• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
UDL Presentation at OCALI 2012
 

UDL Presentation at OCALI 2012

on

  • 4,289 views

Educating Students Who Need Intensive Supports in a UDL Environment ...

Educating Students Who Need Intensive Supports in a UDL Environment
This slide presentation was developed by participants of the 2012 Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence (OCALI) Conference to provide an overview of how students with disabilities (who need intensive supports) can be served in an educational environment that has integrated the principles of Universal Design for Learning.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,289
Views on SlideShare
4,187
Embed Views
102

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
21
Comments
0

5 Embeds 102

http://www.scoop.it 69
https://twitter.com 21
http://pinterest.com 8
http://cmsk12ncus.edmodo.com 3
https://tasks.crowdflower.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Home Page
  • With a large number of students with disabilities needing intensive supports that are educated in our nation’s public schools, every teacher can expect to find students with diverse learning needs in the classroom. Success for all students requires a focus on individual achievement, individual progress, and individual learning. Despite obstacles, recent research tells us that we can teach these students how to learn. We can put them into a position to compete if they have the proper supports in place.   This resource will provide viewers with an overview of how students with disabilities (who need intensive supports) can be served in an educational environment that has integrated the principles of Universal Design for Learning.    
  • Presentation Content
  • With the enactment of IDEA '97, special education is no longer considered a place, but rather a network of services and supports designed to enable students to derive full benefits from a public education. This does not mean that students with disabilities cannot be appropriately served in a specialized setting. Rather, the intent of the law is to emphasize that "placement" or location of services is the last decision an IEP team makes during a team assessment and planning process. An IEP team always starts with the presumption that a student will be placed in the same setting in which he or she would be educated if the disability were not an issue, namely, a regular public school classroom. Source: Jackson, R. (2010). What are the needs of students with low-incidence disabilities. Curriculum Access for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities: The Promise of Universal Design for Learning (p. 15). Washington, D.C.: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum.
  • Yes, in today's classroom 57% of students with disabilities spend more than 80% of their day in general education classrooms, yet general education teachers consistently report that they do not have the skills they need to effectively instruct diverse learners, including students with disabilities. It is believed that improving the skills of general education teachers is a lynchpin to improving outcomes for students with disabilities.   Source:  Blanton, L. , Pugach, C., Florian, L. (2011), Preparing general education teachers to improve outcomes for students with disabilities. ( policy number not given).   AACTE Policy Brief, May 9, 2011
  •   Students with disabilities can be classified in many ways. IDEA ’04 continues to recognize disabilities in the form of more or less discrete diagnostic categories, such as intellectual disabilities (formerly mental retardation), specific learning disabilities, and emotional disturbance. Other approaches to classification include categorizing disabled individuals by severity of need (mild, moderate, severe, and profound), or by how atypical an individual may be when compared to a norm. Still other approaches may emphasize the level of intensity of supports necessary for an individual to function optimally in home, school, community, and work settings. Intensity of support levels may include: intermittent, limited, extensive, and pervasive.   Source: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. (September 30, 2005). Curriculum Access for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities: The Promise of Universal Design for Learning.  
  • Source: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. (September 30, 2005). Curriculum Access for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities: The Promise of Universal Design for Learning.  
  • Source: Multi-Tiered System of Supports . (n.d.). Orange County Public Schools. Retrieved April 27, 2012, from https://www.ocps.net/cs/ese/rti/Pages/Multi-TieredModelofSchoolSupport.aspx  
  • Source: Ohio Center for Low Incidence (OCALI)
  • When construed broadly, intended outcomes of the general curriculum for students with low-incidence disabilities DO NOT differ from those expected for all students. Community inclusion, with the opportunity to achieve a high quality of life, is the ultimate goal for all citizens. State curriculum frameworks in core content areas, local content options, and district-level vision and mission statements about stakeholders' aspirations for students - all drive the general curriculum. Right down to the level of the community school, the question is, How might the curriculum be accessed by students with disabilities? Planning curriculum starts with the individual needs of the student rather than the disability label or the availability of a separate program that typically serves a particular type of student.   Source: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. (September 30, 2005). Curriculum Access for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities: The Promise of Universal Design for Learning.    
