A UDL Index into UDL Content

Suzanne Ender & Adrian Rodriguez CSE 513 Spring 2024

A screenshot of a web browser looking at a website. The website has a white background and a minimal theme. Along the top of the site, a navigation bar has buttons for "UD," a home button, "prev," and "next." Below, the website shows a "voice control," where the user can select one of three avatars. A article sits below these controls with an image to the right of single-column text.

Introduction

Promoting and developing high level literacy skills in Middle and High School classrooms is complex. The increasingly diverse student population enrolling in schools across the United States adds to this complexity (Meo, 2008; Nowicki, 2022; NCES, 2023; Rao & Meo, 2016). Along with this, higher rates of inclusion and greater access to general education settings for students with disabilities (SWD) further impacts the heterogeneity of general education classroom settings (IDEA, 2004). Current and future students will continue to present a wider range of racial or cultural identities, linguistic repertoires, funds of knowledge or background knowledge, skills and abilities in general education settings than in previous decades.

To support the needs of diverse learners, instruction must be dynamic and flexible. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is one framework that helps teachers design or implement multidimensional instruction to support a range of learners. The UDL framework centers on three key instructional principles: material representation, student engagement, and opportunities to demonstrate thinking and learning. According to UDL, teachers can support a diverse classroom of learners by offering multiple ways for students to access content and material, engage in learning, or demonstrate thinking and learning.

Current research on UDL suggests that UDL instruction positively impacts student learning and success (Cite). Although more research is needed in order to better understand the full impact of UDL on student learning, most evidence suggests that UDL promotes inclusive, accessible and dynamic learning opportunities for a range of learners. UDL research has also explored the way teachers implement UDL in classroom settings. The majority of UDL instruction is implemented by Special Education teachers or takes place outside of general education classroom settings while a smaller number of studies evaluate UDL instruction in general education settings. Considering that general education classroom settings represent wider ranges of students’ skills, abilities, knowledge, languages, cultures, and other identity markers, implementing UDL instruction in general education settings may help teachers meet a wide range of learning profiles for general education students as well.

A few studies have explored the role of UDL in general education classroom settings. UDL is commonly associated with assistive technology or also tends to be considered in terms of supporting students in “special education.” General education teachers ….. A driving force behind our CSE 513 final project stems from a need to encourage and support general education teachers to implement UDL instruction in their classrooms. One way to support classroom teachers is to offer a resource on UDL instruction. This resource could support teachers by sharing how UDL helps teachers plan and implement instruction to meet a range of learning needs. This resource could also offer specific steps or strategies for teachers to implement in their own classroom to support diverse learners.

Suzanne Ender and Adrian Rodriguez co-developed a tool to help general education classroom teachers integrate UDL instruction into their own classrooms. Suzanne Ender used her theoretical understanding about instruction, pedagogy and Universal Design to design the overall concept and make critical decisions throughout the design process. Adrian applied his expertise in web design and technology development to engineer, and develop the actual tool and interface for this project.

Overall, Suzanne Ender and Adrian Rodriguez created a “UDL Index into UDL content” as a CSE 513 final project. While the tool is still in initial development phases, it successfully presents information and strategies on UDL to support teachers. By offering a free, accessible tool on UDL instruction, this tool ultimately aims to promote inclusive, accessible, and engaging learning environments for diverse learners in classroom settings.

Methodology and Results

Introduction

What did you design or implement?

“UDL index into UDL content” is a tool or resources to support classroom teachers. The tool intends to share information about UDL as well as instructional tips and strategies. Suzanne Ender and Adrian Rodriguez partnered to design this tool. The overall design of this project took place across several phases.

Phase 1

Theoretical Framework: Concept Development

The first phase of the project identified a current problem of practice. Suzanne’s literature review evidenced the need to share information on why and how UDL can help general education teachers meet the diverse learning needs of general education teachers. This initial phase is an important step in the development of our tool because it establishes a rationale that is also substantiated in current research.

After identifying the rationale and problem of practice, conceptual development and brainstorming was the next step in development. In this phase, Suzanne reviewed data from a current survey she disseminated as a means to better understand how teachers currently offer universally designed instruction in general education classrooms. In this survey, Middle and High School general education teachers answered questions about ways they offer a variety or formats, assistive supports, and components within texts and materials to support diverse learning needs in general education classrooms. Survey questions also asked about barriers that limited teachers’ ability to offer universally designed instruction in their classrooms. In reviewing survey data, several themes emerged on ways teachers implemented instruction. Common limitations or barriers were also identified. Based on this survey data, offering electronic texts as well as graphic organizers were the most common ways teachers modified instruction to support learners. Teachers reported limited resources, training, and money as common barriers for implementation.

