Hajer's picture

Active Learning and UDL in collaboration with Technology

Labo : Active Learning, Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in collaboration with Technology - Step 2

How sharp is the distinction between Universal Design for Learning and Assistive Technology?

By Hajer Chalghoumi. The 8 January 2014

0

With moves towards inclusive education, more and more students with special needs are placed in the general student population (Marino, Sameshima & Beecher, 2009). Advances in technology are considered by many as a promising track of solution for these students as it provide them with new options to participate in and accomplish tasks in an inclusive educational setting (Edyburn, 2010; Rose & Meyer, 2002). In this context, Assistive technology (AT) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) stand at the forefront of the technology-based efforts to create access to education curricula for all students, either with or without disabilities (Peterson-Karlan & Parette, 2008; Rose, Hasselbring, Stahl & Zabala, 2005). AT is technology solutions specifically designed to assist individuals with disabilities in overcoming barriers in their environment (Rose & al., 2005). UDL is an educational approach to curriculum and instruction that benefits of the inherent and nearly limitless flexibility of technology to enable students with diverse learning needs to be successful in the classroom (Lee, Soukup, Little & Wehmeyer, 2009; Special Education Assistive Technology (SEAT) Center, 2006). Because of the size and growth of numbers of students classified as special needs students, AT and UDL solutions in schools are also growing in importance (Cavanaugh, 2004; Judge, 2008; Marino & al., 2009; Edyburn, 2010).

We consider AT and UDL different but completely complementary (Rose & al., 2005; Edyburn, 2010). In fact, AT is “unique, personal (travels with the individual), customized, and dedicated.” (Rose & al., 2005, p. 507) and UDL is “universal and inclusive, accommodating diversity.” (Rose & al., 2005, p. 507). Both kinds of solutions are needed (Hitchcock & Stahl, 2003). Advances in one approach prompt advances in the other and that this reciprocity will evolve in ways that will maximize their mutual benefits. On the one hand, an exclusively AT using setting may not be integrated with the learning goals and may cause more harm than benefits in terms of inclusion. On the other hand, a totally UDL solution that exclude AT may fail to consider the customized adaptations that many students need and will build environments that are too complex and expensive (Rose & al. 2005; Peterson-Karlan & Parette, 2008).

References:
Cavanaugh, T. (2004). Assistive technology and inclusion. Presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE) conference Atlanta, GA.

Chalghoumi, H. & Viens, J. (2009). Training pre-service teachers to use technologies in teaching to students with handicaps, social maladjustments and learning difficulties. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on ICT & Accessibility, May 7-9th, 2009, Hammamet-Tunisia.

Edyburn, D. L. (2010). Would You Recognize Universal Design for Learning if You Saw It? Ten Propositions for New Directions for the Second Decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33, 33-41.

Fink, A. (2010). Conducting research literature reviews: From the Internet to paper. 3d edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hitchcock, C, & Stahl, S. (2003). Assistive technology, universal design, and universal design for learning: Improved learning opportunities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 18(A).

Hopkins, J. (2004). Assistive Technology (AT) to support students with special needs. Retrieved January 8, 2013, from http://curriculum.org/storage/108/1278482872AssistiveTechnology.pdf

Howard, J. B. (2003). Universal design for learning: An essential concept for teacher education. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 19(4), 113-118.

Judge, S. & Simms, K.A. (2009). Assistive technology training at the pre-service level: A national snapshot of teacher preparation programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32(1), 33-44.

Judge, S. (2008). Assistive Technology Training at the Preservice Level: Current Status and Training Needs. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 5109-5112). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Lahm, E. A. (2005). Improving practice using assistive technology knowledge and skills. In D. Edyburn, K. Higgins & R. Boone (Eds.), Handbook of Special Education Technology and Research (pp. 721-746). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design, Inc.

Lee, S.H., Soukup, J.H., Little, T. D. & Wehmeyer, M. L.. (2009). Student and Teacher Variables Contributing to Access to the General Education Curriculum for Students With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, The Journal of Special Education, 43(29), 29-44.

Marino, M. T., Sameshima, P., & Beecher, C. C. (2009). Enhancing TPACK with assistive technology: Promoting inclusive practices in preservice teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(2). Retrieved January 8, 2013, from  http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss2/general/article1.cfm

Nash, T. & Norwich, B. (2010). The initial training of teachers to teach children with special educational needs: A national survey of English Post Graduate Certificate of Education programmes. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 26(7) 1471-1480.

Okolo, C. M., & Bouck, E. C. (2007). Research about assistive technology: 2000-2006. What have we learned? Journal of Special Education Technology, 22(3),19-34.

Peterson-Karlan, G. R., & Parette, H. P. (2008). Integration of technology into the curriculum. In: H. P. Parette & G. R. Peterson-Karlan (Eds.), Research-based practices in developmental disabilities (2nd ed., pp. 183--214). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Rose, D. H., Hasselbring, T. S., Stahl, S., & Zabala, J. (2005). Assistive technology and universal design for learning: Two sides of the same coin. In D. Edyburn, K. Higgins, & R. Boone (Eds.), Handbook of special education technology research and practice (pp. 507--518). Whitefish Bay, WI: Knowledge by Design.

Rose, D.H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Silver-Pacuilla, H. (2006). Moving toward solutions: Assistive and learning technology for all students.

Smith, D. W., & Kelley, P. A. (2007). A survey of the integration of assistive technology knowledge into teacher preparation programs for individuals with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 101, 429-433.

Special Education Assistive Technology (SEAT) Center, National Center for Technology Innovation, & University of Kansas. (2006). Assistive technology outcomes summit: Assistive technology and educational progress … Charting a new direction. Executive summary. Washington, DC: National Center for Technology Innovation Retrieved January 8, 2013, from http://www.nationaltechcenter.org/documents/ExecutiveSummaryFinal.pdf

You should be a member to comment. - Subscribe

Netiquette rules

Enter your username.
Enter your password.