The concept of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) appears to be a 'post-secondary-friendly' approach to the acknowledgment and accommodation of the diversity of learning needs and preferences of adult students - especially students with disabilities. This website explores UDL and presents evidence that makes a strong case for adopting the principles of UDL in adult education (Center for Applied Special Technology, n.d.). The site also offers resources to help adult educators, professors and instructors adapt their practice to conform to UDL principles. Before checking out the UDL website itself, it's worth reflecting on the history behind the UDL concept - and the closely related concept of Differentiated Instruction (DI).
Differentiated Instruction is not a new concept (Snyder, D. n.d.). As a pedagogical phenomenon, it has passed in and out of vogue and assumed novel labels since the term was coined in 1953. Major academic proponents of DI include Tomlinson and, perhaps somewhat unwittingly, Howard Gardner who introduced us to the concept of multiple intelligences. The most widespread recent awakening to DI has occurred in the United States as a response to the introduction of federal education legislation such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Nevin, Falkenber, Nullman, Salazar, & Silio, 2004). These legislative measures were intended to address the educational needs of students with disabilities in the K-12 system in the US. NCLB and the IDEA have no direct impact on the adult and post secondary education systems in the United States. But what about the needs of adult learners who, presumably, also all learn in unique ways? What do adult educators in post-secondary institutions see as their role in terms of adapting their practice to address the needs of all their students? For educators inclined toward a constructivist or critical perspective, the answer may seem self-evident. But what about other perspectives?
It could be argued that the field of adult education has been late to the party of inclusion and the concept of 'meeting the needs of all learners'. In fact, there is widespread acknowledgment that, "there is limited implementation of DI in higher education classes despite the fact higher education has sought to increase access for students of diverse backgrounds" (Sikka, Beebe, & Bedard, 2010). Are we to ascribe the slow uptake of DI, UDL and other such student-centered education approaches to a dearth of constructivist adult educators?! Several studies have identified numerous factors influencing this slow adoption of concepts such as DI and UDL such as:
• The culture of individual accountability at post-secondary institutions
• Financial and temporal resource limitations when it comes to redesigning courses
• The perception that DI may 'cater' to students
• The reluctance of professors to give students choice in their learning and then accept those choices
• Lack of familiarity with the principles of UDL
• Lack of understanding of how to apply principles of UDL (Sikka, Beebe & Bedard, 2010, LaRocco & Wilken, 2013).
The research indicates that, in the case of UDL for example, adult educators are generally unaware of the principles of UDL and how to implement them - they are in an 'orientation' stage (LaRocco & Wilkens, 2013). I feel this accurately describes the status of UDL among my colleagues. Having spent time exploring the UDL website it appears that the application of UDL principles in adult education holds significant potential for learners. I plan to explore this potential and, as part of my role as an adult educator, seek ways to expand the reach of UDL where I work.
*Works cited in this blog entry are fully referenced HERE - many are available in full text.
Differentiated Instruction is not a new concept (Snyder, D. n.d.). As a pedagogical phenomenon, it has passed in and out of vogue and assumed novel labels since the term was coined in 1953. Major academic proponents of DI include Tomlinson and, perhaps somewhat unwittingly, Howard Gardner who introduced us to the concept of multiple intelligences. The most widespread recent awakening to DI has occurred in the United States as a response to the introduction of federal education legislation such as No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Nevin, Falkenber, Nullman, Salazar, & Silio, 2004). These legislative measures were intended to address the educational needs of students with disabilities in the K-12 system in the US. NCLB and the IDEA have no direct impact on the adult and post secondary education systems in the United States. But what about the needs of adult learners who, presumably, also all learn in unique ways? What do adult educators in post-secondary institutions see as their role in terms of adapting their practice to address the needs of all their students? For educators inclined toward a constructivist or critical perspective, the answer may seem self-evident. But what about other perspectives?
It could be argued that the field of adult education has been late to the party of inclusion and the concept of 'meeting the needs of all learners'. In fact, there is widespread acknowledgment that, "there is limited implementation of DI in higher education classes despite the fact higher education has sought to increase access for students of diverse backgrounds" (Sikka, Beebe, & Bedard, 2010). Are we to ascribe the slow uptake of DI, UDL and other such student-centered education approaches to a dearth of constructivist adult educators?! Several studies have identified numerous factors influencing this slow adoption of concepts such as DI and UDL such as:
• The culture of individual accountability at post-secondary institutions
• Financial and temporal resource limitations when it comes to redesigning courses
• The perception that DI may 'cater' to students
• The reluctance of professors to give students choice in their learning and then accept those choices
• Lack of familiarity with the principles of UDL
• Lack of understanding of how to apply principles of UDL (Sikka, Beebe & Bedard, 2010, LaRocco & Wilken, 2013).
The research indicates that, in the case of UDL for example, adult educators are generally unaware of the principles of UDL and how to implement them - they are in an 'orientation' stage (LaRocco & Wilkens, 2013). I feel this accurately describes the status of UDL among my colleagues. Having spent time exploring the UDL website it appears that the application of UDL principles in adult education holds significant potential for learners. I plan to explore this potential and, as part of my role as an adult educator, seek ways to expand the reach of UDL where I work.
*Works cited in this blog entry are fully referenced HERE - many are available in full text.