The Associated Colleges of Illinois

Success in High-Need Schools Online Journal

Current Issue

Vol. 8, #1 - Measuring up to the IPTS using Universal Design for Learning

Srimani Chakravarthi, Ph. D.

University of St. Francis

 

Srimani Chakravarthi is an Assistant Professor at the College of Education, University of St. Francis.

 

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Srimani Chakravarthi, College of Education, University of St. Francis, 500 Wilcox St., Joliet, IL. 60435.

Contact: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

---

 

Measuring up to the IPTS using Universal Design for Learning

Srimani Chakravarthi, Ph. D.

 

Author Bio: Srimani Chakravarthi, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the College of Education at the University of St. Francis In Joliet, IL.  She may be contacted at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Abstract

This paper examines universal design for learning (UDL) in the light of the new Illinois Professional Teaching Standards (IPTS) (Illinois State Board of Education, 2011) and the requirements underlining the standards. Universal design for learning, an established concept in the field of architecture, is now being used in schools for designing instruction which is accessible to all learners, irrespective of their need. It is common practice to design accommodations and supplemental teaching strategies for students who fail to learn in general education classrooms. Instead of retrofitting and providing accommodations to individual children, universal design for learning calls for expanding classroom options and providing a flexible curriculum and instruction with multiple built-in options providing access to learners with any kind of need. Rose and Meyer (2006, viii) posed these questions: “What if all learners had genuine opportunities to learn in inclusive environments? What if we recognized that our inflexible curricula and learning environments are ‘disabled’ rather than pinning that label on learners who face unnecessary barriers?”

This paper analyzes universal design and the component checkpoints under the UDL principles and matches them with specific performance indicators under the IPTS which they correlate to. The intent of this correlation is to demonstrate the need for training teacher candidates with universal design for learning enabling them to master many of the state of Illinois’ performance standards for teachers.

Introduction

The newly revised Illinois Professional Teaching Standards (IPTS) (ISBE, 2010) emphasize the growing need of the hour: enabling each and every student to succeed in the classroom. This standard reflects the growing number of student populations with diverse backgrounds, needs, abilities, cultures and language. IPTS indicator 1: Teaching Diverse Students states that “The competent teacher understands the diverse characteristics and abilities of each student and how individuals develop and learn within the context of their social, economic, cultural, linguistic, and academic experiences. The teacher uses these experiences to create instructional opportunities that maximize student learning.” The challenge for teachers and teacher educators is how to meet the needs of all students in the classroom while maximizing learning. This paper examines universal design for learning as a means to achieve the ambitious new IPTS standards.

Designing instruction to suit different learning needs is popularly achieved through the evidence-based practice of differentiating the content, process and product (Tomlinson, 2000). Although the idea of differentiating instruction is more than a decade old, the practice has not trickled down into the classrooms at a rate promising for success. The reasons for this range across a lack of teacher knowledge, skills & training in specific differentiating strategies. So, how do we actually differentiate the content, process and product? How do we know we are differentiating instruction? Universal design for learning (UDL) provides a blueprint for differentiation. The concept of universal design principles and the integration of technology are mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2004) and the Higher Education Opportunity Act (2008) to enable educators to reach every student in the classroom effectively.

Universal design for learning

Universal design for learning is not a new concept. Borrowed from the field of architecture, the concept involves designing structures which enable access to all, irrespective of their limiting conditions (Rose, Meyer & Hitchcock, 2005). Wheelchair ramps, accessible restrooms, handrails, and closed captioning are all examples of universal design. Although these are designed for individuals with special needs, persons without handicaps often find ramps and handicapped access useful in opening doors and use closed captioning in airports, gymnasiums and quiet environments. The premise of universal design is that refitting buildings with such accommodations at a later time results in much more effort and expense.

