We Welcome Your Feedback, Comments and Discussion. Please Post Your Comments at
We Welcome Your Feedback, Comments and Discussion. Please Post Your Comments at
We Welcome Your Feedback, Comments and Discussion. Please Post Your Comments at
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
The goal of education in the 21st century is not simply the mastery of knowledge. It is the
mastery of learning. Education should help turn novice learners into expert learners
individuals who know how to learn, who want to learn, and who, in their own highly
individual ways, are well prepared for a lifetime of learning.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is an approach that addresses and redresses the
primary barrier to making expert learners of all students: inflexible, one-size-fits-all
curricula that raise unintentional barriers to learning. Learners with disabilities are most
vulnerable to such barriers, but many students without disabilities also find that curricula
are poorly designed to meet their learning needs.
Diversity is the norm, not the exception, wherever individuals are gathered, including
schools. When curricula are designed to meet the needs of the broad middleat the
exclusion of those with different abilities, learning styles, backgrounds, and even
preferences, they fail to provide all individuals with fair and equal opportunities to learn.
Universal Design for Learning helps meet the challenge of diversity by suggesting
flexible instructional materials, techniques, and strategies that empower educators to meet
these varied needs. A universally designed curriculum is designed from the outset to meet
the needs of the greatest number of users, making costly, time-consuming, and after-thefact changes to curriculum unnecessary.
Three primary principles guide UDLand provide structure for these Guidelines:
Introduction
At CAST (the Center for Applied Special Technology), we began working nearly 25
years ago to develop ways to help students with disabilities gain access to the general
education curriculum. In the early years, we focused on helping individuals adapt or fix
themselves overcoming their disabilities in order to learn within the general education
curriculum. That work, commonly focused on assistive technologies, is an important
facet of any comprehensive educational plan.
However, we also came to see that this focus on assistive technologies was too narrow. It
obscured the critical role of the environment in determining who is or who is not
considered disabled. In the 1990s, we shifted our focus towards the general curriculum
and its limitations: how do those limitations contribute to the disabling of our students?
This shift led to a simple, yet profound realization: the burden of adaptation should be
first placed on the curriculum, not the learner. Because most curricula are unable to adapt
to individual differences, we have come to recognize that our curricula, rather than our
students, are disabled.
CAST began in the early 1990s to research, develop, and articulate the principles and
practices of Universal Design for Learning. The term was inspired by the universal
design concept from architecture and product development pioneered by Ron Mace of
North Carolina State University in the 1980s, which aims to create built environments
and tools that are usable by as many people as possible. Of course, since people are not
buildings or products, we approached the universal design problem via the learning
sciences. Thus, the UDL principles go deeper than merely focusing on access to the
classroom; they focus on access to learning as well.
This work has been carried out in collaboration with many talented and dedicated
education researchers, practitioners, and technologists. As the UDL field has grown, so
has the demand from stakeholders for Guidelines to help make applications of these
principles and practices more concrete.
These UDL Guidelines will assist curriculum developers (these may include teachers,
publishers, and others) in designing flexible curricula that reduce barriers to learning and
provide robust learning supports to meet the needs of all learners. They will also help
educators evaluate both new and existing curricula goals, media and materials, methods
and assessments.
Introduction
But first, some clarifications of terms and underlying concepts of UDL may be helpful
for understanding these Guidelines. These include:
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
Introduction
The Guidelines presented here are a first draft; they are an outline or prcis of what will
eventually emerge. While the UDL Guidelines will eventually address the whole
curriculum in depth, this first effort focuses most heavily on two curricular components:
instructional methods and materials. Admittedly, instructional goals and assessment do
not receive adequate consideration in this initial edition but will be in later versions.
These Guidelines are labeled Version1.0 because we expect that as others contribute
suggestions, we will be able to revise and vastly improve them in future editions. Our
intention is to collect and synthesize comments from the field, weigh it against the latest
research evidence, and, in consultation with an editorial advisory board, make appropriate
changes, additions, and updates to the UDL Guidelines on a regular basis. This is just a
beginning but, we hope, a promising one for improving opportunities for all individuals
to become expert learners.
10
Principle I: Representation
11
Principle I: Representation
12
Principle I: Representation
Principle I: Representation
Principle I: Representation
15
Principle I: Representation
Those barriers can be reduced when options are available that supply or activate
relevant prior knowledge, or link to the pre-requisite information elsewhere.
