BERA Bites 15

EDUCATING FOR ALL

‘A world of difference’: Exploring inclusivity in physical education through a posthuman lens

KAY SIDEBOTTOM UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING

Inclusivity as a concept is widely discussed, taught and applied as education grapples with difficult questions of equity and fairness in times of increasing human complexity. 1 However, its meaning is often assumed and not often problematised. Who wouldn’t want fairness and equity for all, regardless of difference? Closer inspection, however, calls us to ask questions such as: Inclusion into what, for what, and for whose ends? Inclusion through a posthuman lens Theories of critical posthumanism can help us to interrogate such issues of power, politics and what it actually means to be human in the world today. The philosophy bases its foundation around a guiding principle that requires us to move beyond humanism. As an ethical stance, humanism is clearly of value for its promotion of human equity, agency and care and its associated liberatory aims and achievements. Critical posthumanism acknowledges this, but also points to its limitations in terms of the reification of humans above other species, and the elevation of certain types of human in particular: the dominant White, male, Western, able-bodied, neurotypical, heterosexual ‘Man of reason’. Braidotti (2013) argues that this idealised human (which the majority of us are not) is deeply encoded in all of our belief systems – including our educational practices. While the meaning of inclusion has shifted from the 1 Original blog post, published 20 May 2026: https://www. bera.ac.uk/blog/a-world-of-difference-exploring-inclusivity-in- physical-education-through-a-posthuman-lens

original Latin inclaudere – meaning to shut in – the sense of enclosure, or folding people into a fixed and limiting system (which actually only reflects the bodies and lived realities of a minority) remains. Contemporary practices of ‘inclusion’, in which content and pedagogy are adapted to suit the diverse needs of students (for example via differentiated materials, learning support and assistive technology) can clearly support difference, but rarely change the original intention of the normative curriculum; it is a process which can be likened to inviting people to sit at a table which has already been set.

‘Contemporary practices of “inclusion” … [reflect] a process which can be likened to inviting people to sit at a table which has already been set.’

Inclusive physical education Physical education (PE) is one example of how – despite inclusion policies and learning which aims to support the abilities of all pupils – ableism continues to be deep-rooted. Practices founded on neoliberal aims of performance and competition, alongside particular understandings of strength, coordination and endurance, project an ‘idealised normative expectation of a healthy, defect-free, fully functioning body capable of performing (athletically) at a high level’ (Giese &

BERA BITES 15 | EDUCATING FOR ALL