Reviewing literature substantiated a need to support teachers with UDL instruction in classroom settings. Results from survey data further identified several parameters and specifications to consider when developing a tool. Developing a tool that offers accessible, comprehensive support at low or no costs could mitigate some of the challenges and barriers that limit teachers’ ability to strengthen and improve UDL instructional design. Based on teacher reports, a tool that shares a variety of options on presenting UDL text and material may also encourage teachers to expand their skill-set and teacher practices.

Phase one served to substantiate the development of a tool to support general education classroom teachers with UDL. It also served to identify what parameters or specific features should be included in this tool.

The final step in this phase was to determine how to engineer or design a tool based on the conceptual framework and specifications. For this phase, Adrian Rodriguez agreed to partner in this project in order to contribute his wide expertise in computer engineering and website design.

Theoretical Framework: Engineering and Design

In this phase, Adrian and Suzanne met to brainstorm ways to engineer and design this tool. Adrian served as the lead for this phase and offered a variety of ways he could design the tool to also meet specific parameters. One of Adrian’s areas of expertise is to engineer and design dynamic, interactive web interfaces that enhance user experiences.

Adrian guided the technical development of this tool by asking many questions. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, many of the answers to Adrian’s technical questions were answered by considering the theoretical framework we established in phase one of the project. For example, since promoting Universal Design is the overarching purpose for this tool, Adrian promoted the engineering and developing this tool should also consider fundamental principles of UDL. By applying UDL principles to the design of this tool, the tool will offer content and material to support UDL instruction while simultaneously serving as an example on how UDL enhances learning and user experience. Essentially, Adrian’s suggestion to prioritize UDL principles in the design of the tool amplified the value and potential that this tool can realize its potential.

Phase 2

Technical Development

After our initial meeting, Adrian and Suzanne took steps to turn the design ideas into reality. Adrian was responsible for the engineering and development of the project. Suzanne developed the information and content that would be uploaded into the tool. While most of this work was differentiated based on our skill sets, we consistently communicated with each other in order to align our development while also holding true to our original design principles and conceptual framing. A number of decisions about the technical design as well as the content and material were made by dialoguing and partnering. Deciding on user interface options is one example of our partnership. In line with UDL, it was important to offer diverse options to access the content in our tool. According to universal design, representing material in multiple ways is one way to support universal access. Some users may prefer to access material in audio format. Other users may prefer to read text descriptions. A key feature of our tool was to prioritize this feature. This shaped the underlying framework to engineer this tool. This also came to play on a more surface level as well. When prompting users to select a preferred modality for accessing content and information in this tool, Adrian and I partnered to determine what this should look like. Adrian offered a variety of examples such as a verbal prompt, a toggle, or having the user select “buttons” or visual representations of different modalities. When choosing interface “aesthetics” for this tool, we referred to the theoretical underpinnings of Universal Design and jointly decided on ways to engage users.

What were your metrics for success, and how did you validate?

After the initial design phase, Adrian and Suzanne spent considerable effort designing the tool and creating the content. Communication and collaboration were important ways Suzanne and Adrian successfully executed the work and established metrics for success. Logistical metrics were important to consider given the time constraints and product deadlines. To meet goals and objectives, Adrian and Suzanne verbalized and agreed on specific “achievement” goals and deadlines to create content or develop a prototype of the tool. Adrian and Suzanne also established metrics to measure the performance and operation of this tool. Checkpoint 1 served as one metric. We presented our design plan to CSE 513 and asked for feedback or suggestions. Jen offered high level feedback on areas we could focus on with this tool. As an expert in the ways humans interface with computers as well as UDL, Jen’s feedback served as a metric to validate the rationale and relevance for developing our tool. Following Checkpoint 1, Adrian and Suzanne integrated additional metrics to evaluate progress, performance, and usability of our tool. After developing content, Adrian reviewed material and offered feedback on quality and clarity. He also used the UDL theoretical framework to evaluate the content. This served as a valuable metric by enhancing the integrity as well as quality of the content and material. On the engineering side, metrics were employed throughout the development phase. Adrian tested and validated many components that contributed to the overall design of the tool. (Images, font, layout, web design). Additionally, Suzanne and Adrian used Click Depth, the number of actions a user needs to perform to reach a given piece of functionality, to continuously evaluate the website’s “interaction cost.” Specifically, Suzanne and Adrian committed to a maximum Click Depth of two mouse clicks and four keyboard commands to reach all content on the site.

