Ever since their creation, institutions of higher education have been closely bound up with the diverse, incessant changes brought about by the political, social and economic conditions that have ceaselessly continued to evolve throughout history (Redondo & Sánchez, 2007; Rojo, 2000). In this regard, it becomes inevitable to talk about information and communications technologies (ICTs). The great cultural and social changes brought about in recent years by technological evolution and development, and in particular the situation in the wake of the global COVID19 pandemic, cannot be ignored, and, naturally, this has led to a series of demands and requirements in the education environment. With the implementation in Spain of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), it has also become evident that there is a vital need to review many aspects of the existing model of university-level education, including organization and management,  administration, and teaching and learning methods (Río & Hìpola, 2005).

The overriding priorities in university institutions are educational equality, the quality of higher education, lifelong learning, employability, a student-centered teaching-learning process, research and innovation, international projection and increasing student mobility opportunities (European Commission, 2009).

Moreover, all this need to be addressed against the backdrop of a university environment that is increasingly heterogeneous and diverse in terms of social and cultural considerations, age differences, and different personal and professional situations, and with an ever-growing presence of functionally diverse students. As a result, in recent years universities have clearly striven to implement more inclusive procedural policies and regulations at local and/or European level. This has been done taking into account Sustainable Development Goal 4 of the European Union’s 2030 Agenda, which states that an inclusive, egalitarian education should be guaranteed and lifelong learning opportunities should be promoted for all (European Union, 2010; United Nations Organization, 2015).<0}

This means eliminating barriers not only in infrastructure but also in virtual environments and the processes that take place in them. Universities should therefore review their practices in order to allow participation by all students and guarantee learning. It is necessary to redefine not only policies and actions focused on diversity awareness and inclusive education, but also those which affect ICT usage (O’Byrne, Jagoe & Lawler, 2019; Odame, Opoku, Nketsia & Nanor, 2021; Valee, 2017).

This study aims to analyze and describe both the ways in which teachers integrate ICTs in the classroom to accommodate diversity and their knowledge of the different national and international standards regarding digital competence and its incorporation into curricular policy.

Participants The study involved a total sample of 1,145 teachers from Education Sciences faculties in Spanish public universities. 52.1% were women, 47.9% were men, and the average age was 44.59 years. The instrument The instrument used to gather data was designed and built ad hoc and evaluated by experts to confirm the validity of its content. It had a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.92 (Agreda, Hinojo & Sola, 2016). The study was carried out using items related to the integration of ICTs in the Spanish university curriculum and items referencing diversity awareness and inclusive education. The questionnaire was administered online and the data acquired were processed using the SPSS statistical package for Mac, version 24. Methodology The study was based on a quantitative, descriptive non-experimental methodological design. One of the synergies that arises when undertaking research in the Social Sciences is precisely the highly ambiguous environment in which they tend to occur. Educational research therefore aims to analyze the methods, procedures and techniques that are used to scientifically discover, understand and explain educational phenomena and provide solutions for overcoming the problems involved at both educational and social level (Bravo, Eisman & Pina, 1998) Results Attention needs to be paid to teachers’ levels of understanding of the different indicators and standards of digital competence and how they relate to inclusion, in both the national and the international context, because most of the sample reported having little of no knowledge in this domain. The same tendency continued with 50% of the sample reporting that their levels of knowledge were also low or non-existent with regard to the integration of ICTs in the curriculum and its relationship with educational practices. Specifically, in the sphere of inclusive education 56.8% of the teachers said they included diversity-friendly e-activities adapted to students’ needs in the classroom. The other 43.8% indicated that they did not adapt activities, either in online or physical environments. Better results were obtained regarding teachers’ attitudes, insofar that ICTs enrich and make learning-teaching processes aimed at accommodating the diversity found in their classrooms more flexible while at the same time enabling them to encourage student creativity and implement innovations that will generate inclusive and diversity-friendly solutions in their future teaching activity.

Universities face the challenge of continuing to transform their architectural and technological infrastructures. Beyond the mere assignment of resources, however, there is still a clear need to develop training programs to help teachers deal with technology and inclusive education. While it is true that teachers appear to be improving in the way they use ICTs to plan course content as a means of enriching and making the teaching-learning process more flexible, there are evidently a series of shortcomings to be overcome when discussing how such technology can be incorporated into the classroom. Likewise, unfamiliarity with national and international indicators of digital competence and inclusion constitutes another problem that needs to be addressed in university education. Without knowledge of these lines of action, it will be impossible to ensure the continuity and improvement of the potential benefits ICTs offer in terms of diversity awareness and inclusive education. There is still a long way to go before ICTs are fully consolidated as a resource and means of support for the development and implementation of actions that will lead to real, effective inclusive education. It may be necessary to promote teacher training initiatives in which ICTs and inclusion are cross-cutting issues, transcending the boundaries of teachers’ specialist subjects both in research activity and in teaching practice.

Agreda, M., Hinojo, M. A., & Sola, J. M. (2016). Diseño y validación de un instrumento para evaluar la competencia digital de los docentes en la Educación Superior española. Pixel-Bit: Revista de medios y educación, (49), 39-56. Bravo, M.P.C., Eisman, L.B. & Pina, F.H. (1998). Métodos de investigación en psicopedagogía. McGraw-Hill. O’byrne, C., Jagoe, C., & Lawler, M. (2019). Experiences of dislexia and the transition to university: A case study of five students at different stages of study. Higher Education Research & Development, 38, 1035-1048. 10.1080/07294360.2019.1602595 Odame, L., Opoku, M., Nketsia, N., & Nanor, B. (2021). University experiencies of Graduates with visual impairments in Ghana. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 68(3), 332-346. https://doi.org/10.1080/1034912X.2019.1681375 Río, A.Z., & Hípola, P.S. (2055). Las universidades españolas ante el proceso de convergencia europeo: análisis de las medidas institucionales y acciones de aplicación y coordinación. Revista de Educación, (337), 169-187. Valee, D. (2017). Student engagement and inclusive education: reframing student engagement. Internatinal Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(9), 920-937. 10.1080/13603116.2017.1296033