Students come to our classes with different skills, experience and motivation.\u00a0 This is especially true of students who have a disability.\u00a0 Some instructors may choose to adapt their course to meet the needs of a particular student with a disability on a case-by-case basis, while others may construct a course with a variety of teaching methods to limit barriers to learning for all.\u00a0 While we do not endorse a particular course design strategy, Universal Design for Learning (UDL) has demonstrated some effectiveness for teaching learners with and without a disability.<\/p>\n
To learn more about methods of UDL implementation for postsecondary students, take a look at this informative\u00a0review<\/a><\/span>.\u00a0 The abstract is copied below.<\/p>\n Abstract<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n This systematic review explored methods of UDL implementation for postsecondary Students come to our classes with different skills, experience and motivation.\u00a0 This is especially true of students who have a disability.\u00a0 Some instructors may choose to adapt their course to meet the needs of a particular student with a disability on a case-by-case basis, while others may construct a course with a variety of teaching … Continue reading Research on Universal Design for Learning<\/span>
\nstudents with and without disabilities and the degree to which these
\nmethods are effective. The authors examined 17 empirically based studies
\npublished across 12 journals focused on the application of UDL principles.
\nThe studies were analyzed with regard to 1) participant information, 2)
\ncourses and delivery mode, 3) independent and dependent variables, 4) implementation
\nstrategies, and 5) effectiveness of implementation. The analysis
\nrevealed that 15 of the studies reported effective outcomes, one study resulted
\nin blended effects, and one did not discuss implementation. Two studies used
\na blended delivery mode for special education courses, and four studies used
\nonline delivery modes for a teacher education course and three professional
\ndevelopment programs. Other studies used face-to-face instruction for teacher
\neducation, general courses, and workshops. The most common independent
\nvariables were UDL principle-based course design and implementation, followed
\nby hands-on activities, training of instructors, peer-led team learning,
\nand a collaborative professional development model. The dependent variables
\nincluded course evaluation, learning outcomes, such as revision of lesson plans
\nand technology use, and level of confidence or acquisition of knowledge about
\nUDL and disabilities. Finally, multiple instructional strategies focusing on the
\nUDL principles were utilized, to include web-based computer-mediated communication,
\nweb-based class management systems, interactions with technology and other participants, and learning community. Overall, the findings revealed
\npromising learning outcomes as supported by the existing literature
\nregarding the effectiveness and practicality of UDL for students with and
\nwithout disabilities at the postsecondary level.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"