Adapting universal design to education calls on teachers to design lesson plans with supports built in to suit learners with diverse needs, rather than providing remedial instruction ("retrofitting") for those who cannot succeed at a later time. The premise is that our traditional lesson plans have barriers imbedded within them. UDL calls for the use of low and high technology to remove some common barriers and, thereby, make lessons accessible to all learners (Rose, Meyer & Hitchcock, 2005).  UDL is scientifically based on brain research, specifically the three main brain networks involved with learning: the recognition network, the strategic network and the affective network. The recognition network engages the "what" aspect of learning, i.e., recognizing facts, procedures & concepts. The strategic network involves the "how" aspect of learning which enables us to find ways to remember procedures, sequences and processes. The affective network concerns the "why" aspects of learning, involving the feelings, engagement and motivation to learn (Center for Applied Special Technology, 2011).

In designing a lesson, these three aspects of the brain network need to be considered to result in effective learning; since individuals recognize (perceive), strategize (remember) and feel differently about different content and presentation, options must be provided for optimal learning among people with diverse abilities. This diversity is reflected in varied auditory, visual, oral, motor, behavioral and cultural/linguistic abilities among students, both in perception and expression. In planning for these diverse modalities, we are better able to achieve equal access to lessons by all learners in the classroom.

How does UDL actually look in the classroom? Here are a few examples: Joe struggles with decoding complex words, especially in subjects such as geography. His teacher provides him with audio versions of the textbook to help him to comprehend its content along with scaffolds such as highly readable texts and visual aids for vocabulary words during his geography class. Providing a visual of the word during class and listening while reading both provide Joe the scaffolds he needs to succeed.  Aliya is a freshman in high school and she struggles with writing. Observing that her ability to articulate orally far excels her composition skills, her teachers allows her to use a speech-to-text program and a word prediction program while drafting and revising her papers. These scaffolds assist her to express her ability and skills in the content area.  Students like Joe and Aliya with varying abilities need not be limited in gaining access to learning. Audio books, visuals and writing software are just a few of the possible options that can benefit not only them, but also many other students with varying levels of reading and writing.

Universal design for learning is based on three main principles that guide curriculum design,  instruction and assessment:

• “Multiple means to Represent: give diverse learners options for acquiring information and knowledge,

• Multiple means to Express: give learners options for demonstrating what they know,

• Multiple means to Engage: tap into learners’ interests, offer appropriate challenges, and increase motivation” (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST] 2011).

The Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) which has been involved in promoting UDL, offers various resources for teachers and teacher educators, including UDL videos, modules to learn about UDL, sample lesson plans, lesson planning templates and resources to use to provide multiple options. There are numerous research studies that support the use of different options in representing, expressing and engaging (See National Center on Universal Design for Learning, 2011).  The principles of UDL are further elaborated through guidelines under each principle and detailed checkpoints under each guideline.

Universal design and Illinois Professional Teaching Standards

Universal design provides tools and skills to achieve various benchmarks put forth in the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards. It is clear that designing lessons following universal design guidelines will enable access to diverse learners in the classroom, as explicitly required in the new IPTS. Using UDL guidelines provided by the Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST] (2011), an analysis of the Illinois Professional Teaching Standards (Illinois State Board of Education, 2010) performance indicators was done to examine the alignment of the two. Tables 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 illustrate the alignment of UDL guidelines with the IPTS standards.