Positive Disability Principles

Is it Ableist?

What parts of the work are accessible and what are not (for example, are both design tools, and their outputs accessible? Our work aims to support users with diverse backgrounds and abilities. To this end, we began by ensuring that every aspect of our website functions with a screen reader. This work included deliberate grouping and labeling of elements to ensure both Comprehensibility and Operability. As a screen reader user himself, Adrian appreciates that traversing web content via “source order” (i.e. the order in which elements appear in HTML code) does not always relate a website’s key features; listening to a series of introductory paragraphs, a common document structure, does not convey whether a web page hinges on a key element halfway down the page. To preserve and relate hierarchy, Suzanne & Adrian employed stringent containerization patterns and utilized WCAG-ARIA to create deliberate “landmarks” for all key content areas of their tool, including media control panels. This effort allows screen reader users to index directly into all key points of interest. Moreover, Suzanne & Adrian implemented motor-friendly arrow-based keyboard controls for advancing content, and they used an aria-live region to notify blind users of changes to the tool’s Document Object Model (DOM). Hence the authors implemented best practices to ensure that their tool supports users with diverse sensory needs. Given that Blind and Visually Impaired (BVI) people comprise a relative minority among target users, prioritizing this especially “confounded” group aligns with Sin’s Invalid’s Second Principe, Leadership of the Most Impacted. The authors also resisted Ableism by accounting for uses with complex identities.

Disability is Intersectional and Heterogeneous:

The following two subsections are written in Plain Language for fulfillment of the Plain Language Competency by Adrian Rodriguez

What Makes You, You?

What makes us who we are? Is it our age? Is it the color of our skin? Or is it the memories we have made? People who study race and sex believe that all of these things make us who we are. We call people who study things like race, sex, and power Social Scientists. Social Scientists believe all . More importantly, they believe that, when Let’s go over an example. Adrian is a Hispanic man who qualifies as “legally blind.” Being “legally blind” means he cannot read small text no matter how close he gets to it. Adrian also can’t read large text unless he puts his face a few inches away from it. This experience made Adrian’s childhood very different from his older brother’s childhood. Hector, Adrian’s older brother, faced many challenges as a Hispanic kid growing up in America, and Adrian faced many challenges as a Blind kid. But the challenges that Adrian faced as blind Hispanic kid are totally different from the challenges his brother faced. They are also different from the challenges that the White blind kids Adrian knew faced. For example, kids who are just blind often receive special classes to help them use their hearing. And Hispanic kids often receive extra English classes to help them learn the language. But, because Adrian needed help with English and his vision, his school district classified him as having deep learning problems, even though Adrian has always been good at learning. The lesson is that we are made of multiple things about us– not just one thing. And the experience of people who don’t fit in for multiple reasons is unique– and sometimes much worse– than people who don’t fit in for just one reason. That’s why we designed a website that includes computer-generated “learning buddies” that act like people with multiple kinds of life experiences.

We Understand the Things We Know

Imagine you are talking to your mother, father, or a close family member. You and this family member probably have a lot in common. Because you have so much in common, it is easier to speak with this person. They can explain things to you by talking about things you already know. You two are already in sync. Now think about your teacher. At first, you might not have been able to understand them so easily. And, if you and your teacher come from a different place, it might always be a bit difficult to understand them. What if your favorite family member, or your best friend, could teach you? We believe that learning from people that understand us in a deep way can make school easier. For this reason, we created a website where you can have a computer-generated tutor rewrite books for you in a way that is easier to understand. For example, if you are a totally blind African American female, you might want to learn certain things from someone who is also a totally blind African American female. Of course, the computer-generated assistants on our site are not real people, but they are very good at explaining things as if they were.

Nothing About Us Without Us

Are people with disabilities engaged in guiding this work? At what stages?

