“It’s no use going back to yesterday,
because I was a different person then”
As our journey through the looking glass comes to a close, I invite you to reflect on the leadership and management repercussion of this reflection. What is required, on the part of unit leaders and senior management, to guide Disability Services staff “through the looking glass”? What are the pragmatic steps required, in terms of management of change, to reach these sustainable goals? Now that we have identified the future we want, how do we get there in terms of organizational change?
Acknowledge and challenge our ambivalence with regards to UDL
Disability Services are often offered the role of promoting UDL on campuses, because prima facie this seems like a good fit. We have seen through this analysis, however, that their position is often ambivalent towards UDL, for many different reasons. It hence becomes very difficult for them to maintain ownership over UDL within their campus community, and this in turn often ends up jeopardizing wider efforts for implementation. This ambivalence is difficult to eliminate altogether, but with a degree of clarity and lucidity, it becomes possible for units to verbalize this hesitation and to tackle it progressively - finding their way among this complex landscape and defining positive roles they are able to play even if they do not carry the brunt of the work in relation to UDL development and implementation (Fovet, in print). Certainly as far as the leadership of these units is concerned, it is healthy to acknowledge this hesitation and to work towards mitigating it, rather than ploughing ahead as if in denial.
Engage in meaningful cross-campus alliances for the development and implementation of UDL
If Disability Services don’t end up being directly in charge of UDL implementation and development, it nevertheless remains essential for them to be actively involved in this work through strategic collaboration. This may take the shape of active collaboration with Teaching and Learning centres or with instructional designers. Such partnership are not common currently and a shift in mindset is required before such osmotic work can take place.
We have also discussed the need for Disability Services to be more highly aware of Intersectionality. This implies active partnership with other services such as Widening Participation offices, International Students support services, Indigenous Students support services, advocacy services for racialized students, etc. The format of service provision within student services is currently highly fragmented and such partnerships rarely emerge organically. They will have to be triggered strategically, and this implies a culture change that will have to be actively facilitated by unit leadership.
Avoid using obsolete funding model as an excuse for stagnation
There is no doubt that existing funding models are locking Disability Services into practices that are grounded in the medical model. However, governments in most Global North countries are already indicating a will to move away from this format of funding; some have taken concrete steps to develop alternatives. While Disability Services cannot move entirely away from this funding model and these practices at present, they must nonetheless begin to be creative, and work their way progressively towards a new perspective on funding. This may be uncomfortable for a while, as unit staff end up having the feeling of ‘sitting between two chairs’, but moving forward is nevertheless inevitable there is no alternative. The argument that current funding does not allow for creativity and innovation has become an excuse which allows Disability Services to lock themselves in a status quo. This discourse must be actively challenged by leadership.
Engage in an authentic reflection on hiring practices
We have seen that several stances are currently problematic within Disability Services: practices grounded in the medical model, over-focus on the notion of ‘help’, lack of sensitivity with regards to Intersectionality, absence of osmotic relationship with other services, etc. A reflection needs to be carried as to whether current hiring practices might be perpetuating these habits and allowing ‘group think’. Services will need to break these patterns and seek to hire advisers with genuinely different backgrounds, world views, training and perspectives in order to create diversity in a field where there is little currently (Fovet, 2020).
Support staff as they begin using UDL as a lens on their practice
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG44erKUkSg
To download the video transcript
Collaborate with other student services and embracing Intersectionality
If Disability Services no longer formulate their mandate in terms of diagnostic information, then it becomes immediately apparent that they have to ready themselves to welcome and support students who do not identify primarily as having a Disability but may still be experiencing very real barriers in their learning. Students may be feeling ostracized and marginalized on campuses in various ways and through multiple perspectives; they do not necessarily unpack these experiences in terms of multiple identities – instead, they experience it as a whole with regards to their entire campus experience. They may therefore, as a result, end up approaching any of the relevant services for support and will expect this support to acknowledge the full spectrum of their difficulties. In a way, an ideal situation in terms of Intersectionality would be a scenario where, irrespective of whom they contact first, students are referred seamlessly to a full range of support services. This sort of modus operandi, however, presumes a multidisciplinary ease which does not as of yet exist among Disability Services personnel. This is a culture that must be actively created by unit leaders.