Table 1.1: Aligning UDL Principle 1 with IPTS standards

Principle 1: Provide Multiple Means of Representation
UDL guidelines and checkpoints	IPTS performance indicators
Guideline 1: Provide options for perception
Offer ways of customizing the display of information	1H. analyzes and uses student information to design instruction that meets the diverse needs of students and leads to ongoing growth and achievement 1L. uses information about students’ individual experiences, families, cultures, and communities to create meaningful learning opportunities and enrich instruction for all students. 5M. uses strategies and techniques for facilitating meaningful inclusion of individuals with a range of abilities and experiences
Offer alternatives for auditory information	6J. selects, modifies, and uses a wide range of printed, visual, or auditory materials, and online resources appropriate to the content areas and the reading needs and levels of each student (including ELLs, and struggling and advanced readers)
Offer alternatives for visual information	6J. selects, modifies, and uses a wide range of printed, visual, or auditory materials, and online resources appropriate to the content areas and the reading needs and levels of each student (including ELLs, and struggling and advanced readers)
Guideline 2: Provide options for language, mathematical expressions, and symbols
Clarify vocabulary and symbols	5J.  monitors and adjusts strategies in response to feedback from the student 6L. facilitates the use of appropriate word identification and vocabulary strategies to develop each student’s understanding of content
Clarify syntax and structure	5L. develops a variety of clear, accurate presentations and representations of concepts, using alternative explanations to assist students’ understanding and presenting diverse perspectives to encourage critical and creative thinking
Support decoding of text, mathematical notation, and symbols
Promote understanding across languages
Illustrate through multiple media	2M. uses a variety of explanations and multiple representations of concepts that capture key ideas to help each student develop conceptual understanding and address common misunderstandings
Guideline 3: Provide options for comprehension
Activate or supply background knowledge	1I. stimulates prior knowledge and links new ideas to already familiar ideas and experiences;
Highlight patterns, critical features, big ideas, and relationships	1J. differentiates strategies, materials, pace, levels of complexity, and language to introduce concepts and principles so that they are meaningful to students at varying levels of development and to students with diverse learning needs
Guide information processing, visualization and manipulation	2Q. applies and adapts an array of content area literacy strategies to make all subject matter accessible to each student. 3Q. develops or selects relevant instructional content, materials, resources, and strategies (e.g., project-based learning) for differentiating instruction.
Maximize transfer and generalization

 

Table 1.2: Aligning UDL Principle 2 with IPTS standards

Principle 2: Provide Multiple Means of Action and Expression
UDL guidelines and checkpoints	IPTS performance indicators
Guideline 4: Provide options for physical action
Vary methods for response and navigation	5I. uses multiple teaching strategies, including adjusted pacing and flexible grouping, to engage students in active learning opportunities that promote the development of critical and creative thinking, problem-solving, and performance capabilities
Optimize access to tools and assistive technologies	2L. demonstrates fluency in technology systems, uses technology to support instruction and enhance student learning, and designs learning experiences to develop student skills in the application of technology appropriate to the disciplines 2O. designs learning experiences and utilizes assistive technology and digital tools to provide access to general curricular content to individuals with disabilities 5N. uses technology to accomplish differentiated instructional objectives that enhance learning for each student 5O. models and facilitates effective use of current and emerging digital tools to locate, analyze, evaluate, and use information resources to support research and learning
Guideline 5: Provide options for expression and communication
Use multiple media for communication
Use multiple tools for construction and composition
Build fluencies with graduated levels of support for practice and performance	2P. adjusts practice to meet the needs of each student in the content areas
Guideline 6: Provide options for executive functions
Guide appropriate goal-setting
Support planning and strategy development
Facilitate managing information and resources
Enhance capacity for monitoring progress

 

Table 1.3: Aligning UDL Principle 3 with IPTS standards

Principle 3: Provide Multiple Means of Engagement
UDL guidelines and checkpoints	IPTS performance indicators
Guideline 7: Provide options for recruiting interest
Optimize individual choice and autonomy	1K. facilitates a learning community in which individual differences are respected 4N. engages students in and monitors individual and group-learning activities that help them develop the motivation to learn
Optimize relevance, value, and authenticity	4L. analyzes the classroom environment and makes decisions to enhance cultural and linguistic responsiveness, mutual respect, positive social relationships, student motivation, and classroom engagement
Minimize threats and distractions	4M. organizes, allocates, and manages time, materials, technology, and physical space to provide active and equitable engagement of students in productive learning activities
Guideline 8: Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence
Heighten salience of goals and objectives
Vary demands and resources to optimize challenge
Foster collaboration  and community	4K.  uses strategies to create a smoothly functioning learning community in which students assume responsibility for themselves and one another, participate in decision-making, work collaboratively and independently, use appropriate technology, and engage in purposeful learning activities
Increase mastery-oriented feedback
Guideline 9:Provide options for self-regulation
Promote expectations and beliefs that optimize motivation
Facilitate personal coping skills and strategies	1K. facilitates a learning community in which individual differences are respected
Develop self-assessment and reflection	6N. uses modeling, explanation, practice, and feedback to teach students to monitor and apply comprehension strategies independently, appropriate to the content learning

