Editing UDL Conclusions

Now that you have read about and contributed your understanding to the '''[[Recognition Brain Network]]''', the '''[[Strategic Brain Network]]''', and the '''[[Affective Brain Network]]''', as well as discussed muliple means of '''[[representation]]''', '''[[expression]]''', and '''[[engagement]]''', tie it all together and tell us what Universal Design for Learning really means.

----
'''Click the "edit" tab''' at the top of the page to contribute to this article...


== Universal Design for Learning is/means... ==

To apply the principals of UDL, it seems as though one should acquire a thorough understanding of the cognitive and affective domains of learning - and be able to use one to affect the other.  For example, in order to universally reach all types of learners, one must use the various steps in Bloom's cognitive domains, creatively utilizing latest technology engaging the learner in the material, with the pre-established purpose of changing their behaviors and attitudes of the things that are being learned.  So, the Instructional Designers might consider themselves to be architects of cognition.

UDL can be thought of as a logical continuation and expansion of the recent emphasis on diversity and inclusiveness in popular and academic American culture. The recognition that excluding segments of the population from shared experience lessens the experience for the entire population leads directly to the idea that designing instruction to embrace difference enhances the instruction for all.


Universal Design for Learning Means to Me as a Designer...increased awareness that the design for one may be enhanced by a design for all.

To apply these principles as a corporate web training developer this means applying UDL to all components of a course. Including: 
•  Content 
•  Medium
•  Audience
•  Assitive Technologies 
•  Design, development and delivery validation tools (i.e. Section 508 Compliance validation) 
•  Developers, content SMEs and test audiences with disabilities

The idea behind UDL that lessons must be planned from the beginning to incorporate diverse methods of instruction to meet the needs of learners with a variety of capabilities and attributes is a lofty goal. In education, our system has evolved to have "specialists" that deal with a variety of unique cases. These specialists; social workers, counselors, special ed teachers, instructional coaches, etc. seem to be spokes on the wheel that represents UDL. UDL seems to say that it would be ideal if every teacher was able to design every lesson in a way that can address multiple intelligences, abilities and disabilities and all the individual differences in each student. If it isn't just one teacher designing the instruction, then it must be a team that can work to achieve the goal. In my experience, I have not seen this happen very often. We have a long way to go. The first step is to make people aware of the need. This wiki helps to do that. 

If the concepts were applied to socio-cultural learning where the teacher is more of a guide, then the underlying structure of the lesson would be very important so that the learners would be able to find the most appropriate means for them to move through the lesson. If the learners are more in control of the way they approach the lesson, the guide would have to be able to provide multiple means of access and engagement which lead to multiple means of expression. Some of the UDL concerns would be addressed by the learners in the socio-cultural approach as they would be bringing their preferences to the lesson from the start if it is up to them to figure many things out on their own. The guide would have to be able to observe the preferences and provide the means for the students.

The use of technology in a UDL approach would be necessary as there are technologies available that can assist a student in using their strengths. A podcast, for instance, would help present information to the student who processes information better through auditory means and would like to communicate the achievement of the learning goal by talking about it rather than writing about it or making a graphic poster about it. 

Since UDL requires many formats, it seems like it would be a lot of work initially to design a lesson that can utilize the variety of formats but once the work is done, the lesson could be used in a variety of situations. The main problem I see with UDL is time. It takes time to plan comprehensive lessons. 


Universal Design for Learning must extend beyond the classroom. Both school and district administrators must recognize the importance of UDL and apply it not only for students, but also for staff members. Learning environments must be created so that teachers with disabilites can effectively reach ALL of their students. It seems more and more that having a diverse class is the norm rather than the exception. Planning from teachers, administrators and district leaders must recognize this and help create classrooms that understand UDL and provide scaffolds for all learners, whether they are young, old, ADHD, hearing impaired, blind, ESL or have another disability. UDL presents a methodology for inclusion that would help acheive these important goals.

I feel that the strongest argument for UDL is that it does not treat different abilities as disabilities. All capabilities are designed for and included in planning.











.