As we continue to build on the foundations of the SHUTTLE project, we are pivoting our focus toward one of the most critical challenges of Education 5.0: True, systemic inclusion in Higher Education.

We don’t want to design a workshop based on theories alone. We want to build it using the collective intelligence, the "raw" data, and the lived experiences of potential stakeholders (higher education teachers, students and management, as well as content developers for higher education and future employees).

So in this first phase we are looking for the Signals and the Frictions that define our current landscape.

•Input: Please share one "Signal of Inclusion" (a successful practice) and one "Point of Friction" (a barrier) you see in your current HEI in connection to Education 5.0 and either collaborative, intercultural, digital, self or business leadership.

•How: Share one "Signal of Inclusion" (a successful practice) in the section Signals of Inclusion; share one "Point of Friction" (a barrier) in the section Points of Friction. Follow the guidelines as described in the PowerPoint slide above.

•Time: It should take no more than 10 minutes.

•Format: Short stories or bullet points.

•Deadline: Please share your insights by 13th April 2026.

By sharing these honest points of tension, you provide the real-world case studies that will form the backbone of our developing inclusive content for higher education courses.

•Result: Feeling the Inclusion Pulse: Insights from the workshop participants. A snapshot of voices mapping the gap between our current HEI reality and an inclusive Education 5.0 future. This will be shared with you by 20th April 2026 (by email).

•A Signal of Inclusion is a specific moment, policy, or practice in your institution where you felt: "Yes, this is how inclusion should look in connection to Education 5.0."

•A Point of Friction is a specific instance where inclusion stalled, felt performative, or hit a structural wall.

You can address any type of leadership. Please check some examples in the PowerPoint slides above as inspiration for your sharing.

•Self-Leadership is about examining the 'hidden filters': Personal unconscious bias awareness and commitment to inclusive values.

•Collaborative Leadership could be about de-siloing the institution: Co-creating inclusive spaces with students and staff.

•Digital Leadership is mostly about algorithmic bias and accessibility: Ensuring accessibility and equity in digital learning environments (incorporating AI responsibly).

•Intercultural Leadership or cultural intelligence is about navigating diversity and fostering a sense of belonging for international/minority groups.

•Business Leadership could be about social justice: Building institutional resilience through social justice and ethical governance.

•Story: "Our faculty now includes a 'Diversity Statement' in every syllabus that invites students to request specific learning adjustments before the term starts, rather than waiting for an official disability office letter.

•Impact: Students, staff

•The SHUTTLE Connection: self-leadership

• The Story: "You test an AI-driven video interviewing tool. The software is programmed to flag 'high-potential' traits based on North American communication norms—such as high vocal energy and constant direct eye contact. As a result, candidates from cultures that value high-context communication, humility, or indirect eye contact as a sign of respect are systematically filtered out."

• Impact: The organization’s diversity of thought, and long-term innovation.

• The SHUTTLE Connection: Intercultural leadership.

According to the SYDLE website https://www.sydle.com/blog/education-5-0-61e71a99edf3b9259714e25a “Education 5.0 is the use of new technologies to provide more humanized teaching, with a focus on students’ social and emotional development and solutions that improve life in society”. Allegedly this is achieved through the development of collaborative skills, critical thinking, interdisciplinary problem-solving skills, better interpersonal relations, empathy, and tolerance of diversity, creativity, conflict management and more fluid communication. Education 5.0 is also linked to the developments of AI-assisted teaching and learning, its opportunities, limitations, and political, social, cultural, philosophical and ethical risks. (in: Multidimensional Inclusive Pedagogical Learning Framework.

SHUTTLE Transnational Report: Part One, p.4)

NOTE: Read more about SHUTTLE and Education 5.0 in the Pdf document above.

The project is designed to strengthen voice, choice, and a sense of belonging, using sport as a tool for personal development and social integration rather than only performance. Through partnerships with sports clubs, local authorities, and community organisations, IPBeja extends its role beyond the campus and contributes to more inclusive sport practices in Beja and the wider Alentejo region, supporting equal access and participation for underrepresented groups.

Impact: Students and community

The SHUTTLE Connection: self-leadership (?)

Impact: this friction tends to turn gender equality into a set of “good intentions” rather than a coherent, institutionalised dimension of IPBeja’s mission and governance.

The SHUTTLE Connection: Introduction of gender mainstreaming (?)

Impact: Students, staff, the institution)

The SHUTTLE Connection: collaborative and intercultural leadership

Impact: Academic and integration problems; exclusion; lack of/difficulties in crosscultural communication and understanding.

The SHUTTLE Connection: Self-leadership;  Intercultural leadership

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE Connection: Intercultural leadership

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE Connection: collaborative and intercultural leadership

Impact: students, staff, university, region

Impact: students, staff, university

Impact: students, staff, stakeholders, society.

The SHUTTLE Connection: self-leadership, collaborative and intercultural leadership

•Story: This Project aims to deepen knowledge and skills around Citizenship, Interculturality and Mediation in Glocal Contexts, in line with the following United Nations Sustainable Development Goals: SDG 4 - Quality education, ensuring access to inclusive and equitable education and fostering lifelong learning; SDG 5 - Gender equality, eliminating forms of discrimination based on gender; SDG 10 - Reduce inequalities by ensuring equal opportunities through educational/training and multicultural experiences; SDG 16 - Peace, justice and effective institutions, contributing to the construction of peaceful societies, contexts of social justice, and institutions that are responsible in the face of current societal challenges.

•Impact: Students, teachers, staff

•The SHUTTLE Connection: Collaborative and Intercultural lidership

From Welcome to Walls: PALOP Struggles in Portuguese Classrooms

Story: Although there are efforts to welcome students and intercultural initiatives, tensions persist between the cultural diversity of the student body and the institutional conditions required for full integration. In the classroom, there are still instances where students from Portuguese-speaking African countries (PALOP) do not integrate easily into groups of Portuguese students.

Impact: Academic and integration problems; difficulties in crosscultural communication and understanding.

