Why does Moodle matter?

I think that Moodle, or the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) has an important role to play in creating a welcoming, accessible and inclusive space to students in higher education. Since the pandemic, there is a clear expectation from students, and often staff, that learning materials and course information will be available online. As Lonsdale et al. say, ‘(the pandemic) unveiled the many benefits of online teaching and learning as a complement to standard face to face delivery, such as accessible materials to all and innovative teaching approaches that have the student learning experience (i.e., an experience that adds value to the learner) at the centre.’ (Lonsdale et al., 2022)

The VLE has many potential purposes; it is a communication tool, a repository, it offers flexibility in the time and place to study, as well as digital accessibility. It can, therefore, enable students to access their course around their other commitments, or at a time or in a format that is more suitable to them, or via assistive technology, like a screen reader. This might apply to students (and staff) with work or caring commitments, illness, fatigue or who have mobility issues, for example. It could also help to support students and staff who are new to HE, through greater transparency and clarity about what is required and a breaking down of assumed knowledge.

However, this can only work if the course material is present, up to date, readable, locatable and written in plain language. From conducting Moodle projects over the past two years we know that students often find Moodle frustrating and difficult to use. Staff also tell us that they don’t like it. However, both staff and students use it, to varying degrees, and there is a expectation for it to work better for everyone. Poorly organised VLEs with hidden, poorly named, incomplete or inaccessible content creates frustration and raises barriers. Given the changing expectations we’ve seen since the pandemic, it also makes the university seem old-fashioned and out of step. How can we present ourselves as a radical, forward thinking place, when we can’t share key course information in a way that includes everyone?

Why focus on neurodiverse, visually impaired and disabled students and staff?

As I’ve discussed above, I think Moodle is important for all staff and students, not only those with a disability, and our learning design should reflect a commitment to be inclusive, as well as accessible. Good practice in these areas is, in any case, overlapping and mutually beneficial. I had thought about asking students from a range of groups to participate, e.g. international students, those from a non-academic background and neurodiverse and disabled students. However, I was uncomfortable about the prospect of grouping these students together, and somehow ‘othering’ everyone, I thought it might discourage participation. I also thought, given the scale of the action research project, focussing on a particular group might be more manageable. This was backed up by advice from Rachel. Of course, focusing on neurodivergent and disabled students doesn’t exclude others either since students and staff will have multiple and varied intersectional ‘identities’.

My professional context at CSM: I think it made sense to me to focus on this group because it links in well with work we already do on digital accessibility. Working in the digital learning context, digital accessibility is an area in which we can have a real impact and one in which there has been a lack of leadership and focus. My intervention in Unit 2 was about developing knowledge and awareness of inclusive practice in the digital learning teams, with a view to create cross-UAL guidance. As a result of this, we have created a cross-UAL working group to move this forward. In Unit 1, Sarah and I identified that one of the limitations of our work on digital accessibility and inclusion is that we don’t talk to enough disabled staff and students directly. This key element of our efforts was missing.

The UAL context: Another reason to focus on neurodivergent, disabled and visually impaired students and staff is that these groups are well represented amongst staff and students at UAL and at CSM in particular. In UAL’s 23/24 Census, 17% of students across UAL declared a disability, and 21% at CSM, the highest percentage of all colleges. (The 2021 national census showed 17.7% of the population in England declaring a disability.) In reality, the number of students and staff at UAL with a disability is likely to be much higher, with well known barriers to declaring, including stigma (common amongst some international students), a lack of a diagnosis or a wish to maintain privacy.

Looking at the UAL Dashboard data for attainment, it appears that disabled students achieve at a similar, if not higher rate than those who have not declared a disability. However, continuation and retention is an issue, with significantly lower rates of retention amongst undergraduate disabled students. Looking at data from 20/21 and 22/23, this seems to be an ongoing trend. Interestingly, there was a peak for the retention of students with a learning disability during the pandemic (2020/21). Perhaps this was due to teaching online and a more flexible learning environment? For postgraduate students the trend is similar. Continuation rates for postgraduate disabled students are much lower than for non-disabled students. In 2020/21, the most recent year there is data, 90.1% of non-disabled students completed, compared with 77.6% of students declaring a disability.

