According to Universal Design for Learning UDL if the student can t read then

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a proactive approach to designing learning experiences to be accessible for all students, while differentiation is a reactive evaluation of the needs of individual students where adjustments are retrofitted into the learning environment. Some people use the terms synonymously, but they are different. However, UDL and differentiation belong together with each playing a significant role in providing access to the learning environment for all students. UDL addresses macro, upfront planning while differentiation is the micro-planning that occurs once teachers know the needs of the students in their class. Both UDL and differentiation focus on changing the learning environment to accommodate the student, rather than expecting the student to change to fit into the environment. Embedded within this approach is the rejection of the idea of the ‘average’ student, because no one fits the mythical ‘average’ (see Rose 2015). Our classrooms are diverse in many ways due to different experiences, socio-economic backgrounds, religion, race, gender and ability. Teaching toward the statistical average results in poor outcomes because the average student does not exist and therefore in reality we are teaching no one. However, when we acknowledge diversity and utilise the frameworks of UDL (see CAST 2019) and differentiation (see Tomlinson 2003) all students benefit. Consequently, UDL and differentiation are not only for students with disability, but provide benefit for everyone.

How do we approach using UDL and differentiation in the classroom? The three key aspects of Universal Design for Learning are:

Multiple means of representation-give learners various ways of acquiring information and knowledge.

Multiple means of expression-provide learners alternatives for demonstrating what they know.

Multiple means of engagement-tap into learners’ interests, offer appropriate challenges, and increase motivation.

The core aspect of UDL is that the learning goals are the same for all students, while providing different ways these goals are achieved. Let’s draw on UDL principles to approach the sub-strand of ‘responding to literature’ within the Australian Curriculum with a focus on the purchase of books for the school library.

The UDL principle of  ‘Multiple means of representation’ can be met through the purchasing a range of books including large print, easy read formats, e-books, videos with subtitles and sign language, tactile books and braille books. These multiple avenues enable a greater number of students to access literature.

‘Multiple means of expression’ provides avenues for a variety of approaches for students to express their understanding of the text instead of the usual ‘read aloud’. These approaches could be via sign language, apps such as Proloquo2go, video, role play, board games and storyboards.

‘Multiple means of engagement’ means that a range of student interests and backgrounds should be incorporated within the texts to engage students. Penell, Wollack and Koppenhaver (2017) state that children’s literature tends to depict a narrow representation of characters. This can isolate students who fail to see themselves represented within literature, and it sends powerful messages about who belongs and who doesn’t. Incorporating quality literature into the school library is vital. However, many books that have characters with disabilities can be patronising or are written to explain the nature of a disability rather than portraying students with disability in a positive manner. These books can work against the premise of inclusive practice that is at the heart of UDL. Penell, Wollack and Koppenhaver (2017) list books that are respectful and inclusive of students with disability that should be available in all school libraries.

Providing a range of books and materials in the library via the framework of UDL will reduce the need for teachers to differentiate in their classrooms. However, there will always be a need to differentiate as UDL is unable to account for all diversity within the classroom. Tomlinson (2003) provides three areas to differentiate. These are:

Content: This aspect covers the ‘what’ the student is learning and ‘when’ the student is learning. It allows for a flexible approach to the breadth, depth and pace of learning.

Process: This covers the ‘how’ of learning and includes scaffolding, modelling and explicit instruction.

Product: This is the ‘evidence’ or outcome of learning and can be supported through technology, rubrics, think-alouds or alternative forms of assessment.

These three areas of content, process and product are differentiated in response to the readiness, learning profile and interests of students. Consequently, Tomlinson’s (2003) framework provides choices for students in how to approach and demonstrate their learning. An example is a grid by Erickson (2006) which is utilised to teach literacy in the primary classroom:

Hence, together UDL and differentiation provide a framework to support diverse classrooms by removing barriers to learning and facilitating an environment provides access to all students.

References

CAST (2019) http://www.cast.org/ accessed on 3rd June 2019

Erickson, C. (2006) Differentiated Instruction: Applying the Work of C.A. Tomlinson in the Primary Literacy Classroom Master of Education, Lakehead University

Penell, A.E., Wollack, B. & Koppenhaver, D.A. (2017) Respectful Representations of Disability in Picture Books in The Reading Teacher Vol. 71 No. 4

Rose, T. (2016) The End of Average New York: Harper Collins

Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the Promise of the Differentiated Classroom: Strategies and Tools for Responsive Teaching.

What is universal design for learning and how is it helpful to struggling students?

What are UDL strategies that you can apply to your instruction for a student with problems in reading?

What is the purpose of universal design for learning UDL?

How does UDL support the learning needs of all students?