Abstract
Background
Inclusive teaching practices have become essential to support student success in our diverse college classrooms. Given the variations in how inclusivity is translated into teaching behavior, it is important for us to examine how our students define and perceive inclusivity.
Objective
The main goal of this qualitative study is to define and characterize inclusive classroom communities and inclusive pedagogy practices through the voices of current college students.
Method
Participants included 365 undergraduate students from a public and a private university. Students responded to open-ended questions about inclusive teaching practices, characteristics of an inclusive classroom, inclusive teaching behaviors, and inclusive behaviors of classmates.
Results
Participants highlighted that inclusive teaching impacts all students while noting that teaching practice may differentially impact specific student populations, including students with disabilities and students of color. Students also identified specific instructor and classmate characteristics and behaviors that contribute to an inclusive (or non-inclusive) classroom community.
Conclusion
This study highlights students’ views on what characterizes inclusive teaching. Participants underscored the importance of respectful and welcoming environments both from faculty and peers.
Teaching Implications
Findings offer practical implications for instructors as they create and support an inclusive classroom, particularly as it pertains to teacher and student characteristics and behaviors.
As college student populations become increasingly diverse, educators must evolve their teaching skills to meet students’ needs effectively (Sandoval-Lucero, 2014). Inclusion, which is described in greater nuance below, is generally the philosophy and practice of creating learning environments where all students, regardless of their abilities, backgrounds, or differences, are actively and meaningfully included in the educational process (Loreman, 2017). Ignoring aspects of inclusivity in our classrooms can limit access to education and learning for students who come from traditionally underserved and marginalized populations (Goldwasser & Hubbard, 2019). Inclusive practices in the college classroom are essential for promoting a positive learning environment, preparing students for a diverse world, and fostering personal and societal growth (Goldwasser & Hubbard, 2019; Oleson, 2023). This creates more equitable and enriched educational experiences for every student. Diversity in the classroom can include many different types of diversity. To name a few, this includes individuals of diverse racial, cultural, and ethnic backgrounds, students who are first-generation college students, students of diverse genders, and students who identify as neurodiverse. For instance, as one form of diversity in the United States, one report found that 45% of undergraduates in the United States identified as students of color (Espinosa et al., 2019). Even if classroom populations do not include visibly diverse identities, teachers of psychology can still create an inclusive learning culture that supports and values a range of experiences and perspectives.
Aligning with the U.S. Department of Education's mission, it is imperative for college campuses to create diverse and welcoming campus environments for all students, ensuring equal access to resources (Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Department of Education, 2016). Furthermore, in line with the American Psychological Association's Principles for Quality Undergraduate Education in Psychology (APA, 2023), faculty members must acknowledge the long history of discriminatory policies and practices that have been threaded within higher education. Faculty members must be committed to ongoing endeavors aimed at deconstructing these oppressive systems and play an active role in advocating for and incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion in their teaching approaches (APA, 2023).
Prior to designing an inclusive classroom, research is needed to clearly define what an inclusive classroom entails, and then to identify the instructor and student characteristics that help shape an inclusive classroom. For example, researchers have found that instructor attitudes are linked with inclusive classroom behaviors (Cash et al., 2021) and the student-instructor relationship matters for inclusion (Carballo et al., 2021). However, specific instructor characteristics, instructor teaching practices, and student-to-student relationships have not been studied as thoroughly from a student perspective. For this reason, in the current study we used the voices of current students to define the inclusive classroom and to identify both educator and student characteristics and behaviors that shape inclusion.
Defining Inclusion
Inclusive education has become a global topic, which has led to increasing interest from researchers. This interest can be traced back to the global movement pushing for “education for all” as a result of the 1994 UNESCO Salamanca Declaration (UNESCO, 1994, 2000, p. viii). While the principles of inclusive education were originally developed for K–12 students, these principles have become increasingly relevant in higher education (Moriña, 2017). Inclusion is the response to the human rights movement that requested equal rights for all people in all areas of life, including education (Paseka & Schwab, 2020). However, even with such increased interest in inclusive education practices, inclusive education itself is not a clearly defined concept and varies widely from one discipline to the next (Göransson & Nilholm, 2014; Krischler et al., 2019).
