Universal Design For Learning: Implementation In Six Local .
inForumIn Depth Policy AnalysisUniversal Design for Learning:Implementation in SixLocal Education AgenciesbyinForum – An analysis of a critical issue in special educationKim Moherek SopkoJune 2008Project ForumNational Association of State Directors of Special Education(NASDSE)1800 Diagonal Road - Suite 320Alexandria, VA 22314
Project Forum at National Association of State Directors ofSpecial Education (NASDSE) is a cooperative agreementfunded by the Office of Special Education Programs of theU.S. Department of Education. The project carries out avariety of activities that provide information needed forprogram improvement and promote the utilization of researchdata and other information for improving outcomes forstudents with disabilities. The project also provides technicalassistance and information on emerging issues and convenessmall work groups to gather expert input, obtain feedback anddevelop conceptual frameworks related to critical topics inspecial education.This report was supported by the U.S. Department of Education (CooperativeAgreement No. H326F050001). However, the opinions expressed herein do notnecessarily reflect the position of the U.S. Department of Education, and no officialendorsement by the Department should be inferred.Note: There are no copyright restrictions on this document; however, please creditthe source and support of federal funds when copying all or part of this material.This document, along with many other Forum publications, can be downloaded from the ProjectForum at NASDSE web address:http://www.projectforum.orgTo order a hard copy of this document or any other Forum publications, please contact Nancy Tucker atNASDSE, 1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 320, Alexandria, VA 22314Ph: 703-519-3800 ext. 326 or Email: nancy.tucker@nasdse.orgThis document is available in alternative formats. For details please contact Project Forum staff at703.519.3800Year 3 Deliverable 3-3C
Table of ContentsINTRODUCTION . 1METHODOLOGY . 2FINDINGS. 3Policies and Practices. 3Systemic Issues . 3Practical Application. 5Supports and Influences. 6Benefits . 9Challenges. 9Future Directions . 10Recommendations. 10CONCLUSION. 11APPENDIX A: UDL Mini Survey . 13APPENDIX B: Interview Questions. 14APPENDIX C: UDL Materials Identified by LEAs. 19APPENDIX D: Sample UDL Obsevation Tool. 21APPENDIX E: Sample UDL Rubric . 23
inForumUniversal Design for Learning: Implementation in SixLocal Education AgenciesINTRODUCTIONUniversal Design for Learning (UDL) is a theoretical framework developed by the Center forApplied Special Technology (CAST) 1 that builds upon architectural concepts of universal designdescribed by the Center for Universal Design (CUD) 2 at North Carolina State University. UDLaffords opportunities for all individuals to gain knowledge and skills through rich support forlearning and reducing barriers that can inhibit access to learning. Just as universal design inarchitecture anticipates the needs of individuals with disabilities and builds structuresaccordingly, universal design for learning anticipates special needs of students and createscurriculum, instruction and assessments that are specifically designed to facilitate access. In theprocess, all students benefit. For the purpose of this document, UDL is defined as the proactivedesign of curricula (including learning goals, instructional methods and materials, andassessments) that are accessible and usable by all students with little or no need for additionalaccommodations and are compatible with available assistive technology. While UDL is anoverall practice, not a method for individualizing services for students, educators must considerthe individual needs of students when implementing instructional practices and assessments.The UDL theoretical framework 3 designed by CAST includes three principles to enable everystudent to access and participate in all facets of learning. The three principles are multiple andflexible means of: presentation to provide students various ways of acquiring information and knowledge;expression to provide students alternatives for demonstrating what they know; andengagement/participation to tap into students’ interests, challenge them appropriately,and motivate them to learn.CUD established seven principles of universal design to provide guidance for environmental,product and communication design. These seven principles are: equitable use; flexibility in use; simple and intuitive use; perceptible information; tolerance for error; low physical effort; and size and space for approach and es/index.html2Universal Design for Learning: Implementation in Six Local Education AgenciesProject Forum at NASDSE2008 June-1-
