Stubborn silos between pedagogy and space planning limit inclusive higher education learning environments

Stubborn silos between pedagogy and space planning limit inclusive higher education learning environments | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Case Report Stubborn silos between pedagogy and space planning limit inclusive higher education learning environments Louise Nagle, Petrina Comerford This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7252220/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This research explores lecturers' perceptions of fostering inclusion within higher education learning environments and the challenges they face in adapting to meet these expectations. An exploratory case study employing a qualitative approach was undertaken which utilized semi-structured interviews and a thematic analysis. Twelve lecturers were interviewed from diverse disciplines across an Irish university, including STEM, Social Sciences, Health, Arts and Business. The main themes that emerged were a) Considerations of Inclusion in the context of the learning environment b) Restrictions and difficulties within learning environments in terms of inclusion c) Strategy required to adapt to inclusion needs. Additional sub-themes within these are also examined. Findings reveal that lecturers acknowledged their responsibilities in promoting student inclusion supported by staff Continuous Professional Development (CPD). However, it was also evident that the learning environments available to lecturers have not evolved in parallel to advances in the profession. The time and planning required for deliberate inclusive teaching activities emerged and this work had to consider the space in which the activities would be delivered. These spaces were often considered inadequate. Participants expressed frustration at the persistent silos between academic staff and those managing facilities, underscoring the need for cross-functional collaboration. While situated within the Irish higher education context, the findings are transferable to universities internationally, particularly those seeking to align inclusive pedagogical practices with flexible, student-centered spatial design. Inclusion Learning Spaces Higher Education Introduction The education sector is faced with a plethora of challenges. The continued commercialization of education, for example, impacts universities’ intake which in turn changes roles and responsibilities within it [1]. Challenges are compounded with the needs of students in terms of empowerment and participation [2]. What is observable is the gradual revolutionizing of the teaching [3] and lecturers are confronted with expectations to pivot their delivery to meet these transitions, including that of inclusion. This inclusive education also demands a changing learning environment to accommodate a disparate student intake [4]. Learning Environments The learning environment is a shared space [5] and is a fundamental pillar of inclusion in higher education, which ‘can both enable and disable; it can facilitate, or hamper, human actions’ [6]. It not only reflects equal access to education but also an equal educational experience in both virtual and physical learning environments. Therefore, the expectation of inclusive and interactive education is real [7]. While pedagogical approaches in higher education have evolved to meet these demands, the design of learning environments in many Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) has remained largely unchanged [8], raising concerns about their impact on student inclusion. Lecturers are often assigned rigid environments, such as tiered lecture halls, which were not always easy to manage or facilitate resettling [8]. In addition, there is a bureaucracy in terms of booking spaces and a territorial culture over rooms in specific academic departments [5]. In the event that adequate space is secured, there is also the challenge of adapting teaching techniques to facilitate learning [6]. Lecturers also need to develop adequate competence [9] to deliver in innovative learning environments. While pedagogical and policy changes are crucial within higher education, they must be complemented by purposefully designed learning environments that promote accessibility [10]. Obligations in relation to Inclusivity Every student within an educational setting has the right to quality experiences [11]. Although architectural designs of campuses have been proclaimed as symbols of change [12] the configuration of a learning space in higher education has remained the same for decades [10]. Within an Irish context, tertiary institutions are expected to adopt a new National Charter for Universal Design in Tertiary Education [13], which puts an obligation on HEIs to ensure areas are welcoming, accessible and sensory-aware while also lowering barriers in the physical environment [13]. An inclusive higher education system is also a priority in the country’s economic social and equality objectives published in the Irish National Access Plan (for third level). Even with the increased emphasis on inclusion, there are still issues with educators’ conceptions and execution of inclusive education. For example, some disciplines such as Engineering have gender-based inclusion challenges [14]. Research has shown that modifications to physical spaces not only enhance inclusivity but also contribute to student autonomy, collaboration, and overall well-being [7]. However, achieving true inclusion requires a holistic approach—one that integrates flexible learning spaces with inclusive teaching practices, institutional policies, and staff training [10]. As HEIs prepare to implement the ALTITUDE Charter, it is imperative that inclusion transcends policy rhetoric and translates into tangible, student-cantered changes. Methodology An exploratory case study was chosen to gain insight into real-world experiences, as this approach enables researchers to understand what actually happens in practice [15]. The research aimed to gain a unique understanding of personal experiences and knowledge construction. A qualitative approach was used to explore participants’ perspectives on learning spaces. The researchers acknowledged and took account of the potential for bias. This process of reflexivity therefore involved the researchers themselves reflecting on their own way of thinking [16]. Ethical approval was received by the relevant HEI in which the participant lecturers worked (HREC MR-24-025). Consent from participants in the research was also obtained. Semi-structured interviews were used as the research tool for data collection [17] and these research interviews took place between February 2024 – February 2025. The researchers were mindful of soliciting as wide a range of views and disciplines as possible. An important consideration was that the cohort represented the spectrum of academic departments. A total of 12 lecturers were interviewed across various disciplines including Music, Health and Outdoor Ed, Business, Social Science, Nautical Science, Sports and Leisure, Early Childcare, Nursing, Engineering & Science, Culinary Arts, Accountancy and Tourism & Hospitality. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and the data was anonymized. NVivo (Version 15) was employed to code the data following Braun & Clark’s [18] Thematic Analysis (TA). This is a method for identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data, which was relevant to the research undertaken. It minimally organizes and describes the data set in (rich) detail. The identification of which data to include became an initial decision and was based on prevalence of a theme “both in terms of space within each data item, and prevalence across the entire data set” [18] (pg. 10). Therefore, counting the re-occurrence of key concepts formed part of this process. Findings The examination of data began with participants' views on inclusion, both in relation to their teaching practices and the environments in which they deliver learning. This section explores how they understood and enacted inclusion within their professional contexts. Therefore, we began the analysis with their views on this concept within their work, their reflections on their work environment and then how they considered inclusion in this context. Considerations on Inclusion It was evident from participant reflections that they were familiar with the term ‘Inclusion’ and participants contemplated it when planning and delivering their teaching. The research demonstrated that in many cases teaching staff took ownership around expectations of inclusivity and viewed it as part of their teaching role. This was evident when one lecturer reflected on inclusion more broadly within modern educational systems explaining that ‘ inclusivity…it's everyone's job ’ (P4). It was also recognised that students have varying needs and that support, understanding and acceptance is required (P10). Several participants highlighted the growing emphasis on inclusion, noting that student expectations have evolved in parallel with societal change including more openness (P1). The injustices of the past formed part of the context in which inclusion sits and this was evident when one lecturer reflected that in the past students with learning differences for example could not move from local education institutions as there were no supports for them (P4). Integrating change appears to be a balancing act and one lecturer explained that 'There’s a fine line to walk in ensuring inclusivity without creating new divisions’ (P10). Not all change was welcome and there was a danger of being ‘creatures of habits’ and resisting change (P1). There also emerged a question around what inclusion involved and what was acceptable. While many lecturers viewed inclusion as fundamental, others expressed concerns about its implementation and interpretation, so consensus was not always apparent:‘I suppose maybe I don't believe exactly in the whole [thing]...I just treat everybody the same’ (P12). Another explained if there is ‘a shy person, it might not be right to select them, you know? That nearly goes against the concept of inclusion (P5)’, which reflects the complexity of the area and the challenges that lecturers find themselves facing. These reflections highlight that while inclusion is widely acknowledged by lecturers as an essential aspect of their role, its interpretation and implementation vary significantly. Some viewed inclusion as a shared institutional responsibility, while others expressed uncertainty or concern about how best to apply inclusive principles in practice. This variation underscores the complexity of embedding inclusion meaningfully across higher education. The following section explores these challenges, identifying that they are compounded by structural and spatial barriers within the physical teaching environment. How the environment can enhance inclusion Lecturers emphasized that the physical learning environment is a crucial factor in fostering inclusion, engagement, and learning outcomes: ‘ the environment is integral to teaching and learning…I think that those kinds of large spaces, the area spaces, natural light, they [are] so important in terms of people's (students) engagements ’ (P1) and: ‘ the physical space it's a huge element of it [engagement]’ (P3). In some instances, the type of space fostered lecturer enthusiasm and one participant reflected on an emotional connection to a room, explaining that they ‘love’ going into a specific room and that it was their ‘favorite’ space (P7). This suggests that even informal or overlooked spaces can carry deep meaning and act as anchors for identity, expression, or comfort. Teaching in higher education occurs across various environments, including outdoor spaces. One participant explained that 'in the spring, I plan to vary the site for students because some learn differently and might benefit from the outdoors ’ (P7). This identifies that the benefits of teaching outdoors were discernible and were also supported for example when a participant reflected that ‘ there is incredible equality of discomfort in the outdoors...there's no gender roles outdoors… play outdoors tends not to have such gender stereotypical roles ’ (P2). Participants also reflected how they can use the environment to enhance the teaching and learning experience. Several lecturers viewed it as a two-way process and participants reflected on the need for students to work with the teacher to enhance the teaching and learning experience. One participant captured this idea by saying ‘ I would link that very much with the students creating the learning space…spaces are the opportunity for the students to connect with each other, with the staff’ (P3). This perspective is further explored in the next sub-section. Adapting teaching style to consider inclusivity within the learning space Lecturers highlighted strategies that encourage student engagement, flexibility, and active participation in both physical and virtual classrooms. Teaching has moved from a didactic style to a more learner centred style (Wong, 2024). Therefore, lecturers explained that student engagement is significant to the modern teaching and learning process. It became apparent from the research that the learning space was integral to inclusivity and the ability to allow students move around, interact and engage with the teaching and learning process. One participant explained that they found ‘ that movement within the group makes a difference ’ (P8). Another reflected that ‘ I will tell students from the start, if they need to get up at any point, they don't even have to ask permission ’ (P11). The same observations emerged from the online delivery space where one participant reflected on the importance of ‘ nurturing relationships in an online environment between yourself and students and amongst the student s’ (P4) and another reflected that ‘ I think