International trends in the education of students with special educational needs
Download 3.41 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE
- 23.1 Universal Design
- 23.2 Universal Design for Learning
22.7 SummaryParents play important, if not critical, roles in educating and supporting their children’s education. Parents have been considered in almost every chapter of the current review. Many countries have legislation and/or policies on parent involvement in the education of SWSEN, at a minimum their participation in major decisions affecting their children, such as their IEPs and decisions regarding placements. Five different levels of parent involvement have been identified: (a) being informed, (b) taking part in activities, (c) participating in dialogue and exchange of views, (d) taking part in decision-making, and (e) having responsibility to act. Parents of SWSEN often require support and guidance in managing their children’s challenging behaviour. There is clear evidence that when this is provided both children and parents can benefit. There is quite an extensive international literature on the efficacy of parental involvement in their children’s education Three parent training programmes stand out as having good outcomes: (a) behavioural parent training, (b) parent-child interaction therapy, and (c) Triple P-Positive Parenting Programme. CHAPTER TWENTY-THREEUNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNINGIn recent years, the importance of universal design (UD), which had its origins in architecture and engineering, has been increasingly emphasised in education, where it is referred to as universal design for learning (UDL) .1 It has been described as ‘a blueprint or framework for educators in designing flexible curriculum and instruction’ (Brownell et al., 2012, p.81). In a nutshell, UDL involves planning and delivering programmes with the needs of all students in mind. It applies to all facets of education: from curriculum, assessment and pedagogy to classroom and school design. The term Universal Design for Learning, as embedded in US law, is taken to mean a scientifically valid framework for guiding educational practice that provides flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in the ways students are engaged; and reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains high achievement expectations for all students, including students with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient( Higher Education Opportunity Act, 2008). In the US, the National Association of State Directors of Special Education describe UDL as being ‘a growing practice across the nation, one that is increasingly referenced in education policy briefs, research literature, teacher professional development, and books and articles for educators. Numerous states and universities have some type of UDL initiative underway.’ Similarly, in their Australian review, Shaddock et al. (2009) gave considerable prominence to UDL, describing it as a ‘leading practice [that] should pervade policy, planning and delivery’ (p.15). The theme of this chapter is that educational services and policies should be universally designed and inclusive of the needs of SWSEN, along with those of all other students. In other words, regular education should be accessible to all students in terms of pedagogy, curriculum and resourcing, through the design of differentiated learning experiences that minimise the need for subsequent modifications for particular circumstances or individuals. In this chapter, two topics will be discussed: (a) universal design, and (b) universal design for learning.
Equitable use: The design is useful and marketable to any group of users. For example, a website that is designed so that it is accessible to everyone, including students who are blind and using text-to-speech software, employs this principle. Flexibility in use: The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities. An example is a museum that allows a visitor to choose to read or listen to the description of the contents of a display case. Simple and intuitive use: Use of the design is easy to understand regardless of the user’s experience, knowledge, or language skills. Science laboratory equipment with control buttons that are clear and intuitive is a good example of an application of this principle. Perceptible information: The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user’s sensory abilities. An example of this principle being employed is when multimedia projected in a noisy academic conference exhibit includes captioning. Tolerance for error: The design minimises hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintentional actions. An example of a product applying this principle is educational software that provides guidance when the student makes an inappropriate selection. Low physical effort: The design can be used efficiently and comfortably with a minimum of fatigue. Doors that are easy to open by people with a wide variety of physical characteristics demonstrate the application of this principle. Size and space for approach and use: Appropriate size and space is provided for approach and use, regardless of the user’s body size, posture or mobility. A science laboratory work area designed for use by students with a wide variety of physical characteristics and abilities is an example of employing this principle. (Centre for Universal Design, 2010; Ginnerup, 2009) Although UD standards address the needs of people with disabilities, its originators emphasised that it is a comprehensive concept designed to benefit all users. Thus, it involves developing products (appliances, settings, systems, and processes), which can be used by a wide variety of persons with different levels of abilities in a wide variety of settings, conditions, and circumstances. It goes beyond the issue of mere accessibility of buildings for people with disabilities and should become an integral part of policies and planning in all aspects of society (Ginnerup, 2009). Not to take account of these principles risks creating what Imrie & Kumar (1998) graphically referred to as ‘apartheid by design’. 