  •   An analogy can be drawn between educational materials in a curriculum and physical structures in architecture. It is inconceivable that a public school building could be constructed today without wheelchair access. It should be equally untenable for public schools to purchase curriculum materials that are inaccessible to students with disabilities, who are entitled by federal and state law to receive a free, appropriate public education (FAPE). Access, participation, and progress in the general curriculum requires far more than access to physical spaces in classrooms and school buildings. Schools and school districts must make every reasonable effort to ensure that students with disabilities have on-time access to the same instructional resources as non- disabled students Planning for students with disabilities begins with curriculum. Despite earlier calls for curriculum focus, special education developed as a field that concentrated less on curriculum and more on the needs of the disability. IEP teams today should begin with the presumption that students with low-incidence disabilities can achieve state-and district-level standards. Where special educators lack knowledge of curriculum content, they must seek out colleagues from general education or participate  in more structural or systemic approaches for curriculum collaboration. Collaboration through a shared commitment among general and special education personnel on IEP teams is crucial to develop and implement a plan that ensures access, participation and progress with the general education curriculum. Source: Jackson, R. (2010). What are the needs of students with low-incidence disabilities. Curriculum Access for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities: The Promise of Universal Design for Learning (p. 15). Washington, D.C.: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Nolet, V., & McLaughlin, M. J. (2000). Accessing the general curriculum: including students with disabilities in standards-based reform. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
  • Both IDEA and NCLB recognize the right of all learners to a high-quality standards-based education. The laws preclude the development of separate educational agendas for students with disabilities and others with special needs.   UDL address the core principles of No Child Left Behind by supporting: Greater accountability by guiding the development of assessments that provide accurate, timely, and frequent means to measure progress and inform instruction for all students.   Greater flexibility and choice for teachers, parents, and students by guiding the development of curricula that provide high expectations for every student and meaningful choices to meet and sustain those high expectations.   Greater use of evidence-based practices by guiding the design of high-quality curriculum that include research-based techniques for all students, including those with disabilities.   Source: UDL Questions and Answers. (n.d.). CAST. Retrieved April 27, 2012, from www.cast.org/udl/faq/index.html   Definition from http://www.cast.org/udl/faq/index.html  
  • Video: For All Students
  • The “What’s in in for Me” outlines the benefits for the student AND teacher. Source:    Kortering, L. J., McClannon, T. W., & Braziel, P. M. (November/December 2008). Universal design for learning. A look at what algebra and biology students with and without high incidence conditions are saying. Remedial and Special Education, 29(6), 352-363.
  • Source: Meyer, D. ;., Strangman, A. A., & Rose, N. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning [TEACHING EVERY STUDENT IN -OS]. Alexandria, VA: Association For Supervision & Curriculum Deve.   Definition: http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/udl/DifferentiatedInstructionHTML.asp   
  • Now, let’s take a look at both. This graphic describes the similarities and differences between the concepts of Universal Design for Learning and Differentiated Instruction. If you are familiar with the idea of differentiated instruction you will notice that UDL shares many of the same philosophies in that they both encourage providing access to materials in a variety of formats in an attempt to meet the needs of as many students as possible. However, one of the most important differences between the two is that UDL begins with the design of the curriculum before the student enters the classroom whereas differentiated instruction begins with the individual needs of the student and the teacher adjusts the curriculum as those needs become apparent. Source: Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2003). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved [9-1-09] from http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_diffinstructudl.html
  •   A UDL classroom / environment will provide increased opportunities for students with intense needs to access the curriculum.  It provides a foundation that opens doors for as many as possible. However, there will still be some students with specific needs that are written into their IEP's that will require additional supports typically referred to as AT. To succeed in the general education classrooms, our students must have access to personal supports and technology supports. Schools that want to implement inclusive practices should ensure that general and special education teachers have access to planning time if they expect innovations in the curriculum to take hold.   Source: Fisher, D., Frey., & Sax, C. (1999). Inclusive elementary schools: Recipes for individualizing success. Colorado Springs, CO:PEAK Parent Center. Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (1999). Inclusive elementary schools: recipes for success. Colorado Springs, Colo.: PEAK Parent Center.  
  • There’s just one more important term we would like to define today and that is Assistive Technology. Assistive Technology can be defined as…” “…any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with disabilities”   The video shows how the use of one technology support the learning needs of one student AND how it was then incorporated into the classroom to benefit ALL students.   Source: Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat. 2647 (2004).  