The definition of inclusion has varied across disciplines, and many experts have indicated that inclusion is difficult to define and is subject to different interpretations (Göransson & Nilholm, 2014). Building off the many definitions in the literature and the many populations included, we describe inclusion as the practice of including and providing equal access to all people (UNESCO, 1994), especially those who may otherwise have been marginalized or excluded based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic background, immigration status, languages spoken, and/or disability. For instance, Tienda (2013) defines inclusion as “organizational strategies and practices that promote meaningful social and academic interactions among persons and groups who differ in their experiences, their views, and their traits” (p. 467). Göransson and Nilholm (2014) examined various definitions of inclusion to consolidate into one clear definition. The authors found four distinct categories in which definitions of inclusion clustered: (a) inclusion as the placement of students in typical general education classrooms (placement definition), (b) inclusion as meeting the needs of students who require special support or those with disabilities, specifically in social and academic areas of development and functioning (specified individualized definition), (c) inclusion for all students in areas of social and academic functioning (general individualized definition), and (d) inclusion as it relates to the development and creation of communities broadly defined (community definition). Inclusion can also be operationalized at different levels; at the level of the instructor, inclusion in the classroom can include instructional tasks such as planning course assessments and evaluations (Tai et al., 2021), in which “the design and use of fair and effective assessment methods and practices that enable all students to demonstrate to their full potential what they know, understand and can do” (Hockings, 2010, p. 34).
However, the instructor represents only one social element of the classroom community, in which student-instructor and student-to-student interactions may help shape student perceptions of the classroom as inclusive. Previous research has identified several barriers that keep instructors from implementing inclusive practices: inclusive education has not been universally defined in higher education and across diverse student populations (Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011), instructors may lack knowledge and/or implementation skills in inclusive teaching (Cotán et al., 2021; Quaye & Harper, 2007), instructors may struggle with a lack of time and institution-provided support, such as accommodating financial needs and classroom sizes (Cotán et al., 2021; Moriarty, 2007; Womack, 2017), and instructors may recognize the associated risks in discussing diverse issues in their courses, such as the potential for tokenization and cultural appropriation (Gurin et al., 2002; Lintott & Skitolsky, 2016). Collaboratively, these factors may prevent instructors from implementing inclusive teaching practices in their classrooms.
Inclusive Classroom Characteristics
The Role of the Instructor
In this section, we highlight the many ways instructors can engage in inclusive behaviors in the classroom. First, open and clear communication between instructors and students seems essential in an inclusive classroom (Danowitz & Tuitt, 2011). One opportunity for instructors to communicate clear expectations is through the syllabus, where information is provided about the course, grading guidelines, and assignments (Danowitz & Tuitt, 2011). Beyond the content, a learner-centered syllabus emphasizes the readability and accessibility of the document. This can include a separate calendar of lecture topics and assignments (Carballo et al., 2021) and images to break up groups of text (Richmond et al., 2019; Womack, 2017). Designing a syllabus that is readable and accessible improves student perceptions of the instructor's effectiveness and has a positive impact on rapport between students and the instructor (Richmond et al., 2019). Another technique to promote inclusivity is diversity programming in the syllabus. Incorporating the instructors’ awareness of diversity into the syllabus can have a positive impact on students’ initial impressions of their instructors and their course engagement (Maimon et al., 2021). For example, instructors can set the tone for an inclusive classroom by including a diversity statement, decolonizing the agenda, and incorporating safety cues. In terms of safety cues, an instructor might introduce themselves with their pronouns on the first day of class and then purposefully use visuals in a PowerPoint that represent psychologists from a range of diverse backgrounds. Such instructor-led safety cues designed to help students feel that their unique identities are valued in the classroom can support student perceptions of the classroom as inclusive (Howansky et al., 2022). For example, women were more likely to engage with a course when they saw a gender-inclusive image and gender-inclusive statements in the course description (Kizilcec & Saltarelli, 2019). Explicit statements of diversity, equity, and inclusion can help instructors promote an inclusive learning environment and move students toward cultural competence (Fuentes et al., 2021). Decolonizing the agenda includes decentering whiteness in the curriculum and creating space for Indigenous and underrepresented histories (Arday et al., 2021). For example, diversity-centered learning objectives, course content from authors of various racial/ethnic backgrounds, and exposure to multicultural perspectives outside of Black History Month are all methods by which an inclusive classroom setting can be established (Fuentes et al., 2021; Quaye & Harper, 2007).