23.2 Universal Design for LearningIn the US, one of the key recommendations of the President’s Commission (2002) was to incorporate universal design in accountability tools: ‘all measures used to assess accountability and educational progress [should] be developed according to principles of universal design so that modifications and accommodations are built into the test that will not invalidate the results’ (p.27). But, as we shall see, UDL goes well beyond assessment. It recommends ways to provide cognitive, as well as physical, access to the curriculum, assessment and pedagogy. In education, it is usually refers to ‘the creation of differentiated learning experiences that minimise the need for modifications for particular circumstances or individuals’ (Villa et al., 2005, p.35). Thus, rather than adapting things for individuals at a later time, UDL environments are created from the outset to be accessible to everyone. In other words, ‘pre-fitting’ not ‘retro-fitting’ is the aim. The Center for Applied Special Technology (2010) provides a useful definition of UDL as being: the design of instructional materials and activities that allows the learning goals to be achievable by individuals with wide differences in their abilities to see, hear, speak, move, read, write, understand English, attend, organize, engage, and remember. It is achieved by means of flexible curricular materials and activities that provide alternatives for students with disparities in abilities and background as well as those with no visible disabilities. [It] applies not only to the content, but also to goals, methods, and manner of assessment. The Center goes on to point out that in UDL, (a) alternatives should be built into instruction and should not have to be added on later; (b) it is intended to be inclusive, not solely for those who have disabilities; and (c) it should comprise more than accommodations for physical, sensory, or cognitive disabilities, but should include students with differing abilities, cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and approaches to learning. According to the Center on Universal Design for Learning, three overarching primary principles guide UDL: Principle I: Provide Multiple Means of Representation (the ‘what’ of learning). Students differ in the ways that they perceive and comprehend information that is presented to them. For example, those with sensory disabilities (e.g., blindness or deafness); learning disabilities (e.g., dyslexia); language or cultural differences, and so forth may all require different ways of approaching content. Others may simply grasp information better through visual or auditory means rather than printed text. In reality, there is no one means of representation that will be optimal for all students; providing options in representation is essential. Principle II: Provide Multiple Means of Action and Expression (the ‘how’ of learning). Students differ in the ways that they can navigate a learning environment and express what they know. For example, individuals with significant motor disabilities (e.g. cerebral palsy), those who struggle with strategic and organizational abilities (executive function disorders, ADHD), those who have language barriers, and so forth approach learning tasks very differently and will demonstrate their mastery very differently. Some may be able to express themselves well in writing text but not oral speech, and vice versa. In reality, there is no one means of expression that will be optimal for all students; providing options for expression is essential. Principle III: Provide Multiple Means of Engagement (the ‘why’ of learning). Students differ markedly in the ways in which they can be engaged or motivated to learn. Some students are highly engaged by spontaneity and novelty while other are disengaged, even frightened, by those aspects, preferring strict routine. In reality, there is no one means of engagement that will be optimal for all students; providing multiple options for engagement is essential. The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines further expand on these principles (see Table 23.1). I. Provide Multiple Means of Representation Provide options for perception Options that customize the display of information Options that provide alternatives for auditory information Options that provide alternatives for visual information Provide options for language and symbols Options that define vocabulary and symbols Options that clarify syntax and structure Options for decoding text or mathematical notation Options that promote cross-linguistic understanding Options that illustrate key concepts non-linguistically Provide options for comprehension Options that provide or activate background knowledge Options that highlight critical features, big ideas, and relationships Options that guide information processing Options that support memory and transfer II. Provide Multiple Means of Action and Expression Provide options for physical action Options in the mode of physical response Options in the means of navigation Options for accessing tools and assistive technologies Provide options for expressive skills and fluency Options in the media for communication Options in the tools for composition and problem solving Options in the scaffolds for practice and performance Provide options for executive functions Options that guide effective goal-setting Options that support planning and strategy development Options that facilitate managing information and resources Options that enhance capacity for monitoring progress III. Provide Multiple Means of Engagement Provide options for recruiting interest Options that increase individual choice and autonomy Options that enhance relevance, value, and authenticity Options that reduce threats and distractions Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence Options that heighten salience of goals and objectives Options that vary levels of challenge and support Options that foster collaboration and communication Options that increase mastery-oriented feedback Provide options for self-regulation Options that guide personal goal-setting and expectations Options that scaffold coping skills and strategies Options that develop self-assessment and reflection © 2009 by CAST. All rights reserved. CAST (2008). Universal design for learning guidelines version 1.0. Wakefield, MA: Author. Table 23.1 Universal Design for Learning Guidelines
Elsewhere, the present writer pointed out that as rehabilitation services expand, particularly in the area of assistive technology, there will be an increasing need for some degree of international standardisation (Mitchell, 1999). Directory: Documents -> about about -> Analysis of Law in the United Kingdom pertaining to Cross-Border Disaster Relief Prepared by: For the 30 June 2010 Foreword about -> Optus pre-paid mobile broadband service about -> Optus mobile broadband service about -> Optus Pre-Paid Mobile Service Service Description about -> About Ace Computers about -> About atlanta about -> Sir Francis Drake is a historic hotel near Moscone Convention Center, San Francisco about -> Optus ip phone Express Service Service Description about -> Autism Spectrum Disorders Download 3.41 Mb. Share with your friends:
|