  • This chart summarizes the information from the previous slides. We show this to you, so that you can see an example of UDL in practice. It’s the same information we have been talking about (the differences between UDL and AT) but now it is presented side-by-side in chart form as an alternative format.   Source: Basham, J. D. (2001). A Working Understanding of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Assistive Technology: Similarities and Differences  
  • UDL takes the approach that access needs to be provided for all students - those with disabilities and those without. Whereas assistive technology is an approach to provide access primarily for individuals with disabilities. Source: Rose., Hasselbring., Zabala., & Stahl. (2011, May 4). UDL Powerpoint. Ross Pike Educational Service Center. Retrieved April 27, 2012, from www.rpesd.org/Downloads/UDL_PPT_5-4-112.pdf    
  • Hopefully, by now you are starting to understand the concept of Universal Design for Learning and you are probably seeing much overlap between differentiated instruction, UDL and assistive technology. The next few slides will highlight some of the ways UDL is similar to assistive technology but also the ways AT and UDL differ. Let’s begin with the similarities of UDL and AT. It is safe to say that implementation of assistive technologies as well as implementation of UDL both utilize a problem-solving process. It’s not just a matter of providing one avenue or method of teaching and hoping that it will be good enough for the mid-range student with average skills and adequate background knowledge. Both AT and UDL in practice will utilize various forms of technology and both will address the needs of students with disabilities in an effort to provide access, increase participation and improve overall outcomes. So the similarities are significant, but there are also some very specific differences between the implementation of assistive technologies and the concept of universal design for learning.   Source: Rose., Hasselbring., Zabala., & Stahl. (2011, May 4). UDL Powerpoint. Ross Pike Educational Service Center. Retrieved April 27, 2012  
  • Source:  Edyburn, D. L., & Gardner, J. E. (2009). Universal Design for Learning. Arlington, VA: Technology and Media Division of the Council for Exceptional Children.    
  • The last support that we will review is AIM (Accessible Instructional Material). Now, think back to those times when, upon returning to school in the fall, there was a brand new textbook waiting for you—no bends, no marks, you were the first person to write your name in it. Now imagine not being able to access the content because of a visual impairment or print disability. The first day feeling changes to anxiety rather than excitement. Students with a visual impairment or print disability may have to wait several weeks or even months to get the materials in a format they can use and learn from. In the meantime, students feel unprepared and risk falling behind their peers. In most schools, the use of print-based instructional materials, mostly textbooks, is still primarily how teachers deliver curricular content. This system works fine for many learners. But for others—those who struggle to read because of physical, sensory, cognitive, or learning differences—such materials are not as effective for learning. These students need instructional materials in accessible, specialized formats in order to have meaningful and equal access to the general education curriculum. Such access is guaranteed in federal education statutes, including the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The next few slides will outline the “What” of Accessible Instructional Materials (AIM).
  • Most educators know of the concept of RTI. Let’s see how RTI & UDL are similar in nature. Response-to-Instruction1 (RTI) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) represent innovative approaches to addressing the needs of students with disabilities. In recent years, RTI and UDL have both received increased attention from the education, policy, and disability communities. RTI and UDL differ from one another in that RTI is a process for making educational decisions based on an at-risk student's success or failure during specialized intervention, while UDL is a process for making curriculum design decisions to maximize success in the general curriculum. However, RTI and UDL share the objective of improving educational outcomes for students with disabilities and are similar in several important ways. First , both RTI and UDL recognize that poor achievement does not necessarily reflect disability, but rather may also reflect poor instruction. That is, in some cases the curriculum, not the student, may be deficient. RTI puts this belief into practice by prescribing that general education curricula incorporate research-validated instruction and intervention by making disability identification contingent on the program of instruction and by acknowledging that there are cases where changes should be made to general classroom instruction in place of student intervention. UDL also encourages the use of research-validated instruction and intervention and emphasizes the notion of disabled curriculum by further stating that the curriculum, and not the student, must bear the burden of adaptation. Second , RTI and UDL both reflect the understanding that a curriculum that is effective for one student may not be effective for another student. With RTI, this is most readily apparent with the individualized approach to intervention that is part of the problem-solving method. With UDL, the curriculum is designed to incorporate a wide variety of options in its goals, materials, methods, and assessment so that the curriculum in its entirety is flexible and accommodating of individual student needs. Third , RTI and UDL treat assessment as something that should inform instruction and intervention and consider once-a-year test scores insufficient to determine student ability. In RTI, students' responsiveness is commonly monitored over time and with respect to multiple interventions; while in UDL, multiple, ongoing assessments are administered. The use of curriculum-based measurement as a means to inform teachers about the effectiveness of instruction and guide decision-making regarding appropriate instruction and intervention is a key point of convergence of RTI and UDL. With effective implementation of curriculum-based measurement, interventions can be determined while instruction is still ongoing and before a student fails. Both of these strategies are important to improve the ability of students with disabilities to participate and progress in the general education curriculum. Source: Multi-Tiered System of Supports . (n.d.). Orange County Public Schools. Retrieved April 27, 2012, from https://www.ocps.net/cs/ese/rti/Pages/Multi-TieredModelofSchoolSupport.aspx
  • Some of the tools and supports can be globally offered to all and therefore available automatically for those who need them , however, AT is still needed in some cases. When the "technology" is applied proactively to all students, it could be thought of as UDL but if a particular student has that same technology support written into their IEP, it is considered AT.