The SHUTTLE Connection: Self-leadership;  Intercultural leadership

It not only helps international students adapt and feel a sense of belonging, but also develops intercultural skills and empathy among local participants. Overall, the initiative promotes respect, reduces barriers, and strengthens an inclusive academic community.

Impact: Students, staff, institution, community

The SUTTLE Connection: collaborative, self, intercultural leadership

Impact:
Unequal access to opportunities, slower adaptation, and a weaker sense of belonging for some students, which can affect both academic success and well-being.

The SHUTTLE Connection:
Inclusive mobility and equitable access highlighting the need to design systems that go beyond formal structures and actively bridge hidden social gaps.

Title: Wellbeing-Centered Learning + Practical Empowerment

The Story:
At UAS in Nysa, nearly 100 pedagogy students participated in intensive RECOVER workshops focused on youth mental health and wellbeing. The sessions, led by international experts, created a safe and open space for dialogue, reflection, and hands-on learning. Students gained practical tools, access to international resources, and the opportunity to engage in a broader European initiative.

Impact:
Strengthened student wellbeing awareness, development of self-leadership and emotional competencies, and better preparation for future professional roles in education.

The Education 5.0 Connection:
Human-centered education, self-leadership, and wellbeing as core components of future-oriented learning.

Story: I teach English to a class of international students in Czechia. They come from all over the world (Brazil, Turkey, China, Ukraine, Vietnam, Azerbaijan, Myanmar, Kazakhstan), so the English language itself really works as a means of inclusion. However, I believe that allowing limited use of students’ native languages can significantly enhance inclusion. While English remains the main medium of instruction, students are occasionally encouraged to clarify difficult concepts with peers in their first language. This practice reduces anxiety and helps students engage more deeply with the material. It also acknowledges the linguistic diversity of the classroom as an asset rather than a problem. It enables students to build confidence gradually and participate more actively. Importantly, this approach fosters mutual respect among students from different linguistic backgrounds. In this way, multilingualism becomes a tool for inclusion and collaboration.

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE Connection: collaborative and intercultural leadership

Story: A notable barrier to inclusion in my teaching context is the continuous intake of students throughout the academic year. While most students begin in October, others enter the programme at later stages, including the start of the summer semester or beyond. This complicates the development of a cohesive learning community. Students who start together are more likely to establish social connections and shared norms early on. In contrast, late-arriving students must integrate into an already formed group dynamic. This often results in reduced participation and a weaker sense of belonging among newer students.

From the perspective of higher education, this reflects a structural tension between flexibility and inclusion. Although flexible access broadens participation, it may inadvertently undermine the creation of a supportive, human-centered learning environment.

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE Connection: self-leadership, intercultural leadership

Story: Initially, this project was created and implemented at Escola Secundária Nuno Álvares to help foreign students enrolled in Year 10 and struggling with  English, level B1.1/B1.2. Now, it involves both foreign and local students. Three main strategies have been used to enhance their language skills: the creation of individual learning plans in digital and/or paper format, shared with students through learning management systems such as Google Classroom; grouping students so that one acts as a mentor and supports the mentee in both the learning process and their integration into the class and co-teaching, one of the teachers leads the lesson while the other works with a small group for intensive intervention.

Impact: Students and staff

The SHUTTLE connection: collaborative, digital and intercultural leadership

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE Connection: intercultural and collaborative leadership

At the same time, in the interest of ensuring equitable conditions across programmes, it may be appropriate to consider extending similar preparatory opportunities to students in the Czech-language track. It is reasonable to anticipate that further developments in this direction may be considered as the initiative evolves.

Impact: students, teachers

The SHUTTLE Connection: business leadership

Story: Migrant or refugee students who are integrated in upper secondary classes at Escola Secundária Nuno Álvares, in Castelo Branco, have difficulties not only because the content may be new to them, but also because they lack the required language skills to understand the teachers and to take national exams at the end of Years 11 and 12. In order to succeed, these students need more than Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills (BICS); they also need Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) to understand and use academic discourse and the terminology of subjects, such as Physics and Chemistry or Biology and Geology.

Without specialized training, the teachers involved do their best to make sure all students are given equitable conditions for access to the curriculum and educational success. However, the implementation of these measures still presents significant challenges, and further work needs to be done.

Impact: Students and staff

The SHUTTLE connection: collaborative and intercultural leadership

IMPACT: Students then struggle with their English in other classes in other departments and it sometimes come back to "why didn't the English department prepare you better?" or "how did you manage to pass this class if you're unable to communicate at a B2 level?" Despite feedback, there is still no option for a B1 English course in the state Bachelor Program.

Impact: Students and staff

The SHUTTLE connection: Self-leadership

Story: Last school year, I worked with a group of Timorese students and, to support their inclusion and sense of belonging, I paired them at times with students from the Higher Technical Course in Recreational Education for Children. These students acted as their buddies/mentors, engaging together in a variety of activities throughout the first semester. This collaboration fostered meaningful connections, cultural exchange, and peer support, playing a key role in helping the Timorese students adapt to their new academic and social environment.

Impact: Students (Timorese and Recreational Education for Children students).

The SHUTTLE Connection: self-leadership, collaborative leadership and intercultural leadership.

Impact: Reduced participation, slower integration, and potential feelings of isolation among Timorese students; missed opportunities for mutual learning among all students.

The SHUTTLE Connection: Intercultural leadership.

Story: Recognizing the growing diversity and needs of students, IPCB created the ALLIN project as part of its Mental Health and Well-being Service. Instead of relying only on traditional psychological support, the initiative introduces a multi-level approach: from open awareness sessions for the whole academic community, to anonymous peer interaction spaces ("Café ALL YOU"), and accessible therapeutic and medical support. By offering flexible, stigma-reducing, and inclusive formats, including anonymous digital participation, the program actively lowers barriers to seeking help.