One positive disability principle asserts that people with disabilities must always be present when there is any effort, decision, or discussion that involves a person with a disability. In future phases, it will be important to seek counsel from people or experts with disabilities in order to validate or improve the degree that our tool promotes universal access. Cross validation from individuals with disabilities can also serve to improve, modify, or validate the content that we present in our tool. We aim to offer a wide range of options that teachers can use to promote UDL in their classrooms. Input from people with a range of access needs will be a crucial step to make sure our tool comprehensively addresses ways to support learners.

Along with the need to check membership and gather input, the positionality of the authors do substantiate and positively reflect this disability principle. Suzanne identifies as a person with a ‘hidden disability’ who benefits from multimodal input to support her learning needs. Her lived experience contributes and supports the disability principle that people with lived experience with a disability are experts when it comes to knowing what is most supportive. Adrian, on the other hand, is a person of color with visible sensory disability. His positionality enabled him to appreciate the value of screen reader support. Moreover, his experiences as an English as a Second Language Learner motivated him to promote cultural pluralism through the language options the website offers.

Disability Agency, Independence and Autonomy:

Is it being used to give control and improve agency for people with disabilities

Efforts to promote agency, independence and autonomy for people with disabilities is a positive disability principle that is integral to our work in this project. The United States has a tragic and devastating history of systemically oppressing, excluding and disenfranchising people with disabilities. The legacy and historical underpinnings of exclusion traces back to the early European colonization efforts that ceded land from indigenous people across the North American continent. At the earliest stages, heteronormative, ableistic, sexist, racist, monolingual norms have served to exclude, oppress, or silence people. For this reason, this positive disability principle aims to prioritize agency, independence and autonomy for people with disabilities. Apart from the historical context, assuming competence and fostering agency, independence, and autonomy serves to empower people with disabilities and instills opportunities to thrive, self-actualize and make their own decisions. This disability principle is an underlying framework for our project. The tool aims to help teachers UDL instruction for diverse learners. In this way, UDL instruction promotes students’ ability, agency, and autonomy to successfully engage and learn. The technical design of our tool also aligns with this positive disability principle. To encourage teachers to use this tool, we acknowledged the heterogeneity of teachers. By integrating UDL into the design elements of this tool, we aim to promote user agency, independence, autonomy that supports their interests and learning needs.

Developing a universally designed tool that supports UDL instruction is significant and relevant at this point in time. On April 8, 2024 the Federal Review posted an official ruling requiring the accessibility of web or electronic content from all state and local government entities, including public schools. This ruling is specifically referring to the need for schools to ensure electronic content such as websites, curriculum, documents, and other interfaces be accessible to all learners, regardless of skill or dis/ability. The tool we developed adheres to accessibility standards identified in this legislation and serves as a model or exemplar of accessible web content. In a recent study on web accessibility throughout universities, key accessibility features such as alternative text, parsing, and link purpose were missing up to 85 percent of the time (Macakoğlu, 2023). Beyond academia, inaccessible web content or technology prevails throughout privately or publicly developed websites. In an effort to counterbalance the overwhelming abundance of web or technology inaccessibility, our tool serves as an exemplar or model of fully accessible web content.

Disability Model Analysis

UDL

Universal Design (UDL) is one framework that helps teachers design or implement multidimensional instruction to support a range of learners. The UDL framework centers on three key instructional principles: material representation, student engagement, and opportunities to demonstrate thinking and learning. This framework is foundational to all phases of developing in our work. Integrating principles of UDL played a role in reviewing research, identifying problems of practice, brainstorming tool development, content and material development, engineering and design, as well as user interface.

DisCrit

According to DisCrit theory (Annamma et. al, 2013), intersectional identity markers all play a role in inclusion and access. The DisCrit framework acknowledges that identity markers such as ability, race, class, and language intertwine and impact one’s access to resources, education, and employment. The DisCrit theoretical framework played an important role in the design process of this tool. In designing our tool, our goal was to offer teachers the opportunity to learn about UDL dynamic, interactive format. With UDL in mind, we designed a tool with options to read or listen to the text. We also offered content in full text or abridged versions. Screen reader compatibility was also a feature in our design. To enhance accessibility and universal access, we designed this tool with intersectionality in mind. If users choose to access the material via “audio,” they have the option to hear content presented by three different personas. The personas range in identity markers in terms of skin color, hair, features, and voice dialect. Our effort to include diverse personas in this tool supports intersectionality in two ways. In one way, our tool promotes representation of pluralistic identities across the teaching force. At least 80% of the teaching workforce identifies as White/European descent. Incorporating voices and personas that represent teachers who may be multilingual or identify as BIPOC serves to elevate and acknowledge these perspectives and voices. Along with this, a body of work acknowledges that affinity groups where people share identity markers offer affirming and validating experiences. Including opportunities for users to hear content from a person that aligns with their own identity markers may enhance and improve user experiences. Finally, our decision to represent intersectional identities serves as a means to prioritize and elevate pluralistic, intersectional voices and identities. This is one small effort to promote inclusive content that is both anti ableist as well as antiracist.

