The COALITION Erasmus Plus Higher Ed project has allowed for the creation of a collaborative environment to map teaching competencies, following needs analysis, towards the implementation of inclusive teaching practices as well as virtually develop participatory inquiry processes for the transformation of teaching practice. Usinga comparative dimension among six European universities, we advocate for a transition towards faculty development (FD) processes that prioritize sustainability. This shift is essential to empower academics as self-regulated learners, enabling them to cultivate competencies conducive to the creation of effective Inclusive Student-Centered Pedagogy (I-ScP) lessons within their specific educational contexts. I-ScP as a prevailing approach in higher education (HE) has garnered acclaim from students, educational researchers, and policymakers alike (Council Recommendation, 2017). As a catalyst for fostering self-directed learners, I-ScP positions learners at the core of the learning experience.

 FD Programs focusing on I-ScP can serve as an innovative approach to enhance the knowledge and skills of faculty members. According to Doménech et al. (2023), faculty members can play a decisive role and “can provide decisive help to prevent students from dropping out of the university and guarantee their academic success (Lombardi, Murray & Kowitt, 2016)”. Intentional syllabus redesign employed as a self-regulatory FD method (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2022) showed academics feel accountable for their teaching choices. Carballo et al. (2019) confirmed that adopting an inclusive social model helps academics realise that they can be held accountable by how they design courses that are proactively inclusive and appropriately align learning environments, processes, and resources. I-ScP FD programs can also contribute to fostering a robust and enduring collegial work environment, ensuring that faculty members are prepared and consistently advancing in their strategies and competencies (Zahedi & Bazargan, 2023). Perceived as a tool to cultivate effectiveness among early-career faculty members, and enhancing the quality of their teaching, research, and counseling capabilities (Rahman, 2023), peer-coaching and peer-observation are considered as effective development tools that utilise collaborative and reciprocal reflective input between teachers in non-intimidating and non-hierarchical systems (Netolicky, 2016). Moreover, if FD activities contribute to students’ learning outcomes in positive way (Gutierez & Kim, 2018; Yee, 2016), they are likely to be effective.

 Despite the pivotal role attributed to I-ScP in HE, there exists a gap in systematic understanding of its practical implementation. A comprehensive systematic review of empirical research unveils the varied applications of I-ScP within classroom settings, beyond-classroom scenarios, and at institutional levels in HE institutions (Grøndahl Glavind, et. al., 2023). Aiming to encourage engagement, self-awareness and self-regulation, and building upon Hockings' (2001) framework, we characterize I-ScP in HE as a deliberate and forward-looking approach to teaching and learning. Seeking to proactively meet the needs of all students and considering the potential requirements of all stakeholders without resorting to labeling (Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023), we strategically crafted FD activities promoting equity as learner-centered opportunities.

 Recent advancements in FD favor approaches leveraging 1) informal peer discussions, 2) peer coaching sessions before or after peer-observation protocols, 3) self-regulation tasks aligning syllabus components with I-ScP principles following the work of Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts on intentional syllabus re-design as a reflective process (2022) and 4) action research. However, a substantial disparity exists between teaching practices and policies, with limited attention given to the pedagogical acumen of academics’ post target FD modes (Castillo-Montoya, et al., 2023; Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, 2023). In light of this shift, the COALITION partners aim to address this gap by systematically documenting academics' reflections and assessments of various reflective  FD modes.

Following needs analysis (Savva, 2012) and mapping of emerging needs in terms of academics' pedagogical acuity and overall readiness to adopt I-ScP pedagogies, we employed two survey methods, i.e. semi structured interviews and faculty reflective reports, to collect data. Adopting a learner-centred FD approach with academics as learners, through a “methodological approach that foregrounds plurality and contestation, orienting research frameworks towards inclusiveness, tensions, unpredictability and complexity” (Khoo et al., 2019: 182), the study has a comparative dimension among six universities in six European countries (Greece, Latvia, Spain, Netherlands. Sweden, Romania) involved in this consortium. The view promotes a concept of non-dominating and reflexive ‘strong objectivity’ (Rosendahl et al., 2015) that derives its strength from a rigorous appreciation of social situatedness, informed by a standpoint perspective (Wilmes et al. 2018) that involves both expert and non-expert actors in co-producing knowledge as equal partners. Based on insights attained in the initial stage of the project (needs analysis & mapping competencies), we developed participatory inquiry processes for the transformation of teaching practice within a community of practice that favors formative scaffolding and integrates different tools that expand learning beyond the initial context of action. To provide a comparative analysis of effective FD processes suggested by academics, thirty semi-structured interviews (5 from each university) collected during the needs analysis stage of this study and eighteen faculty reflective reports (3 from each university) were undertaken to delve deeper at identifying ways of optimising alignment with I-ScP. Participation in the study was voluntary, and the research protocol received approval from the institutional review board to ensure the ethical treatment of human subjects.