• Impact: Students (national and international), academic staff, non-teaching staff

• The SHUTTLE Connection: self-leadership

https://uni-bge.hu/en/news/intercultural-easter-is-back

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIqg5x9MhAP/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

Impact: students

SHUTTLE connection: self-leadership, collaborative leadership, intercultural leaderhsip

https://fb.me/e/410fVJxIY

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE connection: self-leadership, collaborative leadership, intercultural leadership

Impact: students

The SHUTTLE connection: self-leadership, collaborative leadership, intercultural leadership

https://uni-bge.hu/en/sustainability/equal-opportunities

Impact: educators, administrative staff

The SHUTTLE connection: collaborative leadership

Impact: students, educators

The SHUTTLE connection: self-leadership, collaborative leadership, intercultural leadership

Impact: students, educators, institution

The SHUTTLE connection: collaborative leadership

The clearest and most institutionalised example of inclusion at the University of Extremadura (UEx) is the Student Support Unit (UAE – Unidad de Atención al Estudiante), a well-established service staffed by technical specialists who provide dedicated support to students with educational needs arising from a disability or from exceptional personal circumstances that may hinder their academic progress and full participation in university life.

In addition to its permanent staff, the Unit is supported by coordinators based across the University’s 17 faculties and schools, located on its four campuses in the cities of Badajoz, Cáceres, Mérida and Plasencia. These coordinators are academic staff who act as a link between the Unit’s specialists and students requiring support at each centre.

Impact: Students and staff

The SHUTTLE connection: Business-leadershipo, self- and collaborative-leadership

On the one hand, in the specific case of the Faculty of Education and Psychology (UEx), the very high student–staff ratio in pre-service teacher education programmes creates conditions that make inclusive practices difficult to implement effectively. Large class sizes reduce opportunities for individualised attention, flexible assessment, and timely identification of students who may require support, thereby limiting the practical impact of institutional inclusion policies.

On the other hand, there is a lack of specialised training of academic staff in inclusive education. While support services exist, many lecturers lack the pedagogical preparation needed to recognise and respond to the diverse needs of students, including those arising from disability or exceptional personal circumstances. As a result, responsibility for inclusion is often informally transferred to our specialised unit, rather than being embedded within everyday teaching practice.

Impact: Limited integration into the academic community, reduced intercultural exchange, and missed opportunities for building a sense of belonging beyond the classroom.

The SHUTTLE Connection: Intercultural leadership

Impact: Students and staff

The SHUTTLE connection: Self-leadership, collaborative leadership

Impact: Community, students and staff

The SHUTTLE connection: Self-leadership, collaborative leadership, intercultural leadership

Impact: Students, particularly international, PALOP and low-income students

The SHUTTLE connection: Self-leadership, collaborative leadership, intercultural leadership

Share your letters by May 15th on this Padlet!

Guidelines for Your Letter

Consider these three layers:

•          The Digital Layer: How is AI or tech helping a student who previously struggled to belong? (e.g., Real-time neuro-adaptive interfaces? Universal translation in the cafeteria?)

•          The Human Layer: How has the role of the “Student”, "Professor", “Leader” or "Coach" changed? (e.g., From "sage on the stage" to "architect of belonging"? Or from self-directed learner to inclusion collaborator?)

•          The Physical/Social Layer: What does the "vibe" of the campus feel like? Who or what is there that wasn't there in 2026?

To: Her 2026 self (written May 2036) when she was a student at a HE

Dear...

Example "Starter" Prompts

If you are stuck, choose one of these opening lines:

•          Dear 2026 Colleague / Learner, you wouldn't believe it, but our graduation ceremony today featured 15 different languages, and nobody needed a headset because..."

•          "I just walked into the Engineering lab, and the most amazing thing happened: the environment literally reshaped itself to accommodate..."

•          "The 'Inclusion Office' was shut down three years ago because it was not needed anymore. Now, every department..."

•       We will identify the common themes in your 2036 visions.

•       We will then proceed to ask, as Part 4 of our Workshop (the final part): "If this is where we are in 2036, what is the single most important leadership decision we must make in 2026 to get there?"

·        Signals of Inclusion: 21 primary posts describing successful inclusive practices.

·        Points of Friction: 10 primary posts identifying systemic barriers or challenges.

·        Comments: 2 specific interactive comments from participants reacting to other posts.

This analysis provides a mapping of "Signals of Inclusion" and "Points of Friction" identified by workshop participants, categorized by the five leadership dimensions of the SHUTTLE project.

Read more in the publication above.

Your Task:

To help us prioritize the most impactful strategies for our upcoming e-book content, we invite you to complete a brief ranking survey: https://forms.gle/th4MhDPzkWTespu17

This survey focuses on the key drivers that emerged from our collective intelligence, including:

• Student Co-creation: Collaborative design of curricula and study programs.

• Peer Mentorship: Strengthening the "Inclusion Pulse" through buddy systems and student-led integration.

• Well-being & Mental Health: Embedding emotional competencies and accessible support into the learning environment.

• Multilingual Flexibility: Recognizing linguistic diversity as an asset for collaboration.

Please submit your rankings by 27^th April 2026.

Read the report above.

Ana Piedade

Dear Professor Ana,

I imagine you walking slowly through the campus again in 2036, with the same attentive gaze you once tried to brought into every classroom. So much has changed—and yet, I think you would feel unexpectedly at home.

Let me tell you about a small moment. In the courtyard, now called the “shared commons,” a group gathers around a table: a student from Cabo Verde, another from Ukraine, a mature learner from the local community, and a visiting scholar from Brazil. Their conversation moves fluidly across languages, gently supported by invisible translation systems that allow each person to speak from where they are—linguistically, culturally, emotionally. No one asks them to adapt; the space adapts to them.

You would notice, too, how teaching has softened. The lecturer nearby is not leading, but listening—guiding the group with questions that invite stories, not just answers. Yet, they learn a lot.

Students are keepers of perspectives, responsible for weaving each other in and finally they work in CBL (do you remember HEROES aliiance?!). Inclusion is no longer discussed—it is practiced, moment by moment.

And perhaps what would touch you most is this: you would not feel like a visitor. Retired lecturers as you, migrants, elders, and first-generation students all inhabit the same rhythms of the campus. Knowledge no longer belongs to a stage or a syllabus: it circulates through lived experience.

I think you would recognize something here: not the university as it was, but as it always hoped to be.

