With UDL initiatives expanding in our small corner of British Columbia, Canada, we wanted to check in with learners–the “end user” in design terms. Specific classroom encounters are where UDL is put to the test and at the same time, are the conditions under which UDL theory is refined and advanced (Laist et al., 2022). As instructors in post-secondary adopted the practices of offering multiple pathways, implementing flexible attendance and grading practices, supporting learner voices, and meeting the call for inclusive practice with choice in modality and method, we started to wonder: How were students feeling in these classrooms? What was their experience? Did they find it helpful? Confusing? Did they experience an increase in cognitive load? A decrease? Did they feel supported or skeptical?

We put out the call for participation and got a great deal of feedback from students across the post-secondary sector. We share extracts of the experiences of 50 students in postsecondary institutions across North America.

What do students have to tell us about UDL pedagogy?

In the following pages we will explore this question by examining accessible teaching, design, disability representation, authenticity, and choice as it is described by students. Many students had not even heard the term UDL and therefore did not comment directly on UDL as a pedagogical framework or practice. Many shared their experiences of what supported their learning which, without knowing it, sometimes reflected UDL design decisions. We tried to map these experiences into the UDL design framework to help instructors intentionally implement the foundations of UDL in their courses.

What is Universal Design for Learning?

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a curriculum design framework.

Rather than a heuristic, process map, or series of checkboxes, UDL can be thought of as a lens that you can use to design curriculum for inclusivity and flexibility through multiple pathways to reach learning goals.

UDL grew out of the concept of Universal Design (UD) which was applied to physical spaces (Goldsmith, 1963, 2000) to make them spacious, accessible, navigable, and flexible in their use. Think of an older-style public bathroom stall with only a toilet, designed for a single ambulatory user, who only had the option of putting their belongings on the floor next to the toilet (yuck). Compare that design to a modern public bathroom that is more spacious, with hooks and shelves in the stalls, more capacious toilet paper holder, the option of hand dryers or paper towels, and extra-large accessible stalls. Some modern bathrooms even have parenting spaces and room for strollers. The push to make public built environments like bathrooms, libraries, government buildings, and schools has been impressive and designed from the ground up. You can think of UDL as an extension of the bathroom example. What are the flexible hooks and shelves of our classrooms? How can we design pedagogy so that it can be used by the widest range of people?

By designing for choice and flexibility in activities, UDL has the goal of creating expert learners. Expert learners know their strengths and weaknesses and they know which learning strategies work for them. They know how they learn best, and they know when to ask for help. Expert learners are able to identify why they have been successful, why they might be struggling, and how to make changes. Instructors who design activities and curriculum according to UDL principles build in methods not only to convey content, but in developing students who have the ability to reflect on their learning preferences and goals, and to create learning communities in which all learners feel they belong and belong meaningfully.

UDL uses components of design thinking: using empathy to understand learner needs and goals, identifying gaps, working iteratively, and using feedback to steadily improve response. Maintaining a process-orientation and attitude of steady improvement is a key aspect of UDL. The UDL matrix is considerable, organized vertically by cognitive networks and horizontally by levels of knowledge building. When we started speaking to students, we anticipated that there would be comments that would fit in across the entire matrix: students might go into depth about engagement, for example, or would speak about the ways that UDL practices lead to transformative learning.

Instead, the bulk of the comments showed access problems. Students are often stuck from even entering a deeper layer of learning and engagement because of a lack of basic access. We tried to build a bridge by acknowledging basic access issues and tying them to the wider frame of good design Our hope is to not only eliminate barriers but open possibilities for deep engagement and meaningful learning.

• To learn more about the theoretical foundations of UDL see the CAST (2018c) guidelines
• To learn more about UDL and the basics of its implementation, see: A Comprehensive Guide to Applying Universal Design for Learning (Takacs et al., 2022).

Recognizing UDL In the Classroom

Since the UDL framework is large and complex, it is unlikely that instructors would use the framework in its entirety. Instructors are more likely to work piecemeal, creating a UDL-inspired assignment or exams, working flexibly on deadlines, topic choice, and modality. From student feedback, precious few referred to UDL, but they did recognize proactive design choices, a disposition towards accessibility, openness and rich learning experiences. Sometimes instructors do not even know that they are implementing UDL principles; they try out ideas and see what seems to work to improve grades, support engagement, and expand the connections students make in the programs. Some instructors implement UDL to make grading more interesting for themselves!

It is often said that good design is invisible. Bad design tends to be visible, but the question is to who and how many. The conversations we had with students are an excellent illustration of this principle, as most students we interviewed were the few for whom seemingly good design left gaps and barriers.

We examined and organized the student interview data according to five principles that characterize the curriculum design principles of UDL:

1. Choice and preferences
2. Multi-modality
3. Flexibility
4. Mapping
5. Authentic activities
6. Assessments

The students we interviewed also identified explicit discussions on disability as being important from a disability justice standpoint. Jackson and Cedillo (2020) argue that “the only way accessibility work is oriented … toward disability justice is by centering and foregrounding work by disabled disability activists” (p. 111). Similarly, in this Pressbook we see the students as knowledge holders, whose experiences give them a perspective that might be hidden from those who design curriculum and teach courses in postsecondary institutions.

This resource is dedicated to telling stories about UDL implementation so that we can know from the students themselves, whether it helps and how.