Towards Inclusive Tutoring: Elevating Student Voices and Empowering Knowledge Co-Creation
As higher education (HE) strives for inclusivity and equity, rethinking the tutor-student dynamic is vital. Tutors, advisers, and support staff are central to creating a respectful, collaborative academic environment where students feel heard. David Ausubel aptly observed, “The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows.” This highlights the importance of valuing students’ prior knowledge in the advising interactions aimed at empowering students' educational development.
This piece draws on social epistemology and healthcare/education ethics to explore what “useful” knowledge means for personal tutoring, where biases and power imbalances may limit student's voices. Here, I outline ways to promote more inclusive, equitable, and student-centred tutoring that recognises each student’s unique background and needs.
Objectives of Inclusive Tutoring
The move toward inclusive tutoring has three main goals:
- Addressing Inequities in Knowledge Exchange: Social ethics can help us understand and counteract biases that may undervalue certain voices in tutoring relationships.
- Recognising and Mitigating Implicit Bias: Prejudice and stereotyping, though often unintended, influence how we listen to students. Recognising and calling out bias allows for more inclusive and empowering practices.
- Navigating Ethical Dilemmas: Reflective practice models and professional supervision can help tutors address ethical challenges in a way that respects and validates students as credible knowledge bearers.
These objectives stem from experience supervising practitioners and pastoral care workers, who often face similar ethical challenges. They underscore the importance of self-reflection and commitment to professional growth.
Tutors often encounter challenges balancing role boundaries with a holistic, inclusive approach. Students approach the Success Service with concerns ranging from academics and mental health to financial stress. This diversity of needs calls for a nuanced, responsive tutoring model that respects role boundaries while supporting students’ broader well-being.
Addressing Power Imbalances in Knowledge Exchange
Miranda Fricker's research demonstrates how biases hinder equitable listening, leading to “epistemic injustice” (2008)—instances where an individual’s knowledge is unfairly dismissed. Two types are particularly relevant in HE:
- Testimonial Injustice: When a student’s credibility is undermined by stereotypes, such as assumptions about younger students’ maturity, competence, or commitment.
- Hermeneutic Injustice: When students lack the language or tools to fully express their experiences, as seen in neurodiversity or mental health contexts. Without shared understanding, these students face additional barriers to self-advocacy.
Such biases can inadvertently privilege staff perspectives over students’, creating a credibility gap and limiting students’ contributions to the learning environment.
Implicit Bias in Action: A Case Study
An international student once sought advice on understanding lecture material, which language barriers complicated. My instinct was to empathise, offer resources, and normalise her experience. Later, I realised I missed an opportunity to explore her views on systemic changes that might help her and others in similar situations, such as inclusive teaching practices. This case illustrates a common pitfall—the “righting reflex” (Miller & Rollnick, 2012) where the focus shifts to fixing rather than understanding the rich and multifaceted lived experiences of students. Following curious questions about the complexities of student experiences, taking the time to invite students into a dialogue about broader institutional improvements can promote empowerment and co-creation.
Systemic Strategies for Inclusive Tutoring
- Develop Self-Awareness and Training: Training on implicit biases and social identity impacts can foster an equitable tutoring experience by enhancing our ability to listen fairly.
- Use Motivational Interviewing Techniques: Open-ended questions allow students to share their perspectives, creating a collaborative atmosphere that values their voices.
- Establish Safe Feedback Mechanisms: Transparent feedback channels, such as student liaison committees, enable students to see how their input shapes institutional practices, setting clear expectations for what feedback can realistically achieve.
- Adopt Reflective Practice Supervision to Mitigate Bias: Self-reflection, especially when feeling frustrated with students, can help tutors gain insight into different student perspectives and deepen understanding.
- Student Participation in Feedback Loops: Collaborating with student unions to co-create panels and focus groups encourages students to actively shape their educational experience, aligning with the university’s commitment to equity and inclusion.
Listening as a Virtuous Practice
Inclusive tutoring goes beyond answering questions; it’s about creating a space where students feel genuinely heard and valued. By reflecting on biases and adopting practices that support student empowerment, we can foster a culture in HE that sees students as co-creators of knowledge. This shift requires commitment from all stakeholders—tutors, staff, and leaders alike.
As we consider these strategies and case studies, we would do well to reflect on how our team can better incorporate student feedback into long-term planning. What additional structures promote a more inclusive tutoring environment? By addressing questions of knowledge circulation and power, we move closer to a student-centred approach that respects and amplifies every student’s voice.
References and Further Reading
Baumtrog, M. D., & Peach, H. (2019). They can't be believed: children, intersectionality, epistemic injustice. Journal of Global Ethics, 15(3), 213-232.
Beeghly, E., & Madva, A. (Eds.). (2020). An introduction to implicit bias: Knowledge, justice, and the social mind. Routledge.
Bindra, G., Easwaran, K., Firasta, L., Hirsch, M., Kapoor, A., Sosnowski, A., & Vatansever, G. (2018). Increasing representation & equity in students as partners initiatives. International Journal of Students as Partners, 2(2), 10–15.
Burroughs, M. D., & Tollefsen, D. (2016). Learning to listen: Epistemic injustice and the child. Episteme, 13(3)
Carel, H., & Györffy, G. (2014). Seen but not heard children and epistemic injustice. The Lancet, 384(9950)
Cundy, A. (2019) Taking the credit: can universities tackle academic fraud? Financial Times.
Fricker, M. (2015). Epistemic contribution as a central human capability. In G. Hull (Ed.), Essays on equality in theory and practice. 73–91. UCT Press.
Giroux, H. A. (1996). Teenage body politics and the pedagogy of display.
The review of education/pedagogy/cultural studies, 18(3), 307-331.
Kidd, I. J., Medina, J., & Pohlhaus, G., Jr. (2017). Introduction. In I. Kidd, J. Medina, & G. Pohlhaus (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of epistemic injustice, 19–28. London: Routledge
McLeod, J. (2011). Student voice and the politics of listening in higher education. Critical studies in education, 52(2), 179-189.
O’Donnell, P., Lloyd, J., & Dreher, T. (2009). Listening, path-building and continuations: A research agenda for the analysis of listening. Continuum, 23(4), 423-439.
Kurs, R and Grinshpoon, A (2018). Vulnerability of Individuals with Mental Disorders to Epistemic Injustice in Both Clinical and Social Domains. Ethics & Behavior, 28:4, 336-346. doi: 10.1080/10508422.2017.1365302.
Wilson, T. and Santoro, D. “Philosophy Pursued through Empirical Research: Introduction to the Special Issue,” Studies in Philosophy & Education 34, 2 (2015): 115–124, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-015-9460-9
Miller, W.R. and Rollnick, S., 2012. Motivational interviewing: Helping people change. Guilford press.