group activities are another means of getting students to be included in the [online] class, group or environment ’ (P5). The need for student participation was observable where students could not ‘hide’ and are ‘connected’ (P12). This connection was also encouraged by a participant who explained that they create situations where ‘peers are articulating their experiences, then they can learn from the experiences of each other and the voices of each other’ (P2). Another participant spoke about social constructivism creating an equitable and active class by presenting from the side or back of the classroom and incorporating flipped classroom techniques (P2). The size of the class also impacted the experiences in delivery: ‘ I actually think that the smaller class sizes and practical sessions, definitely they encourage interaction ’ (P6) and that ‘ engagement improves in smaller, practical settings ’ (P10). This suggests that inclusivity is not solely about the physical layout but also about the scale of learning environments. Smaller settings foster engagement, whereas larger lecture halls may hinder participation. Observations around smaller labs being less daunting for speaking out (P6) emerged and the need for spaces to encourage students to interact were identified (P3). While lecturers are clearly adapting their pedagogical approaches to support inclusivity, these efforts often occur in isolation and without alignment from space design, scheduling systems, or institutional planning. This disconnect underscores the persistent silos between teaching practice and structural decision-making in higher education. Student contribution to inclusivity In addition to lecturers adapting their teaching strategies, students also played an active role in fostering inclusive learning environments, by contributing to the shaping of learning spaces and pedagogical approaches. One participant reasoned that students ‘ are overcoming the challenges of the traditional spaces’ (P3). It was also recognised that they are contributing to adaptations of the teaching environment: ‘ I also asked them what particular teaching style do they like, what learning approach do they like, what do they think would benefit them (P11). This formed larger inclusive and reflective learning for students, which was evident where one lecturer identified that students gained an understanding that their actions affect the people around them ‘the whole planet and the whole global community’ (P2). This view could link to their interaction with the classroom environment while also considering ‘ international students in group work bringing diverse perspectives, which help local students learn more about other cultures ’ (P7). Despite participants’ valuable insights, their voices are often overlooked within the ‘larger machinery of the institution’ (Ramdas et al, 2024), which create silos that persist within HEIs. These perspectives could be harnessed in the future design and adaptation of physical learning spaces, which was described by P3 who suggested that ‘ students [are] creating the learning space [and] we should be hearing from stakeholders as spaces are designed .’ Restrictions and difficulties with Learning Spaces The lecturing staff that were interviewed reflected on the restrictive environment in which they often deliver their classes: ‘if students have a sense that spaces are old or tired or rigid ...they line up, they go in, they can't move… it's that's not enjoyable, that's not inclusive...it affects attendance ’ (P4) and: ‘ it's just the greyness, the drabness, the monotonous hegemony almost of the learning environment.. [lecturer halls are] very barren, very bare bar, you know, that kind of Spartan type environment ... I think impinges learning at a deeper level’ (P7). This would suggest that from the lecturer's perspective the learning environment affects teaching and learning. In one observation, this was attributed in part to the age of the buildings: ‘ our physical buildings of course are already built and designed with it's in the 1970s view of what a learning environment looks like’ (P4). Research participants also reflected on the importance of choosing a room suitable to the class size: ‘ large seated areas...can be very intimidating and undermining if... there’s less than 20 in a class group... should be a of a sense of containment and safety….too big an environment can undermine’ (P4) and: ‘ restriction on room numbers, room capacity, often we can't make changes’ (P3). Other environments were uncomfortable and described as ‘ too squashed... too warm’’ (P12) or inflexible where ‘you can't move things around ’ (P5). The restrictions around movement in the learning area was discerned as an issue when delivering classes and one lecturer observed that some spaces are static where students take the same seats every week (P8) and that tired lecture halls restrict movement (P11) The need for a variety of learning spaces was seen as a requirement to stimulate the teaching and learning process : ‘different spaces allow different kinds of conversations and engagement, leading to better learning outcomes ’ (P10) and that it takes planning and consideration: ‘if you've got three or four lectures in a row and you're rushing from one room to the next and you're just trying to get set up, that's the time where you may not consider it ’ (P6). It became evident that lecturers connected learning spaces with inclusivity, and they explained that activities are ‘normal centric’ and built on the assumption that everyone is ' like Leonardo da Vinci's picture of a human being ’ (P2). This assumption causes challenges as lecturers ‘ see a range of inclusive and non-inclusive spaces...a classroom that has the fixed seating and the PowerPoint and no ability for students to move around, get into groups’ (P3). Lecturers also had to consider the diverse needs of their students: ‘ some people are auditory, some people like visuals’ (P11) so adapting content formed part of the delivery process. In relation to the online teaching environment, it was apparent that the virtual environment is ‘ difficult...it's a terribly sterile environment’ (P2). Another observation identified the difficulties for students engaging in online delivery when ‘ those with learning differences are unable to practice their social skills online in a way they can do in the physical environment ’ (P6). The same lecturer, however, reflected that ‘ online it's a lot easier because again, the nature of it, you're in a private space... you've time to gather your thoughts ’ (P6). The flexibility of online delivery was identified by another lecturer who explained that ‘ I personally love learning online as I can pause, I can rewind, I can open Google, I can open chat GPT I can tease things out, I can go back to that what I'm learning ’ (P5). The time required to adapt and managing learning spaces in order to consider inclusion also emerged as a difficulty. This added responsibility to an already busy role (Lauermann, & Karabenick, 2014). One lecturer explained that they have less time to dedicate to EDI activities (P10) and another reflected that ‘ I think staff are up against a huge challenge when it comes to timetabling, room allocation, feeling like they have responsibility to manage the attendance issues… taking account of our systems, aligning our space design and then, you know, keeping ... both the students and the staff at the forefront…and I'm not sure we're doing that’ (P3). Staff feel unprepared and unsupported Learning spaces are in a state of transition and this was apparent where it was indicated that ‘ I think actually it's a meeting point between what we've had historically and where we're going in the future as well’ (P1). Transitions often occur within a state of flux and uncertainty and it was observable within the research that lecturers sometimes feel unprepared when confronted with integrating inclusivity into their teaching in certain space. This was notable when one participant was faced with online delivery explaining that ‘ there are students not suitable to online delivery…they're not really the type of learner that engages really well with online learning ’ (P12). A challenging environment may require structure and support which emerged as a concern: ‘y ou’ll never know everything. The more training you do, the more you realise how much you don’t know. Mental health, for example, is often overlooked as a disability ’ (P10). Another explained that ‘ my perception would be that if somebody feels different, they identify themselves as different... that sometimes can create something of a power gradient in a teaching situation’ (P2) and it was observed that if there is an issue it can pertain to a ‘lack of knowledge or a lack of appreciation… on the part of the lecturer as opposed to not wanting to assist ’ (P6). Continuous Professional Development (CPD) was identified as an answer to this perceived lack of readiness for the demands of the learning environment(P11) and another explained that ‘ I would really like to do... upskilling on ... different abilities that you would see in a classroom and ... cheat sheet styl e. I could do all my lectures outdoors; I would probably need more upskilling ’ (P9). However, as already identified in the previous section, time and workload were seen as barriers to engaging with this training: ‘ having the time and space to address these challenges remains a problem ’ (P10) and ‘ the intensity that's on people ... the paperwork and timing and quick turnaround ’ (P4). Lecturers also reflected on confrontation, which can emerge in a teaching environment with one reasoning that when they are trying to include all participants others ‘are rolling their eyes and maybe becoming less tolerant of that individu al’ (P2). Innovation required to adapt to inclusion needs The third theme that emerged within this research identified the innovative approach that lecturers adopted to respond to the challenges they identified. It emerged that lecturers were adapting their teaching to meet inclusion needs and one explained that that they wouldn’t have tried a different style unless they have 'been forced to actually do it’ (P1). Several lecturers indicated that they experiment or try out various ways of teaching to ensure that students are gaining the best learning experience: ‘to include people by empowering people and creating micro opportunities to let them to be in charge of their own learning [which] supports them in developing more self-efficacy around their own learning (P2). There were other physical signals of change ‘ for example, we now have gender-neutral nursing uniforms, which wasn’t something we had 10 years ago (P8) and ‘our uniform policy had to change to accommodate students wearing hijabs’ (P10). The interviewees identified that beyond local adaptations, changes at management level are also required where it was perceived that “ we’re quite rigid in our structure. Our classrooms are set up in specific ways, and we deliver material in a set manner ’ (P10) and it emerged that the system of accessing suitable spaces needed to adapt. Adapting the layout Lecturers work with the physical spaces they have available to them and observed the restraints they began to overcome. This was identified when one lecturer indicated that ‘ I think about equality in terms of how I lay out the chairs…I'll tend to put them out in a circle beforehand ’ (P2) and another discerned that smaller groups allow a more comfortable setting for students to have ‘that Eureka moment where something clicks’ (P11). Overcoming isolation and lack of engagement can take many forms across many disciplines. One lecturer explained that a group of lecturers formed an online group where people met from all over the world and entitled it ‘conductors in isolation’ (P1). Such initiatives required a large buy-in of students and staff whereas in other cases, adapting a learning space required smaller amounts of planning and resources: ‘ while I'm planning for interactive group work... I might do something like a flipped classroom, get students to look at things in advance ’ (P3) and ‘changing the layout slightly so that you have ... less opportunity for the students to not engage ’ (P12). Thinking outside the box was required in some cases as well as being flexible and innovative. One participant realized ‘that movement makes a huge difference in learning. Static environments can lead to static ideas ’ (P8) and another spoke of having the ‘ability to step in and out of the space…so it's like the notion of the physical space but having sort of side rooms where you can quietly choose to step into one another ’ (P4). An interesting example of adaption was described following a chance conversation on the African American composer, Florence Price with a class which was an impetus for them to dedicate half of the concert to the composer. This appeared to have an emotional impact on the lecturer who described it as a moment that made them ‘ consider my role in a much more profound way...that was really kind of an eye-opening moment ’ (P1). Discussion Based on themes identified the findings provide insight into how lecturers perceive and navigate inclusivity in higher education learning spaces. The majority of research participants were aware of the obligations that inclusiveness put on the educational system on their university and on their work [19] [20]. This would imply that management has informed them of the needs of students and how these needs can be met. However, this was not always the case and some felt underprepared, as one participant explained that if ‘ there's an issue, it's often because of a genuine, maybe lack of knowledge or a lack of appreciation…on the part of the lecturer as opposed to not wanting to, to assist ’ (P6). Awareness and education around expectations in terms of inclusivity would appear to be an on-going activity among staff [21] and perhaps