 

Findings and Conclusion

The above tables demonstrate that the universal design for learning contains checkpoints which correlate closely with many benchmarks from six of the nine IPTS standards. Universal design for learning holds great potential for increasing the success of the increasingly diverse learners in today's classrooms by providing explicit guidelines for differentiating the curriculum, instruction and assessment. Teaching preservice and inservice teachers how to plan lessons that are universally designed enables teachers to master numerous performance indicators established through the newly revised Illinois Professional Teaching Standards for educators. The IPTS has established a clear need for use of methods such as universal design. Training in UDL should become an important part of the teacher preparation program in any higher education setting.

References

Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines, version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author.

Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA). (2008).  Public Law 110-315, 20 U. S. C.

Illinois State Board of Education. (2010). Illinois Content-Area Standards. Illinois Professional Teaching Standards. Retrieved from http://www.isbe.net/profprep/PDFs/prfstandards.pdf

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). (2004).  Public Law 108-446, 20 U. S. C.

National Center on Universal Design for Learning. (2011). Research Evidence. Retrieved from  http://www.udlcenter.org/research/researchevidence/

Rose, D.  H., Meyer, A.  & Hitchcock, C. Eds. (2005).  The Universally designed classroom – Accessible Curriculum and Digital Technologies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rose, D.  H., & Meyer, A. Eds. (2006).  A practical reader in universal design for learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Tomlinson, C.  A.  (2000).  Differentiation of instruction in the elementary grades. ERIC Digest. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED443572.

---

 

The Associated Colleges of Illinois (ACI) Center for Success in High-Need Schools was founded in 2004 on the assumption that collaborative partnerships, especially between colleges and schools and between teacher education and arts and sciences faculty, would to help close the achievement gap among the largely minority students at high-need schools.  No Child Left Behind (NCLB), the signature educational initiative of the Bush era, provided the primary funding impetus for the Center, of which a five-year $7.2 million Teacher Quality Enhancement Program (TQEP) grant was the centerpiece.

 

ACI member colleges and universities made ideal partners for a program whose success depended on committed long-term college-school relationships, shared responsibility and decision-making, and a joint focus on students and learning.  Eight ACI members from across Illinois became TQEP grant co-collaborators with the Center: Aurora University, Concordia University Chicago, Elmhurst College, Lake Forest College, McKendree University, North Central College, Quincy University, and University of St. Francis.  The case studies that compose this issue of the Journal for Success in High-Need Schools tell their stories--what they put in place, what they achieved, and what they have sustained since TQEP grant funding ended in 2009.

 

Table of Contents

Publisher’s Column: Jan Fitzsimmons, Ph.D.

 

Transformative Partnerships - Authentic Change: Outcomes of the ACI Teacher Quality Enhancement Partnership Projects: Jerry Berberet, Ph.D.

 

ACI Member partnership Case Studies:

Aurora University: Sherry Eagle, Ph.D., Daniel Hipp, Ph.D.

Concordia University Chicago: Jane Buerger, Ph.D., Dara Soljaga, Ph.D.

Elmhurst College: Brian Kahn, Ph.D., Judith Kaminski

Lake Forest College: Dawn Abt-Perkins, Ph.D., Shelley Sherman, Ph.D.

McKendree University: Julie A. Tonsing-Meyer, Joseph J. Cipfl, Ph.D.

North Central College: Rebecca Clemente, Ph.D., Maureen Kincaid, Ed.D.

Quincy University: Ann K. Behrens, Ph.D., Ellen Crowe, Ph.D.

University of St. Francis: Barbara S. Ingold, John Gambro, Ed.D.

Guest Column: What's Driving Education Change in Illinois?

Linda Tomlinson, Ph.D.