The Role of the Student
In addition to the instructor, classmates may also shape whether a classroom is perceived as inclusive by any one student. Past research at the university level has shown that experiences of bias and discrimination have a negative impact on the feeling of belonging among students from racially minoritized groups, specifically Latinx, Black, and Asian students, attending predominantly white institutions (Hussain & Jones, 2021). However, frequent diverse peer interactions have been shown to mitigate the adverse effects of these discriminatory incidents (Hussain & Jones, 2021). These diverse positive social interactions, usually occurring outside of formal classroom settings, enhance students’ sense of belonging and subsequently contribute to improved academic performance in college. Prior reviews of inclusive classroom characteristics frequently cite student-to-student interactions as opportunities for instructors to capitalize on peer-to-peer support, while also effectively embedding diverse student perspectives in assignments (Sanger, 2020). For example, instructors might use Think-Pair-Share, jigsaw, or team-based learning strategies that promote student-to-student interaction (Sanger, 2020). However, research on the role of student-to-student interactions in promoting or supporting inclusive classroom structures remains relatively scarce.
The Classroom Environment
The accessibility of a classroom also contributes to how inclusive a classroom can be perceived (Han et al., 2018). To make sure a classroom is fully accessible, there should be no physical barriers (Moriña, 2017). However, frequently instructors do not have the ability to make decisions about which classrooms to teach in, especially in higher education. For instance, when teaching courses with many students, lecture halls may not be as accessible as other classrooms, thus limiting the accessibility of the physical space itself. As such, to teach in a space that is physically accessible, faculty should consider not only institutional support, but also institutional capabilities including the availability of institutional resources.
Beyond the traditional classroom space and reflecting the increasing prevalence of virtual classrooms, another factor to consider is student accessibility to technology resources. Students with disabilities report that in addition to architectural barriers, inaccessible information and technology hinder their education (Moriña, 2017). Not all students have the devices or quality internet connection that supports the virtual classroom setting (Parmigiani et al., 2021). Whether the classroom consists of face-to-face and/or virtual environments, accessibility must be assessed across the diverse student populations that teachers of psychology serve.
Inclusive Instructor Characteristics
Prior research suggests that students’ perceptions of their instructor and relationships with their instructor may impact their evaluations of a classroom as inclusive (Shane-Simpson et al., 2022). Although some instructor characteristics can be unchangeable, many other characteristics may be developed by instructors who are striving to create an inclusive classroom environment (Shane-Simpson et al., 2022). Numerous studies highlight how characteristics such as enthusiasm, respect, accessibility, and flexibility are imperative when working with students with disabilities (Cotán et al., 2021; Moriña, 2017). Some advocates for inclusive pedagogy have argued that instructors should express their own vulnerability with students by sharing personal experiences (Sanger, 2020), such as those experiences that illustrate how they successfully overcame their own obstacles. During student interactions, instructors also play an important role in providing their students with validation when students share their own perspectives or experiences, for example, affirming the student's feelings, and providing a student with feedback on their disclosed perspective. Furthermore, validation of student experiences can help support students of color by facilitating an inclusive and welcoming classroom environment (Linder et al., 2015). In fact, student–professor relationship formation and maintenance are frequently noted as key attributes of inclusive classrooms (Carballo et al., 2021; Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011; Linder et al., 2015; Shane-Simpson et al., 2022). Given that student–professor relationships can impact student perceptions of a classroom as inclusive, specific instructor behaviors that effectively support relationships with students should be clearly identified. As argued by Griful-Freixenet et al. (2017), instructors who have a strong understanding of the needs of their students are better equipped to support their learning.