Feminist Disability Theory

The feminist dis/ability framework (Garland-Thompson, 2005) is another helpful framework to evaluate or analyze our work. An important component of the feminist dis/ability framework addresses the relationship between identity markers, power, and access. Under the feminist dis/ability framework, it is important to consider how power and identity may interplay in terms of access and inclusion. Elements of the feminist disability framework integrate with several aspects in our work. In the initial phases of this work, survey data suggested that access to resources and financial constraints were barriers that limited teachers’ ability to learn or implement UDL instruction. With this in mind, we designed a tool that would eliminate these barriers. Our tool is free, accessible, and multidimensional. Our tool presents comprehensive aspects of UDL: It defines UDL, explains why it supports learners, and offers specific strategies or steps teachers can take to implement UDL in their own classrooms. Our effort to provide a free, accessible, and comprehensive tool is a way we empower teachers to gain knowledge and improve their practice. School systems commonly include bureaucracy and power structures that limit teachers’ agency or access to resources. Our tool breaks down barriers and democratizes UDL professional development for any teacher who would benefit from our resource.

Learnings and Future Work

Overall, we came to an important conclusion that presenting simple, generic questions are robust, inclusive, and comprehensive ways to promote universal access. For example, presenting toggles for audio, full text, or multimodal presentation effectively supports universal access for a wide range of users. When designing instruction to meet diverse learning needs, teachers frequently need to consider the intersectional and multimodal learning needs for a number of students. Doing so takes time, effort, and dedication. However, a key principle that came up in designing this project revealed that universal design does not have to be complicated. Asking simple questions provides opportunities for a wide range of users to successfully access content. Presenting content via audio may support users who are in transit, have diverse visual capabilities, and/or are multitasking, such as caretaking or cooking. Launching this tool has been rewarding, informative, and satisfying. Collaboration by Suzanne and Adrian reinforces the power of collaboration and interdisciplinary partnerships. With effort, communication, and dedication, Suzanne and Adrian realized a sophisticated and dynamic tool may positively impact teachers as well as students. Future work may include efforts to refine and improve the user experience. Adding content is another way the tool may continue to develop. Before modifying or revising our tool, it will be important to pilot our tool to see how diverse users experience and interact with it. This work could take place in the form of a pilot study that could include qualitative interviews, focus groups or collecting survey data. These sessions will provide valuable input and will serve as an additional validity metric.Farther down the line, “implementation” research could take place in order to learn how this tool supports teachers in UDL instruction.

Competencies

Adrian

Suzanne

References

Annamma, S. A., Connor, D., & Ferri, B. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1-31.

Berne, P., Morales, A. L., Langstaff, D., & Invalid, S. (2018). Ten principles of disability justice. WSQ: Women’s Studies Quarterly, 46(1), 227-230.

Elavsky, F., Mankoff, J., & Satyanarayan, A. (2022). Increasing Data Equity Through Accessibility.

Garland-Thomson, R. (2005). Feminist disability studies. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(2), 1557-1587.

Heumann, J., & Joiner, K. (2020). Being Heumann: An unrepentant memoir of a disability rights activist. Beacon Press.

Irwin, V., De La Rosa, J., Wang, K., Hein, S., Zhang, J., Burr, R., … & Parker, S. (2022). Report on the Condition of Education 2022. NCES 2022-144. National Center for Education Statistics.

Meo, G. (2008). Curriculum planning for all learners: Applying universal design for learning (UDL) to a high school reading comprehension program. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 52(2), 21-30.

Rao, K., Gravel, J., Rose, D., & Tucker-Smith, N. (2023). Universal Design for Learning in its 3rd decade: A focus on equity, inclusion, and design. International Encyclopedia of Education, 6, 712-720.

Shakespeare, T. (2006). The social model of disability. The Disability Studies Reader, 2(3), 197-204.