Their participation is reduced, not because of a lack of interest, but because of a defensive adaptation to the framework proposed by the institution. Misalignment between assessment methods and learning objectives: Assessment methods such as written exams, oral presentations or multimedia projects sometimes measure the ability to perform in a given modality rather than the targeted skill (analysing, arguing, solving or creating). When expression becomes the condition for success, form supplants substance and the formative function of assessment is lost. Temporal inequalities: Intensive teaching schedules, grouped deadlines and inflexible submission dates accentuate differences in success rates. Students who have to juggle studies and employment, long commutes, family responsibilities or special health conditions learn in a more constrained environment than that which prevails in institutional planning. This time lag undermines perseverance and the quality of work produced.
These dimensions interact with each other as if in some kind of a majestic ‘ballet’. They constitute a veritable ecosystem of requirements. Inclusive pedagogy is, therefore, defined as a concept of teaching and learning that organises equivalent conditions of access from the outset. It also focuses on participation in the learning process and production of evidence of learning for students who differ in their resources, constraints and modes of expression. Examining the illusion of inclusion Higher education institutions readily display their inclusive ambitions. Charters, labels and institutional campaigns highlight openness, diversity of audiences and the desire to support everyone. In reality, implementation is more fragmented with adapted deadlines for certain students and occasional adjustments to schedules. These actions respond to specific situations, but they do not necessarily establish generic and sustainable conditions for heterogeneous cohorts of students. This gap between intention and implementation perpetuates an illusion of progress and often characterises the absence of systemic levers. It is important to understand that clearly identifying this gap is more a matter of diagnosis than criticism. Teaching that does not take into account the five dimensions mentioned above generates hidden costs. Several phenomena combine to create the following scenarios. Confusion of expectations: When instructions for exercises, assignments or examinations are formulated with implicit assumptions – regarding the expected tone, the degree of reference to literature, the structure of reasoning or stylistic expectations –students who are not familiar with these codes devote a significant amount of energy to reconstructing the rules of the game. Their learning focuses less on knowledge and more on decoding the academic system. Withdrawal & self-censorship: Teaching formats based, for example, on rapid speaking or spontaneity in class – presentations, guided discussions or impromptu interventions – favour those who have already mastered these forms of expression. In the absence of written, asynchronous or collective alternatives, some students withdraw to avoid or limit their exposure.
44 Ambition • ISSUE 2 • 2026
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online