In contrast, opposing traits, such as disrespect, are often used to characterize ineffective pedagogical practices in higher education (Zayac et al., 2021). Luckily, most of these instructor characteristics are changeable, where instructors can seek out professional development opportunities to enhance their communication skills with their students (Shane-Simpson et al., 2022; Zayac et al., 2021). Other instructor characteristics such as one's race or gender may affect the learning environment. For example, research on the impact of instructor gender (Brooks et al., 2018) found that matching male or female instructors with same-gendered students impacted how students interacted with the course. Furthermore, some studies found that minority-gender students may benefit the most from same-gender course materials, such as images (Kizilcec & Saltarelli, 2019). These more implicit messages about the attributes of the instructor and their teaching philosophy (e.g., images of the instructor, statements in a syllabus) may serve as early indicators to students about whether a course is going to feel inclusive. Because an instructor's characteristics and behaviors play an important role in perceiving a classroom as inclusive, we wanted to understand, from the students’ view, what attributes and behaviors make an instructor appear more inclusive.
Current Study
This study was designed to define and characterize inclusive classroom communities and inclusive pedagogy practices through the perceptions of college students. Research highlights how various factors, from the physical classroom to peers and the instructor themselves, can impact students’ feelings of inclusion. The current study was designed to address the following questions from students’ perspectives:
Which groups of students are impacted by inclusive teaching practices? How do instructor and classmate characteristics and behaviors prevent an inclusive classroom? How do instructor and classmate characteristics and behaviors support an inclusive classroom?
Method
Prior to data collection, this study was approved by each institution's Institutional Review Board. In addition, this study was pre-registered with the Open Science Framework on 10/20/2021.
Participants
Students from two universities were asked to complete an online survey via the Qualtrics Survey Management System. The sample included 197 students from a public, regional university in the Midwest U.S. and 168 students from a private research university in the Midwest U.S., resulting in 365 participants. Ages ranged from 18 to 61 years (M = 19.65 years; SD = 3.62). Participants self-identified as White (n = 250), Asian (n = 87), Hispanic/Latinx (n = 27), African American/Black (n = 18), Native American (n = 3), Middle Eastern (n = 3), and Other identity (n = 4). Three participants indicated that they would prefer not to answer. When asked for their current gender identity, 226 participants identified as female, 129 as male, 2 as trans male/trans man, 5 as genderqueer/gender non-conforming, 1 as an unreported identity, 2 responded “I don’t know,” and 9 participants indicated that they’d prefer not to answer or did not respond.
Procedure
Participants took part in this study as part of an undergraduate research credit requirement in their Introduction Psychology course at each institution. Students were able to choose from a series of studies that were being advertised. They were also able to opt out of studies and complete library assignments instead. After signing up for the study, participants signed the consent form. Participants then completed demographics questionnaires before completing the survey, which took approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete. 1
Open-Ended Questions
Participants were asked a series of open-ended questions that were aligned with our research questions and the background literature on inclusive teaching practices. Questions were developed by the first two authors of this article. We assigned a high value to the voices and first-hand accounts of our students by using researcher-developed open-ended questions and allowing students to express their views and experiences freely (see Tables 1 and 2 for open-ended questions). This approach allowed us to generate inclusion themes directly from the voices of our students, while also supporting our students in feeling valued and heard via their opinions about inclusion. Once responses were collected, we applied a deductive thematic approach to the content analysis (Potter & Levine-Donnerstein, 1999), where a literature review of inclusive pedagogy was used to guide the qualitative coding for the survey question: “Which groups of students does inclusive teaching impact?”
Coded Responses From Participants When Asked: What Instructor/Classmate Behaviors Might Prevent a Classroom from Feeling Inclusive?
