student experience via feedback through
iLearn and student focus group activities within curriculum review;
 Resource base to support self/peer review and improvement of Peer Review
of Teaching documentation (in progress);
 Progress and activities captured in UoL Inclusive Cultures wiki;
 External speakers and workshops on curriculum review and developing digital
literacies.
A community output was a SEDA conference on the developments of iLearn, ‘From
Institutional Policy to Individual Practice’ (2011), which was very well received and
will result in contribution to a forthcoming SEDA Special Editions publication (July
2012).

10. 10
Lessons learned and key messages
It was decided early on in the Programme that we needed to be mindful of the
change we could realistically achieve. An important recognition, that influenced our
approach, was the acknowledgement that, beyond our own individual practice, we
could only seek to inform others and the final decisions regarding change in practice
and ownership of that change rested with others (both individually and institutionally).
To maximise impact we also recognised the importance of a rigorous evidence base
to give weight to our approaches and that it is essential to identify need for change
that would be of measurable advantage to all stakeholders. In addition, it is essential
that initiatives, where possible, are synergised with institutional drivers and relevant
existing agendas to maximise and effect institutional and individual engagement.
Similarly, it has been important to recognise that senior managerial contributions can
be effected through institutional processes (e.g. via approval in relevant
committees) and not necessarily limited to personal contributions.
The Programme has met with remarkably few challenges. However, as with any
culture change programme, it is been difficult to ascertain to what extent our
activities have influenced and informed larger initiatives and, as mentioned above
this complicates processes of evaluation as well as legitimacy of claims of impact.
Continuing work
Implementation of the Programme’s aims is ongoing. In addition to the continuing
activities outlined above, the following activities are scheduled:
 a forthcoming meeting of the Educational Development Division Learning and
Teaching Committee members to review how inclusion manifests in teaching
programmes (specifically within Educational Development’s Continued
Professional Development, Certificate of Professional Studies and the
Postgraduate Certificate/Diploma and Masters in Learning and Teaching). It
was considered essential by the Inclusivity Programme team that Educational
Development should model best inclusive practice throughout its course
design, assessment and teaching practices;
 recommendation reports to Committees;
 continued evaluation of Programme progression and impact;

11. 11
 further collaborative development of iLearn to create discipline specific
inclusive learning resources (currently there are two significant projects
underway);
 launch of the Online Curriculum Planner, supporting guidance and iTeach;
 new student representation procedures have been developed which are
currently going through consultation in each of the faculties following
discussions at earlier open fora, and that the results of the consultations will
be incorporated into the updated procedures for the university in line with the
new QAA Code of Practice on Student Engagement and Representation.
Value of the programme
The success of the Programme, to a large extent, is indebted to the considerable
efforts and previous ambitious work of the Mulberry Project allowing the current team
to continue progressing the work of developing an inclusive culture at UoL in a
context where the seeds for change had already been firmly rooted. The programme
itself has afforded formal and explicit opportunity, within a time-tabled framework, to
progress key initiatives whilst providing a valuable network of practitioners across the
wider Higher Education community. In addition, the opportunity to benchmark
practice, draw on the experiences of the community, utilise resources and learn
lessons from others, has been invaluable.

12. 12
References
Ball S. and McNaught A., Technology Change for Inclusion: 12 steps towards
Embedding Inclusive Practice with Technology as a Whole Institution Culture in UK
Further Education, JISC Techdis Service,
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CFE
QFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heacademy.ac.uk%2Fassets%2FDocuments%2F
goingdigital%2FTCI_Report_FE.doc&ei=LXOeT4C9AYjD8QO78rTSCg&usg=AFQjC
NGaZVxQ8nv2N6eDz_gsnsZD1zZOVw&sig2=CZV5-je3b2C0XI9DrImZTg
(accessed 27/04/2012)
Booth T. and Ainscow, M., (2000) Index for Social Inclusion, Bristol: CSIE
Flemming N., (2011) VARK: A Guide to Learning Styles, http://www.vark-
learn.com/english/index.asp (accessed 227/04/2012)
May H. and Thomas L., (2010) Embedding equality and diversity in the curriculum -
Self-evaluation framework, HEA, York
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/inclusion/EmbeddingEquality.pdf
(accessed 12/06/2011)
Powell S. S., (2011) From Institutional Policy to Individual Practice, Using
Technology to Enhance Learning, 16th Annual SEDA Conference, Birmingham,
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCQ
QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seda.ac.uk%2Fresources%2Ffiles%2F28_Powell
.ppt&ei=Gbp2T9zmG8KY8gP0zZTFDQ&usg=AFQjCNEC3frqjtq4oB35Eps78KEEb3
q1vA&sig2=-UmmSF5UOuAEtL4sCiOAxQ (accessed /20/03/2012)