Inclusion in educational settings is not merely about representation; it also requires patience, nuance, and a willingness to engage with differences. As institutions evolve and become increasingly diverse, particularly in countries with high levels of migration, it is essential to reflect on what inclusion looks like in practice. Moreover, it is important for me to consider where its limits might be established in the context of safety, shared space, and institutional norms.
As an immigrant, I understand that moving to a new country involves adapting to cultural and institutional practices that may not reflect my own traditions or beliefs. However, I do not expect the systems I enter to accommodate every aspect of my background, nor do I view this as a form of alienation. On the contrary, adaptation can coexist with the cultivation of personal and cultural identity. For example, one of the most important celebrations in Mexico is the “Day of the Dead,” for which there are two bank holidays. Although it is important to me, I do not expect a UK institution to grant me those bank holiday days. If I wish to take them, I need to use my annual leave or adapt my celebration to weekend days. And that’s fine by me; I believe that adaptation and acceptance must go both ways.
Inclusion must create environments where individuals can participate without sacrificing religious expression. For example, in a friend’s genetics lab, a student tried to pray in an area with hazardous materials that could endanger him and others. Despite the university having prayer rooms for safe practice, the student felt discriminated against when the Professor pointed this out. This highlights the need for mutual accommodation to be effective.
I’m not saying religion and belief shouldn’t be considered in our classrooms; I’m contemplating how to include them correctly. Sometimes, religious beliefs contradict the freedoms of others. How do we accommodate this in class? It seems similar to cases involving disabilities, where “reasonable adaptations must be made.” In reality, what’s considered reasonable is open to quite a lot of interpretation. (McCulloch, 2025). Inclusion is not about unlimited accommodation, but about careful, respectful consideration of how people live, believe, and belong. It involves balancing patience with differences and building structures that honour individual needs and communal integrity. Accommodation raises questions about the interpretation, application, and enforcement of laws and rules (Seglow, 2015). I haven’t considered religion in my classes, but now I’m thinking about how to be more mindful of it. Dr. Singh mentioned encouraging students to look beyond stereotypes and understand that everyone faces their own challenges (Singh, 2016), which I aim to incorporate into my teaching. I still need to learn more techniques or strategies.
References:
BBC (2025) ‘I felt completely isolated’: What it’s REALLY like to be DEAF in prison. [Online video]. 20 May. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w6mXL22F50
Equality Act 2010. (2010) c.15. London: The Stationery Office. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents
Seglow, J. (2015) ‘Religious accommodation law in the UK: five normative gaps’, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 21(1), pp. 109–128.
Simran Jeet Singh (2016) Challenging Race, Religion, and Stereotypes in the Classroom. 1 December. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CAOKTo_DOk
4 replies on “Religion, Inclusion, and the Complexities of Adaptation in Academic Spaces”
Hello Sara!
Thank you for your thoughtful and reflective comment. The issues you’ve raised about inclusion, adaptation, and institutional norms warrant a deeper examination of power, privilege, and whose experiences are centred or marginalised in educational settings.
You rightly note that inclusion is not merely about representation, but also the nuances of daily interaction and institutional engagement. As Sara Ahmed (2012) contends, institutions often “perform” diversity without actually transforming the underlying norms that produce exclusion. In this light, it’s not just about making space for different cultural or religious practices, but about re-examining who defines what is “reasonable” or “normal” in the first place.
Your example of the student praying in a hazardous lab space invites important questions about spatial design and institutional flexibility. While safety must be a priority, one would interrogate why safe religious practice wasn’t already anticipated in the design of learning environments. As Judith Butler (2004) suggests, vulnerability is not evenly distributed; institutions often fail to consider the embodied realities of those who do not fit normative assumptions, such as being able-bodied, Christian-secular, or Western.
You mention adaptation as a two-way process, which is indeed crucial. However, I believe we must be cautious against framing this reciprocity as an equal exchange when power imbalances persist. Migrants, racialised students, and religious minorities are often expected to adapt far more than the institutions themselves. As Crenshaw (2013) illustrates, intersectional marginalisation can mean that people live at the confluence of multiple systems of oppression. Thus, the absence of accommodation might not alienate some, but it can be a barrier to full participation for others, especially those racialised or gendered differently.
On the point of “reasonable accommodations,” Alison Kafer (2013), argues that what is seen as “reasonable” often reinforces existing norms and fails to imagine more inclusive futures.
