Beneficial For All: The Universal Design for Learning

Due to the increasingly high expectations and pressures to succeed in college, feelings of stress, anxiety, and being overwhelmed are common among college students. A study conducted by the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) found that more than 80 percent of college students reported feeling overwhelmed by all they had to do during the school year; and an additional 45% of students admitted to feeling hopeless at times (“College Student Mental Health Statistics” 6). In almost all classrooms, students are expected to complete their work on time unless they have a “valid” reason to be excused from completing assignments on time or requesting extensions (such as approved accommodations). Even when the majority of students are struggling to pass courses, professors don’t always give leeway. Although 64% of students who dropped out of college did so for mental health reasons, the other 36% of students did not- finding college stressful enough without mental health issues (Gruttadaro and Crudo 8). While professors and administrators often deny the need for a shift in learning methods (seeing it as only being beneficial for students with disabilities and, therefore, not worth it), it is evident that something needs to change.

To decrease the stress of college and ensure all students’ ability to succeed in their courses (regardless of whether or not they have a disability), colleges need to provide accessible learning environments. The “the most inclusive and least stigmatizing” way to do so would be by implementing universally designed educational methods (Story 5). Universal Design (UD) is a design method aimed at creating products and environments that are accessible, usable, and suitable for all individuals. Universally designed items and methods help to “minimize the amount of adaptation required of the individual and maximize their natural inclusion in daily activities of all kinds.” (Story 5–6) Rather than requiring individuals with disabilities to adapt and/or use assistive devices in order to be included in society, UD methods encourage the remodeling of products and environments to include more individuals (Story 5).

Thereby, it is not too surprising that “universal” educational designs “[honor] student variability and [remove] barriers to student learning by embracing differences.” (Novak et al.) As Katie Novak et al. explain in their article, “6 Myths about Universal Design for Learning”, “universally designed educational methods would encompass all learners because human variability is not this/that, either/or but rather a continuum of differences that change according to context and opportunity.” Rather than planning curriculums around what the majority of students can do, professors should take into consideration students’ various strengths and weaknesses when it comes to learning. “Universally” design educational methods, such as these, allow students to learn individually while still together.

Modified from the basic definition of a Universal Design (UD), Sheryl Burgstahler provides “a definition that can be used for the applications to teaching and learning” in her piece, “Universal Design of Instruction (UDI)”. She defines UDI as a “design of teaching and learning products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design” (Burgstahler). The Universal Design for Learning (UDL), on the other hand, provides guidance on curriculum designs and how to optimize students’ learning. While “not a codified program or set of practices that schools can readily adopt”, UDL guidelines “offer a set of concrete suggestions” for how to make learning easier for all students independent of their strengths, challenges, and/or disabilities (Novak et al.). These suggestions include providing multiple means:

1. Engagement: ways for students to be motivated to learn (individually or in groups, with a routine or spontaneity, with personal relevance or not, etc.)
2. Representation: ways they can “perceive and comprehend information that is presented to them” (visually or auditory materials or printed text, with or without captions, considering language barriers, etc.)
3. Action and Expression: ways they can learn and display their knowledge (using computers or having to handwrite assignments, having to present to a class or write an essay, etc.) (“The UDL Guidelines”).

These guidelines, while often claimed by schools to be “too difficult to implement”, are actually very easy to provide and only require the teacher to comply. Professors can easily provide students with options on the format of their midterms/finals (such as timed-exams, not timed-examed, essays, presentations, projects, etc.), on how to achieve participation grades (such as in-class, in a discussion board, through different assignments, by going to office hours, etc.), and on almost everything else except their final grade. Although misunderstood as hard to implement into courses and requiring extra work from teachers for only a portion of their students to benefit off of; UDL only requires a small amount of effort and flexibility from professors to make an impact on all students.

Despite “[growing] out of efforts to help students with disabilities”, UDL is actually beneficial for all students and doesn’t take away or distract from any other students’ education (Novak et al.). In comparison to Differentiated Instruction (DI)- which supports specific students’ needs and helps them keep up in classes without having to change entire lesson plans-, UDL offers all students flexibility in learning methods, materials, and assessments (Novak et al.). It’s all-accessible classrooms and teaching methods help to reduce the stigmatization of people with learning disabilities by including them in “normal” educational programs as well as provides non-disabled students with alternative ways of learning. Novak et al. explain how universal teaching designs benefit non-disabled students just as much as students with disabilities; arguing that “even students who are identified as gifted and talented benefit from inclusion when three key components are met”: flexibility in the way students learn, differences in the speed students are expected to move at, and variety in how students should understand topics. These three components help students learn more efficiently by letting them choose how they would prefer to learn (which would most likely be the easiest, most engaging, and the best way for them).

Although criticized and rejected as unnecessary by school administrators and professors, universally designed educational methods are actually more necessary than ever. As the number of college students with mental health issues increases each year, so will the stress, pressures to keep up, feelings of hopelessness, and dropout rates; unless college administrators and professors seek solutions to these issues. Creating flexible and adaptable educational environments that let “learners truly have ownership in their learning” will allow students to do better in courses, learn/understand more, and have more fun while doing so (Novak et al.) In order to implement this Universal Design for Learning in a college course, students (both disabled and non-disabled) must express the demand for it to school administrations and/or to specific professors and prove how it will help all students while not hindering the education of any other.

Work Cited:

Burgstahler, Sheryl. “Universal Design of Instruction (UDI): Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examples.” DO-IT, 2015, www.washington.edu/doit/universal-design-instruction-udi-definition-principles-guidelines-and-examples.

“College Student Mental Health Statistics: National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI).” Chadron State College: Care Team, www.csc.edu/care/resources/statistics/index.csc.

Gruttadaro, Darcy and Dana Crudo. “College Students Speak: A Survey Report on Mental Health.” NAMI, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, 2012, https://www.nami.org/Support-Education/Publications-Reports/Survey-Reports/College-Students-Speak_A-Survey-Report-on-Mental-H.

Novak, Katie, et al. “6 Myths about Universal Design for Learning.” Novak Educational Consulting, 29 July 2020, www.novakeducation.com/6-myths-about-universal-design-for-learning/.

Story, Molly Follette. “Maximizing Usability: The Principles of Universal Design.” Assistive Technology, vol. 10, no. 1, 1998, pp. 4–12., doi:10.1080/10400435.1998.10131955.

“The UDL Guidelines”. CAST, Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.2, 06 October 2020, http://udlguidelines.cast.org/