should not be taken for granted. Aspirations for what a positive inclusive environment would look like were evident in the research, with participants explaining the space should allow conversations, engagement, safety, stimulation and movement. Some participants were comfortable in consulting students on the teaching style that suited them within a given environment and others reflected on the way that students create the learning spaces, which could reflect a co-creation of learning experiences where both lecturers and students are navigating a new way. This co-operation was evident where some lecturers were open to feedback from students, to being innovative and to thinking outside the box. This positive attitude of lecturers positively affected the quality of inclusion [22]. This is acknowledged in reflections on the need to be adaptive, facilitating [7], cognizant of context and improve curriculum [23]. It was also apparent that participants had to work with the spaces available to them and they demonstrated ingenuity and innovation in delivering teaching in what was sometimes a challenging environment. For example, there were reflections on active learning [5] and bringing movement into the classroom environment [24]. This was achieved by encouraging interaction between students in some cases when, for example, they were sent off to work together. Students were also encouraged to be inclusive and ‘ they [the students] understand that their actions are not just for them ’ (P2) but that their actions have consequences for others. This was observed when international students were integrated in activities. This work required a diversity of delivery spaces [6] which existed in terms of outdoor [25], online, lecture halls, small classrooms, active learning spaces. However, access to these facilities was not always an option due to limitations in availability. Lecturers identified these spaces make a difference to delivery [9] improving well-being [26] and are important to student engagement [23]. Some participants had to work at engaging students and others viewed students as ‘partners’ in the teaching and learning process and actively sought student input and feedback. In some cases, this demanded modifications to delivery and teaching styles, which required adjusting techniques and lecturers moving outside of comfort zones. Participants reflected on having no control over the delivery space, with difficulties in accessing smaller rooms, controlling the size of the class [27], the availability of suitable spaces and working with a rigid booking system [5]. What is clear from the research is that most facilities available to lecturers are not sufficient or adequate. Adjectives describing teaching spaces included tired, rigid, barren, bare and Spartan as well as intimidating, undermining, belonging to the 1970’s emerged. Others reflected that space can be static, it can hinder movement, be sterile and non-inclusive. These observations did not lend themselves to a conducive learning environment [5] when, for example, students ‘ line up, they go in, they can't move… it's that's not enjoyable, that's not inclusive...it affects attendance ’ (P4). Other difficulties included restrictions on movement, the lack of variety of spaces and non-inclusive rooms. Difficulties in the creation of a safe space online [28] were also identified, as well as adapting online delivery for varying learning needs. What was evident was that lecturers were challenged in their environment and somewhat overwhelmed at times. Participants reflected on difficulties around being inclusive and in one case a lecturer explained that they questioned what is acceptable and what is not, for example should they select a shy person to speak to in a classroom environment? This had to be balanced with expectations of ensuring students were engaged and stimulated [3] [4]. The demands that inclusivity brings can be overwhelming at times and this was indicated in comments around the ability to keep up with developments within the inclusivity space, using the correct language and the constant evolving conversations around inclusivity [29]. The historical baggage that HEIs possess when educational programs were white, male and European still exists in some disciplines [30]. A lack of awareness that “across the current academic literature, the “traditional Irish student” is now considered a misnomer, with research demonstrating that the student body is now made up of learners from diverse social, linguistic, racial, religious and ability profiles” [20] (pg. 24) is still evident. The resulting rate of change in adapting to the learning experience and the corresponding environment requires consideration and skill on the part of the educator [7]. Academic staff sometimes struggled in responding to students’ needs, in adapting spaces and ensuring everyone felt included. In particular, challenges were realized in finding the time required to learn about inclusivity, to develop relevant skills and competencies in the area and to access supporting resources. Participants explained that they may need support for delivering in various spaces. This applied to adapting content for an outdoor environment, to encouraging student engagement in the classroom and delivering online for example. Reflections on social constructivism, equitable classroom [31], flipped classroom and active classes emerged [27]. The preparation, scaffolding and premeditated teaching and learning activities emerged and this work had to consider the space in which the activities would be delivered. They therefore contemplated how they could use the environment to encourage inclusivity and often the challenges that this environment brought emerged during this reflection. For example, the challenge of large classes was evident in reflections [8] and the search for a space to hold the relevant class was an ordeal in some cases. It could be argued that these challenges affect the well-being of lecturers while working in what is perceived to be a demanding profession [3]. It emerged that learning spaces as well as teaching and learning itself are in a state of transition [3] from an old environment that accommodated didactic styles to a modern way of teaching and learning [32]. This transition is hindered by inflexible silos where the booking of facilities seems to add stress to the lecturers and can be perceived as stringent control on access. It is apparent that sections of the university operate in divisions, with cultural and operational differences between academic and non-academic units [33]. A university with independent units working without access to the bigger picture can be counterproductive [34], inefficient and lead to frustration. Conclusion A number of conclusions can be drawn from the research findings. If universities are operating in fixed inflexible systems and with units working in isolation, then progress in tackling many inclusion issues will not be resolved. A cause of frustration was the long-standing 'silos' between pedagogy and space planning that demanded cross-functional collaboration. Without this cooperation and investment in teaching strategies, progress is hampered [35]. This study extends current research by exposing how institutional structures and spatial limitations can undermine inclusive pedagogy. Therefore, collaboration between administration functions and lecturers in the coal face of delivery is overdue and without it, lecturers cannot access the supports and facilities they badly need. Such interventions would require a cultural shift to reduce these internal ‘silos’. Therefore, there must be a move beyond policy verbosity to ensure tangible, lasting change. It is not just a moral or institutional imperative; it is a national and global one. The National Access Plan and expected adoption of the ALTITUDE charter will formalise responsibilities put on universities and in turn lecturers. However, lecturers are still challenged in terms of meeting these commitments due to a lack of time, support, inadequate facilities and insufficient supply of adequate spaces [6]. If universities are truly dedicated to inclusion, not as a rhetoric but as a foundational principle, then they must act. Learning environments need to empower both students and staff. Essential investment in the physical and pedagogical infrastructure should be made to enable inclusive practice. Advancing inclusion in education is central to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 4 on Quality Education and SDG 10 on Reduced Inequalities. Now is the time to match ambition with action. If inclusive education is to move from principle to practice, it must be supported by targeted, sustained investment. It cannot be expected that lecturers transform their teaching within outdated or inflexible systems. Governments and higher education leaders must prioritise funding for the physical, digital, and pedagogical infrastructure required to create accessible and inclusive learning environments. This includes retrofitting existing spaces and integrating inclusive technologies. Short-term initiatives are not enough; what is needed is long-term, strategic investment that empowers staff and benefits all learners. Without financial commitment, inclusion risks becoming tokenistic rather than transformative Funding is not a peripheral issue but the foundation on which meaningful, lasting change must be built. While grounded in the Irish context, the findings offer transferable insights for global institutions who wish to integrate inclusive teaching and flexible, student-centered learning spaces. Limitations The research is limited by sample size and the fact that it was undertaken in a single HEI. Declarations Acknowledgements The authors declares that there are no acknowledgments for this manuscript. Author contributions The authors are solely responsible for all facets of this manuscript’s development. Funding No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript. Consent to participate All research involving human subjects was freely-given and written informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from participants. Availability of Data and Materials Anonymised participation data is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request, subject to ethical approval. Ethics approval and consent to participate Ethical approval was received by the relevant HEI in which the participant lecturers worked (HREC MR-24-025). Consent from participants in the research was also obtained. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations of the University Human Ethics Committee. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The author declares no competing interests. Open Access The authors give permission to publish this article through open access Corresponding Author (Author 1) Dr. Louise Nagle – Munster Technological University, Co. Kerry Ireland Email: [email protected] Orcid ID: 0000-0003-3713-8807 Author 2: Petrina Comerford – Munster Technological University, Co. Kerry Ireland Email: [email protected] Orcid ID: 0009-0006-1985-7487 Clinical trial number: not applicable References Veles N, Graham C, Ovaska C. University professional staff roles, identities, and spaces of interaction: Systematic review of literature published in 2000–2020. Policy Reviews in Higher Education. 2023 Jul 3;7(2):127-68. https://doi-org.mtu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/23322969.2023.21938226 Osborne A, Yillah RM, Bash-Taqi A, Conteh OB. Navigating exclusion: school responses to the radical inclusion policy for marginalized students in Sierra Leone. Discover Education. 2025 Mar 21;4(1):67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00452-3 Ramdas S, Slootman M, van der Zee K. Creating equitable learning environments by building on differences in higher education: design and implementation of the MIXED model. Learning Environments Research. 2025 Jan 31:1-6.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09524-5 Duarte J. Inclusion in culturally and linguistically diverse bilingual schools in the Netherlands: promising beginnings, ongoing challenges. Learning Environments Research. 2025 Apr 8:1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09533-4 Power CK, Supple B. Teaching spaces: The fourth corner of university learning. Benade L. Flexible learning spaces: Inclusive by design? New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies. 2019 Jul 1;54(1):53-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-019-00127-2 Wong M. Inclusion may not lead to belonging: The case for student-centered classrooms. College Teaching. 2024 Jan 18:1-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2024.23078844 Willis J, Gillett-Swan J, Franz J, Farahnak Majd N, Carroli L, Gallagher J, Bray E. Thriving in vertical schools: Aspirations for inclusion and capability from a salutogenic design perspective. Learning Environments Research. 2024 Jun 11:1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09502-3 Khamitova A. Innovative learning spaces of higher education: a systematic mapping review of themes. TechTrends. 2023 Sep;67(5):830-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00892-4 Altes TK, Willemse M, Goei SL, Ehren M. Higher education teachers’ understandings of and challenges for inclusion and inclusive learning environments: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review. 2024 May 1;43:100605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100605 Anwar N. Report review: Reimagining our futures together: a new social contract for education: edited by Mary de Sousa, Paris, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2021, 186 pp., ISBN 978-92-3-100478-0. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707 Alterator SC, Deed CR. Framing innovative learning environments. School Space and Its Occupation. Conceptualising and Evaluating Innovative Learning Environments. 