Note. N = 362 responded to the prompt for instructors; n = 2 indicated I Don’t Know. N = 363 responded to the prompt for classmates; n = 2 indicated I Don’t Know.
Coded Responses From Participants When Asked: How Do Your Instructors/Classmates Create or Support an Inclusive Classroom?
Note. N = 353 responded to the prompt for instructors; n = 1 indicated I Don’t Know. N = 360 responded to the prompt for classmates; n = 2 indicated I Don’t Know. For the first prompt, the theme “non-inclusive traits” (n = 49; 14%) was removed from analyses due to the lack of specificity in responses. Similarly, responses indicating what classmates “didn’t do” (n = 53; 15%) were removed from the second prompt.
Due to the scant amount of research investigating educator, classroom, and classmate characteristics, the remainder of the response data was investigated via a general inductive approach, in which the raw data were holistically explored to identify key categories or themes (Thomas, 2006). All open-ended survey responses were coded by dyads formed by the authorship team. For each survey question, two researchers reviewed the entire set of response data and then collaboratively identified the prominent coding categories (themes) from the data. The team openly discussed a subset of the data (10–20 responses) to revise and refine the themes developed for a given question. Interrater reliability was assessed with a subset of the remaining data (at least 20% of responses) to check for coding agreement at the ≥80% level. Once reliability was established, one researcher independently coded the remaining student responses for the question.
Results
Students Impacted by Inclusive Teaching
When students were asked to identify which groups of students inclusive teaching impacts, they frequently cited: Everyone or all students (44%, n = 156), disability (27%, n = 95), race, ethnicity, or students of color (26%, n = 94), minority or underrepresented students (not specified) (21%, n = 78), other (uncategorized responses) (16%, n = 57), LGBTQ+ (15%, n = 54), and income or socioeconomic status (15%, n = 52). Students who talked about inclusion impacting all students sometimes simply stated “Everyone” but, in other instances, expanded upon their responses: “I would say that inclusive teaching can impact anyone, as the whole idea is that you're trying to make the learning environment more accessible. But if you want specificity, I would say probably racial minority students more so than others, and potentially those who are disabled.”
Other students indicated that: “… Inclusive teaching impacts all minorities whether that be in terms of race, gender, sexuality, or religion. Teachers that ignore the relevance of subjects to individuals in their classroom, ignore the impact that their subject might have on individuals, or intentionally omit information from certain minorities create a toxic environment that diminishes the voice of minorities.”
Another student stated: “I think that inclusive teaching is important, as feeling safe is important for effective learning. I think that inclusive teaching impacts students of minority groups most, including racial, sexual orientation etc.
It is noteworthy that the research team also asked participants to indicate what an inclusive classroom looked like via an open-ended response. However, the qualitative themes closely overlapped with the responses to the other open-ended responses, and as such, data from this question were not included in this manuscript.
Behaviors That Prevent Inclusion in the Classroom
When students were asked to indicate which instructor behaviors prevent inclusion, 11 instructor and 6 classmate themes emerged. See Table 1 for further description of themes and sample quotes. For instance, participants commonly stated that they feel excluded when there is discrimination and a lack of equality stating “… instructor holds students to separate/different standards, prefers one identity group over others …,” “An instructor who only calls on certain people of the same race or gender as them,” [Lack of equality & discrimination] or when an instructor is closed-minded and “constantly rejects new ideas” [Closed-Minded]. Another student indicated: “… students feel more eager to learn when the professor opens the discussion to the class and initiates open communication. When professors do not do this and lecture on and on without any variety, students … are less likely to engage with what's being taught” [No Discussions, No Student Interactions, No Group Work].
When asked about classmate behaviors, participants most frequently cited: negative student-to-student relationships (34%), such as: “… if a classmate cuts someone off while participating”; prejudice, discrimination, and/or racism (23%), such as: “any classmate that doesn’t want to associate with another classmate because they don’t like their ethnicity, religion, or other biases”; the exclusion of other students (15%), including: “only staying with people you know”; and negative personality and behaviors (15%) such as being insulting or mean to others, including: “closed off, apathetic or rude … bad attitude.”