With affection,
From 2026

The "Inclusion Office" was shut down three years ago because it was no longer needed. Now, every department is the inclusion office. Today, walking back onto campus as a teacher, you finally see what that truly means.

You step into a seminar room and the environment shifts (literally!!!!). The lighting softens, the acoustic panels adjust, and a quiet neuro-adaptive interface offers each student a personalised connection on the shared screen. Nobody publishes it. Nobody pauses. The room simply belongs to everyone in it. And so do you! In a way it never happened before.

Your role has a different name now, you are not the teacher but the architect of belonging. You are not at the front of the room; you move through it. Between a doctoral researcher from Mozambique, a 58-year-old engineer returning to study, a non-speaking student co-creating ideas through a gesture interface. Each of them is not merely included, each of them is leading the session alongside you.

The campus feels quieter and louder at once. Quieter because there is no longer a separate struggle to be heard. Louder because so many more voices have found their frequency. There are murals in twelve languages. The cafeteria translates in real time, not with headphones but through ambient sound merged into the architecture itself.

What was once policy is now instinct. Inclusion is not what we teach, it is how we think, build, and belong. It became, at last, institutional DNA. Finally!!!

With pride and recognition,

Your 2036 self

Today, as I returned to campus as a teacher, I realized how profoundly higher education has changed—not through spectacular technology alone, but through the quality of human relationships it now protects and encourages.

AI is everywhere, of course. Students no longer come to class primarily to collect information; they can access knowledge instantly, in forms adapted to their needs, languages, and learning styles. Instead, classrooms have become spaces for something much more valuable: interpretation, dialogue, and the sharing of lived experience.

This morning, I watched a discussion between students from different cultural and professional backgrounds. The professor spoke very little. Instead of delivering content, she guided reflection, asked difficult questions, and connected personal experiences to broader ethical and social contexts. Teaching now feels less like transferring knowledge and more like mentoring people.

What surprised me most was the atmosphere on campus. Ten years ago, universities invested heavily in mental well-being initiatives because anxiety, loneliness, and uncertainty had become almost defining features of student life. Those support systems still exist, but they are no longer the center of institutional attention. The long-term inclusion programs truly changed the culture itself.

Students seem more confident, more secure in their identities, and less afraid of making mistakes or not belonging. Diversity is no longer treated as a challenge to manage, but as the normal condition of academic life. People participate more openly because they trust that they will be heard.

This Tuesday morning at IPCB feels very different from the campus I knew ten years ago. As I walk into the learning commons, I notice that inclusion is no longer a “project” or a special initiative — it is simply the way the institution lives and breathes.

Near the entrance, a multilingual digital wall welcomes students in Portuguese, Tetum, Chinese, English, and several other languages represented on campus. AI-assisted translation tools are embedded into every classroom, allowing students to participate comfortably in their preferred language while still engaging with others in real time. No one is afraid to speak anymore because communication itself has become shared ground.

I sit beside a new group of international students during a collaborative workshop. Teachers are no longer seen mainly as transmitters of knowledge, but as facilitators of participation and belonging. What moves me most is not the technology, but the naturalness of the interaction. Every first-year student automatically joins a peer-circle mentorship program, inspired by the old buddy initiatives we once created for Timorese students. Today, these circles are part of the institutional culture, connecting students across backgrounds, ages, and learning paths.

One moment stays with me: a student hesitates before sharing an idea, and another quietly says, “Take your time — your perspective matters here.” Nobody finds that sentence extraordinary anymore. That is the real transformation.

In 2036, belonging is not measured by how quickly students adapt to the institution. Instead, the institution continuously adapts to its people. Inclusion has become the campus’s institutional DNA — visible in its spaces, its teaching, and, above all, in the everyday relationships between people.

With hope,
Your 2026 Self

Today I travelled to 2036 and identified aspects of how my institution operates that make me truly proud. What struck me most was not a new building or advanced technology - it was the natural way in which equity is lived. Here, in 2036, all students are treated exactly the same, regardless of gender, sexual orientation, or nationality, not because this is proclaimed on posters, but because it is deeply embedded in everyday practices.

Inclusive language and behavior, respect for identities, and the appreciation of cultural diversity no longer depend on the individual sensitivity of each professor, non-teaching staff member, and/or student - they are recognized, required, and continuously updated competences. Trust is visible in the corridors, classrooms, and informal spaces.

On the digital level, academic platforms have been designed to ensure equity: accessible content, multilingual support, and early-warning mechanisms that identify situations of exclusion or inequality.

Interestingly, the former “inclusion office” no longer exists. Not because inclusion has become less important, but because it has become everyone’s responsibility. Today, more than ever, I know that the fundamental decision began in 2026: to train, commit, and hold the entire institution accountable.

With conviction,

The role of the teacher had also changed. The teacher was no longer merely someone who transmitted content, but someone who designed learning experiences, critically monitored the data produced by the platforms, and ensured that AI was used with fairness, transparency, and respect for privacy. Statistics was no longer merely a difficult course unit, but had become a common language for understanding real-world problems and making more inclusive decisions.

What struck me most was the atmosphere. There was no evident separation between students with “special needs” and the others. The campus was prepared for everyone, being physically accessible, digitally adaptive, and socially attentive. Inclusion did not need to be announced on posters. It became visible in interactions, in decisions, and in the way each person was listened to.

At that moment, I realised that the real transformation had taken place when we stopped asking “how can we integrate these students?” and started asking “what kind of institution do we need to become so that everyone belongs from the very beginning?”.

Dear 2036 Self, 

Today, I returned to the campus as a lifelong learner, and I realized how much this place has changed. It has become a completely different place – more open and welcoming for all students. 

The first thing that pleasantly surprised me was the communication between buildings. Students don’t have to rush from one class to another - small electric buses now move around campus, and electric scooters are available near every building. This makes it much easier for people with limited mobility to get around the university. In addition, parking areas have been redesigned to be more accessible and less stressful to use. 

The entire campus is also much better adapted for people with disabilities. Doors open automatically, classrooms have intelligent real-time translation, and elevators and ramps are obtainable everywhere without difficulty. 