2018 Aug 16:3-11. ALTITUDE Project. ALTITUDE - The National Charter for Universal Design in Tertiary Education . AHEAD Educational Press. 2024 Hulus A. Review of comprehensive approaches for encouraging innovation and inclusion in ETC education to foster women’s engagement. Discover Education. 2025 May 19;4(1):123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00539-x Verner JM, Abdullah LM. Exploratory case study research: Outsourced project failure. Information and Software Technology. 2012 Aug 1;54(8):866-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2011.11.001 Weick KE, Quinn RE. Organizational change and development. Annual review of psychology. 1999 Feb;50(1):361-86. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.361 Hettiarachchi, S., Jayathilake, C. & Pereira, S.S. Balancing aspirations and realities: A qualitative study of L2 motivation among Sri Lankan social science lecturers in English medium instruction. Discov Educ 4, 195 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00626-z Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. In Encyclopedia of critical psychology 2014 (pp. 1947-1952). Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613 Lauermann F, Karabenick SA. Teacher responsibility: What does it mean for teachers’ motivation and emotions?. In Teacher Motivation 2014 May 30 (pp. 116-132). Routledge. Healy R, Banks J, Ryder D. Ireland’s Approach to Universal Design in Tertiary Education is Maturing: An Introduction to this Special Issue. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education. 2024 Sep 24;16(2). https://doi.org/10.62707/aishej.v16i2.919 Keiler LS. Teachers’ roles and identities in student-centered classrooms. International journal of STEM education. 2018 Sep 14;5(1):34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0131-6 Guillemot F, Lacroix F, Nocus I. Link between the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education and the quality of inclusive education as perceived by parents of children with a disability. Learning Environments Research. 2025 Apr 23:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09534-3 Scott C. Managing and regulating commitments to equality, diversity and inclusion in higher education. Irish Educational Studies. 2020 Apr 2;39(2):175-91. https://doi-org.mtu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/03323315.2020.17548779 Strean WB. Creating student engagement? HMM: Teaching and learning with humor, music, and movement. Creative Education. 2011 Aug 9;2(3):189-92. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2011.23026 Becker C, Lauterbach G, Spengler S, Dettweiler U, Mess F. Effects of regular classes in outdoor education settings: A systematic review on students’ learning, social and health dimensions. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2017 May;14(5):485. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050485 Tancredi H, Graham LJ, Killingly C, Sweller N. Investigating the impact of Accessible Pedagogies on the experiences and engagement of students with language and/or attentional difficulties. Learning Environments Research. 2024 Aug 31:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09514-z Bent T, Knapp JS, Robinson JK. Evaluating the effectiveness of teaching assistants in active learning classrooms. Journal of Learning Spaces. 2020 Sep 21;9(2). https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1984 Korneeva E, Strielkowski W, Krayneva R, Sherstobitova A. Social health and psychological safety of students involved in online education during the covid-19 pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2022 Oct 26;19(21):13928. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192113928 Banks J. Conversations and Key Debates on Inclusive and Special Education: Global Insights from ‘The Inclusion Dialogue’. Taylor & Francis; 2025 Mar 3. Sandhu S, Harris R, Copsey-Blake M. School history, identity and ethnicity: an examination of the experiences of young adults in England. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2023 Mar 4;55(2):153-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2023.2184212 Plöger S, Pescarmona I, Bunch GC, Lotan RA. Building equitable, excellent, and democratic classrooms around the world: Complex Instruction and beyond. Intercultural Education. 2025 Jan 2;36(1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2024.2435745 Marisol EC. Didactic trends and perceived teachers’ training needs in higher education: A case study. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education. 2019;7(3):71-85. https://doi.org/10.5937/IJCRSEE1903071B Finnegan J, Llewellyn DC. Breaking Down the Silos: Innovations for Multidisciplinary Programs. In 2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access . Domanic M. Breaking Down the Silos. A hypothesis for Redesigning the Academic Spatial Environment to Encourage Interdisciplinary collaborations (Doctoral dissertation, Politecnico di Torino). Stephens CG, Antwi SH, Linnane S. Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A Framework for Re-Design of an Environmental Education (EE) Outreach Program for a More Inclusive and Impactful Science Festival Event. Discover Education. 2025 Dec;4:217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00660-x Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7252220","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Case Report","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":545825366,"identity":"0d40f798-f051-40e2-97a0-bc5626df0733","order_by":0,"name":"Louise Nagle","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Munster Technological University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Louise","middleName":"","lastName":"Nagle","suffix":""},{"id":545825367,"identity":"b48ef27b-eafa-4ceb-9ebe-5c11b0de27db","order_by":1,"name":"Petrina Comerford","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Munster Technological University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Petrina","middleName":"","lastName":"Comerford","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-30 11:23:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7252220/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7252220/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":96174294,"identity":"149bc191-8fca-4a5d-9984-5c88f981d8f6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-18 11:09:36","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":112453,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"StubbornSilosResearchNoTrackedChanges29thSept2025.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7252220/v1/8d6b2b2aa7ca4523655cc487.docx"},{"id":96253963,"identity":"994c3679-8f96-495b-a4a1-19ba8f2c1dc2","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-19 07:45:44","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":4371,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ed52810aa3e14e4aa36b1703e8e807a0.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7252220/v1/0a19411c7b641cc535156278.json"},{"id":96174296,"identity":"23fd9b6e-0bf8-442c-a387-00ce5d840464","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-18 11:09:36","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":94096,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ed52810aa3e14e4aa36b1703e8e807a01enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7252220/v1/c1e555027f8590b12e4e29d8.xml"},{"id":96174295,"identity":"b34a5e9c-d148-4221-aa05-8a087b4e1bfc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-18 11:09:36","extension":"xml","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":92995,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"ed52810aa3e14e4aa36b1703e8e807a01structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7252220/v1/5086b1a62d6bf6bbd7caf88b.xml"},{"id":96252476,"identity":"4f77841a-a7e9-4637-940b-5e74b126f980","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-19 07:41:00","extension":"html","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":102959,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7252220/v1/1abaa78b3618ad5b4b9e81c3.html"},{"id":98383668,"identity":"922792ed-c6cf-4b41-bc33-4114c066c501","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 08:10:29","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":626789,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7252220/v1/966ff6f7-6104-48b1-83ec-cd1cbd2a6b60.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Stubborn silos between pedagogy and space planning limit inclusive higher education learning environments","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe education sector is faced with a plethora of challenges. The continued commercialization of education, for example, impacts universities\u0026rsquo; intake which in turn changes roles and responsibilities within it [1]. \u0026nbsp;Challenges are compounded with the needs of students in terms of empowerment and participation [2]. \u0026nbsp; What is observable is the gradual revolutionizing of the teaching [3] and lecturers are confronted with expectations to pivot their delivery to meet these transitions, including that of inclusion. This inclusive education also demands a changing learning environment to accommodate a disparate student intake [4].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"_Toc195087317\"\u003eLearning Environments\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe learning environment is a shared space [5] and is a fundamental pillar of inclusion in higher education, which \u0026lsquo;can both enable and disable; it can facilitate, or hamper, human actions\u0026rsquo; [6]. It not only reflects equal access to education but also an equal educational experience in both virtual and physical learning environments. Therefore, the expectation of inclusive and interactive education is real [7]. While pedagogical approaches in higher education have evolved to meet these demands, the design of learning environments in many Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) has remained largely unchanged [8], raising concerns about their impact on student inclusion. \u0026nbsp;Lecturers are often assigned rigid environments, such as tiered lecture halls, which were not always easy to manage or facilitate resettling [8]. In addition, there is a bureaucracy in terms of booking spaces and a territorial culture over rooms in specific academic departments [5]. In the event that adequate space is secured, there is also the challenge of adapting teaching techniques to facilitate learning [6]. Lecturers also need to develop adequate competence [9] to deliver in innovative learning environments. While pedagogical and policy changes are crucial within higher education, they must be complemented by purposefully designed learning environments that promote accessibility [10]. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"_Toc195087318\"\u003eObligations in relation to Inclusivity\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEvery student within an educational setting has the right to quality experiences [11]. Although architectural designs of campuses have been proclaimed as symbols of change [12] the configuration of a learning space in higher education has remained the same for decades [10]. Within an Irish context, tertiary institutions are expected to adopt a new National Charter for Universal Design in Tertiary Education [13], which puts an obligation on HEIs to ensure areas are welcoming, accessible and sensory-aware while also lowering barriers in the physical environment [13]. \u0026nbsp;An inclusive higher education system is also a priority in the country\u0026rsquo;s economic social and equality objectives published in the Irish National Access Plan (for third level). \u0026nbsp;Even with the increased emphasis on inclusion, there are still issues with educators\u0026rsquo; conceptions and execution of inclusive education. For example, some disciplines such as Engineering have gender-based inclusion challenges [14]. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResearch has shown that modifications to physical spaces not only enhance inclusivity but also contribute to student autonomy, collaboration, and overall well-being [7]. However, achieving true inclusion requires a holistic approach\u0026mdash;one that integrates flexible learning spaces with inclusive teaching practices, institutional policies, and staff training [10]. \u0026nbsp;As HEIs prepare to implement the ALTITUDE Charter, it is imperative that inclusion transcends policy rhetoric and translates into tangible, student-cantered changes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eAn exploratory case study was chosen to gain insight into real-world experiences, as this approach enables researchers to understand what actually happens in practice [15]. \u0026nbsp;The research aimed to gain a unique understanding of personal experiences and knowledge construction. \u0026nbsp;A qualitative approach was used to explore participants\u0026rsquo; perspectives on learning spaces. \u0026nbsp; The researchers acknowledged and took account of the potential for bias.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThis process of reflexivity therefore involved the researchers themselves reflecting on their own way of thinking [16]. Ethical approval was received by the relevant HEI in which the participant lecturers worked (HREC MR-24-025). Consent from participants in the research was also obtained. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSemi-structured interviews were used as the research tool for data collection [17] and these research interviews took place between February 2024 \u0026ndash; February 2025. The researchers were mindful of soliciting as wide a range of views and disciplines as possible. An important consideration was that the cohort represented the spectrum of academic departments. \u0026nbsp;A total of 12 lecturers were interviewed across various disciplines including Music, Health and Outdoor Ed, Business, Social Science, Nautical Science, Sports and Leisure, Early Childcare, Nursing, Engineering \u0026amp; Science, Culinary Arts, Accountancy and Tourism \u0026amp; Hospitality. