By The Research Culture and Researcher Development Team.

The University of Glasgow’s Research Strategy 2036 states that “Great research flourishes in a supportive, inclusive and collegial environment; one where a positive research culture enhances quality, attracts and retains diverse talent, and strengthens our reputation.”

At Glasgow, inclusive research practice, and therefore inclusive researcher development activity, is recognised as a key condition for research excellence. Glasgow’s Inclusive Research Practice Guide (Eikhof and Pearce, 2024) sets the scene for inclusion: “Inclusion is a perspective focused on experiences. It assesses the degree to which everything we do, individually and collectively, is experienced as open, participative, fair, connecting, empathic, respectful of difference and equitably designed. Inclusion considers our practices, processes, decisions, structures, interactions, relationships, allocations and communications. Because these are dynamic, living and lived aspects, inclusion is never ‘achieved’ but has to be constantly created and re-created.”

As inclusive educators, the Research Culture and Researcher Development Team is keenly committed to ensuring that inclusion (encompassing accessibility) is business as usual across all of our events, and initiatives. We work to prioritise inclusion and accessibility for our learners guided by the UK’s legal requirements (The Equality Act 2010 and Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) Accessibility Regulations, 2018)

In 2022 the Research Culture and Researcher Development Team set out the ways of working that underpin our inclusive approach. Below we publish our revised 2026 commitment, set out as a series of statements of intention. Our list is not exhaustive; it represents our minimum standard. Our list is not a prescription; it’s a series of thinking prompts that support us to make the best possible decisions within the limitations of our working environments. Our list is not finished; our learning about, and commitment to, inclusivity is a work in progress. Our list has constraints, and whilst we work hard to do as much as possible, we also accept that we have time, capacity, budget and technological constraints. Nonetheless, we are committed to inclusive practice, and we are publishing our statement below to generate a learning dialogue with developers, researchers and inclusivity experts.

A. Foundational principles

The Research Culture and Researcher Development Team will:

A1. Keep our Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Accessibility knowledge(s) up to date, drawing on both mandatory organisational training requirements, and learning from the wider and more specialist professional opportunities our networks and professional memberships offer.

A2. Ensure all provision is inclusive and accessible by design meaning that we do the work to anticipate and mitigate direct and indirect inequalities, inaccessibilities, and exclusions as part of the design process, rather than asking our learners to do all the work by sending us specific requests or complaints. We want all colleagues to feel like they belong in our (online) classroom by default, and don’t have to do extra work to advise or correct us.

A3. Learn through practice. A simple ‘how can we make this event more inclusive and accessible to you?’ question on every booking form, reminder email, or evaluation form creates space for us to learn from the expectations of those who feel safest having reminded us of their needs directly.

A4. Co-design. Co-designed (and co-delivered) events are frequently better, more relevant, more tailored, and more credible. We create opportunities for co-design via specific consultations, and ongoing partnerships. Co-design helps us to:

A4.i. Activate different perspectives. A team (seminar series, panel, competition judges, or conference speaker line up) is better if it consciously includes a range of ideas and knowledges. Understanding of any topic is deeper if it is achieved collectively through different experiences of ethnicity, disability, gender, socioeconomic background, nationality, culture, and age, as well as through different disciplines, methods, professional specialisms, and career stages. If we find that we don’t personally have all the contacts needed to pull together a diverse team, panel or event, we ask our networks.

A4.ii. Use the right language. We will run our learning designs and materials past others to ensure that it is not only clear and inclusive but that it resonates with the groups we are trying to reach. We check that our vocabulary is up to date, expand acronyms, avoid jargon and try to minimise metaphors and aphorisms.

A4.iii. Stay aware of our unearned advantages. We invite colleagues to keep us appraised of the fact that the support, freedoms, resources, and graces we take for granted, may not be available to everyone.

A4.iv. Confront our own biases, habits, and assumptions. There are a great deal of characterised cognitive biases. Our brains’ perceptive and decision-making capabilities are fallible. We work together to reduce our error-rate.

A4.v. Challenge (micro)aggressions. Microaggression is a term used for commonplace daily verbal, behavioural or environmental slights, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate ‘otherness’ and perhaps also hostile, derogatory, or negative attitudes toward stigmatized or culturally marginalized groups. We appreciate being told what more we need to learn.

A4.vi. Spot unintended signals. Secondary choices about our learning materials such as use of associated images, file names, locations of materials, platforms, and where/when we advertise, all convey subtle messages and can create, coherence or confusion for our learners.

A5. Make authentic choices. Each of us as educators will make design and delivery decisions that resonate with our values, expertise, and professional standards, so that we can lead authentically and credibly in our classrooms.

A6. Recognise our boundaries. We understand the shared origins and distinct boundaries between ‘person-centred teaching’ and its origins in therapeutic practice. We are able to be sensitive to our learners emotional needs, without crossing professional boundaries.