The library looks completely different from the one we knew before. It is modern, full of space for both individual and group study, and next to it, there is a large cafeteria where students actually spend time together instead of only eating quickly between classes. Outside, the campus has been expanded with tables, seating areas, and even a small outdoor gym, which encourages students to relax and connect outside of lessons. 

Across the campus, spaces are designed with different needs in mind. There are quiet rooms for those who need calm and reduced stimulation, as well as open areas intended for discussion and social interaction. People choose spaces based on how they function best, whether they are introverted, extroverted, or sensitive to sensory input. 

The classrooms themselves are equipped with modern computers, laptops, interactive boards, and projectors, making lessons more engaging and available for everyone. 

Looking at all of this, I feel that in 2036, the university is no longer just a place for learning, but it has become a place where everyone can truly feel part of the community. 

With Hope, 

Your 2026 Self 

UAS in Nysa has changed so much that you need to see it to believe it. Our new campus implements inclusion on a spatial level — not only is everything accessible for the disabled part of our community, but the layout of the classrooms and hallways has also changed to become more open and inviting. Just like “quiet rooms” for highly sensitive people. Our University paid a great deal of attention to improving the well-being of Erasmus students. For starters, there are plenty of new events that help with the integration of  Erasmus and Polish students.  Technology has also changed a lot here, especially with the development of AI, which has greatly improved intercultural communication. Accessible digital platforms, AI translation tools, and adapted learning materials help international and visually impaired students participate more comfortably in university life. On top of that, every week students host presentations about their uniqueness and cultural backgrounds, which helps the university better understand and accommodate their needs. Multicultural events, mental health support, and student integration initiatives make the campus feel more welcoming and inclusive for everyone. Our university has built a new campus with a large parking area that includes plenty of spaces for disabled members of our community. The campus also includes ramps, elevators, quiet rooms for neurodivergent students, and accessible study spaces designed to support both individual learning and teamwork.

With pride and affection

Your 2036 self

I just walked into the Business school, and the most amazing thing happened. The environment literally reshaped itself to accommodate every single person in the room and not one student looked up in surprise because by 2036 that is simply what rooms do.

But what stopped me was not the technology. It was a conversation in the corridor just outside. A student was explaining her business model to a professor. However, the professor was sitting down, taking notes, and the student was drawing on the wall. Not a whiteboard. The wall. The building itself had become a canvas, and the hierarchy had quietly dissolved into something more honest, two people thinking together.

You, we used to worry about losing authority by letting students lead. Look at that corridor now and tell me something was lost.

The Business school has people in it who were invisible in 2026. Older students returning after careers. Students who communicate differently. Students who arrived last month from places still in conflict, bringing perspectives. They are not accommodated as exceptions, they are here as protagonists. Their lived experience is shaping the curriculum, the case studies, the very questions we choose to ask in class.

We did not wait for a perfect policy. We started with one classroom, one corridor, one honest conversation. And it spread, quietly, until belonging became the reflex of this place, not the exception.

Keep teaching. Keep listening.

Your 2026 self

Dear Student,

Welcome to the academic year 2036–37.

We would like to invite you to the 'Words We Carry' Day, taking place on 8 September, your very first day of university.

All students, newcomers and returning, together with teaching and support staff, are invited to contribute one piece of writing to a collective digital book. A sentence, a paragraph, a poem, a drawing, a song, a single word. There is no assessment and no right answer. Just something honest about where you are right now: what you are hoping for, what worries you, what you already know that nobody here has thought to ask you about yet.

By the end of the day, the digital book will be ready and shared with everyone. At the end of the year it reopens, and you will return to what you wrote in September to see how your thinking has moved. When you read what others wrote, you will find that many of you arrived carrying the same words of doubt or hope. And that is what a community is made of.

This year, for the first time in our history, the number of students joining us remotely exceeds the number on campus. Be sure that wherever you are joining us from, your feelings belong in this book.

We look forward to supporting you in crossing out any words you no longer want to carry.

The Rector, 2036–37

You wouldn’t believe it, but our graduation ceremony, attended by 60 nationalities, was held only in English, and nobody needed a headset, as after the complete breakdown of AI in 2032, students had become more interested in learning foreign languages than ever before.

You might be shocked to read these lines, but after profound analyses of interconnected reality, AI had become entirely independent of humans, who had been identified as dangerous and malevolent intruders on this planet. As a perfectly rational tool, it decided to eliminate humanity by attacking its production, logistics, transport, and other systems. Consequently, it had to be switched off globally, and humans were forced to return to their previous practices in order to maintain their basic supply chains.

Due to this unprecedented change, humanity realized the limitations of pure rationalism, which had nearly brought the species to extinction. This experience led to the recognition of the role of emotional intelligence in the cognitive process and, consequently, in education. The development of EI then became the central focus of teachers and academics in the following decades and enabled a major paradigm shift.

Wishing you every success in overcoming this unexpected milestone!

All the best,

Markéta Laciková

When I look back on what our campus was like 10 years ago, I can hardly believe how far we've come in such a short time.

As I walk up the ramp leading to the Technology and Management building, I marvel at the many groups of students sitting on the grass, or around tables in the patio, engrossed in discussions or writing on their tablets and laptops. I hear different languages, see different hair colours and styles and note how relaxed these young people look around each other. We have recently dropped the concept of international student. Real-time AI translation tools and international institutional consortia have effetively made our small  inland university a bigger and global institution.

I head to the Tourism Year 1 lab room, decorated with posters from all over the world, pictures and postcards which students have brought from their homes and their travels. I look at the discussion boards on eco-community tourism the group has been working on.
Shortly, I'm  having a tutoring session with our online course students who will be joining me from different countries and continents.

After that, the locally-based students will be coming to class to discuss their reports on best practices in community tourism around the world. I expect a lively discussion between them, and I will be mostly observing and moderating. Being a teacher now is quite different from what it was 10 years ago. It involves mostly supervision, moderation and facilitation. Cocreation, collaboration and peer-assessment are now standard and well-established practices.

After that, I'll have another tutoring session where we'll revise and finetune the posters students will be presenting at the global eco-community tourism conference. They expect my feedback on content and organisation, as they have used AI to check language accuracy. They will be presenting in 10 different languages.