Religion can certainly conflict with other rights, including gender and LGBTQ+ freedoms. But again, the goal is not to accommodate belief at the cost of others’ safety or dignity, but to engage in sustained, difficult dialogues where power asymmetries are addressed. As Joan Tronto (1993) argues in Moral Boundaries, a feminist ethic of care demands attentiveness, responsibility, and responsiveness, not just tolerance.
Your comment reminded me that inclusion isn’t just about allowing difference, but about asking harder questions: Whose differences are already built into our systems? Whose are seen as “extras” or “exceptions”? And how can we, as educators, help shift that balance?
As I continue to reflect on my own practice too, I aim to move from simply reacting to difference toward creating environments where a range of identities and ways of being are already expected and supported. That will mean learning more, listening better, and probably making a few mistakes, but I believe that’s part of the process too.
I like the idea of discussing with students how everyone “faces their own challenges” and finding ways to embrace and value differences, even if they are contradictory. It makes me reflect on the need to approach inclusion with humility, structural awareness, and a readiness to shift the ground beneath us when needed.
References :
Crenshaw, K.W., 2013. Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. In The public nature of private violence (pp. 93-118). Routledge
Ahmed, S., 2012. On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. In On being included. Duke University Press.
Butler, J., 2004. Precarious life: The powers of mourning and violence. verso.
Kafer, A., 2013. Feminist, queer, crip. Indiana University Press.
Tronto, J., 2020. Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. Routledge.
Hi Antonella!
Thanks so much for your comment, you touched very important and interesting points. And I also liked how you mention that even we all need to adapt, the bigger responsabilities for inclusion lay with the institutions.
I liked how you phrased that the goal is not to accommodate belief at the cost of others’ safety or dignity, but to engage in sustained, difficult dialogues where power asymmetries are addressed. I think that in the enviroment I’m in at UAL, I feel that they always want me to pull away from the difficult topics rather thant supporting in creating safe environments to have them.
And also as you mention, I’m also trying to get better and listen more, and making mistakes in the process!
Cheers!
Hi Sara,
Thank you for this blog post, it was a really interesting read and I really appreciate your personal candour and experiences when discussing the issues raised.
Your post highlights some of the knottiness of making truly pluralistic and inclusive teaching spaces, as doing so relies on some levels of reciprocity, openness and acceptance i.e. “reasonable” adjustments that can, as Kafer states, reinforce existing norms (2013). Your blog leaves me asking more questions about where we can find models of how this can play out in relation to religion, faith and belief, as this often feels like an area that is under-served and skimmed over in many DEI trainings (including UAL’s).
You mention how religion in particular can sometimes, “contradict the freedoms of others”. Although of course in many ways, I agree, I think it’s important to acknowledge that this can also be true of other facets of identity, such as cultural and political beliefs. Of course I understand that religion can certainly create conflict and hurt, I guess I’m just mindful that those who don’t hold religious beliefs can still hold beliefs that are harmful to others. So I think that finding inclusive ways for people to show up as their whole selves, is inherently going to cause conflicts of needs and beliefs in a room, and so we should be mindful of religion within this context too. One useful example I’ve found, to perhaps model ways of engaging with this complexity, is the use of performance techniques in peace building: https://peacefulchange.org/our-work/dialogue-across-divides/ a colleague of mine, Raj Bhari, works with this organisation and often finds ways to navigate complex conflicts in a variety of contexts, including communities made up of diverse and sometimes conflicting religious beliefs. This work is slow and sustained – but I wonder what we can learn from this to apply to teaching contexts where the communities are generally more transient?
I think that your use of anecdotes, both your own experience in the UK as a Mexican person who celebrates “Day of the Dead”, but also the student in the lab who was looking for prayer space, offer useful and practical insights into some important questions to consider when imagining more inclusive practices. I agree with Antonella’s comment above, that we should be mindful of how reciprocity is not always a mutual exchange of power.
Thanks for your thoughtful reflections – this has given me plenty of food for thought!
Warmest wishes,
Chuck
Hi Chuck!
Thanks so much for taking the time to read this post and reply to it.
I definitely agree that the majority of the responsibility for making the necessary adaptations for diversity lies with the system, in this case, the university providing it. Because while not doing so, as you mentioned, we should be mindful of how reciprocity is not always a mutual exchange of power.
Also, as you say in your own blog post about religion and in this comment, faith and belief, as this often feels like an area that is under-served and skimmed over in many DEI trainings (including UAL’s), because of this I also felt that by not talkign about it, I was being neutran and doing the best I could do. Now I also see that that might not always be the case.
Best,
Sara