  • No citation needed  
  • The picture above is a graphical representation of classroom, with the level of supports needed in place to allow success for diverse learners, including those with disabilities.
  • The superintendent from a school district that institutes one-to-one computing, turned to one of the students and said, in a very accusatory tone, "So, how is this [one-to-one access] really making a difference for you?" The young man, Casey, looked the superintendent squarely in the eyes and replied " Sir, I'm spacial ed, and I've been special ed all my life. But with this thing here," he said, pointing to the laptop computer, " with this, I am just as smart as the kid next to me." To say you could hear a pin drop was an understatement. Those in the room sat in a stunned silence. The superintendent recoiled and immediately asked, No, really, How is it making a difference to you?. Casey responded, "I don't read so well, and learning through my eyes is hard. With the laptop, what I do is write what I am going to turn in, like an essay or answers to the questions the teacher has on the assignment, and then I go up to the menu bar and pull down to 'speak it'. Then I put on my headphones, close my eyes, and listen as my computer reads back to me what I have written. If what I have written makes sense, then I know what I have written is OK to hand in. If not, then I can go back and make my corrections."   Source: Pitler, H. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Using Technology with Classroom Instruction that Works, Howard Pitler Elizabeth R Hubbell  
  • Another set of teaching skills has to do with general education teachers working collaboratively with their colleagues, as a part of a team, to put into practice inclusive education that is challenging and motivating to students. When general education teachers take a primary responsibility for the learning of their students, they should do so as a part of a professional learning community along side their special education colleagues. Teacher collaboration is the key to successfully meeting the sometimes complex needs of students with significant needs. Meeting the needs of students with disabilities starts with engineering your classroom using the principles of Universal Design for Learning, which are Multiple Means of.. Representing Content Action and Expression of Knowledge Engagement in Curriculum and Activities The UDL guideline graphic above gives you a comprehensive review of the three principles. You can view and download the full version at www.cast.org.   Source: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. (September 30, 2005). Curriculum Access for Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities: The Promise of Universal Design for Learning  
  • Note: Citation from CAST
  • Some popular teaching practices for conveying functional skills include the following: embedding opportunities to practice functional life skills in daily activities in the natural setting where they would occur; using concrete, age-appropriate, real-life teaching materials; demonstrating new routines in a sequential manner, checking for understanding at each step; and using a variety of modes for expressive and receptive communication skills.   Source: Sands, Deanna J., Elizabeth B. Kozleski, and Nancy K. French. Inclusive education for the 21st century. Australia: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, 2000. Renzaglia, Adelle "Promoting a Lifetime of Inclusion." Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 18.3 (2003): 2. Virginia Commonwealth University    
  •   Information is more accessible and likely to be assimilated by learners when it is presented in a way that primes, activates, or provides any pre-requisite knowledge. Barriers and inequities exist when some learners lack the background knowledge that is critical to assimilating or using new information. However, there are also barriers for learners who have the necessary background knowledge, but might not know it is relevant. Those barriers can be reduced when options are available that supply or activate relevant prior knowledge, or link to the pre-requisite information elsewhere.   Priming, or pre-practice, has also been documented as an effective classroom intervention for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Priming consists of previewing information or activities that a student is likely to have difficulties with before they actually engage in that activity. Priming has been shown to be effective in reducing disruptive behavior in students with autism and in increasing on-task behavior during class storybook reading activities and in increasing initiations of social interaction with typical peers.   Peer tutoring consists of any instructional strategy where two students work together on an academic activity, with one student providing assistance, instruction, and feedback to the other. Peer tutoring strategies and their variants have been demonstrated to be effective in producing improvements in on-task behavior and math performance and in on-task behavior and social interactions.   Source: "Principle I. Provide Multiple Means of Representation | National Center On Universal Design for Learning." Home National Center On Universal Design for Learning. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2012.   Harrower, Joshua , and Dunlap. "Including Children With Autism in General Education Classrooms." Behavior Modification, 25.5 (2001): 771.   Harrower, Joshua , and Dunlap. "Including Children With Autism in General Education Classrooms." Behavior Modification, 25.5 (2001): 766.