When I returned to Nuno Álvares Secondary School in 2036, the first thing I noticed was the calm and welcoming energy. Students from different parts of the world talk to each other in pluricultural and plurilingual groups. Race, religion, language, country of origin or social status are no longer an issue. Students interact with each other, showing genuine respect and acceptance of others.

Modern interpretation systems allow each speaker to receive instant interpretation of what other participants in the interaction say and can, therefore, express themselves using their own mother tongue. Teachers are supportive and value cultural and linguistic differences in a way that everyone feels respected and able to reach the much-desired success and acceptance.

Classrooms no longer have the traditional rows, with students facing forward to minimize distractions. Direct instruction has given place to collaborative environments where teachers support differentiated, exploratory learning. Tables are grouped together in squares to foster peer-to-peer discussions and group work. Instruction no longer relies on intuition; it is data informed. This means that each student knows what to do to reach their learning goals and the decisions made by teachers are data informed and tailored to each specific student.

The sad memory of foreign students struggling with the Portuguese language to understand content from different subjects is no longer an issue. Students have access to resources in their mother tongue, and they can use their own language in tests and exams. Cutting edge translation and interpretation technology allows students to understand teachers and teachers to understand students’ written and spoken outcomes.

Moreover, students have access to AI tutors to study. These tutors are used to challenge them to think critically and solve problems without being given direct answers. Equitable access to the curriculum and the chance to thrive academically is a reality, since it is recognized and accepted that different individuals require unique resources to achieve the same opportunities for success.

With hope,

Your 2026 Self

If this manifesto point is an absolute reality in 2036, tell us how you would write it!

Post Your Comments

For the points that resonate with you, please use the bubble speeach icon to comment on the following:

(1) Current barrier/feeling.

(2) Changes you would introduce to the manifesto point.

(3) One small action we must take by 2028 to make this change happen.

Add a Point to the SHUTTLE Inclusion Manifesto

You can also use the (+) button to add points to the SHUTTLE Inclusion Manifesto. Think back to the Frictions we identified, the Drivers we ranked, and the 2036 Visions you wrote. What is the one principle you feel is missing? Add it to the SHUTTLE Manifesto!

The classrooms in the Portuguese polytechnic institutions where I teach were mostly designed for a standard student who never existed: young, without responsibilities, without physical or cognitive limitations, fully available. The reality is radically different: working students, students with children, students with dyslexia or other undiagnosed conditions, international students functioning in a language that is not their own. The dominant feeling is one of unilateral adaptation — it is the student who adapts to the space, never the other way around.

(2) Changes I would introduce

The 2036 vision would be stronger if it were more operational. It is not enough to say that spaces "fluidly reshape" — we need to define what that means in terms of architectural decision-making, accessible digital platforms, and flexible scheduling. In smaller institutions in the interior of Portugal, where resources are scarcer, adaptability must be designed creatively and at low cost, with a focus on organisational flexibility rather than technological investment alone.

(3) One small action by 2028

Conduct a participatory accessibility audit, involving both students and teachers, in at least one organisational unit of each partner institution. The goal is not a technical report, but a simple map: "what in this space prevents you from learning?" The answers inform physical and digital intervention priorities — with criterion and without wasting resources.

In my experience teaching in polytechnic contexts — where students often arrive through non-linear paths, with histories of prior academic failure, forced geographic mobility, or the difficult balance between work and study — the greatest barrier to belonging is not a lack of technology or resources. It is the persistence of an asymmetric relational model in which the teacher speaks and the student receives. Many students arrive convinced that their place is precarious, that any mistake confirms they are "not cut out for this." The classroom is still not, in most cases, a space where not knowing is safe.

(2) Changes I would introduce

This pillar would gain precision if it acknowledged that the transition from "content transmitter" to "architect of belonging" is not a matter of individual goodwill — it is a question of pedagogical model and institutional recognition. In the fields of Human Resources and Organisational Behaviour that I teach, I regularly use students' lived experiences as central analytical material, not as secondary illustration. This shifts the dynamic: the student becomes a legitimate source of knowledge. This principle should be explicitly embedded in teaching methodologies and in pedagogical quality assessment criteria.

(3) One small action by 2028

Create, in each SHUTTLE partner institution, a shared repository of belonging-centred pedagogical practices, fed by teachers themselves: concrete methodologies that place the student as protagonist, with evidence of impact on engagement and retention. Not a top-down manual, but a horizontal community of practice. First step: one annual 3-hour inter-institutional meeting, dedicated solely to this.

2036 Vision: We don't treat everyone exactly the same—we give individuals what they uniquely need. Tech and data are used to customize support and challenge students critically.

Current barrier/feeling

This vision for 2036 is part of a logic of educational personalization with social justice, in which pedagogical differentiation ceases to be understood as a privilege or exception and becomes a principle of equity. Instead of offering the same to everyone, the institution seeks to respond to distinct needs, recognizing that initial inequalities influence access, participation, and academic success. This perspective is particularly relevant when considering cultural dimensions. In terms of gender equality, personalization cannot be limited to individual performance; it must also question the mechanisms of socialization, expectation, and evaluation that reproduce asymmetries. Personalization can support different paces, content formats, modes of interaction, and assessment strategies, as long as it respects student autonomy and does not reduce them to a set of limitations.

Changes you would introduce to the manifesto point.

In a social context marked by persistent inequalities and increasing diversity, we affirm the need for a paradigmatic transformation: the shift from a logic of uniformity to a logic of personalization with equity. This manifesto proposes a scientific, ethical, and pedagogical commitment to an education that recognizes differences not as deviations, but as constitutive dimensions of social justice.

One small action we must take by 2028 to make this change happen.

To create institutional systems for critical monitoring with disaggregated data that is interpreted pedagogically.

(1) Current barrier/feeling

We keep treating equity as a problem that the institution should be solving for students. The fact is that underneath every support office or programme, there is a relationship where the university identifies the problem and designs a solution for the student/recipients. Many times, students don’t show up and we wonder why.

