neurodiversity – Active Learning in Political Science ©

This post is the third in a series reflecting on events hosted by the UCL Centre for the Pedagogy of Politics (CPP) last year.

The first and second posts discussed, in some detail, ideas raised in our spring panel on ‘Relational Pedagogies Inside and Outside the Classroom‘.

This post offers some more tentative reflections on our autumn panel on ‘Disability, Technology, and Inclusive Education’. For reasons that will become clear, I shall be oscillating between the usual blog format and the lesser-spotted bleg (this one, not this one…).

My main aim in organising this panel was to bring together educators who have thought deeply about how technology can make higher education more inclusive for disabled and neurodivergent students, and who share a concern that widespread advances made during the early stages of the Covid-19 pandemic have been lost in the rush to ‘return to normal’.

Initially, my hope was to hear mainly from people who teach politics (understood broadly) and have published their thoughts and reflections in disciplinary SoTL. But I was unable to find much, if anything, in the usual outlets (e.g., those covered in Jeremy’s SoTL round ups) that included a focus on inclusivity gains during the early part of the pandemic and subsequent losses.

This was a surprise because, more generally, inclusivity is a strong theme in our discipline’s SoTL, as is co-production, and most of the disabled students we teach have a clear view on this: according to Disabled Students UK, 85% of disabled students report that they would benefit from the continuation of online teaching and learning options introduced during the early stages of the pandemic.

It seems to me that there are three possible explanations for my inability to find much disciplinary SoTL reflecting this perspective:

This academic year, the UCL Centre for the Pedagogy of Politics (CPP) is hosting a series of online panel events. Our first event on 4 December was on the theme of ‘Disability, Technology, and Inclusive Education‘. In this guest post, one of the panellists at that event, Martin Compton (College Lead for AI and Innovation in Education, King’s College London), offers further reflections on how best to use technology to facilitate the inclusion of disabled and neurodivergent students, the extent to which changes required in the early part of the Covid-19 pandemic improved inclusion for disabled students, and whether those improvements have been maintained.

I was delighted to be invited to speak at the UCL Centre for the Pedagogy of Politics’ recent panel on Disability, Technology, and Inclusive Education. My current role at King’s College London (AI and innovation in education lead) can sometimes mask my wider faculty development and student engagement passions related to inclusive education but this was a perfect opportunity to connect these aspects of my work. The invite prompted me to reflect again on my own position, shaped by both professional and personal experience. I spoke alongside two people whose work I admire greatly. Dr Miranda Melcher’s coherent thinking, scholarship and advocacy of high impact interventions were passionately shared. And my former colleague, Ben Watson’s, leadership in digital accessibility at UCL has had cross-sector impacts. It was a great opportunity to be reminded of the clarity of their arguments, their commitment to practical change and their willingness to challenge the limits of established thinking.

My own starting point in this space is relatively simple. Digital tools, and now generative AI, have already changed what is possible for many learners, especially those who have been historically marginalised. A significant complicating factor is that these same tools can widen divides at the same time. I understand the many good reasons to resist certain developments in educational technology. I understand the arguments that warn of harm and the potentials for exacerbating marginalisation. So to that end, I am neither a technological determinist nor a tech evangelist. I do, however, feel concerned by the strength of anti-technology narratives that often drown out successful inclusive applications and hard-won gains. Too often accessibility is an afterthought as opposed to embedded practice. In a 2023 paper, (co-authored with Ben and Dr Alex Standen, now at LSE), I argued that there was a risk (already apparent in fact) that progress made during the Covid lockdown period, and recently expanded through responsible uses of AI, would be undone wherever opportunity to ‘return to normal’ presented itself. But, wilfully ignoring or winding back on approaches that can narrow engagement and attainment gaps should never be on the table. We need to hold on to what worked for those whose needs and voices are so often the least heard in policy discussions.

Tag: neurodiversity

Reflecting on recent UCL CPP events, Part 3: ‘Disability, Technology, and Inclusive Education’

Disability, Technology, and Inclusive Education