A7. Avoid stereotypes. We will avoid the heuristics that group people of similar demographics, experiences, disciplines, or disabilities into a single set of assumed needs.

A8. Support all collaborators and guest facilitators we are responsible for to understand and work in alignment with this guide.

B. Communicating expectations

The Research Culture and Researcher Development Team will:

B1. Be transparent about design choices. We will let people know what the session aims to achieve, and how the different activities included will support their learning. To allows participants to manage their own engagement with the activities we will communicate if they need to prepare something in advance, that they will need microphones or cameras, or if they will be asked to speak in front of the whole group.

B2. Offer a session summary and/or content warnings for any topics, content, or images that could be considered sensitive or upsetting. Fair warning allows participants to manage their own engagement with the materials.

B3. Avoid last minute changes to the format, schedule, times or venue as far as possible, and communicate all of the details in advance to allow participants to plan.

B4. Use a Code of Conduct to clearly establish that it’s everyone’s responsibility to create inclusive conditions. The Research Culture and Researcher Development Code of Conduct covers what inclusive behaviour means in practice, and what will happen if someone contravenes the Code.

B5. Re-communicate participants’ expectations at the start of a session noting how design decisions have been made to support a good learning environment.

C. Physical accessibility

The Research Culture and Researcher Development Team will:

C1. Consider timing and scheduling. Scheduling outside of core hours (10am–4pm at Glasgow) may mean that some colleagues are excluded from attending all or part of our events. We aim to avoid school holidays, key religious holidays and Fridays (many people with flexible working patterns don’t work on Fridays). Where we can, we offer a choice of repeat sessions and/or vary regular sessions over different days and times. Note: colleagues on fixed term contracts may be excluded by a programme that requires a year’s sign up.

C2. Provide accurate information on physical accessibility in advance, to enable planning ahead. For example, outline whether there are steps to the venue or speaker platform, hearing loops, the locations of toilets (including gender neutral facilities, and cubicles containing sinks), reflection or prayer facilities, breastfeeding/pumping facilities, lifts, ramps, disabled parking, if a quiet area will be available, or if water is freely available.

C3. Plan for physical comfort. Participant learning may be adversely affected if attendees are asked to work without breaks, stay seated, remain standing, work outside, walk, or sit on the floor for any length of time. We communicate that is it acceptable to choose to be present in a way that is most enabling for each individual. This includes coffee and lunch times as it is challenging for someone using a mobility device to also hold a plate.

C4. Always use microphones. Participants with hearing loss or impairment rely on it.

C5. Support dietary requirements. We will ensure that the refreshments served are suitable for a variety of dietary requirements and are clearly labelled. If some participants are fasting (e.g. for Ramadan), you may wish to offer them access to food at a later point in the day, or a lunchtime space away from the food.

D. Digital Accessibility

All digital content (before, during and after your event, course or workshop) should comply with the Digital Accessibility Regulations (2018). The Research Culture and Researcher Development Team will:

D1. Make presentations and handouts available in advance or at the start of the session, so that participants can set up screen readers, take time to process complex concepts or instructions, or alert you to any inaccessible language or images that need your attention.

D2. Avoid situations where long or complex reading takes place during the session (especially from the screen). We will make sure that required reading is available well in advance.

D3. Use the Microsoft Accessibility Checker (Tools > Check Accessibility) and a screen reader (e.g. in Word, Review > Read Aloud) to identify issues in learning materials. We avoid using strings of symbols and emojis in the text as these are read out by screen readers as long strings of frustrating code.

D4. Use live captioning on MS Teams. Additionally, we will consider in what settings a skilled live captioner, or British Sign Language interpreters would provide an even better translation experience.

D5. Adjust subtitles on YouTube. We check and adjust auto-generated captions for accuracy, especially when it comes to names, technical terms or professional jargon.

D6. Write good Alt Text. As well as ensuring there is ‘Alt’ (alternate) text for all images, (including in images used on all social media).

D7. Deploy digital discussion tools (e.g. mentimeter, slido, or padlet) so that participants can engage anonymously. These tools also create a record of the discussion for those who’d like to refer back to it, and allow more equitable use of Question and Answer time.

D8. Make space for participants who need to be camera off, or mic off during online sessions. Since learners don’t always have a workspace to themselves, or have full control of their working environment, we recognise that allowing presence in a number of forms is needed.

D9. Use Creative Commons licensing to help others know the permissible ways to reuse our materials.

D10. Accept that some authors may use generative AI to support them with some aspects of the drafting process, and where AI has been used we require authors to declare this, specifying what platform, and for what purpose AI has been used.

We aim to create the best experience for each of our participants within the constraints of our skills and resources. So, what have we missed? Let us know in the comments.