These data give only a rough idea of the experiences of students who declare a disability, and there will be many others not included. In addition, it gives no indication of the intersectional challenges that students are likely to be facing, nor the specific disabilities or learning differences students identify as having (the data is due to become more nuanced in this regard). However, I think it is fair to say that it indicates that there is room for improvement in the student experience for this cohort and making course information management more accessible and inclusive seems like a good start.

The social model of disability: The UAL Disability Service advocates the Social Model of Disability, which states that, ‘…people are disabled by the world around them, rather than by their impairment or difference.’ (UAL Disability Inclusion Toolkit, no date). In parallel with the need to make anticipatory adjustments (see ‘The law’ below), there is a strong argument here for creating a more equitable and inclusive online learning space.

The social model ‘looks at ways of removing barriers that restrict life choices for disabled people….It embraces a view of the individual and individual difference as the source of diversity that can enrich the lives and learning of others.’ (Inclusive Teaching and Learning in Higher Education as a Route to Excellence, 2017)

UAL has an explicit focus on social justice. In the Social Purpose Implementation plan, UAL commits itself to ‘Build inclusive societies in which difference of all kinds is celebrated and valued.’ and ‘Build more equitable prosperity and wellbeing for all people.’ (Social Purpose Implementation Plan, 2023). In my view, a small but important thread of this in education is developing a VLE which offers reliability, flexibility, support, and and relevant, up to date information in a welcoming space, to everyone.

The law: A final compelling argument for my focus on ensuring that Moodle (and the hosted content) is accessible, is that it’s the law. Under the Equality Act 2010 we have a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments which are anticipatory. This means we need to make these changes in advance of any student or member of staff declaring a disability. As the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) guidance states:

‘The duty requires you to take positive steps to ensure that disabled students can fully
participate in the education and other benefits, facilities and services provided for
students.’ (EHRC Guidance, 2014)

Furthermore, the Public Sector Bodies (websites and mobile applications) Accessibility Regulations (PSBAR) 2018 set a clear threshold for public bodies, including HEIs; our digital content must meet the internationally recognised Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 AA standard by by Sept 2020, and WCAG 2.2 standards by October 2024. Failure to do so could mean UAL is subject to legal action.

Although compliance with the law is obviously essential, it hasn’t yet received clear, focussed attention at UAL and we in the Digital Learning teams have a role in helping that to happen. As I’ve said above though, it’s not just about compliance, but about creating a more supportive space for students and staff to work and learn.

Bibliography:

‘Census 2021’ (2023) Office for National Statistics Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/disability/articles/disabilitybyagesexanddeprivationenglandandwales/census2021 (Accessed: 10 January 2024)

Department for Education on behalf of the Disabled Student Sector Leadership Group (2017) Inclusive Teaching and Learning in Higher Education as a route to Excellence (2017) Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-report-offers-guidance-to-support-disabled-students (Accessed: January 2024)

‘Disability Inclusion Toolkit’ (no date), UAL Disability Service, Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/sites/explore/SitePage/45680/disability-inclusion-toolkit (Accessed: 10 January 2024)

Equality and Human Rights Commission (2014) ‘What Equality Law Means for You as an Education Provider – Further and Higher Education’. Available at: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/what_equality_law_means_for_you_as_an_education_provide_further_and_higher_education.pdf (Accessed: December 27 2023)

Lonsdale, M., Qin X., Chen Y., Green H., Algethami M., and Xu J. ‘The Power of Information Design in Enhancing the Organization of Information and Course Material in an Online Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)’. Information Design Journal 27, no. 3 (31 December 2022): 235–77

Social purpose implementation plan – Short read (2023) Available at: https://canvas.arts.ac.uk/documents/sppreview/1c50e2a5-ab34-4157-a23f-ae3d411f80ae 11 Oct (Accessed: 10 January 2024)

‘Understanding WCAG 2.2’ in GOV.UK Service manual (Updated 5 October 2023) Available at: https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/helping-people-to-use-your-service/understanding-wcag (Accessed 9 January 2023)