  • "Project-based and other hands-on learning activities also provide the needed flexibility to address individual needs and have been suggested as good practice for all students. Similarly, community-based instruction provides flexibility to accommodate all students with very diverse needs. For example, by using the community as an instructional setting, students can apply complex mathematical and scientific concepts, whereas students with significant disabilities can acquire more basic skills, such as street crossing.    Source:   Renzaglia, A., Karvonen, M., Drasgow, E., & Stoxen, C. C. (2003). Promoting a Lifetime of Inclusion. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 18(3), 140-149.   Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., Hyde, A. A., & Varner, W. (1998). Best practice: new standards for teaching and learning in America's schools (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.  
  • Researchers investigating instructional adaptation have identified a variety of strategies for facilitating the inclusive education of students with severe disabilities. For example, incorporating choice, by allowing students to choose a Language Arts assignment, revealed dramatically decreased levels in undesirable behavior (disruptive and off-task) (Powell & Nelson, 1997). Furthermore, allowing students to choose the order in which they complete academic tasks has been shown to result in increased levels of desirable classroom behavior (Dunlap, et al., 1994)  
  • Source: Reschly, A., & Christenson, S. (n.d.). Prediction of Dropout Among Students With Mild Disabilities A Case for the Inclusion of Student Engagement Variables. Remedial and Special Education. Retrieved April 27, 2012, from http://rse.sagepub.com/content/27/5/276.abstract    Prediction of Dropout Among Students With Mild Disabilities A Case for the Inclusion of Student Engagement Variables Amy L. Reschly University of Georgia
  • It is easy to observe the lack of student engagement when students are slouched in their chairs and not listening to the teacher or participating in the discussion. Many teachers who constantly see disengaged students put the burden on the student and lament that they could be better teachers and have better results if they had the opportunity to work with a “better” group of students. But classrooms with high levels of student engagement are not simply a result of “student quality.” It is true that, depending on students ’ prior experiences, attitudes, and perceptions, students can make it easier or more difficult to create a highly engaged classroom. But teachers are not limited to poor learning results because students are not engaged. When educators examine more closely the characteristics of engaging instruction, they can begin to identify the elements that contribute to high levels of student engagement. These elements are a combination of the background of students and the influence and expectations of family and peers, but they also include schoolwide and classroom practices. For teachers to deal with low levels of student performance, they must begin to reflect on the elements that contribute to student engagement. Teachers can have direct control and make changes instantaneously in some areas. For other changes to occur, it will take time for both students and the teacher to develop new skills. Improvements may depend on planning and seeking out new solutions or making changes at the schoolwide level. Regardless of the time it takes to make significant changes to improve student engagement practices, educators should become familiar with the two basic elements that together provide the roadmap for teachers to focus on and facilitate student engagement. These elements are preconditions and pedagogy. 
