Having submitted  last year with “inclusion” as a central theme – little did the authors realise how critical this exploration would be.   The paper argued the need to adopt a considered approach to “inclusion” in the contemporary world.  Influenced by the significant advances in education one group demanded in the past and resultant changes in political economic and social policies, 'inclusion' is most associated with disability. People with disabilities were historically excluded from society, by a medicalised and prescriptive approach (Parsons, 1951).  The social model (Oliver, 1996) and subsequent Universal Design (UD) Universal Design for Learning (UDL) approach demanded inclusive practice be considered not just in classrooms, but beyond. The paper will build on the argument last year - how does research on ‘inclusion’ need to shape up if it is going to engage with differing perspectives, theories and values that exist? Is it time for researchers to rethink as we connect and reconnect?  (The past year has increased our need to re-evaluate research approaches).

People with disabilities continue to challenge 'exclusionary' practice. Where once a disabled person; by way of example a person who is deaf, was labelled and defined, and consequently excluded from educational and consequently work opportunities,  the social model of disability (Oliver 1996) enabled inclusion in classrooms and resultant careers.  The social model led to the development of UD (Storey et al, 1998) and UDL (Scott, 2001; Rose, 2006) philosophies and practices’ that resulted in technology and curricula that enabled; respecting ability, motivation and determination.  But while new theories continue to emerge in 'disability' and 'research' - do we need to explore how we engage with the very theories we rely on and how accessible (and inclusive), our research is as a result? Is it time to rethink and reconnect? This paper will explore “inclusion” for both research and researcher on a doctoral journey.  The authors will build on two previous papers presented at ECER; Authors (2018) and Authors (2019) and the thinking and discourse that resulted from them. 

The context is that students with disabilities have been increasing in the school system and the fruits of this are now coming through to Further and Higher Education (AHEAD, 2017). This is a result of Irish and EU policies promoting the inclusion of disabled people taking effect (Ebersold, 2012). While inclusive pedagogical practices in the classroom have been developed, practices outside of pedagogy but in education, including career guidance may not be ‘connected’ with more diverse learners (OECD, 2002) (Leong & Brown, 1995) .  While a model of European contemporary guidance in an inclusive education environment was explored in previous papers; this paper will exploit the learning and discourse and ask the bigger question ‘as the need to be more inclusive in our societies and classrooms continues to develop apace – do we need to ‘rethink’ and ‘reconnect’ with what we believe is disability and inclusion? If we seek to apply the social model of disability to other theories are we actually reverting to ‘labelling’ and the idea that ‘one size fits all’ medical model thinking. Do in fact need to take a more ‘inclusive approach’ as we both engage in our research and consider the very theories we are engaging with.

If indeed we are taking a truly inclusionary approach (and moreover today) – should our research reconsider, our reflexivity, positionality and methodology?  Is it time to reconsider our approaches and take a more collaborative approach as we seek to define “inclusion” and be “inclusive”? Finally is it time for the ‘inclusion agenda’ to move beyond 'disability' and take a multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary and arguably, inclusive approach? 

In the first paper, Authors (2018) explored how other professionals might learn from inclusive education developments over the years. It examined the shift from medical model to social model thinking and more recently that of inclusive and universal design practices yet with much of the emphasis on the teacher-learner relationship. The objective was to consider other relationships learners have in a learning environment – notably the career guidance professional. The paper reviewed the different models of disability in education while also applying the Bronfenbrenner framework to conceptualise the position of the learner in relation to the career guidance professional in contrast to their relationship with a teacher. Authors (2019) went a step further in that it examined what ‘Career Guidance Needs To Learn From ‘Disability’ if it is to become more inclusive as a practice.’ The paper explored the need for a theoretically informed practice model for career guidance, to support the inclusive agenda in education. Once again, using the Bronfenbrenner ecosystem (1979) – what could be learned when the models of disability and career guidance were reimagined using a Universal Design ‘lens’. The combined approaches of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), Bronfenbrenner, Disability, and Guidance Counselling positioned the disabled learner in a contemporary career guidance relationship. This research will demonstrate how exploring disability and career guidance theories using a Universal Design for Learning (UDL), and Bronfenbrenner, framework can show a clear and positive path ahead for ‘inclusion’. Aligning the literature, exploring the development of the different theories and language against their original backgrounds; while using both the Universal Design for Learning framework and the Bronfenbrenner ecosystem, will be particularly innovative as both models are well-suited to explore where disability, the learner, and the professional is positioned in a contemporary inclusive environment Bronfenbrenner and Universal Design offer a framework to enable such an exploration. This is perhaps what makes this model different from previous models driving inclusion. This year (2021), the paper will draw on the researcher’s own research experience, the methodological significance of the researcher’s subjectivity, positionality and reflexivity and particularly as the very philosophies of UD and inclusion shaped and realised unexpected learning and opportunities.