Addressing the diverse needs of faculty regarding I-ScP, utilizing technology and implementing active learning strategies, the respondents pin pointed several initiatives that a comprehensive FD program design should embrace. The suggested FD program should encompass individualized professional development planning, incorporating elements of well-being and self-care. Also, cultural competency and diversity training, along with improving communication and collaboration skills are also integral curricular components. By empowering faculty members towards I-ScP professional growth, participants identified ways that university teachers can adopt to align inclusive learning activities into the academic syllabus. As a result, several strategies arose, such as the need to incorporate diverse content and perspectives into course materials that can help to reflect the varied backgrounds and experiences of all students. Another key aspect was the use of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles which aims to ensure the creation of flexible and accessible learning materials, accommodating different ways of learning and learning preferences. Other relevant inputs refer to fostering collaborative learning opportunities, peer interactions, and group work that can foster an environment where all students feel comfortable participating and incorporating the received feedback and support. Last but not least, faculty members’ emphasised the need for designing FD programs that allow faculty voices to be heard and taken into account giving rise to their diverse needs. To conclude, university teachers could contribute to inclusive and equitable learning environments by utilising their reflexive subjectivities and aligning them into teaching praxis that embraces I-ScP, while acknowledging the diverse needs of their student population.

Castillo-Montoya, M., Bolitzer, L. A., & Sotto-Santiago, S. (2023). Reimagining Faculty Development: Activating Faculty Learning for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, 38, pp.415-481. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Council Recommendation (2017). On promoting common values, inclusive education, and the European dimension of teaching, Official Journal of the European Union. Grøndahl, G. Et al. (2023). Student-centred learning and teaching: a systematic mapping review of empirical research. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 47(9), 1247-1261. Gutierez, S.B.& Kim, H.B. Peer coaching in a research-based teachers’ professional learning method for lifelong learning: A perspective. Alberta Journal of Education, 64(2), 214-221. Hockings, C. (2010). Inclusive Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: A Synthesis of Research. York: Higher Education Academy. Howlett, C., Arthur, M., & Ferreira, J. (2016). Good CoPs and bad CoPs: Facilitating reform in first-year assessment via a community of practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(4), 741–754. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2022). The ‘naked’ syllabus as a model of faculty development: is this the missing link in Higher Education?, International Journal for Academic Development. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts, K. (2023). Coaching Instructors as Learners: Considerations For A Proactively Designed Inclusive Syllabus. Education Centre for Higher Education, Marijampoles Kolegija, Latvia. Khoo, SM., Haapakoski, J., Hellsten, M. And Malone, J. (2019). Moving form interdisciplinary educational ethics: bridging epistemological differences in researching higher education internationalisation(s), European Educational Research Journal 18 (02) 181-199. Netolicky, D.M. (2016), "Coaching for professional growth in one Australian school: “oil in water”", International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 5 (2), 66-86. Rahman, M. H. A. (2023). Faculty development programs (FDP) in developing professional efficacy: A comparative study among participants and non-participants of FDP in Bangladesh. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 7(1), 100499. Rosendahl, J. Zanella MA and Rist, S. (2015) Scientists’ situated knowledge: String objectivity in trasndisciplinarity. Futures 65: 17-27. Sava, S. (2012). Needs Analysis and Programme Planning in Adult Education. Verlag Barbara Budrich. Yee, L. (2016). Peer coaching for improvement of teaching and learning. Journal of Interdisciplinary Research in Education, 6(1), 64-70. Zahedi, S., & Bazargan, A. (2023). Faculty member's opinion regarding faculty development needs and the ways to meet the needs. Research and Planning in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-89. Wilmes, S., Siry, C., Heinericy, S. Heesen, KT., Kneip, N. (2018). The role of Critical Reflexivity in the Professional Development of Professional Developers: A co-autoethnographic exploration. Interfaces Cientificas