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and the data was anonymized. NVivo (Version 15) was employed to code the data following Braun \u0026amp; Clark\u0026rsquo;s [18] Thematic Analysis (TA). This is a method for identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data, which was relevant to the research undertaken. It minimally organizes and describes the data set in (rich) detail. The identification of which data to include became an initial decision and was based on prevalence of a theme \u0026ldquo;both in terms of space within each data item, and prevalence across the entire data set\u0026rdquo; [18] (pg. 10). Therefore, counting the re-occurrence of key concepts formed part of this process.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Findings","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe examination of data began with participants\u0026apos; views on inclusion, both in relation to their teaching practices and the environments in which they deliver learning. This section explores how they understood and enacted inclusion within their professional contexts. \u0026nbsp;Therefore, we began the analysis with their views on this concept within their work, their reflections on their work environment and then how they considered inclusion in this context.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"_Toc195087321\"\u003eConsiderations on Inclusion\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt was evident from participant reflections that they were familiar with the term \u0026lsquo;Inclusion\u0026rsquo; and participants contemplated it when planning and delivering their teaching. The research demonstrated that in many cases teaching staff took ownership around expectations of inclusivity and viewed it as part of their teaching role. This was evident when one lecturer reflected on inclusion more broadly within modern educational systems explaining that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003einclusivity\u0026hellip;it\u0026apos;s everyone\u0026apos;s job\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P4). It was also recognised that students have varying needs and that support, understanding and acceptance is required (P10). Several participants highlighted the growing emphasis on inclusion, noting that student expectations have evolved in parallel with societal change including more openness (P1). The injustices of the past formed part of the context in which inclusion sits and this was evident when one lecturer reflected that in the past students with learning differences for example could not move from local education institutions as there were no supports for them (P4).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIntegrating change appears to be a balancing act and one lecturer explained that \u0026apos;There\u0026rsquo;s a fine line to walk in ensuring inclusivity without creating new divisions\u0026rsquo; (P10). Not all change was welcome and there was a danger of being \u0026lsquo;creatures of habits\u0026rsquo; and resisting change (P1). There also emerged a question around what inclusion involved and what was acceptable. While many lecturers viewed inclusion as fundamental, others expressed concerns about its implementation and interpretation, so consensus was not always apparent:\u0026lsquo;I suppose maybe I don\u0026apos;t believe exactly in the whole [thing]...I just treat everybody the same\u0026rsquo; (P12). \u0026nbsp;Another explained if there is \u0026lsquo;a shy person, it might not be right to select them, you know? That nearly goes against the concept of inclusion (P5)\u0026rsquo;, which reflects the complexity of the area and the challenges that lecturers find themselves facing. These reflections highlight that while inclusion is widely acknowledged by lecturers as an essential aspect of their role, its interpretation and implementation vary significantly. Some viewed inclusion as a shared institutional responsibility, while others expressed uncertainty or concern about how best to apply inclusive principles in practice. This variation underscores the complexity of embedding inclusion meaningfully across higher education. The following section explores these challenges, identifying that they are compounded by structural and spatial barriers within the physical teaching environment.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch4\u003eHow the environment can enhance inclusion\u003c/h4\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLecturers emphasized that the physical learning environment is a crucial factor in fostering inclusion, engagement, and learning outcomes: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethe environment is integral to teaching and learning\u0026hellip;I think that those kinds of large spaces, the area spaces, natural light, they [are] so important in terms of people\u0026apos;s (students) engagements\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P1) and: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethe physical space it\u0026apos;s a huge element of it\u003c/em\u003e [engagement]\u0026rsquo; (P3). In some instances, the type of space fostered lecturer enthusiasm and one participant reflected on an emotional connection to a room, explaining that they \u0026lsquo;love\u0026rsquo; going into a specific room and that it was their \u0026lsquo;favorite\u0026rsquo; space (P7). \u0026nbsp; This suggests that even informal or overlooked spaces can carry deep meaning and act as anchors for identity, expression, or comfort.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTeaching in higher education occurs across various environments, including outdoor spaces. One participant explained that \u003cem\u003e\u0026apos;in the spring, I plan to vary the site for students because some learn differently and might benefit from the outdoors\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P7). This identifies that the benefits of teaching outdoors were discernible and were also supported for example when a participant reflected that\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003ethere is incredible equality of discomfort in the outdoors...there\u0026apos;s no gender roles outdoors\u0026hellip; play outdoors tends not to have such gender stereotypical roles\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P2). Participants also reflected how they can use the environment to enhance the teaching and learning experience. Several lecturers viewed it as a two-way process and participants reflected on the need for students to work with the teacher to enhance the teaching and learning experience. One participant captured this idea by saying \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI would link that very much with the students creating the learning space\u0026hellip;spaces are the opportunity for the students to connect with each other, with the staff\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P3). This perspective is further explored in the next sub-section.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch4 id=\"_Toc195087323\"\u003eAdapting teaching style to consider inclusivity within the learning space\u003c/h4\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLecturers highlighted strategies that encourage student engagement, flexibility, and active participation in both physical and virtual classrooms. Teaching has moved from a didactic style to a more learner centred style (Wong, 2024). Therefore, lecturers explained that student engagement is significant to the modern teaching and learning process. It became apparent from the research that the learning space was integral to inclusivity and the ability to allow students move around, interact and engage with the teaching and learning process. \u0026nbsp;One participant explained that they found \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethat movement within the group makes a difference\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P8). \u0026nbsp; Another reflected that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI will tell students from the start, if they need to get up at any point, they don\u0026apos;t even have to ask permission\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P11). The same observations emerged from the online delivery space where one participant reflected on the importance of \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003enurturing relationships in an online environment between yourself and students and amongst the student\u003c/em\u003es\u0026rsquo; (P4) and another reflected that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI think group activities are another means of getting students to be included in the\u003c/em\u003e [online] \u003cem\u003eclass, group or environment\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe need for student participation was observable where students could not \u0026lsquo;hide\u0026rsquo; and are \u0026lsquo;connected\u0026rsquo; (P12). This connection was also encouraged by a participant who explained that they create situations where \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;peers are articulating their experiences, then they can learn from the experiences of each other and the voices of each other\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P2). Another participant spoke about social constructivism creating an equitable and active class by presenting from the side or back of the classroom and incorporating flipped classroom techniques (P2). \u0026nbsp;The size of the class also impacted the experiences in delivery: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI actually think that the smaller class sizes and practical sessions, definitely they encourage interaction\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P6) and that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eengagement improves in smaller, practical settings\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P10). This suggests that inclusivity is not solely about the physical layout but also about the scale of learning environments. Smaller settings foster engagement, whereas larger lecture halls may hinder participation. Observations around smaller labs being less daunting for speaking out (P6) emerged and the need for spaces to encourage students to interact were identified (P3). \u0026nbsp;While lecturers are clearly adapting their pedagogical approaches to support inclusivity, these efforts often occur in isolation and without alignment from space design, scheduling systems, or institutional planning. This disconnect underscores the persistent silos between teaching practice and structural decision-making in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch4 id=\"_Toc195087324\"\u003eStudent contribution to inclusivity\u003c/h4\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addition to lecturers adapting their teaching strategies, students also played an active role in fostering inclusive learning environments, by contributing to the shaping of learning spaces and pedagogical approaches. \u0026nbsp;One participant reasoned that students \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eare overcoming the challenges of the traditional spaces\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P3). It was also recognised that they are contributing to adaptations of the teaching environment: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI also asked them what particular teaching style do they like, what learning approach do they like, what do they think would benefit them\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P11). This formed larger inclusive and reflective learning for students, which was evident where one lecturer identified that students gained an understanding that their actions affect the people around them \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;the whole planet and the whole global community\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P2). This view could link to their interaction with the classroom environment while also considering \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003einternational students in group work bringing diverse perspectives, which help local students learn more about other cultures\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P7). Despite participants\u0026rsquo; valuable insights, their voices are often overlooked within the \u0026lsquo;larger machinery of the institution\u0026rsquo; (Ramdas et al, 2024), which create silos that persist within HEIs. These perspectives could be harnessed in the future design and adaptation of physical learning spaces, which was described by P3 who suggested that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003estudents\u003c/em\u003e [are] \u003cem\u003ecreating the learning space\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[and]\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;we should be hearing from stakeholders as spaces are designed\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rsquo; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"_Toc195087325\"\u003eRestrictions and difficulties with Learning Spaces\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe lecturing staff that were interviewed reflected on the restrictive environment in which they often deliver their classes: \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;if students have a sense that spaces are old or tired or rigid ...they line up, they go in, they can\u0026apos;t move\u0026hellip; it\u0026apos;s that\u0026apos;s not enjoyable, that\u0026apos;s not inclusive...it affects attendance\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P4) and: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eit\u0026apos;s just the greyness, the drabness, the monotonous hegemony almost of the learning environment..