Bronfenbrenner (1979) is well suited to explore this move to explore ‘inclusion’ while considering ‘career guidance’, ‘disability’ ‘UD’ and ‘UDL’. The framework affords an opportunity to theorize ‘career guidance’ and ‘the guidance world of a learner with a disability’ (ecology) placing ‘relationships’ in the centre while also acknowledging the different theories and language (drivers) at play. Universal Design and Universal Design for Learning are developing frameworks. They originate from architectural thinking and are a ‘design approach’ that demand that ‘inclusion’ be considered from the beginning in any design process to ensure that most people will benefit (Rose & Meyer, 2006). By applying this thinking to a Bronfenbrenner framework, it demands that we are placing ‘inclusion’ at the very epicentre of the model. And of this research. It is hoped that this paper will explore a model of research that will influence a contemporary inclusive approach in the field of education and research. While the focus of the doctoral studies is on career guidance and disability, the emphasis on the need to be more inclusive is shaping a philosophy and approach. Perhaps such ‘inclusionary’ thinking needs to be explored further as it offers greater opportunity to others seeking a framework. This is of particular note at a time when ‘traditional approaches’ to research are challenged. Also, there is a significance for those that need to be part of the ‘inclusion conversation’ in our education system as a whole.

AHEAD (2017), Number of Students with Disabilities Studying in Higher Education in Ireland 2016/17 Dublin: AHEAD Educational Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development Cambridge. MA: Harvard. Quirke, M., & Mc Guckin, C. (2018). Learning from the past . . . How career guidance might learn from inclusive education. European Conference on Educational Research (ECER): “Inclusion and Exclusion, Resources for Educational Research”, The Free University Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy, 3rd - 4thSeptember, 2018. Quirke, M., & Mc Guckin, C. (2019). Career guidance needs to learn from ‘disability’ if it is to embrace an uncertain future . . . European Conference on Educational Research (ECER): “Education in an. Era of Risk - The Role of Educational Research for the Future”, Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 3rd - 6th September, 2019. Leong, F. T. L., & Brown, M. T. (1995). Theoretical issues in cross-cultural career development: Cultural validity and cultural specificity. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Contemporary topics in vocational psychology. Handbook of vocational psychology: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 143-180). Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Ebersold, S. (2012). Education and training policy transitions to tertiary education and work for youth with disabilities, OECD Publishing Mc Guckin, C., & Minton, S.J. (2014). From theory to practice: Two ecosystemic approaches and their applications to understanding school bullying. Australian Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 24(1),36 – 48 OECD (2002) Who am I? The inadequacy of career information in an information age http://iccdpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/ 03/OECD-Inadequacy-of-Career-Info-2002.pdf Available in English and French Parsons, T. (1951) The Social System (Glencoe, The Free Press). Rose, D.H., and Meyer, A., Eds. (2006). A practical reader in Universal Design for Learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Scott, S. S., McGuire, J. M., & Shaw, S. (2001). Principles of universal design for instruction. Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities. Raleigh, NC: Center for Universal Design. Retrieved from http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/pubs_p/pudfiletoc.htm