Authors:   Wei Yan – Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, Mridula Sharma – Computer Sciences Department, Shan Zhao – Communications Department, Sheryl-Lynn Lewis – Social Work and Human Service Department, Jessica Allingham – Chemistry Department

 

Today’s classrooms ask us to hold complexity with care. Our students carry a wide spectrum of identities, strengths, and needs, and those realities don’t fit neatly into a single framework or checklist. Inclusive teaching, then, becomes less about “getting it right” once and more about cultivating an ongoing practice: noticing, listening, iterating, and returning to our intentions with our students at the center.

What helped us most wasn’t a single strategy or article; it was learning with colleagues. In our Faculty Learning Community (FLC) on Inclusive Classrooms, we showed up as whole educators, bringing our disciplines, our questions, and our imperfect attempts. The conversations were often the catalyst: a colleague’s small adjustment to an assessment, a reframing of “participation,” a reminder that belonging begins with the structures we design and the language we choose. Over time, we found that being in community didn’t just add ideas; it deepened our judgment and sustained our resolve. Circles, not silos, helped us move from intention to practice.

Our FLC had a simple but ambitious purpose: to support diverse learners through deliberate, reflective teaching. We anchored our conversations in Inclusive College Classrooms (Cardon & Womack, 2022) while drawing on the lived experiences of faculty across disciplines and course formats. Across our first six meetings, we explored big questions and practical moves:

  • Learning theories in action: What does it look like to design for variability from the outset, not as an afterthought?
  • Culturally responsive teaching: How do we create space for multiple ways of knowing and make our courses more hospitable to students’ identities?
  • Active learning with access in mind: How can we pair engagement with clarity so students aren’t excluded by the very strategies meant to include them?
  • Inclusive assessment: Where can we add transparency, flexibility, and choice, without sacrificing rigour or alignment?
  • Group Work Facilitation: How can we structure roles, expectations, and check-ins to support equitable participation and shared responsibility?
  • Generative AI in the Classroom: How can we guide students in the ethical, transparent, and purposeful use of AI tools while preserving critical thinking and authentic learning?
  • Inquiry-Based Learning: How can we design learning experiences around authentic questions and problems that invite curiosity, reflection, and knowledge-building, while providing enough structure and support so all students can participate meaningfully and develop disciplinary ways of thinking?

We didn’t seek unanimity. Instead, we practiced generous curiosity. Faculty shared what worked, where they hesitated, and what they were willing to try next. The result was a shared understanding that inclusive teaching is iterative, and that collegial dialogue makes iteration easier, braver, and more effective.

Our Learnings

Across our FLC, a central insight emerged: inclusion is not an add-on, it is a design orientation. Our discussions pushed us from thinking about accommodation as something reactive to understanding inclusivity as something intentionally built into the very architecture of a course. This shift illuminated how invisible barriers often exceed visible ones, and how classroom realities can diverge sharply from the abstractions presented in the literature. We also confronted the misconception that inclusion “lowers standards.” In practice, we found the opposite: clarity, flexibility, and transparent grading enhance both rigour and learning. These conversations reminded us that our assumptions about what students “should know”, from professional norms to communication expectations, are often shaped by culturally situated experiences that not all learners share. Finally, we recognized that technology alone cannot solve pedagogical challenges; it must be used deliberately, with human judgment guiding its role in the learning process.

Equally powerful was what we learned from learning together. The FLC emphasized that when faculty collaborate across disciplines, inclusion expands beyond the realm of disability services and becomes embedded in curriculum design, assessment practices, and everyday classroom culture. By sharing challenges, successes, and uncertainties, we saw how inclusive teaching becomes a collective pedagogical and ethical commitment rather than an individual burden. These cross-disciplinary conversations helped us imagine institutional practices where belonging and accessibility are shared responsibilities. Ultimately, our community reminded us that inclusive teaching grows not in isolation but in conversation, through curiosity, reflection, and the willingness to iterate together.

Together, these conversations crystallized a handful of core insights we’re carrying forward.

What we are taking with us

A quick snapshot of the big ideas that shaped our learning community.

  • Inclusion is a design choice, not a reaction. It must be built into the course structure from the beginning, not added after challenges appear.
  • Invisible barriers often matter more than visible ones. Real classroom stories revealed complexities that theory alone can’t capture.
  • Clarity strengthens rigour. Flexible assessment and transparent expectations help all students meet high standards.
  • Assumptions aren’t universal. What faculty see as “basic” or “professional” often reflects culturally situated norms, not shared understanding.
  • Technology is a tool, not a solution. Intentionally designed, human-guided tech use supports better learning.
  • Community makes inclusion sustainable. Cross-disciplinary conversation transforms isolated efforts into shared institutional practice.

We’d love to invite you into this ongoing dialogue through a Conversation Café, a facilitated, small-group format that mirrors how our FLC learned together. In short rounds, we’ll explore prompts about inclusive course design, assessment, and the everyday moves that build belonging. You don’t need to arrive with answers. Bring a story, a question, or a curiosity. The aim is to harvest practical ideas while also naming tensions honestly, because shared reflection is how practice deepens.

Inclusive teaching is never finished work; it’s a stance we renew in community. What we learned in the FLC is simple and sustaining: small, intentional changes, shared, tested, and refined together, can transform how students experience our courses. If you’re curious, uncertain, inspired, or somewhere in between, you’re exactly who we hope will join us.

Bring your perspective. Bring your questions. And bring a colleague if you can.

Let’s keep growing in circles.