inForumProject Forum and CAST integrated CAST’s theoretical framework of UDL and the CUD’sprinciples of universal design as a conceptual framework to structure interview questions to learnabout and summarize local level implementation of UDL. Conceptually, UDL assumes that thephysical structure of buildings, classrooms, equipment and materials as well as the technologyinfrastructure follow standard universal design guidelines. With that as a foundation, UDLprovides a framework and guidelines for building a curriculum that is also universally designedfor learning. UDL is equitable, flexible, simple, intuitive and perceptible. UDL ensures thatindividuals with a wide range of diverse abilities can access and use educational curriculum,instruction and assessments through the same or equivalent means regardless of their knowledge,skills and experiences. It supports flexible models of skilled performance; choices of content,tools, learning context, and rewards; adjustable levels of challenge; opportunities for practicewith supports; flexible opportunities for demonstrating skill and knowledge; and ongoing,relevant feedback. UDL also provides multiple examples of perceptible information throughvarious modes of communication (pictorial, verbal, tactile) that are compatible with availableassistive technology (AT). By considering universal design principles while incorporating theUDL theoretical framework of presentation, expression and engagement, educators caneffectively implement UDL practices for the benefit of all students.This document summarizes UDL implementation information from six local education agenciesin five different states. Project Forum at the National Association of State Directors of SpecialEducation (NASDSE) produced this document as part of its cooperative agreement with the U.S.Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP).METHODOLOGYProject Forum first conducted a mini-survey of state directors of special education to identifystates with local education agencies (LEAs) that are effectively incorporating UDL principles asdefined in this document. Nine state directors responded positively to the mini-survey identifyingpotential LEA representatives to interview. Based on the responses to the mini-survey, six LEAsidentified in five states (IN, IA, KY, MA, OH) were contacted regarding interviews. Interviewparticipants varied in number and roles for each LEA. In four of the LEAs, there was oneinterview participant, in one LEA there were two participants, and in another LEA there werefive participants. There was one interview session for each LEA. In the LEAs with multipleparticipants the responses were a team effort rather than individual perspectives. Participantsagreed on the primary speaker’s response to the question and would occasionally elaborate onthe answer. The professional roles of participants included school principals, project directors,teachers, a superintendent, a special education director, an IT specialist and regional educationagency staff. They were interviewed to gather information about UDL practices, successes andchallenges in their LEA. The mini-survey and interview questions are provided in Appendices Aand B.Universal for Learning: Implementation in Six Local Education AgenciesProject Forum at NASDSE2008 June- 2 -
inForumFINDINGSPolicies and PracticesHow UDL practices started in the LEAsUDL was generally introduced to LEAs by an outside source such as a regional educationcenter/agency or a state-funded project. One interviewee reported the LEA superintendent wasaware of UDL, brought CAST into the state for a large presentation on UDL and encouraged butnever required schools to begin a UDL initiative. On average, UDL was introduced to the LEAsfive years ago and the LEAs have been developing the practices since then. While someinterviewees across LEAs reported that UDL was initially presented as an initiative to supportspecial education programs, most quickly realized it was good practice that would benefit allstudents. Most interviewees believed the introduction of UDL with the clear opportunity forindividuals and teachers to take hold of the practices without a district mandate was an effectiveapproach to begin the incorporation of UDL into the LEA. One interviewee believed UDLpractices in her system would be more effective if they were presented as a top-down mandate,but added that the LEA has experienced regular changes in superintendents over an eight-yearperiod.PolicyNone of the LEAs has a clear policy specific to UDL. However, one LEA has writtengoals and includes these goals in its continuous improvement plan. Other interviewees reportedthat UDL provides a framework for curriculum and is implemented as a good practice thatbenefits all children. In general, these LEAs are implementing UDL as a best practice,communicating about it and encouraging its use without a formal written policy.Systemic IssuesStructureAll of the LEA respondents reported that their school buildings and classrooms areaccessible. No significant physical building structural changes have been made to implementUDL practices and LEAs work with the buildings they have available making adaptations andaccommodations as they can. Types of changes that have occurred include changing classperiods as block scheduling is implemented, changing storage methods of materials and buildingsmall learning communities.Technology Infrastructure and UseAll of the school buildings have an upgraded technology infrastructure (within the last sixyears) to support computer use with Internet connections. The LEAs vary in the amount oftechnology incorporated into their schools to support UDL. The ratio of students per computerranged from 1:2.5 to 1:6 with computers available in classrooms as well as computer labs. OneUniversal Design for Learning: Implementation in Six Local Education AgenciesProject Forum at NASDSE2008 June-3-