(2) Changes I would introduce to the manifesto point.

Students who attend university under genuinely difficult equity conditions are the ones that really know about what keeps someone going when everything else is pulling them out. When they graduate, all that knowledge goes away and it is wasted. I would want this manifesto point to include the idea of creating formal structures where student knowledge feeds directly into course design and teacher training, not as merely as consultation, but as a real transfer of authority over what gets built and how. Equity cannot rely exclusively on apps, seminars, or political will. It needs a cultural shift in who is considered an expert on that topic inside a university.

(3) One small action we must take by 2028 to make this change happen.

Maybe including one student-taught session on the topic "Equity from the student perspective" in the teachers training programmes could make a difference. This small inversion, to learn from the ones who have lived it, would do more for relational equity than most programmes are doing now.

It is true that technology has improved access to education, but it has also reduced personal interaction and emotional connection between students and educators. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, many students have experienced increased anxiety, stress, depressive symptoms, loneliness, social isolation, self-harm tendencies, and a loss of study habits and motivation. Some students are afraid of being judged, which makes them hesitant to ask questions, participate in discussions, or seek help when they are struggling. As a result, many students feel emotionally disconnected from the university environment.

2. Changes I would introduce to the manifesto point

I would place greater emphasis on emotional intelligence, empathy, and psychological safety within the learning environment. Educators should not only deliver knowledge but also actively create supportive and inclusive classroom cultures where students feel respected, heard, and safe to participate.

For example, teachers could normalize mistakes as part of learning, encourage open discussions without fear of embarrassment, and regularly invite quieter students to contribute in comfortable ways. Simple practices like checking in with students at the beginning of class, using supportive language, or openly discussing wellbeing and stress management could significantly improve students’ sense of belonging and safety.

3. One small action we must take by 2028

By 2028, every faculty should establish regular wellbeing check-ins and structured feedback where students can openly discuss their learning experience, stress levels, sense of belonging, and emotional wellbeing with educators.

These check-ins could take place through short anonymous surveys during the semester, small discussion sessions, tutor meetings, or informal reflection activities at key moments such as the beginning of the semester, before exam periods, and after major assignments. Universities should also ensure that students know where to seek psychological or academic support if needed.

(a)             Your Personal Journey: How did you feel moving through the different workshop phases? Did your perspective shift as we moved from stories to manifesto to action?

(b)            The Tasks: We’d love to hear your thoughts on the four key tasks we tackled together.

(c)             The Process: How did you find this asynchronous format? Did it provide enough space for your involvement and reflection?

(d)            Emotions & Impact: What were the primary emotions you felt during this process? Has this work changed your view of your agency (Students), your ability to dismantle barriers (Teachers), or how campus life aligns with the world outside (Community Stakeholders)?

Please upload your audio files or notes to the workshop Padlet at by 31^st May 2026.

I'll just share a personal anecdote from my own classroom, which was with first year Business English students. During a class of about 15 students, one student would often stand up and pace around the room in the middle of the lesson. While this behavior surprised everyone, I recognized it as a likely manifestation of neurodivergence rather than a disruption. Instead of drawing negative attention to the student, I tried to normalize his behavior and only asked him to return to his chair when specific activities required him to be there.

The Impact

By reframing standard classroom etiquette to accommodate individual needs, I hope I established a more inclusive environment for both him and his classmates. Also, I hope it modeled inclusive behavior for his peers.

The SHUTTLE connection: self leadership, collaborative

It is so strange to look back at how things used to be. Today, I was just talking with my personal synth (a physical artificial entity companion we have at home) and I think you would be amazed by how effortless everything feels now. The AE just naturally aligns with whatever you need the moment of your display.

We don't go outside anymore, so the university projects right into your display, and we are always connected and occupied inside. All those awkward social barriers between everyone have completely disappeared. Half the time, you can't even tell if you are collaborating with a real person or an AE on display and nobody thinks about it. It just feels like a group of minds sharing ideas on a shared digital canvas. Learning has never been easier!

The best part is the control you have over your circle. The algorithm filters everything perfectly, which determines exactly who populates your school network based entirely on your own preferences to create your best learning environment. That can be anything: a specific regional style, a comforting aesthetic, or an entirely custom peer group that fits your algorithm. Just last week I was collaborating with characters from Looney Tunes! I guess that's because I've been watching a lot of the old shows.

We really have to thank the massive cooling grids humming away outside for all of this; they keep our processors stable so our cubes stay perfectly peaceful.

It’s just strange to think you still leave your space.

Stay safe,

Your 2036 Self

Participation in this workshop proved to be a progressively transformative experience. At the beginning, while engaging with stories, I found myself primarily in a mode of reading and interpretation, valuing the diversity of perspectives presented. As we moved towards the development of the manifesto, I noticed a clear shift toward a more critical and proactive stance, seeking to identify shared principles and give them coherence, translating ideas into practical possibilities. This progression allowed me to move from a more descriptive understanding to a more strategic and change-oriented perspective.

The Tasks:

Regarding the tasks, I believe each played a complementary role. The sharing of stories was essential in grounding the work in real and meaningful experiences. The development of the manifesto functioned as an exercise in synthesis and collective alignment. The action-oriented phase introduced a pragmatic focus, challenging us to think in terms of feasible solutions.

The Process:

As for the process, the asynchronous format was overall positive. It provided flexibility and time for deeper reflection, which I consider particularly valuable in collaborative contexts involving diverse participants. However, at certain moments, I missed more immediate interaction, which could have enriched the discussion and facilitated the co-construction of ideas. Still, the balance between autonomy and collaboration was, in my view, positive.

Emotions & Impact:

In terms of emotions, the process was marked by curiosity, engagement, and, at times, some uncertainty given the complexity of the topics addressed. Gradually, these emotions evolved into a stronger sense of clarity and purpose. This work contributed to reinforcing my perception of the responsibility of teachers to identify and help dismantle structural barriers. Furthermore, it encouraged a more critical reflection on how campus life connects with broader societal challenges, highlighting the need for greater alignment between these domains.

