By Julie King
When joining CEL’s Basics of Universal Design for Learning Certificate Program in the beginning of the spring 2023 semester, I was scheduled to teach two sections of CMP 100 for the English Department, and I wanted to learn more about incorporating UDL principals into my classroom. I was particularly interested in UDL’s focus on making course content assessable to all learners and exploring new ways in which I could be proactive about it.
In accordance with UDL’s plus one strategy, I decided to improve one area that I had found lacking in my fall semester courses. I knew I could do a better job at lowering barriers of learning for my students with learning disabilities. I wanted to move away from a reactionary approach to helping them and instead improve their learning experience through a deliberate design of their learning environment.
The first revision I made to my previous practice was to invite my students with DSO letters in for a one-on-one consultation about their need for accommodation during the first two weeks of classes. To get us started, I had prepared a list of questions based on what I thought were challenges for my students in the fall semester. Students in CMP 100 examine and practice writing in public and academic contexts. Process oriented writing is at the center of this course and some of this is done in groups. Based on what I had observed in the classroom, group work seemed to be a particular challenge for my students with learning disabilities. By asking specifically about group work, I wanted to learn how to engage this group of students better so they would feel motived and engaged rather than prone to checking out or nervous about sharing their work.
However, during my conversation with my students, I quickly learned that I was focusing on the wrong thing. My preconceived notions about their challenges with group work were completely off. When asked directly, the first handful of students unanimously answered that group work was not an issue for them.
This led me to revise my approach to the conversations we were having. I completely discarded the questions I had prepared which I realized were based on my own false impressions and instead applied a more open and conversational method. Using the DSO accommodation letter as a starting point for our conversation, I asked my students to share which accommodations had been helpful to them in the past, what had been challenging to them in the past, and what I could do to best support them now.
This resulted in great conversations in which the students did most of the talking and decided what and how much they felt comfortable sharing. In turn, I walked away with valuable knowledge about things I would do to accommodate their individual learning needs. I felt better equipped to eliminate barriers to learning and provide equal opportunities to succeed for this group of learners.
As a bonus, the initial conversation became an opportunity for me to listen to my students’ stories. I was surprised to find that many of them had never shared their story with a teacher before. Others had been met with suspicion. Sharing their story made them feel seen and heard from the start. There was now openness and trust where I had previously felt a disconnect. Originally, I was planning to schedule a follow up consultation around mid-terms, but I ended up skipping that because the students now reached out to me on their own.
It was great to see how one revision could have such a significant impact. I like how UDL stresses a plus one approach to improvements because it makes course revisions manageable in a job where we are often pulled in different directions and, at the same time, it reminds us that we should never stop making improvements but keep looking for the things we can do – one at a time - to break down barriers of learning for our students.
Dr. Julie King is an Instructor of English at Kutztown University, and recently completed the Basics of Universal Design for Learning course as part of the Center for Engaged Learning's Inclusivity Institute.