Behaviors That Support Inclusion in the Classroom
When asked to indicate how their instructors create or support an inclusive classroom, 11 instructor and 7 classmate themes emerged. See Table 2 for a full description of themes and sample quotes. Frequent responses included: compassionate teaching characteristics (39% of participants), responsive to students and student needs (30%), including all students in course discussions (21%), treat students fairly/equally (11%), and facilitates student-to-student interactions (10%). Students who mentioned compassionate teaching talked about the instructor being respectful, polite, welcoming, and open-minded as important characteristics that support inclusive classrooms. For example, students felt that instructors should “… create a welcoming energy and communicate with all students at a respectful level.” Additionally, students discussed how instructors should be available and responsive to students’ needs, such as providing “… the option of attending remotely if you are sick … flexible with due dates and willing to adjust them back if a majority of the class would benefit.” One example of themes that included compassionate teaching and also being responsive to students’ needs, included one student stating: “… asking questions. supporting those who may need help. Being understanding of the many issues that may arise in any given day.” In terms of including all students in course discussions, students noted the importance of valuing their opinions and engagement, “… by making sure it is well known that everyone has a voice.” And “Involving everyone in the class discussion, calling on the people who want to people called on and not choosing which student to answer the question.” In terms of treating students fairly/equally, one student stated: “They do not avoid particular students or discriminate. They treat everyone with the same professionalism.” For more themes for this question along with student quotes, see Table 2.
When asked how their classmates help create or support an inclusive classroom, participants most frequently cited: classmate characteristics (54%; e.g., respectful, patient, polite), including others in conversations/groups (31%), helping fellow students (23%), awareness or knowledge of diverse perspectives (13%), and active participation (10%). Students discussed having classmates who are “… respectful and understanding of each others’ mistakes and thoughts” and those who are “… open minded and accepting of the different types of students in each classroom and [appreciate] those differences” [Classmate Characteristics]. Similar to their views on instructors, students noted the importance of having classmates who are “allowing for everyone to speak” and “… willing to talk to new people and have conversations with others” [Include Others in Conversations]. In their responses, students talked about being supportive of their fellow classmates: “… they approach those who appear distraught and offer assistance regardless of any characteristics of the person” [Helping Fellow Students]. More themes and quotes are available in Table 2.
Discussion
Findings from this study leverage the voices of students in higher education to identify inclusive instructor and classmate characteristics. Participants highlighted that all students are impacted by inclusive teaching, although specific student populations may be differentially impacted (e.g., students with disabilities, students of color). Barriers to inclusion included instructors who treat students differently (e.g., favoring one group over another), are closed minded, and instructors who neglect to facilitate class discussions or facilitate limited student-to-student interactions. Students also highlighted that classmate barriers to inclusion may look like negative student-to-student relationships and prejudice, racism, or discrimination from other students. In support of inclusion, instructors can engage in compassionate teaching characteristics, be responsive to student needs, and include all students in discussions. Classmates can be respectful or welcoming, include fellow students in conversations, and help their fellow students in the classroom. Taken together, these findings can allow instructors to see what students perceive as inclusive behaviors; this may, in turn, inform how instructors interact with their students and facilitate student-to-student interactions.
Defining the Inclusive Classroom
When students were asked to identify who is impacted by inclusive teaching, participants indicated: all students, students with disabilities, and students of diverse backgrounds, including students who come from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. Some students identified racial/ethnic minoritized students, but also included students who identify as LGBTQ+ and students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds. The inclusion of these specific student populations aligns with many of the current definitions of inclusion (Paseka & Schwab, 2020; Tienda, 2013), highlighting that students perceive inclusion touches all people, especially those who may otherwise have been marginalized or excluded, particularly based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic background, immigration status, languages spoken, and/or disability. However, it is also interesting to note that the participants did not include other characteristics such as weight inclusivity (Roberts, 2021) in any of their responses. It is possible that participants only reflected on the first thoughts that came to their mind when we asked about an inclusive classroom, thus indicating that while student reports are meaningful as we try to understand their perspectives and lived experiences, we also need to focus on all forms of inclusivity that may lead students to feel excluded in a college classroom.