Although I initially thought my current practices in higher education were adequate, the workshop's content challenged my perspective, significantly broadening my mindset. Moving forward, I am eager to delve deeper into these concepts and learn how to implement the Inclusion Manifesto in my daily work with students and faculty members.

While the asynchronous format offered excellent flexibility for independent exploration and reflection, it lacked depth. More dedicated time for direct interaction with international colleagues would have provided much richer insights and collaborative learning opportunities.

I hope we keep in touch — I would love to continue learning alongside you!

        Your Personal Journey: How did you feel moving through the different workshop phases? Did your perspective shift as we moved from stories to manifesto to action?

Moving through the different workshop phases felt like a genuinely enriching and evolving journey. In the beginning, engaging with personal and shared stories created a strong sense of connection and reflection, allowing me to situate my own experiences within a broader collective context. As we transitioned into the manifesto phase, I felt a growing sense of clarity and purpose. As a matter of fact, ideas that initially felt intuitive became more structured and intentional. By the time we reached the action phase, there was a clear shift toward empowerment and possibility, where reflection was transformed into concrete pathways for change. Overall, my perspective deepened throughout the process, moving from introspection to a more confident and action-oriented outlook.

        The Tasks: We’d love to hear your thoughts on the four key tasks we tackled together.

The tasks stand out for their clear structure and objective orientation, guiding participants through a coherent and meaningful process. At the same time, they invite a balanced engagement of reflection and critical thinking, encouraging participants to question, interpret, and deepen their understanding at each stage. Importantly, the process also leaves space for imagination, allowing creative perspectives to emerge and enrich the outcomes. This combination of clarity and openness makes the tasks both purposeful and intellectually stimulating.

        The Process: How did you find this asynchronous format? Did it provide enough space for your involvement and reflection?

I found the asynchronous format to be highly effective and supportive of meaningful engagement. One of its greatest strengths was the flexibility it offered, allowing me to approach the tasks at a time and pace that suited my own rhythm. This made it much easier to balance the activities with other responsibilities while still remaining fully committed to the process.

The format also created valuable space for reflection. Having time to think, revisit ideas, and seek out additional information enabled a deeper and more critical engagement with the tasks. Rather than responding immediately, I could process the questions more thoughtfully, which contributed to more considered and nuanced contributions.

In terms of involvement, the asynchronous approach actually facilitated a stronger sense of participation. Without the pressure of real-time interaction, I felt more comfortable taking the time to articulate my thoughts clearly and confidently. This allowed for a more intentional and reflective form of engagement, ultimately enhancing both the quality of my input and my overall experience.

        Emotions & Impact: What were the primary emotions you felt during this process? Has this work changed your view of your agency (Students), your ability to dismantle barriers (Teachers), or how campus life aligns with the world outside (Community Stakeholders)?

Throughout this process, I experienced a strong sense of engagement, curiosity, and growing confidence. There was also a feeling of inspiration that emerged as the work progressed, particularly as ideas became more connected and purposeful. To be able to read other opinions shared and think about them, is quite interesting and an enrichment process. At different moments, I felt both challenged and motivated, which contributed to a rewarding and meaningful experience.

This work has positively influenced my perspective in several ways. It reinforced a sense of agency, highlighting the capacity to actively contribute, shape ideas, and engage in transformative processes. It also strengthened the belief that barriers, whether in educational contexts or broader social environments, can be thoughtfully identified and addressed through critical awareness and collaborative effort. Additionally, it deepened my understanding of how campus life can meaningfully connect with the wider community, showing that these spaces are not separate but rather interconnected and mutually influential.

Overall, the process fostered a more empowered, reflective, and action-oriented outlook.

(b) Tasks
The different tasks were very complementary. The points of friction activity helped me identify hidden inclusion challenges, while the signals of inclusion task allowed me to reflect on positive practices, such as the buddy programme with Timorese students. The manifesto and scenario-building activities encouraged me to think collectively and envision a future where inclusion is embedded in institutional culture.

(c) Process
I found the asynchronous format effective because it gave me the flexibility and time needed for reflection. It allowed me to connect the activities with my own professional experiences while still feeling part of a shared learning process.

(d) Emotions & Impact
The main emotions I felt were reflection, empathy, and hope. SHUTTLE reinforced my belief that inclusion is about creating a genuine sense of belonging. It also strengthened my confidence that educators and institutions can actively dismantle barriers through intentional actions, collaboration, and intercultural leadership.

In my opinion, the different tasks worked well together. Mapping friction points helped me to identify inclusion challenges that are easy to overlook in everyday practice, while reflecting on positive signals reminded me that good work is already happening and is worth building on. The scenario-building and manifesto activities pushed me to think beyond individual actions and consider what a more inclusive institutional culture could look like.

The asynchronous format suited me very well. It gave me the flexibility to engage with the material at my own pace and connect it to my professional context, while still feeling part of a shared learning experience.

By the end of the workshop, I felt more reflective, more motivated, and more aware of what meaningful inclusion requires. It is not just about policies or adjustments, it is about intentional action, collaboration, and a genuine commitment to removing the barriers that students with special educational needs still face. SHUTTLE workshop helped me to believe that this kind of change is achievable, but it takes effort and willingness to keep questioning current practices.

As long as inclusion is managed by a dedicated office or a small group of specialists, it will remain on the margins. The missing principle is shared ownership — the idea that every member of an institution, from leadership to teaching staff to support teams, has a role to play in making students feel they truly belong.

The missing principle is about shifting power. Inclusion only becomes real when students are not just supported but heard, valued, and involved in decisions that affect them. Belonging should be the default, not something that has to be requested.

One of the main things I took away was that being present in an institution is not the same as feeling like you belong to it. In the case of students with special educational needs, this gap is often invisible to others.

The tasks were well structured and worked well together. Looking at friction points helped me realise that inclusion problems are easy to miss in everyday work. The scenario-building and manifesto tasks encouraged me to think not just about individual situations, but about what a more inclusive institution could look like.

The asynchronous format suited me well. Being able to work through the material at my own pace gave me the space to connect it to my own professional experience, while still feeling part of a group learning process.

SHUTTLE workshop changed the way I think about inclusion.