Examples:
Anchoring instruction by activating relevant prior knowledge (e.g. using
visual imagery, concept anchoring, or concept mastery routines)
Using advanced organizers (e.g. KWL methods, concept maps)
Pre-teaching critical prerequisite concepts through demonstration or
models, concrete objects
Bridging with relevant analogies and metaphors
3.2. Options that highlight critical features, big ideas, and relationships
One of the big differences between experts and novices (including those with
disabilities) in any domain is the facility with which they distinguish what is
critical from what is unimportant or irrelevant. Because experts quickly recognize
the most important features in information, they allocate their time efficiently,
quickly identifying what is valuable and finding the right hooks with which to
assimilate that most valuable information into existing knowledge. As a
consequence, one of the most effective ways to make information more accessible
is to provide explicit cues or prompts that assist individuals in attending to those
features that matter most while avoiding those that matter least. Depending on the
goal of the lesson, highlighting may emphasize 1) the critical features that
distinguish one concept from another, 2) the big ideas that organize domains of
information, 3) the relationships between disparate concepts and ideas, 4) the
relationships between new information and prior knowledge to build networks
and contexts in which the new information has meaning.
Examples:
Highlight or emphasize key elements in text, graphics, diagrams, formulas
Use outlines, graphic organizers, unit organizer routines, concept
organizer routines and concept mastery routines to emphasize key ideas
and relationships
Use multiple examples and non-examples to emphasize critical features
Reduce background of extraneous features, use masking of non-relevant
features
Use cues and prompts to draw attention to critical features
16
Principle I: Representation
most beneficial interventions is to teach them explicitly those strategies and have
them practice in their appropriate use in context. Well-designed materials can
provide customized and embedded models, scaffolds, and feedback to assist
students who have very diverse abilities and disabilities in using those strategies
effectively.
Examples:
Explicit prompts for each step in a sequential process
Interactive models that guide exploration and inspection
Graduated scaffolds that support information processing strategies
Multiple entry points to a lesson and optional pathways through content
Chunking information into smaller elements
Progressive release of information, sequential highlighting
3.4 Options that support memory and transfer
While each of the cognitive scaffolds described above is likely to enhance
retention for some students, others have weaknesses or disabilities that will
require explicit supports for memory and transfer in order to improve cognitive
accessibility. Supports for memory and transfer include techniques that are
designed to heighten the memorability of information as well as those that prompt
and guide students to employ explicit mnemonic strategies.
Examples:
Checklists, organizers, sticky notes, electronic reminders
Prompts for using mnemonic strategies and devices (e.g. visual imagery,
paraphrasing strategies, method of loci, etc.)
Explicit opportunities for spaced review and practice
Templates, graphic organizers, concept maps to support note-making
Scaffolding that connects new information to prior knowledge (e.g. word
webs, half-full concept maps)
Embedding new ideas in familiar ideas and contexts, use of analogy,
metaphor
17
o
o
o
o
by voice
by single switch
by joystick
by keyboard or adapted keyboard
Examples:
Composing in multiple media:
o text
o speech
o drawing, illustration, design
o physical manipulatives (e.g. blocks, 3D models)
o film or video
o multimedia (Web designs, storyboards, comic strips)
o music, visual art, sculpture
20
21
domain, or any student with one of the disabilities that compromise executive
functions (e.g. ADHD, ADD, Autism Spectrum Disorders), the strategic planning
step is often omitted and impulsive trial and error trials take its place. To help
students become more plan-full and strategic a variety of options cognitive
speed bumps that prompt them to stop and think; graduated scaffolds that
help them actually implement strategies; engagement in decision-making with
competent mentors are needed.
Examples:
Embedded prompts to stop and think before acting
Checklists and project planning templates for setting up prioritization,
sequences and schedules of steps
Embedded coaches or mentors that model think-alouds of the process
Guides for breaking long-term goals into reachable short-term objectives
6.3 Options that facilitate managing information and resources
One of the limits of executive function is that imposed by the limitations of socalled working memory. This scratch pad for maintaining chunks of
information in immediate memory where they can be accessed as part of
comprehension and problem-solving is very limited for any student and even
more severely limited for many students with learning and cognitive disabilities.
As a result, many such students seem disorganized, forgetful, unprepared.
Wherever short-term memory capacity is not construct-relevant in a lesson, it is
important to provide a variety of internal scaffolds and external organizational
aids exactly those kinds that executives use - to keep information organized and
in mind.
Examples:
Graphic organizers and templates for data collection and organizing
information
Embedded prompts for categorizing and systematizing
Checklists and guides for note-taking
6.4 Options that enhance capacity for monitoring progress
Many students seem relatively unresponsive to corrective feedback or knowledge
of results. As a result they seem perseverative, careless or unmotivated. For
these students all of the time, and for most students some of the time, it is
important to ensure that options can be customized to provide feedback that is
more explicit, timely, informative, and accessible (see representational guidelines
above and guidelines for affective feedback.). Especially important is providing
formative feedback that allows students to monitor their own progress
effectively and to use that information to guide their own effort and practice.
Examples:
Guided questions for self-monitoring
22
23
25
Examples:
Differentiation in the degree of difficulty or complexity within which core
activities can be completed
Alternatives in the permissible tools and scaffolds
Opportunities for collaboration
Variation in the degrees of freedom for acceptable performance
Emphasize process, effort, improvement in meeting standards as
alternatives to external evaluation, performance goals, competition
27
28
29
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements:
30