Describing Inclusive Teaching
Findings from the current study suggest that the student participants perceive inclusive classrooms to reflect a range of student, instructor, and classroom culture characteristics. Instructor teaching practices, and instructor–student interactions specifically, may influence whether students perceive a classroom as inclusive or not. Historically, studies find that students learn best from student-centered teaching practices when compared with more traditional methods of teaching, for example, teacher-to-student transmission of information (Moriarty, 2007). Furthermore, prior research highlights specific instructional strategies found within inclusive classrooms. For example, the application of Universal Design (UD) principles is believed to be a more inclusive approach when compared with traditional teaching methods, as instructors empower students and give them agency through increased accessibility to learning (Womack, 2017). Others have found that more constructivist teaching approaches align with inclusive practices, where the instructor serves as a teaching guide, recognizing the value of students’ life experiences and their unique needs (Fosnot, 1989). Specifically, students and their instructors are co-creators in developing educational material appropriate for the students in the course based on students’ own experiences (Grier-Reed & Williams-Wengerd, 2018). Findings from the current study align with these earlier studies, where participants highlighted the role of instructor responsiveness to student needs, the act of including students in class-wide discussions, and equal student treatment.
Extending the prior literature, findings from this study also suggest that instructor personality characteristics, not just one's teaching practice, may communicate to students that a classroom is or is not inclusive. For example, participants reported that instructors who were compassionate were considered more inclusive, whereas instructors who were closed-minded and those who were harsh or aggressive in the classroom were not. Interestingly, students did not mention any immutable, or unchangeable, instructor characteristics that may impact inclusive classroom teaching.
We anticipated that instructor characteristics and student communication patterns may impact whether participants felt that they and their classmates are welcoming to all students. Recent studies have found that student–professor relationships (via rapport) can predict whether students view a classroom as inclusive (e.g., Carballo et al., 2021; Shane-Simpson et al., 2022), and the current results further emphasize the role of instructor–student interactions in shaping student participants’ perceptions of inclusion. In fact, while only 7% of participants used the actual term “rapport with students” as one method by which instructors can create or support inclusive classrooms, participants in general described many ways that would be considered factors that contribute to student-instructor rapport (e.g., compassion, responsiveness). Overall, the current findings describe inclusive instructors as those who understand and respond to student needs, actively include all students in classroom discussions, treat students fairly and equally without discrimination, and show compassion with their students.
The Role of Classmate Characteristics and Behaviors
Although studies have explored the role of instructors and the instructor–student relationship in creating and supporting an inclusive classroom (Carballo et al., 2021; Cotán et al., 2021; Sanger, 2020; Zayac et al., 2021), fewer studies have considered the role of classmates in shaping the classroom culture. In one of the few studies exploring the role of classmates (Shane-Simpson et al., 2022), student-to-student relationships effectively predicted whether a classroom was perceived as inclusive by students. Sanger (2020) explained how student-to-student interactions can play an important role in inclusive classrooms as students are given opportunities to collaborate and learn from their peers. Many of the current findings align with this prior research, but also begin to identify how classmates can create or support inclusion. For example, more than half of the participants highlighted the power of classmate characteristics, such as being respectful, patient, and polite. They also noted how specific classmate behaviors positively impact inclusion (e.g., including classmates in conversations, helping fellow students, and active participation) and negatively impact inclusion (e.g., negative relationships with classmates, prejudice and discrimination, exclusion of students, and insulting others). If undergraduate students are seeking specific inclusion characteristics and behaviors from their classmates, educators could draw attention to these inclusive community indicators early-on in the semester. For example, an educator might review a list of student-to-student small group discussion rules or guidelines that explicitly call-out the need for respect, ensuring that all students are included in the conversation, and prohibit behaviors that could be perceived as insulting to other students via instructor-provided examples.