\u003c/em\u003e[lecturer halls are]\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003every barren, very bare bar, you know, that kind of Spartan type environment\u003c/em\u003e...\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;I think impinges learning at a deeper level\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P7). This would suggest that from the lecturer\u0026apos;s perspective the learning environment affects teaching and learning.\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eIn one observation, this was attributed in part to the age of the buildings: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eour physical buildings of course are already built and designed with it\u0026apos;s in the 1970s view of what a learning environment looks like\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P4). Research participants also reflected on the importance of choosing a room suitable to the class size: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003elarge seated areas...can be very intimidating and undermining if... there\u0026rsquo;s less than 20 in a class group... should be a of a sense of containment and safety\u0026hellip;.too big an environment can undermine\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P4) and: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003erestriction on room numbers, room capacity, often we can\u0026apos;t make changes\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P3). Other environments were uncomfortable and described as \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003etoo squashed... too warm\u0026rsquo;\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P12)\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eor\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003einflexible where \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;you can\u0026apos;t move things around\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe restrictions around movement in the learning area was discerned as an issue when delivering classes and one lecturer observed that some spaces are static where students take the same seats every week (P8) and that tired lecture halls restrict movement (P11) The need for a variety of learning spaces was seen as a requirement to stimulate the teaching and learning process : \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;different spaces allow different kinds of conversations and engagement, leading to better learning outcomes\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P10) and that it takes planning and consideration: \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;if you\u0026apos;ve got three or four lectures in a row and you\u0026apos;re rushing from one room to the next and you\u0026apos;re just trying to get set up, that\u0026apos;s the time where you may not consider it\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P6). It became evident that lecturers connected learning spaces with inclusivity, and they explained that activities are\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026lsquo;normal centric\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eand built on the assumption that everyone is \u0026apos;\u003cem\u003elike Leonardo da Vinci\u0026apos;s picture of a human being\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P2). \u0026nbsp;This assumption causes challenges as lecturers \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003esee a range of inclusive and non-inclusive spaces...a classroom that has the fixed seating and the PowerPoint and no ability for students to move around, get into groups\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P3). Lecturers also had to consider the diverse needs of their students: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003esome people are auditory, some people like visuals\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P11) so adapting content formed part of the delivery process.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn relation to the online teaching environment, it was apparent that the virtual environment is \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003edifficult...it\u0026apos;s a terribly sterile environment\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P2). Another observation identified the difficulties for students engaging in online delivery when \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethose with learning differences are unable to practice their social skills online in a way they can do in the physical environment\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P6). The same lecturer, however, reflected that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eonline it\u0026apos;s a lot easier because again, the nature of it, you\u0026apos;re in a private space... you\u0026apos;ve time to gather your thoughts\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P6). The flexibility of online delivery was identified by another lecturer who explained that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI personally love learning online as I can pause, I can rewind, I can open Google, I can open chat GPT I can tease things out, I can go back to that what I\u0026apos;m learning\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P5).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe time required to adapt and managing learning spaces in order to consider inclusion also emerged as a difficulty. This added responsibility to an already busy role (Lauermann, \u0026amp; Karabenick, 2014). One lecturer explained that they have less time to dedicate to EDI activities (P10) and \u0026nbsp; another reflected that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI think staff are up against a huge challenge when it comes to timetabling, room allocation, feeling like they have responsibility to manage the attendance issues\u0026hellip; taking account of our systems, aligning our space design and then, you know, keeping ... both the students and the staff at the forefront\u0026hellip;and I\u0026apos;m not sure we\u0026apos;re doing that\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P3).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch4 id=\"_Toc195087326\"\u003eStaff feel unprepared and unsupported\u003c/h4\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLearning spaces are in a state of transition and this was apparent where it was indicated that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI think actually it\u0026apos;s a meeting point between what we\u0026apos;ve had historically and where we\u0026apos;re going in the future as well\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P1). Transitions often occur within a state of flux and uncertainty and it was observable within the research that lecturers sometimes feel unprepared when confronted with integrating inclusivity into their teaching in certain space. This was notable when one participant was faced with online delivery explaining that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethere are students not suitable to online delivery\u0026hellip;they\u0026apos;re not really the type of learner that engages really well with online learning\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P12). A challenging environment may require structure and support which emerged as a concern: \u0026lsquo;y\u003cem\u003eou\u0026rsquo;ll never know everything. The more training you do, the more you realise how much you don\u0026rsquo;t know. Mental health, for example, is often overlooked as a disability\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P10). \u0026nbsp;Another explained that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003emy perception would be that if somebody feels different, they identify themselves as different... that sometimes can create something of a power gradient in a teaching situation\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P2) and it was observed that if there is an issue it can pertain to a \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;lack of knowledge or a lack of appreciation\u0026hellip; on the part of the lecturer as opposed to not wanting to assist\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P6). Continuous Professional Development (CPD) was identified as an answer to this perceived lack of readiness for the demands of the learning environment(P11) and another explained that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI would really like to do... upskilling on ... different abilities that you would see in a classroom and\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e...\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;cheat sheet styl\u003c/em\u003ee. \u003cem\u003eI could do all my lectures outdoors; I would probably need more upskilling\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P9). However, as already identified in the previous section, time and workload were seen as barriers to engaging with this training: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ehaving the time and space to address these challenges remains a problem\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P10) and\u0026nbsp;\u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethe intensity that\u0026apos;s on people\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e...\u003cem\u003ethe paperwork and timing and quick turnaround\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P4). Lecturers also reflected on confrontation, which can emerge in a teaching environment with one reasoning that when they are trying to include all participants others \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;are rolling their eyes\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eand maybe becoming less tolerant of that individu\u003c/em\u003eal\u0026rsquo; (P2).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"_Toc195087327\"\u003eInnovation required to adapt to inclusion needs\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe third theme that emerged within this research identified the innovative approach that lecturers adopted to respond to the challenges they identified. \u0026nbsp;It emerged that lecturers were adapting their teaching to meet inclusion needs and one explained that that they wouldn\u0026rsquo;t have tried a different style unless they have \u003cem\u003e\u0026apos;been forced to actually do it\u0026rsquo;\u003c/em\u003e (P1). \u0026nbsp;Several lecturers indicated that they experiment or try out various ways of teaching to ensure that students are gaining the best learning experience: \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;to include people by empowering people and creating micro opportunities to let them to be in charge of their own learning\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e[which] \u003cem\u003esupports them in developing more self-efficacy around their own learning\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P2). There were other physical signals of change \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003efor example, we now have gender-neutral nursing uniforms, which wasn\u0026rsquo;t something we had 10 years ago\u003c/em\u003e (P8) and\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026lsquo;our uniform policy had to change to accommodate students wearing hijabs\u0026rsquo; (P10).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eThe interviewees identified that beyond local adaptations, changes at\u0026nbsp;management level are also required where it was perceived that \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ewe\u0026rsquo;re quite rigid in our structure. Our classrooms are set up in specific ways, and we deliver material in a set manner\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P10) and it emerged that the system of accessing suitable spaces needed to adapt.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch4 id=\"_Toc195087328\"\u003eAdapting the layout\u003c/h4\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLecturers work with the physical spaces they have available to them and observed the restraints they began to overcome. This was identified when one lecturer indicated that \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eI think about equality in terms of how I lay out the chairs\u0026hellip;I\u0026apos;ll tend to put them out in a circle beforehand\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P2) and another discerned that smaller groups allow a more comfortable setting for students to have \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;that Eureka moment where something clicks\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P11). Overcoming isolation and lack of engagement can take many forms across many disciplines. One lecturer explained that a group of lecturers formed an online group where people met from all over the world and entitled it \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;conductors in isolation\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(P1). Such initiatives required a large buy-in of students and staff whereas in other cases, adapting a learning space required smaller amounts of planning and resources: \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ewhile I\u0026apos;m planning for interactive group work... I might do something like a flipped classroom, get students to look at things in advance\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P3) and \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;changing the layout slightly so that you have ... less opportunity for the students to not engage\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P12). Thinking outside the box was required in some cases as well as being flexible and innovative. One participant realized \u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;that movement makes a huge difference in learning. Static environments can lead to static ideas\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P8) and another spoke of having the\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003e\u0026lsquo;ability to step in and out of the space\u0026hellip;so it\u0026apos;s like the notion of the physical space but having sort of side rooms where you can quietly choose to step into one another\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P4). An interesting example of adaption was described following a chance conversation on the African American composer, Florence Price with a class which was an impetus for them to dedicate half of the concert to the composer. This appeared to have an emotional impact on the lecturer who described it as a moment that made them \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003econsider my role in a much more profound way...that was really kind of an eye-opening moment\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P1).