inForumLEA interviewee reported that a school’s computer lab is not as updated as the rest of the school,but that it is driven more by the computer teacher who is comfortable with the current level oftechnology in the lab.Most interviewees reported that teachers use computers from 15 to 60% of the day for instructionand administration (e.g., recording attendance, grades or email). One LEA interviewee reportedcomputer use is constant because of the availability of Smart Boards 4 in classrooms. Thefrequency of computer use for instruction varies by the teacher, but as UDL practices andtechnology becomes more integrated in the schools, teachers reportedly tend to increasingly usecomputers for instruction. Interviewees reported that students use computers 10 to 80% of theirschool day for curriculum-based activities, researching and word processing. In one LEA,students in kindergarten through second grade use the computer 20-25 minutes per day toparticipate in the Waterford Early Reading Program. In another LEA, student use of computersincreases by school level and e-lockers (designated places on the school network for storage ofstudent documents and projects) are available and e-portfolios (a collection of student workstored on the school network to monitor student progress) are created at the secondary gradelevels. This LEA also provides computer-based credit options as an independent study programat the secondary level. Students regularly prepare PowerPoint presentations and use wordprocessing software on the computers. The computer is an essential component for integratingUDL practices in these LEAs.The integration and use of Smart Boards in the classrooms varies by LEA based on the numberof Smart Boards available. One LEA has a Smart Board in every classroom, and one has them inevery special education classroom and is starting to add them to other classrooms. The other fourLEAs have a few Smart Boards available.Digital MaterialsNo LEA has a school-wide digital curriculum in its entirety, but some have posted thestate content standards and courses of study on LEA websites. As LEAs adopt new textbooks,they strive to include digitized materials provided by the book publishers, and many use UnitedVideo Streaming as another source of digital materials. Some of the LEAs have centralizeddigital materials and software through their schools’ media centers or another central location inthe LEA and have implemented a bar code system so teachers may check out materials asneeded. LEAs also post digital materials on their network for specific grade levels or subjectareas. Teachers may also find effective supplemental digital materials to use, and most LEAsencourage teachers to investigate appropriate materials and provide recommendations to theadministration and curriculum committees on which materials to adopt. LEAs do not yet havecomplete, accessible databases of digital materials available, but some are developing thembecause they believe these databases would be useful tools for teachers.Commonly used digitally accessible materials in LEAs include Kidspiration, Inspiration, ReadWrite-Gold, United Video Streaming, Read 180 and E-Reader. Interviewees made no strong4Refer to Appendix C for a description of italicized products used by LEAs to support UDL practices.Universal for Learning: Implementation in Six Local Education AgenciesProject Forum at NASDSE2008 June- 4 -
inForumrecommendation for a particular program because not all teachers consistently use them, so datais lacking. Digital materials are primarily used to support literacy skills (reading and writing) andmay also include Co-Writer, Lexia SOS or Read Naturally. Additional materials mentioned byinterviewees include Clicker, Waterford, Type to Learn, Go Solve, Classroom Suite,Encyclomedia, Fast Forward, Fast Math, Go Solve and Board Maker. In addition, scanners areavailable at least in every school building in all LEAs and are sporadically used by teachers toscan/digitize text.Practical ApplicationCurriculum and InstructionAll interviewees reported that many teachers are applying UDL practices, but consistencyamong teachers is lacking. Teachers generally have become more flexible with how informationis presented, how students demonstrate knowledge and ways students are engaged, but there isvariability within the schools and throughout the LEAs. Overall, the use of UDL makes teachersconsider individual learning styles and strengths to ensure equitable and flexible opportunitiesfor all students. Some interviewees reported that administrators developed a culture of risktaking, creativity and flexibility to encourage teachers to apply UDL, and continue to workcreatively to ensure curriculum, instruction and assessments are accessible for all students.The variety of teaching methods reportedly used to support UDL practices include small groups,flexible grouping (often based on learning styles of students