Inclusive Student-centred Pedagogies

Epilogue: Reflexive Pathways toward Inclusive Student-Centred Pedagogies

Kallia Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts

When we read across the chapters of this volume, what emerges is not a fixed doctrine of inclusive education but a constellation of practices, relationships, and commitments that together reimagine what it means to teach and learn in higher education. The Inclusive Student-Centred Pedagogies (i-SCP) framework, as articulated through these contributions, rests on the conviction that learning is a shared ethical act. It calls on educators and students alike to design, to question, and to transform the spaces of higher education into sites of equity and responsibility.

The opening chapters by Marin and colleagues, Brennan, and Engel-Hills remind us that inclusion is not simply a technical or policy concern but a moral stance with profound pedagogical consequences. Through the lens of democratic participation, they illustrate that institutions can cultivate equity only when they embrace difference as a resource for intellectual growth and civic renewal. This democratic orientation echoes Freire’s (1970) insistence that dialogue is the foundation of liberation, and hooks’ (1994) conviction that teaching must always be an act of freedom.

In the second section, the abstract principle of inclusion becomes tangible through the practice of partnership. Cook-Sather’s work on co-creating courses with students demonstrates how shared authorship in curriculum design can transform trust, reciprocity, and classroom dialogue. Kappe’s case study from Inholland shows that when teachers and students act as co-designers rather than separate agents, the resulting curriculum gains authenticity and mutual respect. Spanaki’s study, centred on science students at the University of Crete, highlights that genuine partnership also requires institutional cultures and policies that recognise student voice as a catalyst for change. These contributions collectively suggest that inclusive pedagogy begins with humility, the willingness of educators to listen and to learn alongside their students.

The third section, focused on assessment and curriculum design, confronts one of the most enduring structures of academic life: the way we evaluate learning. Katsampoxaki-Hodgetts and Penderi challenge the culture of compressed, high-stakes examinations, urging us to imagine assessment as an ongoing dialogue that supports agency rather than surveillance. Rontou and Galani, through their study of students with learning difficulties, underscore how inclusive practices in teaching and assessment are crucial to widening participation. Łuczak extends this conversation to disciplinary expectations, revealing how redesigning Business English courses can address entrenched inequities. These authors converge on the point that assessment is not neutral; it can either perpetuate exclusion or nurture learner autonomy. Their arguments resonate with Boud and Soler’s (2016) notion of “sustainable assessment,” which views evaluation as formative, reflective, and designed to prepare students for lifelong learning.

The fourth section expands the discussion into the contemporary realities of digital and multimodal learning. Smith and colleagues map the possibilities and ethical considerations of embedding generative AI as a digital capability, while Winberg and Winberg interrogate the limits of automated systems in assessing inclusive practice. Galani highlights the potential of asynchronous online learning for widening access, while Barrault-Méthy illustrates how gamification in Legal English can operationalise inclusive pedagogies. Kefalaki closes the section by showing how drama-based teaching fosters multimodal literacies and collaborative learning. Together, these chapters recall Kalantzis and Cope’s Digital Learner: Towards a Reflexive Pedagogy (2020), which argues that in an age of proliferating information, education must teach learners not only to absorb knowledge but to design, critique, and reframe it responsibly. The digital, these authors remind us, becomes a vehicle for inclusion only when deployed reflexively, when students are positioned as designers rather than consumers of knowledge.

The fifth section returns to the human dimension of education, where inclusion is embodied in motivation, emotion, and care. Quinlan’s exploration of student interest positions curiosity as the affective engine of learning. Spanaki and Pratikaki reveal how both formal and informal settings shape students’ perceptions of inclusion, while Astyrakaki shows how teaching classical texts such as Herodotus can be reframed within inclusive pedagogical frameworks. Nikolidaki highlights the importance of preparing student-teachers to communicate with parents, extending inclusive practice beyond the classroom to the wider educational ecosystem. Vasilaki and Vasiou situate mindfulness as a pathway to well-being, reminding us that happiness and emotional presence are integral to transformative higher education. Collectively, these chapters underscore that inclusive pedagogy is sustained not only through curriculum and assessment but through relationships of care, trust, and attentiveness.

Across these diverse contributions—spanning digital and embodied learning, scientific and humanistic traditions, formal and informal contexts, a single reflexive impulse emerges: to make education a space where meaning is not transmitted but co-created. Reflexive pedagogy, as Kalantzis and Cope (2020) describe it, is recursive and participatory. It moves between practice and reflection, between personal experience and collective inquiry, recognising that learning alters both the learner and the world they inhabit.

This book therefore concludes not with closure but with openings. The practices presented here point toward a university that learns with and from its members, where inclusion is not an add-on but the foundation of excellence. They invite us to view teaching as an ongoing act of ethical imagination, a commitment to creating spaces in which every voice matters.

For readers wishing to extend this journey, the outcomes of the Erasmus+ COALITION partnership provide further resources: an open-access e-book, a MOOC, and a Faculty Guide that offer reflective tools, examples, and professional development opportunities. These materials, developed collaboratively across European institutions, can be freely accessed at https://coalition-erasmusplus.com. They invite us to continue building universities where inclusion, reflexivity, and civic engagement shape the future of learning that our students deserve.

References

Boud, D., & Soler, R. (2016). Sustainable assessment revisited. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(3), 400–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1018133

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Herder and Herder.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. Routledge.

Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2020). The digital learner: Towards a reflexive pedagogy. Common Ground Research Networks.