  • Preconditions are the factors that must be in place even before classroom instruction begins. The factors are: Learning Relationships: Most students will not do their best in classes when they feel that teachers do not have an interest in them or care about their future. Students can sense whether the teacher cares or is simply “going through the motions.” All of the characteristics that we know about building relationships are essential to contributing to highly engaged classroom instruction. Creating the Ideal Classroom Environment: Good instruction can take place in a variety of settings. However, there is no question that well designed and well-maintained classroom facilities have a positive impact on student engagement. Classrooms should be physically comfortable for students with respect to temperature, space, furniture, and structural organization.   Rewards and Incentives: There is much discussion within education communities and by researchers and practitioners about the role that rewards play in stimulating student work. Rewards and incentives do have their place, but they must be incorporated carefully. A key to effective use of rewards is whether it is offered in advance of a behavior. A bad use of the reward system is when a teacher says to students, “If you are quiet for the next 30 minutes, you will get a piece of candy.” In this scenario, the student associates the behavior with the reward. It is a better practice to give the reward spontaneously after the behavior.   Guiding Principles: These are positive character attributes and appropriate behaviors for achieving in school. In recent years, however, many schools have moved away from programs that deal with behavioral issues and character education to avoid divisive community debates about whether schools should be teaching anything beyond the old 3 Rs. The development of a child’s character and appropriate behavior is first and foremost the responsibility of the family, but schools can play a strong supporting role. Schools with the highest levels of student achievement do not sidestep the issue of character education. They embrace it. These schools acknowledge that their success is due in large measure to their attention to guiding principles, through which they have been able to create the supportive learning environment that is essential for students to achieve high standards.   Pedagogy, how a teacher approaches instruction is an important area of inquiry, particularly how one chooses to interact and sets up routine in the classroom. The following are a few strategies to be aware of: Habits: These are the routines and procedures that teachers create in the classroom. Fundamental Skills: These are the basic proficiencies that all students need to be able to participate in class and complete their work. Student need basic reading skills, for example, to be able to understand directions and materials used in any subject area.   Relevance: The following key aspects of pedagogy help teachers create an environment in which rigorous and relevant learning can take place. Designing for rigorous and relevant learning. One of the barriers to high levels of student engagement is the lack of rigorous and relevant instruction. While it is essential that students acquire fundamental skills before they proceed to more complex work, teachers should not keep students hostage by requiring that they complete all the isolated basics before they have the opportunity to engage in challenging and applied learning experiences. Relevance is just as critical as rigor. Personalized Learning: Each student brings a unique set of characteristics to the classroom: different background knowledge, a unique learning style, a variety of interests, and varied parental support and expectations. To anticipate that each student will learn in the same way, at the same speed, and using the same material is an unrealistic expectation. Some teachers fall into the false assumption that the student is responsible when he or she fails to demonstrate adequate achievement. But often it is the lack of personalizing learning that is the source of failure. Active Learning Strategies: While it may sometimes be efficient to have students listen to a short lecture, view video material, or read a textbook, doing these types of isolating, sedentary activities on regular basis becomes mind-numbing rather than mind-engaging. There are strategies that naturally contribute to a much higher level of student engagement. For example, cooperative learning strategies in which students are organized into structured discussion groups and play specific roles in analyzing problems and seeking solutions are more engaging than listening to a lecture. Focus on Reading: It may seem as a misplacement to talk about literacy as a key ingredient in student engagement. However, many successful schools emphasize the importance of focusing on literacy instruction for continuous learning in all subjects. Having a literacy focus means that all teachers, regardless of subject area, know the reading levels of the materials that they are using, whether that material is incorporated in textbooks, classroom directions, Internet-based resources, or other reading sources.
  • Note: Ask the audience what UDL principles do you see? Source: Edutopia: http://www.edutopia.org/stw-school-turnaround-student-engagement-video  
  • UDL and RtI are particularly being cited by states in requests for waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act in the section about how they will implement the standards. Source: Shah, N. (n.d.). Education Week: Standards Open the Door for Best Practices From Special Ed.. Education Week American Education News Site of Record. Retrieved August 2, 2012, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/04/25/29cs-speced.h31.html?qs=Universal+design+for+learning
  • Source: Ginsburg, A., Salzman, H., & Stigler, J. (2012). Quality Counts 2012. The Global Challenge. Education in a Competitive World. Education Week, 31(16), 6-10.
  • Source: Ginsburg, A., Salzman, H., & Stigler, J. (2012). Quality Counts 2012. The Global Challenge. Education in a Competitive World. Education Week, 31(16), 6-10.

UDL Presentation at OCALI 2012 UDL Presentation at OCALI 2012 Presentation Transcript

  • Educating Students Who Need Intensive Supports in a UDL Environment
  • Educating “Our” Students
  • Presentation ContentHistorical ContextTodays ContextDefinitionsSupportsCurriculum ConceptsUDL Principles & ExamplesAcknowledgement
  • Special Education is NOT a Place….Network of Services &SupportsIEP Team Determines
  • Our Kids in Todays ClassroomToday 57% of students withdisabilities spend more than80% of their day in thegeneral educationclassroom.....Improving general educationteacher skills is a "lynchpin"to improving outcomes forstudents with disabilities....
