1. Inclusive Approaches to Student Communication
Kate Lister and Elaine McPherson

2. Workshop plan Disabled students numbers in the OU
Findings from our study
Guidance on inclusive approaches to language
Impacts for our practice
Workshop plan
1- Elaine
2 – Kate
3 – Elaine
4 - Kate

3. Brainteaser
How many disabled students do you think we have? (Number or percentage)
What do you think our largest disability category is?
What do you think our fastest growing disability category is?
3 min in pairs!

4. Active Students Oct 2018 Disabled Students Oct 2018 % Total Disabled
Different from rest of the sector – normally SpLD makes up 50%. Unseen = long term health conditions, cancer, diabetes, epilepsy, etc.
Active Students Oct 2018
Disabled Students Oct 2018
% Total Disabled
132,966
25,849
19.4%

6. Discussion
Is that what you expected? In what ways do you support disabled students in your role?
3 min in pairs
Feedback

7. UK social model: refers to ‘disabled students’ rather than ‘students with disabilities’ (society is the disabling factor)
Terminology includes ‘impairments’, ‘support’, ‘reasonable adjustments’, ‘circumstances’, etc.
Students are required to ‘disclose a disability’ to access support
Relatively standard in UK HE
Lack of research or evidence that this model of language is effective or desirable
OU (like most institutions) made the decision to use this language and terminology on students’ behalf without consulting them.
The OU and language

8. Students opinions
We ran a project to create a student-driven research agenda.
Students told us:
They don’t like the word ‘disabled’
They don’t feel comfortable disclosing a disability or requesting support
In many cases they did not disclose or access support because they felt uncomfortable with the language

9. What are students’ opinions regarding the language the OU uses to discuss disability?01
What language do students use to discuss the impact of their ‘disability’ on their studies? 02
What model of language do students prefer the OU to use when discussing disability in the context of academic study? 03
ASSIST: A Sociolinguistic Study to Investigate Student-driven Terminology

10. Methodology Focus groups (20 participants) Discourse analysis
Free discussion on learning journey (RQ2)
Critique on choice of OU communication (RQ1)
Discourse analysis
Survey (1046 respondents)
Select preferred style of OU digital communication
Select preferred terminology in 1-1 engagement
Statistical analysis

11. Stage 1 results Discourse analysis from focus groups
Three language models emerged:
A deficit model, focusing on the disability itself and the issues it causes
A support model, focusing on ‘barriers to study’ and the institution supporting the student
An empowerment model focusing on student autonomy, with the institution enabling the student
Discourse analysis from focus groups
Stage 1 results

12. Stage 1 results Deficit/ medical model Support model Empowerment model
Disability
Barriers/obstacles to study
Identity
Condition
Support needs/ requirements
Study needs
Inabilities
Additional requirements
Weaknesses
Problems
Difficulties
Strategies
Help
Support
Tools and resources
Stage 1 results

13. No clear preference for a single dominant model of language
Language should be appropriate to the context
A medical situation requires medical model language
Different reactions to broadcast communication, interactive questions and co-owned artefacts
Different reactions to headings and filler text
Stage 2 results

14. Stage 2 results

15. Stage 2 results
Students with mental health and SpLD conditions preferred support and empowerment language models and were least happy with the term ‘disability’
Students with fatigue/pain and mobility conditions were most comfortable with the term ‘disability’ and were more likely to choose a medical language model than their peers

16. Stage 2 results
Women preferred support and empowerment language models and ‘study needs’ or ‘additional study needs’
Men were more likely to ‘leave it as it is’ (however it is) and were more comfortable with the term ‘disability’.

17. Discussion
So what we do? How can we talk to our students in a way that supports them?

18. What we did
Made changes in some student-facing comms (websites, disability support form, etc)
Dissemination of project and results, seeking feedback
Through Inc STEM, we created:
Methodology report for policy makers/researchers
Guide to using and mirroring disability language for student-facing staff in HE
Guide to engaging with and influencing language for students in transition from school to HE

19. Guidance for staff Look at the guidance:
What do you like about it? What changes would you make to it?
How might this guidance best be used/disseminated?

20. Final thoughts
In our roles, how can we be more inclusive in our approaches to language and disability?

21. Thank you!