Boldly embrace a new wider role for Accessibility services on campus
The most difficult task for Disability Services leaders, looking ahead, will be management of change. Through this journey, we have identified and formulated new goals for these units for the 21st century. The remaining challenge is how best to support this process of change and achieve a culture shift. Disability Services must reframe their work with the social model in mind. This will enable them to align fully and seamlessly with UDL, and to become key stakeholders in campuses’ move towards genuine inclusion. In order to successfully support this management of change, however, it will become increasingly important for unit leaders to acknowledge, borrow and actively use existing literature from the field of Management and Organizational Psychology (Fovet, in print). ¶
Acknowledge and challenge our ambivalence with regards to UDL
Disability Services are often offered the role of promoting UDL on campuses, because prima facie this seems like a good fit. We have seen through this analysis, however, that their position is often ambivalent towards UDL, for many different reasons. It hence becomes very difficult for them to maintain ownership over UDL within their campus community, and this in turn often ends up jeopardizing wider efforts for implementation. This ambivalence is difficult to eliminate altogether, but with a degree of clarity and lucidity, it becomes possible for units to verbalize this hesitation and to tackle it progressively - finding their way among this complex landscape and defining positive roles they are able to play even if they do not carry the brunt of the work in relation to UDL development and implementation (Fovet, in print). Certainly as far as the leadership of these units is concerned, it is healthy to acknowledge this hesitation and to work towards mitigating it, rather than ploughing ahead as if in denial.
Engage in meaningful cross-campus alliances for the development and implementation of UDL
If Disability Services don’t end up being directly in charge of UDL implementation and development, it nevertheless remains essential for them to be actively involved in this work through strategic collaboration. This may take the shape of active collaboration with Teaching and Learning centres or with instructional designers. Such partnership are not common currently and a shift in mindset is required before such osmotic work can take place.
We have also discussed the need for Disability Services to be more highly aware of Intersectionality. This implies active partnership with other services such as Widening Participation offices, International Students support services, Indigenous Students support services, advocacy services for racialized students, etc. The format of service provision within student services is currently highly fragmented and such partnerships rarely emerge organically. They will have to be triggered strategically, and this implies a culture change that will have to be actively facilitated by unit leadership.
Avoid using obsolete funding model as an excuse for stagnation
There is no doubt that existing funding models are locking Disability Services into practices that are grounded in the medical model. However, governments in most Global North countries are already indicating a will to move away from this format of funding; some have taken concrete steps to develop alternatives. While Disability Services cannot move entirely away from this funding model and these practices at present, they must nonetheless begin to be creative, and work their way progressively towards a new perspective on funding. This may be uncomfortable for a while, as unit staff end up having the feeling of ‘sitting between two chairs’, but moving forward is nevertheless inevitable there is no alternative. The argument that current funding does not allow for creativity and innovation has become an excuse which allows Disability Services to lock themselves in a status quo. This discourse must be actively challenged by leadership.
Engage in an authentic reflection on hiring practices
We have seen that several stances are currently problematic within Disability Services: practices grounded in the medical model, over-focus on the notion of ‘help’, lack of sensitivity with regards to Intersectionality, absence of osmotic relationship with other services, etc. A reflection needs to be carried as to whether current hiring practices might be perpetuating these habits and allowing ‘group think’. Services will need to break these patterns and seek to hire advisers with genuinely different backgrounds, world views, training and perspectives in order to create diversity in a field where there is little currently (Fovet, 2020).
Support staff as they begin using UDL as a lens on their practice
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG44erKUkSg
To download the video transcript
Collaborate with other student services and embracing Intersectionality
If Disability Services no longer formulate their mandate in terms of diagnostic information, then it becomes immediately apparent that they have to ready themselves to welcome and support students who do not identify primarily as having a Disability but may still be experiencing very real barriers in their learning. Students may be feeling ostracized and marginalized on campuses in various ways and through multiple perspectives; they do not necessarily unpack these experiences in terms of multiple identities – instead, they experience it as a whole with regards to their entire campus experience. They may therefore, as a result, end up approaching any of the relevant services for support and will expect this support to acknowledge the full spectrum of their difficulties. In a way, an ideal situation in terms of Intersectionality would be a scenario where, irrespective of whom they contact first, students are referred seamlessly to a full range of support services. This sort of modus operandi, however, presumes a multidisciplinary ease which does not as of yet exist among Disability Services personnel. This is a culture that must be actively created by unit leaders.
Boldly embrace a new wider role for Accessibility services on campus
The most difficult task for Disability Services leaders, looking ahead, will be management of change. Through this journey, we have identified and formulated new goals for these units for the 21st century. The remaining challenge is how best to support this process of change and achieve a culture shift. Disability Services must reframe their work with the social model in mind. This will enable them to align fully and seamlessly with UDL, and to become key stakeholders in campuses’ move towards genuine inclusion. In order to successfully support this management of change, however, it will become increasingly important for unit leaders to acknowledge, borrow and actively use existing literature from the field of Management and Organizational Psychology (Fovet, in print). ¶