  • Low-incidence disabilities include—  blindness  low vision  deafness  hard-of-hearing  deaf-blindness  severe intellectual disabilities  severe physical impairments  multiple disability  autistic spectrum disorder
  • High-incidence disabilities include—   communication disorders specific learning disabilities mild/moderate intellectual disabilities emotional or behavioral disorders
  • Intensive Supports:Term used to describe services to students withneeds that cannot be met by the general educationprogram alone and may need additional supports &servicesDefinition of Intensive Supports from RTI:The most intense (increased time, narrowed focus,reduced group size) instruction & interventionbased upon individual student need
  • Students may need intensive supportsbecause…they have a significant disabilitythey are English Language Learnersthey have a large academic/skill gapthey have significant mental health needssensory needshealth care needs
  • General Curriculum for AllIntended outcomes of the general curriculum forstudents with low-incidence disabilities DO NOTdiffer from those expected for all studentsAll Teachers ask themselves "What do MY studentsneed to know and be able to Do?"Planning should focus on an individuals capacitiesand assets
  • Curriculum Design "Accessible" Planning for students with disabilities begins with curriculum
  • Universal Design for Learning “Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a framework for designing curricula that enable all individuals to gain knowledge, skills, and enthusiasm for learning. UDL provides rich supports for learning and reduces barriers to the curriculum while maintaining high achievement standards for all students."
  • UDL: For All Studentshttp://www.udlcenter.org/resource_library/videos/udlcenter/guidelines#video0
  • UDL “What’s In It for Me?UDL can…help reduce time required for making modifications &accommodationsprovide flexible instructional material, techniques & strategies thathelp differentiate instruction to meet varied needsincrease student engagement in the classroomaddress the diversity of learners at the point of curriculumdevelopment (rather than retrofitting) to help educators developcurricula that truly “leaves no child behind”
  • Differentiated Instruction (DI)“DI is to recognize students varying background knowledge, readiness, language, preferences in learning and react responsively. The intent of DI is to maximize each students growth and individual success by meeting each student where he/she is and assist in the learning process.”
  • Universal Design for Learning Differentiated Instruction “To DI is to recognize students’“UDL calls for the design of varying backgrounds, knowledge,curricula for the needs of all readiness, language preferences in learning and interests, and to reactstudents in mind, so that responsively. The intent of DI is tomethods, materials, and maximize each student’s growthassessment are useable by all.” and individual success by meeting each student, where he or she is in the learning process.”UDL begins with curriculum DI begins with the student Source: UDL Guidelines Version 2.0 by CAST Source: Hall, T., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2003)
  • UDL is the foundation...But, additional layers of support are needed to meet all learners, especially those with intensive needs.
  • Assistive Technology“…any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whetheracquired commercially off the shelf, modified, orcustomized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improvefunctional capabilities of a child with disabilities”
  • Differences between UDL and AT Source: Adapted from “A Working Understanding of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Assistive Technology: Similarities and Differences” by Dr. James Basham
  • Basic Differences of UDL & AT UDL provides access and betterment for individuals of all abilities and disabilities proactively makes environmental-based decisions related to the learning environment focused on curriculum, instruction, and assessment deals with issues of access and betterment related to the environment’s design (targets the larger system) AT provides access and betterment for individuals with disabilities (by definition) reactively providing technology to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities generally considering issues of access and betterment as an individual’s issue (targets individual need) Source: Rose, Hasselbring, Stahl, & Zabala, 2005
  • Basic Similarities of UDL & AT Both utilize problem-solving process Both utilize various forms of modern technology Related to individuals with disabilities, both UDL and AT are focused on o Providing access o Increasing participation o Improving outcomes Source: Rose, Hasselbring, Stahl, & Zabala, 2005
  • Some Students will still need AT“If I need it (whatever the tool is) to complete a task then it isAT for me and should be specified in my IEP”Examples:students who are blind with braille supportspage turner for student with high-level SCI
  • What is Accessible Instructional Material (AIM)? The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) 2004 Final Regulations, Sec 300.172 Accessible Instructional Materials requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to ensure that children with “print disabilities” who need instructional materials in specialized formats (Braille, Large Print, Audio or Digital text) receive them in a “timely manner.”
  • An increase in the availability,of new flexible learningmaterials for all students
  • The AIM Website athttp://aim.cast.org is a greatresource for connecting UDLwith AIM
  • The WhyTo provide students who areunable to obtain informationthrough the use of traditionalprint materials with accessiblematerials appropriate to theirindividual needs.
  • The WhyTo enable students with printdisabilities to gain theinformation they need tocomplete tasks, master IEPgoals, and reach curricularstandards.