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eBased on themes identified the findings provide insight into how lecturers perceive and navigate inclusivity in higher education learning spaces.\u0026nbsp;The majority of research participants were aware of the obligations that inclusiveness put on the educational system on their university and on their work [19] [20]. This would imply that management has informed them of the needs of students and how these needs can be met. However, this was not always the case and some felt underprepared, as one participant explained that if \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethere\u0026apos;s an issue, it\u0026apos;s often because of a genuine, maybe lack of knowledge or a lack of appreciation\u0026hellip;on the part of the lecturer as opposed to not wanting to, to assist\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P6). Awareness and education around expectations in terms of inclusivity would appear to be an on-going activity among staff [21] and perhaps should not be taken for granted. \u0026nbsp;Aspirations for what a positive inclusive environment would look like were evident in the research, with participants explaining the space should allow conversations, engagement, safety, stimulation and movement. Some participants were comfortable in consulting students on the teaching style that suited them within a given environment and others reflected on the way that students create the learning spaces, which could reflect a co-creation of learning experiences where both lecturers and students are navigating a new way. This co-operation was evident where some lecturers were open to feedback from students, to being innovative and to thinking outside the box. This positive attitude of lecturers positively affected the quality of inclusion [22]. This is acknowledged in reflections on the need to be adaptive, facilitating [7], cognizant of context and improve curriculum [23].\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt was also apparent that participants had to work with the spaces available to them and they\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edemonstrated ingenuity and innovation in delivering teaching in what was sometimes a challenging environment. For example, there were reflections on active learning [5] and bringing movement into the classroom environment [24].\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThis was achieved by encouraging interaction between students in some cases when, for example, they were sent off to work together. Students were also encouraged to be inclusive and \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003ethey\u003c/em\u003e [the students] \u003cem\u003eunderstand that their actions are not just for them\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P2) but that their actions have consequences for others. This was observed when international students were integrated in activities. This work required a diversity of delivery spaces [6] which existed in terms of outdoor [25], online, lecture halls, small classrooms, active learning spaces. However, access to these facilities was not always an option due to limitations in availability. Lecturers identified these spaces make a difference to delivery [9] improving well-being [26] and are important to student engagement [23]. Some participants had to work at engaging students and others viewed students as \u0026lsquo;partners\u0026rsquo; in the teaching and learning process and actively sought student input and feedback. In some cases, this demanded modifications to delivery and teaching styles, which required adjusting techniques and lecturers moving outside of comfort zones.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants reflected on having no control over the delivery space, with difficulties in accessing smaller rooms, controlling the size of the class [27], the availability of suitable spaces and working with a rigid booking system [5]. What is clear from the research is that most facilities available to lecturers are not sufficient or adequate. Adjectives describing teaching spaces included tired, rigid, barren, bare and Spartan as well as intimidating, undermining, belonging to the 1970\u0026rsquo;s emerged. Others reflected that space can be static, it can hinder movement, be sterile and non-inclusive. These observations did not lend themselves to a conducive learning environment [5] when, for example, students \u0026lsquo;\u003cem\u003eline up, they go in, they can\u0026apos;t move\u0026hellip; it\u0026apos;s that\u0026apos;s not enjoyable, that\u0026apos;s not inclusive...it affects attendance\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rsquo; (P4). Other difficulties included restrictions on movement, the lack of variety of spaces and non-inclusive rooms. \u0026nbsp;Difficulties in the creation of a safe space online [28] were also identified, as well as adapting online delivery for varying learning needs. What was evident was that lecturers were challenged in their environment and somewhat overwhelmed at times. Participants reflected on difficulties around being inclusive and in one case a lecturer explained that they questioned what is acceptable and what is not, for example should they select a shy person to speak to in a classroom environment? This had to be balanced with expectations of ensuring students were engaged and stimulated [3] [4]. The demands that inclusivity brings can be overwhelming at times and this was indicated in comments around the ability to keep up with developments within the inclusivity space, using the correct language and the constant evolving conversations around inclusivity [29]. The historical baggage that HEIs possess when educational programs were white, male and European still exists in some disciplines [30]. A lack of awareness that \u0026ldquo;across the current academic literature, the \u0026ldquo;traditional Irish student\u0026rdquo; is now considered a misnomer, with research demonstrating that the student body is now made up of learners from diverse social, linguistic, racial, religious and ability profiles\u0026rdquo; [20] (pg. 24) is still evident.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe resulting rate of change in adapting to the learning experience and the corresponding environment requires consideration and skill on the part of the educator [7]. Academic staff sometimes struggled in responding to students\u0026rsquo; needs, in adapting spaces and ensuring everyone felt included. In particular, challenges were realized in finding the time required to learn about inclusivity, to develop relevant skills and competencies in the area and to access supporting resources. \u0026nbsp;Participants explained that they may need support for delivering in various spaces. This applied to adapting content for an outdoor environment, to encouraging student engagement in the classroom and delivering online for example. Reflections on social constructivism, equitable classroom [31], flipped classroom and active classes emerged [27]. The preparation, scaffolding and premeditated teaching and learning activities emerged and this work had to consider the space in which the activities would be delivered. They therefore contemplated how they could use the environment to encourage inclusivity and often the challenges that this environment brought emerged during this reflection. For example, the challenge of large classes was evident in reflections [8] and the search for a space to hold the relevant class was an ordeal in some cases. It could be argued that these challenges affect the well-being of lecturers while working in what is perceived to be a demanding profession\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e[3].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt emerged that learning spaces as well as teaching and learning itself are in a state of transition [3] from an old environment that accommodated didactic styles to a modern way of teaching and learning [32]. \u0026nbsp;This transition is hindered by inflexible silos where the booking of facilities seems to add stress to the lecturers and can be perceived as stringent control on access. It is apparent that sections of the university operate in divisions, with cultural and operational differences between academic and non-academic units [33]. A university with independent units working without access to the bigger picture can be counterproductive [34], inefficient and lead to frustration.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eA number of conclusions can be drawn from the research findings. If universities are operating in fixed inflexible systems and with units working in isolation, then progress in tackling many inclusion issues will not be resolved. \u0026nbsp;A cause of frustration was the long-standing \u0026apos;silos\u0026apos; between pedagogy and space planning that demanded cross-functional collaboration. Without this cooperation and investment in teaching strategies, progress is hampered [35]. This study extends current research by exposing how institutional structures and spatial limitations can undermine inclusive pedagogy. Therefore, collaboration between administration functions and lecturers in the coal face of delivery is overdue and without it, lecturers cannot access the supports and facilities they badly need. Such interventions would require a cultural shift to reduce these internal \u0026lsquo;silos\u0026rsquo;.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTherefore, there must be a move beyond policy verbosity to ensure tangible, lasting change. It is not just a moral or institutional imperative; it is a national and global one. The National Access Plan and expected adoption of the ALTITUDE charter will formalise responsibilities put on universities and in turn lecturers. However, lecturers are still challenged in terms of meeting these commitments due to a lack of time, support, inadequate facilities and insufficient supply of adequate spaces [6]. \u0026nbsp;If universities are truly dedicated to inclusion, not as a rhetoric but as a foundational principle, then they must act. \u0026nbsp; Learning environments need to empower both students and staff. Essential investment in the physical and pedagogical infrastructure should be made to enable inclusive practice.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAdvancing inclusion in education is central to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 4 on Quality Education and SDG 10 on Reduced Inequalities. Now is the time to match ambition with action. If inclusive education is to move from principle to practice, it must be supported by targeted, sustained investment. It cannot be expected that lecturers transform their teaching within outdated or inflexible systems. Governments and higher education leaders must prioritise funding for the physical, digital, and pedagogical infrastructure required to create accessible and inclusive learning environments. This includes retrofitting existing spaces and integrating inclusive technologies. Short-term initiatives are not enough; what is needed is long-term, strategic investment that empowers staff and benefits all learners. Without financial commitment, inclusion risks becoming tokenistic rather than transformative Funding is not a peripheral issue but the foundation on which meaningful, lasting change must be built. While grounded in the Irish context, the findings offer transferable insights for global institutions who wish to integrate inclusive teaching and flexible, student-centered learning spaces.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Limitations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe research is limited by sample size and the fact that it was undertaken in a single HEI.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e The authors declares that there are no acknowledgments for this manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/strong\u003e The authors are solely responsible for all facets of this manuscript\u0026rsquo;s development.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eNo funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to participate\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eAll research involving human subjects was freely-given and written informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of Data and Materials\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp; Anonymised participation data is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request, subject to ethical approval.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e Ethical approval was received by the relevant HEI in which the participant lecturers worked (HREC MR-24-025). Consent from participants in the research was also obtained. