Evaluating Pedagogy and Practice of Universal Design for Learning in Public Schools

Abstract

How can education change to meet the demands of effectively educating an increasingly diverse student population with the skills, knowledge, and abilities they need to be productive and successful citizens in the 21st century? One possible solution is to create classrooms, teachers, and schools that embrace the progressive and inclusive practices espoused by Universal Design for Learning (UDL). In addition to being rooted in UDL pedagogy, classrooms designed to meet the challenge of 21st century education need to substantially integrate and utilize advances in technology. The vanguard of literature to date in UDL could be characterized as rhetorical advocacy. That is, UDL literature is in the early stages of introducing and promoting UDL pedagogy, but to date there is not a research base strong enough to establish UDL as a scientifically validated intervention (Edyburn, 2010). UDL might sound like a good idea, but until the research base turns the corner from advocating to assessing and measuring UDL outcomes, the promise of this approach will not be realized. This article describes a study exploring effects and outcomes of a professional development program on the perceptions and practice of UDL principles in K–12 public school inclusive classrooms, and could be one step toward bridging the gap from a good idea to a solidified best practice. Specifically, this study investigated a professional development program’s effect on teachers’ perceptions, conceptualizations, and implementation of UDL principles and practice in their classrooms.

The Administrator’s Role in Universal Design for Learning’s Successful Implementation

“…As referenced in ESSA (2015), UDL is scientifically valid and based on evidence of how a diverse spectrum of people learn best (Capp, 2017;CAST, n.d.). This teaching and learning approach advocates for flexibility, adaptability, student choice, and greater diversity through inclusion (Capp, 2017;CAST, n.d.;Lanterman & Applequist, 2018;Rao et al, 2017;Smith Canter et al, 2017).…”

“…Inclusive teaching strategies are the purposeful pedagogical methods to creating opportunities for all learners, including those with disabilities, to experience full membership or participation with their typically developing peers in a classroom community (Center for Teaching Innovation, n.d.; Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning, 2017;van Steen & Wilson, 2020). The very nature of the UDL framework and guidelines-advocating for multiple pathways centered on student choice and students' strengths-supports inclusion and inclusive teaching practices (Capp, 2017;Lanterman & Applequist, 2018;Rao et al, 2017;Smith Canter et al, 2017).…”

“…The proactive approach to design allows for a greater diversity of students’ needs to be met in the classroom (Capp, 2017; Rao et al, 2017). The UDL framework’s success with improving all students’ learning process is rooted in immense flexibility while maintaining high expectations (Capp, 2017; CAST, n.d.; Lanterman & Applequist, 2018; Rao et al, 2017; Smith Canter et al, 2017). As referenced in ESSA (2015), UDL is scientifically valid and based on evidence of how a diverse spectrum of people learn best (Capp, 2017; CAST, n.d.).…”

Towards an accessible iPad for children and young people with cerebral palsy

“…However, the utility of the UDL model has been questioned by Kieran and Anderson (2018), who contended that the model lacks a consideration of cultural differences between students, which may present a significant barrier to learning. Conversely, Smith-Canter et al (2017) claimed that the UDL model is effective due to its focus on individuality. Rose et al (2005) proposed that, to be most effective, the UDL model should be thoroughly integrated with principles of assistive technology.…”

“…When applying the UDL guidelines to technology, Israel et al (2014) noted the importance of individualised technologies, personalised to meet the needs and interests of each user. Thus, for an assistive technology to be inclusive, it should be able to be adapted to suit the individual (Smith-Canter et al, 2017). A recent investigation by Menges et al (2017) explored attitudes towards eye-gaze technology in Germany.…”