The i-SCP Competence Framework, developed within the COALITION initiative (Erasmus + project: Coaching Academics as Learners for Inclusive Teaching in Optimal Networks: KA220-HED-18399197), provides a structured and comprehensive guide to the knowledge, skills, and attributes essential for university teachers in higher education. This framework aims to support faculty members in adopting inclusive teaching practices that address the diverse needs of students, ensuring equitable learning opportunities in both face-to-face and online environments. By defining clear professional expectations, the framework equips educators with the competencies necessary to foster inclusive and high-quality academic instruction.

Inclusive teaching approaches prioritize the creation of a learning environment where students feel respected, supported, and valued (Jacobs & Renandya, 2019; Carrillo, 2024). This is accomplished by cultivating a classroom culture that acknowledges and celebrates students' diverse identities, including those related to culture, gender, disability, and socio-economic background. University educators play a critical role in removing barriers to student participation, which may involve addressing language challenges, mental health concerns, and the needs of students with disabilities (Meyer & Land, 2005; Le, H., Janssen & Wubbels, 2018).

A key component of inclusive, student-centered pedagogy is the implementation of diverse assessment methods (Otukile-Mongwaketse, 2018). Assessments should be adaptable and designed to capture a broad spectrum of student competencies. By incorporating a variety of assessment formats—such as written assignments, oral presentations, collaborative projects, and digital portfolios—educators provide students with multiple opportunities to showcase their learning (Fung et al., 2022). This approach promotes equity by accommodating different learning styles and reducing disadvantages faced by students who may struggle with conventional testing methods.

Additionally, fostering inclusivity in higher education necessitates ongoing professional development for faculty members (Moriña, 2022). University educators must have access to the knowledge, tools, and skills required to implement inclusive practices effectively (Fornauf & Erickson, 2020). This can be achieved through workshops, peer learning initiatives, and specialized training programs aimed at deepening their understanding of inclusive education principles and pedagogical strategies. Continuous professional development ensures that educators remain responsive to the evolving needs of diverse student populations and are well-prepared to create an equitable and engaging learning environment.

Grounded in research findings based on quantitative research, the framework is informed by data collected through a structured survey administered to university faculty members. This survey was designed to evaluate faculty engagement with inclusive teaching strategies, the availability and effectiveness of institutional support structures, and the impact of these elements on student learning outcomes. The survey results provided critical insights into the challenges and successes of inclusive education in higher education settings, highlighting areas that require further development and institutional commitment. The i-SCP Competence Framework is built around five key dimensions that serve as guiding principles for enhancing inclusivity in higher education. These dimensions focus on institutional accessibility, resource availability, faculty commitment to inclusive pedagogies, curricular adaptations, and active learning strategies. The first dimension, institutional accessibility, emphasizes the need for universities to create an environment that accommodates diverse learners, including students with disabilities and those from underrepresented backgrounds. This involves physical accessibility, digital accessibility, and policies that promote equal participation in academic settings. The second dimension, resource availability, examines the extent to which universities provide faculty with the necessary tools, training, and support to implement inclusive teaching practices. Effective inclusion requires investment in professional development programs, technological tools, and instructional materials that enhance student engagement and support diverse learning needs. Faculty commitment to inclusive pedagogies forms the third dimension of the framework. This dimension highlights the role of educators in fostering inclusive learning environments through reflective teaching practices, culturally responsive instruction, and adaptive teaching strategies that cater to students with varying abilities, backgrounds, and learning styles. Faculty members play a central role in shaping an inclusive culture within their institutions, and their willingness to adopt and refine inclusive pedagogies is critical to the success of these efforts. Curricular adaptations represent the fourth dimension, emphasizing the importance of designing flexible and inclusive curricula that accommodate different learning preferences. This includes the integration of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles, differentiated instruction, and assessment methods that allow all students to demonstrate their learning effectively. The fifth dimension, active learning strategies, focuses on student engagement as a cornerstone of inclusive education. Active learning techniques, such as collaborative projects, problem-based learning, and technology-enhanced instruction, foster deeper understanding and participation among students. By promoting interactive and student-centered learning experiences, educators can create an environment where all learners feel valued and empowered to succeed.

This poster explores contemporary perspectives on the COALITION framework and its role in fostering professional growth, continuous improvement, and enhanced teaching quality in higher education. By implementing the i-SCP Competence Framework, universities can work towards a more inclusive, flexible, and effective educational system, ultimately enhancing learning experiences for a diverse student population.

1.Awang-Hashim, R., Kaur, A., & Valdez, N. P. (2019). Strategizing inclusivity in teaching diverse learners in higher education. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 16(1), 105-128. 2.Bakogiannis, A., Lorrimer, S., & Papavasiliou, E. (2024). Inclusive Pedagogies & Practices of English for Academic Purposes (Eap) in Higher Education (He): A Focus Group Study. Journal of Higher Education and Academic Advancement, 1(10), 1-16. 3.Capper, C. A., & Frattura, E. M. (2008). Meeting the needs of students of all abilities: How leaders go beyond inclusion. Corwin Press. 4.Carillo, B. (2024). Student-Centered Classrooms: Public Elementary School Teachers’ Engagement Strategies for Learners in the 21st Century. Nexus International Journal of Science and Education, 1(1). 5.Danowitz, M. A., & Tuitt, F. (2011). Enacting inclusivity through engaged pedagogy: A higher education perspective. Equity & Excellence in Education, 44(1), 40-56. 6.Dewsbury, B. M., Swanson, H. J., Moseman-Valtierra, S., & Caulkins, J. (2022). Inclusive and active pedagogies reduce academic outcome gaps and improve long-term performance. Plos one, 17(6), e0268620. 7.Florian, L. (2015). Inclusive Pedagogy: A transformative approach to individual differences but can it help reduce educational inequalities?. Scottish educational review, 47(1), 5-14. 8.Fornauf, B. S., & Erickson, J. D. (2020). Toward an inclusive pedagogy through universal design for learning in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 33(2), 183-199. 9.Fung, C. Y., Su, S. I., Perry, E. J., & Garcia, M. B. (2022). Development of a socioeconomic inclusive assessment framework for online learning in higher education. In Socioeconomic inclusion during an era of online education (pp. 23-46). IGI global. 10.Guberina, T. (2023). Cultivating inclusive learning environments: Incorporating diversity through culturally responsive pedagogy. Social Science Chronicle, 2, 1-14. 11.Hoidn, S., & Reusser, K. (2020). Foundations of student-centered learning and teaching. In The Routledge international handbook of student-centered learning and teaching in higher education (pp. 17-46). Routledge. 12.Jacobs, G. M., & Renandya, W. A. (2019). Student centered cooperative learning: Linking concepts in education to promote student learning. Springer.