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations of the University Human Ethics Committee.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e Not applicable.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e The author declares no competing interests.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOpen Access\u003c/strong\u003e The authors give permission to publish this article through open access\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCorresponding Author (Author 1)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDr. Louise Nagle \u0026ndash; Munster Technological University, Co. Kerry Ireland\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmail: [email protected]\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOrcid ID:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e0000-0003-3713-8807\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor 2:\u003c/strong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePetrina Comerford \u0026ndash; Munster Technological University, Co. Kerry Ireland\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEmail: \u0026nbsp;[email protected]\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOrcid ID:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e0009-0006-1985-7487\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClinical trial number: not applicable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVeles N, Graham C, Ovaska C. University professional staff roles, identities, and spaces of interaction: Systematic review of literature published in 2000\u0026ndash;2020. Policy Reviews in Higher Education. 2023 Jul 3;7(2):127-68. https://doi-org.mtu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/23322969.2023.21938226\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOsborne A, Yillah RM, Bash-Taqi A, Conteh OB. Navigating exclusion: school responses to the radical inclusion policy for marginalized students in Sierra Leone. Discover Education. 2025 Mar 21;4(1):67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00452-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRamdas S, Slootman M, van der Zee K. Creating equitable learning environments by building on differences in higher education: design and implementation of the MIXED model. Learning Environments Research. 2025 Jan 31:1-6.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09524-5\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuarte J. Inclusion in culturally and linguistically diverse bilingual schools in the Netherlands: promising beginnings, ongoing challenges. Learning Environments Research. 2025 Apr 8:1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09533-4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePower CK, Supple B. Teaching spaces: The fourth corner of university learning.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBenade L. Flexible learning spaces: Inclusive by design? New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies. 2019 Jul 1;54(1):53-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-019-00127-2\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWong M. Inclusion may not lead to belonging: The case for student-centered classrooms. College Teaching. 2024 Jan 18:1-3. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2024.23078844\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWillis J, Gillett-Swan J, Franz J, Farahnak Majd N, Carroli L, Gallagher J, Bray E. Thriving in vertical schools: Aspirations for inclusion and capability from a salutogenic design perspective. Learning Environments Research. 2024 Jun 11:1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09502-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhamitova A. Innovative learning spaces of higher education: a systematic mapping review of themes. TechTrends. 2023 Sep;67(5):830-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-023-00892-4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAltes TK, Willemse M, Goei SL, Ehren M. Higher education teachers\u0026rsquo; understandings of and challenges for inclusion and inclusive learning environments: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review. 2024 May 1;43:100605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100605\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnwar N. Report review: Reimagining our futures together: a new social contract for education: edited by Mary de Sousa, Paris, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2021, 186 pp., ISBN 978-92-3-100478-0. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379707\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlterator SC, Deed CR. Framing innovative learning environments. School Space and Its Occupation. Conceptualising and Evaluating Innovative Learning Environments. 2018 Aug 16:3-11.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eALTITUDE Project. \u003cem\u003eALTITUDE - The National Charter for Universal Design in Tertiary Education\u003c/em\u003e. AHEAD Educational Press. 2024\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHulus A. Review of comprehensive approaches for encouraging innovation and inclusion in ETC education to foster women\u0026rsquo;s engagement. Discover Education. 2025 May 19;4(1):123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00539-x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVerner JM, Abdullah LM. Exploratory case study research: Outsourced project failure. Information and Software Technology. 2012 Aug 1;54(8):866-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2011.11.001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWeick KE, Quinn RE. Organizational change and development. Annual review of psychology. 1999 Feb;50(1):361-86. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.361\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHettiarachchi, S., Jayathilake, C. \u0026amp; Pereira, S.S. Balancing aspirations and realities: A qualitative study of L2 motivation among Sri Lankan social science lecturers in English medium instruction. \u003cem\u003eDiscov Educ\u003c/em\u003e 4, 195 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00626-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. In Encyclopedia of critical psychology 2014 (pp. 1947-1952). Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLauermann F, Karabenick SA. Teacher responsibility: What does it mean for teachers\u0026rsquo; motivation and emotions?. In Teacher Motivation 2014 May 30 (pp. 116-132). Routledge.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHealy R, Banks J, Ryder D. Ireland\u0026rsquo;s Approach to Universal Design in Tertiary Education is Maturing: An Introduction to this Special Issue. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education. 2024 Sep 24;16(2). https://doi.org/10.62707/aishej.v16i2.919\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeiler LS. Teachers\u0026rsquo; roles and identities in student-centered classrooms. International journal of STEM education. 2018 Sep 14;5(1):34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0131-6\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuillemot F, Lacroix F, Nocus I. Link between the attitude of teachers towards inclusive education and the quality of inclusive education as perceived by parents of children with a disability. Learning Environments Research. 2025 Apr 23:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-025-09534-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eScott C. Managing and regulating commitments to equality, diversity and inclusion in higher education. Irish Educational Studies. 2020 Apr 2;39(2):175-91. https://doi-org.mtu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/03323315.2020.17548779\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStrean WB. Creating student engagement? HMM: Teaching and learning with humor, music, and movement. Creative Education. 2011 Aug 9;2(3):189-92. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2011.23026\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBecker C, Lauterbach G, Spengler S, Dettweiler U, Mess F. Effects of regular classes in outdoor education settings: A systematic review on students\u0026rsquo; learning, social and health dimensions. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2017 May;14(5):485. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050485\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTancredi H, Graham LJ, Killingly C, Sweller N. Investigating the impact of Accessible Pedagogies on the experiences and engagement of students with language and/or attentional difficulties. Learning Environments Research. 2024 Aug 31:1-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-024-09514-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBent T, Knapp JS, Robinson JK. Evaluating the effectiveness of teaching assistants in active learning classrooms. Journal of Learning Spaces. 2020 Sep 21;9(2). https://libjournal.uncg.edu/jls/article/view/1984\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKorneeva E, Strielkowski W, Krayneva R, Sherstobitova A. Social health and psychological safety of students involved in online education during the covid-19 pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2022 Oct 26;19(21):13928. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192113928\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBanks J. Conversations and Key Debates on Inclusive and Special Education: Global Insights from \u0026lsquo;The Inclusion Dialogue\u0026rsquo;. Taylor \u0026amp; Francis; 2025 Mar 3.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSandhu S, Harris R, Copsey-Blake M. School history, identity and ethnicity: an examination of the experiences of young adults in England. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 2023 Mar 4;55(2):153-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2023.2184212\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePl\u0026ouml;ger S, Pescarmona I, Bunch GC, Lotan RA. Building equitable, excellent, and democratic classrooms around the world: Complex Instruction and beyond. Intercultural Education. 2025 Jan 2;36(1):1-4. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2024.2435745\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarisol EC. Didactic trends and perceived teachers\u0026rsquo; training needs in higher education: A case study. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education. 2019;7(3):71-85. https://doi.org/10.5937/IJCRSEE1903071B\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFinnegan J, Llewellyn DC. Breaking Down the Silos: Innovations for Multidisciplinary Programs. In \u003cem\u003e2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDomanic M. \u003cem\u003eBreaking Down the Silos. A hypothesis for Redesigning the Academic Spatial Environment to Encourage Interdisciplinary collaborations\u003c/em\u003e (Doctoral dissertation, Politecnico di Torino).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStephens CG, Antwi SH, Linnane S. Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A Framework for Re-Design of an Environmental Education (EE) Outreach Program for a More Inclusive and Impactful Science Festival Event. Discover Education. 2025 Dec;4:217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00660-x\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Inclusion, Learning Spaces, Higher Education","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7252220/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7252220/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"This research explores lecturers' perceptions of fostering inclusion within higher education learning environments and the challenges they face in adapting to meet these expectations. An exploratory case study employing a qualitative approach was undertaken which utilized semi-structured interviews and a thematic analysis. Twelve lecturers were interviewed from diverse disciplines across an Irish university, including STEM, Social Sciences, Health, Arts and Business. The main themes that emerged were a) Considerations of Inclusion in the context of the learning environment b) Restrictions and difficulties within learning environments in terms of inclusion c) Strategy required to adapt to inclusion needs. Additional sub-themes within these are also examined. Findings reveal that lecturers acknowledged their responsibilities in promoting student inclusion supported by staff Continuous Professional Development (CPD). However, it was also evident that the learning environments available to lecturers have not evolved in parallel to advances in the profession. The time and planning required for deliberate inclusive teaching activities emerged and this work had to consider the space in which the activities would be delivered. These spaces were often considered inadequate. Participants expressed frustration at the persistent silos between academic staff and those managing facilities, underscoring the need for cross-functional collaboration. While situated within the Irish higher education context, the findings are transferable to universities internationally, particularly those seeking to align inclusive pedagogical practices with flexible, student-centered spatial design.","manuscriptTitle":"Stubborn silos between pedagogy and space planning limit inclusive higher education learning environments","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-11-18 11:09:31","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7252220/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"27ac9694-604c-475c-91df-aee98af72bb2","owner":[],"postedDate":"November 18th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-12-17T08:10:09+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-11-18 11:09:31","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7252220","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7252220","identity":"rs-7252220","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}