Some participants also reported that classmate awareness and classmate knowledge about diverse perspectives were important, suggesting that classmate education and/or prior experiences with inclusive behavior might help shape the classroom culture. Consequently, instructors can support students in learning more about diversity by explaining the types of diversity found at the university level and then encouraging students to connect with their classmates to learn more about their unique backgrounds. During class wide discussions, educators can include diverse perspectives in the learning materials and discuss how these perspectives are important for the field of psychology, even if they have been omitted from mainstream learning materials. Educators can also encourage peer interactions thus highlighting students’ voices and encouraging the sharing of diverse experiences and perspectives.
Interestingly, participants reported how instructors can support or not support an inclusive classroom through their facilitation of student-to-student interactions. Limited discussions, student interactions, and group work were identified as instructor behaviors that prevent inclusion. Similarly, participants reported that instructors who facilitate student-to-student interactions are creating or supporting an inclusive classroom community. These findings have direct implications for inclusive teaching practices. For instance, course design could include multiple opportunities for students to work directly with their classmates in dyadic or small group environments. Additional studies should explore the nuances of such relationships and how they might impact student perceptions of their classmates and classroom inclusion more generally.
Participants perceived inclusive classmates as those who provide a welcoming environment, include peers in conversations, help and support fellow students, are not negative or insulting, keep an open mind, and do not prejudge and discriminate against peers. Although classmates have a powerful role in producing and supporting an inclusive classroom, the instructor can serve as a guide in fostering and reinforcing a positive and supportive environment that paves a clear pathway for inclusive classmate characteristics.
Limitations and Future Directions
There are several limitations to consider within this study. Firstly, the data were only collected from two universities, both of which were in the Midwest, U.S., and the student population of both schools was relatively homogenous. This contributes to the study's limited generalizability about college students across the country and from varying backgrounds. A larger and more diverse sample would provide a more complete representation of how students define inclusive pedagogy. Another limitation is the use of a survey as the data collection method. For example, students may have responded to the survey questions in such a way that was pleasing to the researchers and the multiple open-ended questions included in the survey could have resulted in significant participant fatigue. Future qualitative studies exploring inclusive pedagogy and classroom might consider opportunities to reduce potential response bias and participant fatigue; this can be accomplished via fewer open-ended questions or a randomized subset of open-ended questions for each participant. Additionally, this study only used open-ended responses. Future work should follow-up with interviews or focus groups to expand on students’ responses and probe further to produce richer data through more details and examples. Furthermore, although interrater reliability was established at 80%, this reliability was based on approximately 20% of the responses; from there, only one researcher from the team independently coded the remaining responses on the dataset. This independent coding may have resulted in limited consensus for the remainder of the dataset (<80%). Raising the reliability threshold above 80% would ensure researcher coding consistency with a higher level of confidence. Along these lines, a limitation of the current study—and qualitative analyses in general—is potential researcher bias when coding the responses. As objective as the researchers intend to be, risks with qualitative coding include any influence from bias or failure to truly represent participants’ thoughts.
Conclusions
Prior studies note that a lack of instructor training on inclusive pedagogy is a consistent problem in higher education (Cotán et al., 2021; Morina, 2017). Creating and maintaining an inclusive classroom is essential in supporting student growth and classroom community. Students in the current study reported which instructor, classroom, and classmate characteristics impacted their perceptions of the classroom as inclusive or not inclusive. These findings highlight instructor and classmate characteristics such as compassion and respect, while also emphasizing the role of instructor and classmate behaviors, such as instructors responding to student needs and students including their classmates in discussions. Consequently, we recommend that instructors and higher education administrators seek out opportunities to develop these inclusive pedagogy characteristics and behaviors within both novice and seasoned educators. Given that inclusive pedagogy practices may change over time, we anticipate that on-going professional development is needed to help support educators in enacting inclusive pedagogy in their changing classroom environments.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The research team would like to gratefully acknowledge the other student contributors on this project: Taylor Schmidt and Syed Sudman Zaman. They would also like to thank their student participants for their willingness to engage with the online survey during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