  • AIM Conclusion• What are they? Braille, Audio, E-text, Large print.• Why should I care? Creativity occurs at the margins not the middle.• What does that mean? It means solutions & new tools created for the few end up benefiting all. Joy Zabala & Skip Stahl CAST
  • The Link Between RTI & UDL Poor Achievement ≠ Disability Improve Curriculum Educational May NOT Outcomes Be Good 4 All Assessment Informs Instruction
  • UDL Supports InstructionUDL can support the specialized instruction & supports forstudents with significant disabilities as specified in their IEPUDL does reduce the need for specialized instruction andsupportsUDL does not replace AT supports for students withsignificant disabilities as specified in their IEPUDL does pave the way for LRE
  • UDL and LRE...When universally designed general instruction includes toolsand materials that are included in students IEPs as assistivetechnology it opens the opportunity for LRE access forstudents with significant needs.UDL has the potential to reduce the need foraccommodations and modifications for students with IEPs,English language barriers and 504 plans.
  • Supports for Diverse Learners + Assistive Technology AT + + + + Specialized Instruction SI + + + Assessment & Differentiated Instruction RTI + + Universal Design for Learning UDL Begins beforestudents walks through the school doors
  • The Principles: Setting the Stage
  • The Principles of UDL Multiple Means of.. Representing Content Action and Expression of Knowledge Engagement in Curriculum and Activitieshttp://www.udlcenter.org/sites/udlcenter.org/files/updateguidelines2_0.pdf
  • Multiple Means of Representation “There is not one means of representation that will be optimal for all learners; providing options forrepresentation is essential.” - CAST
  • Multiple Means of RepresentationExpressed through community-based instruction by: Concrete Age Appropriate Real LifeTeaching Materials This provides flexibility to accommodate all students with very diverse needs.
  • Multiple Means of RepresentationPriming, or pre-practice, has been documented as an effectiveclassroom intervention for students with significant cognitivedisabilities  It has been shown effective in reducing disruptive behavior in students and increasing on-task behaviorActivating background knowledge
  • Multiple Means of Action & ExpressionStudent Perspectives: Why Choices in Communication Methods?
  • Multiple Means of EngagementEngagement facilitatesthe inclusive educationof students with severedisabilities, such as:Allowing students tochoose.... assignment order subject orderdecreases undesirable behavior
  • Multiple Means of Engagement Reschly and Christenson’s study examined the engagement of students with learning disabilities and emotional disturbance and the relation of this engagement to school completion.Student engagement variables were significant predictorsof school dropout and completion for students with LD orEBD and students without disabilities.
  • Strengthen Student EngagementThe two basic elements that together provide the roadmapfor teachers to focus on and facilitate student engagement: Preconditions are the factors that must be in place even before classroom instruction begins Pedagogy are positive character attributes and appropriate behaviors for achieving in school and becoming good citizens as adults
  • Strengthening Student EngagementPre-ConditionsLearning relationshipsCreating the ideal classroom environmentRewards and incentivesGuiding principlesHabitsFundamental skills Pedagogy Designing for rigorous and relevant learning Personalized learning Active learning strategies Focus on reading
  • Strengthening Student EngagementTake responsibility for student engagement practices  It is primarily the teacher’s responsibility to engage the students, as opposed to the teacher expecting students to come to class naturally and automatically engaged. Engagement
  • Which UDL Principles do you See?http://www.edutopia.org/stw-school-turnaround-student-engagement-video
  • Common Core and State Standards  High Quality Instruction  Least Restrictive Environment  Response to Intervention  Universal Design for Learning  Differentiated InstructionShah, N. (n.d.). Education Week: Standards Open the Door for Best Practices From Special Ed.. Education Week American Education News Site of Record.Retrieved August 2, 2012, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2012/04/25/29cs-speced.h31.html?qs=Universal+design+for+learning
  • U.S. Challenge Build core skills in a way that takes into effect the diversity around all students, especially students with learning difficulties Curriculum which goes deep and allows for students to master concepts
  • U.S. Challenge We must continue to look at other countries doing better and reflect on the why. Continue to do everything possible to narrow the achievement gap of our students with disabilities
  • AcknowledgmentsWe would like to thank the following agencies and people who helped support and develop thisresource.Agency Support Advisory TeamCAST James Basham, Ph.D.IDEA Partnership Maya Israel, Ph.D.Ohio Department of Education Alisa Lowrey, Ph.D.Ohio State Support Teams Patti Ralabate, Ed. D.OCALI Joy Zabala, Ed.DCore Development TeamShawna Benson - Deb Brewer - Heather Bridgman - Deb Dargham - Jeff McCormickBill Nellis - Lorene Phaler - Patti Porto - Jan Roger - Ron Rogers - Greg Wilson