Implementation of universal design for learning in inclusive education: A scoping review in countries
List of Authors
  • Hasrul Hosshan , Siti Intan Farahana Mhd Fauzy

Keyword
  • Universal Design for Learning, Inclusive Education, Asian

Abstract
  • Universal Design for Learning (UDL) derives from the Universal Design (UD) architecture, challenging traditional product adaptation by advocating for designs that consider every individual (King-Sears, 2009). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) extended UD to learning environments, resulting in the development of UDL with three core principles outlined by CAST in 2020. These enduring principles emphasize multiple ways of engagement, various means of representation, and multiple means of action and expression, aligning with the brain's learning networks (CAST, 2021). UDL goals encompass inclusivity, equity, flexibility, and accessibility. Methods include diverse means of representation, engagement, and action and expression, utilizing accessible texts, multimodal resources, and technology tools. Assessment in UDL involves formative assessment, varied formats, clear criteria, and consideration of learning styles. Implemented in Asian countries, UDL positively impacts education, particularly for special needs students. Shifting from instructor-centered to student-centered approaches enhances student involvement, satisfaction, and self-efficacy. UDL empowers teachers to diversify methods, adapting to student abilities and improving learning quality. The effect of UDL on inclusive education is substantial, increasing accessibility, individualized paths, engagement, breaking barriers, empowering diverse learners, and enhancing academic performance. UDL's multifaceted approach ensures effective use of materials and activities by students with diverse needs. In conclusion, UDL is a robust framework fostering inclusive and effective learning environments. Its principles, methods, and materials contribute to overall inclusive educational success. Limitations, including educator training gaps, pose barriers to rigorous implementation. Scoping review data unveils UDL's multidimensional implementation in various Asian educational contexts, providing crucial insights into its regional applications and implications.

Reference
  • 1. Al Hazmi, A. N., & Ahmad, A. C. (2018). Universal Design for Learning to Support Access to the General Education Curriculum for Students with Intellectual Disabilities. World Journal of Education, 8(2), 66-72. 2. Alquraini, T. A., & Rao, S. M. (2020). Assessing teachers’ knowledge, readiness, and needs to implement Universal Design for Learning in classrooms in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(1), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1452298 3. Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Sociological Research Methodology, 8, 19-32. 4. CAST (2018). UDL and Assessment. Retrieved from http://udloncampus.cast.org/page/assessment_udl 5. CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org 6. CAST (2021). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines. Retrieved from version 2.2. Retrieved from https://www.cast.org/impact/universal-design-for-learning-udl 7. Capp, M. J. (2017). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A meta-analysis of literature between 2013 and 2016. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(8), 791–807. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1325074 8. Chita-Tegmark, M., Gravel, J. W., Maria De Lourdes, B. S., Domings, Y., & Rose, D. H. (2012). Using the universal design for learning framework to support culturally diverse learners. Journal of Education, 192(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574121920010 9. Cook, S. C., & Rao, K. (2018). Systematically Applying UDL to Effective Practices for Students With Learning Disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 41(3), 179-191. 10. Davis K., Drey N., Gould. (2009). What are coping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46, 1386-1400. 11. Dewi KC, Ciptayani PI, Surjono HD, et al. (2018). Critical success factor for implementing vocational blended learning. J Phys Conf Ser. IOP 2018;953(1):012086. 10.1088/1742- 6596/953/1/012086 12. Hartmann, E. (2015). Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Learners with Severe Support Needs. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 11(1), 54-67. 13. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Moher D, Wager E, Middleton P, Altman DG, et al. (2008). CONSORT for Reporting Randomized Controlled Trials in Journal and Conference Abstracts: Explanation and Elaboration. PLoS Med 5(1): e20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050020 14. Katz, J. (2015). Implementing the Three Block Model of Universal Design for Learning: Effects on teachers' self-efficacy, stress, and job satisfaction in inclusive classrooms K-12. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(1), 1-20. doi:DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2014.881569 15. King-Sears, M. (2009). Universal design for learning: Technology and pedagogy. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(4), 199–201. https://doi.org/10.2307/27740372 16. Leonardo, M. D. F., & Cha, J. (2021). Filipino Science Teachers’ Evaluation on Webinars’ Alignments to Universal Design for Learning And Their Relation To Self-Efficacy Amidst The Challenges Of The Covid-19 Pandemic. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 7(2), 421-451. 17. Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory & Practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing. 18. Meyer, A., Rose, D.H., & Gordon, D. (2014) Universal design for learning: Theory and practice, Wakefield MA: CAST 19. Ministry of Education. (2018). Universal Design for Learning (UDL) guide. Retrieved from http:// inclusive.tki.org.nz/assets/inclusive-education/MOE-UDL-guide-summary.pdf 20. Morina, A., & Orozco, I. (2021). Spanish faculty members speak out: Barriers and aids for students with disabilities at university. Disability & Society, 36(2), 159-178. doi:10.1080/09687599.2020.1723495 21. Peters, Micah, Godfrey, Christina, McInerney, Patricia, Soares, Cassia, Khalil, Hanan, and Parker, Deborah (2015). The Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2015: Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Adelaide, SA Australia: The Joanna Briggs Institute. 22. Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(4), 371-385. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1123 23. Rao, K. (2015). Universal design for learning and multimedia technology: Supporting culturally and linguistically diverse students. Journal of Educational Multimedia & Hypermedia,24(2),121–137. 24. Singapore Ministry of Education. (2019). Implementation of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in Singapore Special Education Schools. UDL-IRN Summit. Singapore. 25. Waitoller, F. R., & Thorius, K. A. K. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-86.3