You are here:

UDL and the University: Understanding the Utility and Affordances of Universal Design for Learning in Postsecondary Contexts
PROCEEDING

, Michigan State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, NV, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-37-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

As college student diversity grows, so, too, do concerns about student retention and degree completion, which are often persistent problems for many colleges and universities. One framework through which educators have attempted to address this gap is Universal Design for Learning (UDL). Within the past decade, UDL has begun to establish a presence in educational policy and recommendations for best practices. Although some excellent work has been done examining UDL-aligned practices in educational settings, UDL is still somewhat adolescent in its scholarship. As a result, our capacity to understand the utility of UDL is limited. This paper offers a consideration of the current conceptualizations of UDL and UDL-aligned practices in the literature and the particular affordances (and challenges) of their implementation within postsecondary contexts.

Citation

Green, K.R. (2019). UDL and the University: Understanding the Utility and Affordances of Universal Design for Learning in Postsecondary Contexts. In K. Graziano (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2582-2587). Las Vegas, NV, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 9, 2023 from .

© 2019 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bransford, J., Brown, A. & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  2. CAST (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org SITE 2019-Las Vegas, NV, United States, March 18-22, 2019
  3. Cuseo, J. (2007). The empirical case against large class size: Adverse effects on the teaching, learning, and retention of first-year students. Journal of Faculty Development, 21(1), 5-21.
  4. Dean, T., Lee-Post, A., & Hapke, H. (2017). Universal design for learning in teaching large lecture classes. Journal of Marketing Education, 39(1), 5-16.
  5. Edyburn, Dave L. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for learning if you saw it? Ten propositions for new directions for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(1), 33-41.
  6. Exeter, D.J., Ameratunga, S., Ratima, M., Morton, S., Dickson, M., Hsu, D., & Jackson, R. (2010). Student engagement in very large classes: The teachers’ perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 35, 761-775.
  7. Griful-Freixenet, J., Struyven, K., Verstichele, M., & Andries, C. (2017). Higher education students with disabilities speaking out: perceived barriers and opportunities of the universal design for learning framework. Disability& Society, 32(10), 1627–1649.
  8. Kennedy, M.K., Thomas, C.N., Meyer, J.P., Alves, K.A., & Lloyd, J.L. (2014). Using evidence-based multimedia to improve vocabulary performance of adolescents with LD: A UDL approach. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 71–86.
  9. Knowles, M. (1977). Adult learning processes: Pedagogy and andragogy. Religious Education, 72(2), 202-211.
  10. Masson, A.-L., Klop, T., & Osseweijer, P. (2016). An analysis of the impact of student-scientist interaction in a technology design activity, using the expectancy-value model of achievement related choice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26, 81–104.
  11. Morningstar, M.E., Shogren, K.A., Lee, H., & Born, K. (2015). Preliminary lessons about supporting participation and learning in inclusive classrooms observations. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 40(3), 192–210.
  12. National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Demographic and enrollment characteristics of nontraditional undergraduates: 2011–12. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2015/2015025.pdf.
  13. Rao, K., Ok, M.W., & Bryant, B.R. (2014). A review of research on universal design educational models. Remedial and Special Education, 35(3), 153–166.
  14. Rappolt-Schlichtmann, G., Daley, S.G., Lim, S., Lapinski, S., Robinson, K.H., & Johnson, M. (2013). Universal design for learning and elementary school science: Exploring the efficacy, use, and perceptions of a web-based science notebook. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1210–1225. Https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033217
  15. Roberts, K.D., Park, H.J., Brown, S. And Cook, B. (2011) Universal Design for Instruction in postsecondary education: A systematic review of empirically based articles. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24, 5-15.
  16. Rose, D.H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  17. Rose, D.H., Harbour, W.S., Johnston, C.S., Daley, S.G., & Abarbanell, L. (2006). Universal design for learning in SITE 2019-Las Vegas, NV, United States, March 18-22, 2019 postsecondary education: Reflections on principles and their application. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 19, 135–151.
  18. Samuels-Peretz, D., & Powers, J. (2014). Documentation and Universal Instructional Design: A partnership supporting diverse learners in higher education. The New Educator, 10 (1), 35-43.
  19. Schelly, C., Davies, P., & Spooner, C. (2011). Student perceptions of faculty implementation of Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(1), 17–30. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ941729.pdf
  20. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017, January). Reimagining the role of technology in higher education. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/Higher-EdNETP.pdf.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References