rather than on student areas ofweakness), incorporation of low-tech assistive technology devices (i.e., highlighters, pencil grips,sensory-integration seat supports) as well as more advanced AT devices (i.e., digital cameras,Alpha Smart with co-writers, Smart Boards, and clickers). Teaching methods are shifting awayfrom a one-size-fits-all approach and toward multiple opportunities for creativity and flexibility.A specific example provided was the study of the novel Huckleberry Finn. Teachers tookstudents to a local park where three rivers converged (similar to details in the novel), and theteachers dressed up, read and acted as characters in the novel. The follow up activity includedreflection on the experience and its correlation to the novel that students were able to completeby writing in a journal, drawing, and/or taking photographs. This type of activity demonstratesflexibility with many opportunities to address a variety of learning styles.Another creative teaching and learning method reported was the use of digital cameras and LCDprojectors for presentations. Additionally, an annual community science fair is held by one LEAfor senior students and there is increased variation in the presentation and delivery formats of thestudent projects as UDL is integrated.Teachers adjust their teaching primarily based on informal observations of student participation,motivation, intrigue, excitement and learning, but may also use log sheets and surveys. In oneLEA, teachers have individual conversations with students about learning styles so they mayappropriately adjust their teaching methods. Two different LEAs use a UDL observation or selfassessment checklist to make instructional decisions and assess teachers’ use of UDL practices(see Appendices D and E).Universal Design for Learning: Implementation in Six Local Education AgenciesProject Forum at NASDSE2008 June-5-
inForumAssessmentsWhile formal assessments are still commonly used, especially to address accountability inthe LEA and state, teachers are becoming more creative and flexible to ensure assessments areaccessible and usable by all students, that ongoing and relevant feedback is provided and thatassessment is an embedded and continuous process. Teachers are moving away from pencil andpaper assessment measures and afford more flexible opportunities for students to demonstrateknowledge (e.g., writing songs, painting pictures,
Universal Design for Learning: Implementation in Six Local Education Agencies . INTRODUCTION . Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a theoretical framework developed by the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) 1. that builds upon architectural concepts of universal design described by the Center for Universal Design (CUD) 2
Bruksanvisning för bilstereo . Bruksanvisning for bilstereo . Instrukcja obsługi samochodowego odtwarzacza stereo . Operating Instructions for Car Stereo . 610-104 . SV . Bruksanvisning i original
10 tips och tricks för att lyckas med ert sap-projekt 20 SAPSANYTT 2/2015 De flesta projektledare känner säkert till Cobb’s paradox. Martin Cobb verkade som CIO för sekretariatet för Treasury Board of Canada 1995 då han ställde frågan
service i Norge och Finland drivs inom ramen för ett enskilt företag (NRK. 1 och Yleisradio), fin ns det i Sverige tre: Ett för tv (Sveriges Television , SVT ), ett för radio (Sveriges Radio , SR ) och ett för utbildnings program (Sveriges Utbildningsradio, UR, vilket till följd av sin begränsade storlek inte återfinns bland de 25 största
Hotell För hotell anges de tre klasserna A/B, C och D. Det betyder att den "normala" standarden C är acceptabel men att motiven för en högre standard är starka. Ljudklass C motsvarar de tidigare normkraven för hotell, ljudklass A/B motsvarar kraven för moderna hotell med hög standard och ljudklass D kan användas vid
LÄS NOGGRANT FÖLJANDE VILLKOR FÖR APPLE DEVELOPER PROGRAM LICENCE . Apple Developer Program License Agreement Syfte Du vill använda Apple-mjukvara (enligt definitionen nedan) för att utveckla en eller flera Applikationer (enligt definitionen nedan) för Apple-märkta produkter. . Applikationer som utvecklas för iOS-produkter, Apple .
och krav. Maskinerna skriver ut upp till fyra tum breda etiketter med direkt termoteknik och termotransferteknik och är lämpliga för en lång rad användningsområden på vertikala marknader. TD-seriens professionella etikettskrivare för . skrivbordet. Brothers nya avancerade 4-tums etikettskrivare för skrivbordet är effektiva och enkla att
Den kanadensiska språkvetaren Jim Cummins har visat i sin forskning från år 1979 att det kan ta 1 till 3 år för att lära sig ett vardagsspråk och mellan 5 till 7 år för att behärska ett akademiskt språk.4 Han införde två begrepp för att beskriva elevernas språkliga kompetens: BI
making formal decisions at the final “appeal” stage of our process (see page 75 for more details ) All figures relate to the financial year 2012/2013. 4 annual review 2012/2013 . Financial Ombudsman Service Financial Ombudsman Service . annual review 2012/2013 5. chairman’s foreword. Sir Nicholas Montagu . kcb. we have resolved . more cases. than in any previous year – and each of .
