735530

research-article2017
ALXXXX10.1177/1045159517735530Adult LearningAdult Learning

ADULT LEARNING February 2018

Refereed Articles

Universal Design for Learning

Guidelines for Accessible Online Instruction

Carol Rogers-Shaw, MA, MS1, Davin J. Carr-Chellman, PhD2, and Jinhee Choi, MS, BFA1

Abstract: Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a technologies, students with disabilities, language
framework for the teaching–learning transaction that barriers, and low socioeconomic status are often less
conceptualizes knowledge through learner-centered successful in school than students from the dominant
foci emphasizing accessibility, collaboration, culture (Aronson, 2008; Gregg, 2007; Kanno &
and community. Given the importance of access Kangas, 2014), in part because one-size-fits-all
to achieving social justice, UDL is a promising education does not work. Merely applying technology
approach to meeting all tools is not enough; educators in
learners’ needs more effectively. all sectors—from higher

“
In this article, the history By following education to community-based
and philosophy of UDL are education, from formal settings to
discussed and elaborated,
the well- nonformal settings—need to
followed by an explanation of established, but change their ways of thinking. By
how the principles of UDL were seldom utilized, following the well-established,
used to improve an existing but seldom utilized, principles of
online course offering for adult
principles of UDL, UDL, adult educators are able to
learners. adult educators are reimagine the ways learning
Keywords: UDL, accessibility, able to reimagine the occurs and is assessed in the
online learning, epistemology, ways learning occurs online simple
classroom. More than
indicators of best practices
adult learners
and is assessed in the or lists of possible

Introduction online classroom.” accommodations, UDL offers an

epistemological shift that
The use of Universal Design facilitates design for all learners
for Learning (UDL) is effective in enhancing a within a holistic framework. The application of this
learner’s ability to acquire, generate, and use new epistemological shift helps address significant
knowledge. Its coincidence with technological practical and justice concerns.
developments and advances has afforded the David Rose, Anne Meyer, and colleagues at the
opportunity for greater inclusivity. Despite the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) are
possibilities presented by online education and new credited with originating the term UDL. It applies

DOI:10.1177/1045159517735530. From 1Pennsylvania State University, University Park and 2University of Idaho, Moscow. Address correspondence
to: Davin J. Carr-Chellman, PhD, University of Idaho, 402 Education Building, Moscow, ID 83843, USA; email: dcarrchellman@uidaho.edu.
For reprints and permissions queries, please visit SAGE’s Web site at http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav.
Copyright © 2017 The Author(s)

20
Vol. 29  No. 1 ADULT LEARNING

Ronald Mace’s universal designs in architecture to demonstrate their learning via multiple means”
teaching and learning. UDL has been used with (Hollingshead, 2017, pp. 1-2).
“students with atypical backgrounds in the dominant Non-UDL course designs often view diverse needs
language, cognitive strategies, culture, or history of the from a deficit perspective; to level the playing field,
average classroom who, therefore, face barriers in certain compensatory accommodations must be made
accessing information when presented in a manner to meet socially constructed norms or impose a
that assumes a common background among all standardized methodology. Accommodations offered to
students” (Rose, Harbour, Johnston, Daley, & students are frequently ineffective because they focus
Abarbanell, 2006, p. 3). A useful metaphor for UDL, on students’ disabilities rather than on an
offered by Edyburn (2010), is the fairy tale of understanding of students’ needs in the overall context
Goldilocks; educators should offer students the chance of the course (Cawthon & Cole, 2010; Kurth & Mellard,
to “try multiple options to determine which option is 2006). UDL, however, accommodates diversity in
‘just right’ for ensuring their performance is acceptable different ways as it reorients how knowledge is
to meet high standards” (p. 39). With UDL, there is a defined, obtained, and expressed by embracing
focus on learning relevance, value, and authenticity in difference (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014). Every
terms of learners’ needs and desires through the learner has limitations (Shakespeare & Watson, 2002)
inclusion of real-life tasks and an understanding of the depending on how the content is structured and
importance of flexibility. By shifting to a learner- shared. UDL effectively offers multiple means of
centered education and emphasizing collaboration and representation that give learners various ways of
community, students become motivated to meet high acquiring information and knowledge; multiple means
expectations (CAST, 2015). Returning to the Goldilocks of engagement that tap into learners’ interests,
metaphor, designing courses with the intention of challenging and motivating them; and multiple means
helping each student find the approach to acquiring, of expression that provide learners with alternatives for
generating, and using new knowledge that is just right demonstrating what they know (CAST, 2015). These
for him or her represents a different set of priorities multiple means of representation, engagement, and
than is traditionally the case. It is a different way of expression are where the rubber meets the road for the
framing the teaching–learning transaction. epistemological shift and constitute the mechanisms
The need for this kind of epistemological and used to meet all learners’ needs more effectively. In this
priority shift is increasingly evident. Distance and vein, Hollingshead (2017) argues,
postsecondary education instructors face increasingly
diverse students with disabilities, language and cultural Although, the UDL framework was initially
barriers, and significant skill deficiencies (Bates, 2005). conceptualized with students with disabilities in
In spite of this demographic diversity, the type of mind, it quickly shifted the focus from the
education delivered has not significantly changed student’s disability to the “disabled curriculum”
(Baggaley, 2008; Lee, 2017). Individual accommodations (Rappolt-Schlichtmann, Daley, & Rose, 2012). In
are often applied, but the structure and culture of other words, the students were not the “problem”
higher education, and the nature of what constitutes but rather the instruction (i.e., goals, methods,
knowledge, its acquisition, and its expression in materials, and assessment strategies) was too
practice, have not responded. Traditional behavioristic constricted and not flexible enough to
methods such as multiple choice assessments or accommodate the diversity of students in the
text-based discussions do not effectively capitalize on current school system (Meyer & Rose, 2000;
students’ differences and demands. Moving beyond Rappolt-Schlichtmann et al., 2012; Rose & Gravel,
more behavioristic approaches, “[f]lexible instruction 2010; Rose & Meyer, 2000; Rose, Meyer, &
designed within UDL framework ensures that learners Hitchcock, 2005). (p. 4)
have multiple means to engage in learning, are given
the information and content instruction through Essential to understanding and incorporating UDL
multiple modalities, and have an opportunity to principles is acknowledging that, although systematic

21
ADULT LEARNING February 2018

design and planning is a key to effective online passed in the 1970s, and the 1990 Individuals With
instruction, one strategy does not necessarily meet the Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; U.S. Department of
needs of every student. UDL encourages design that Justice, 2016). The rights of students with disabilities
differentiates and individualizes instruction more than to be included in mainstream classes was based on
traditional design frameworks (Hall, Vue, Strangman, & IDEA’s demand for placing students in the “least
Meyer, 2004). Its goal is to provide options for every restrictive environment” (National Center for Universal
learner, just like Goldilocks. Design for Learning at Center for Applied Special
Technology [NCUDL at CAST], 2012). Although the
The History and Ethos of UDL focus of IDEA is on students aged 3 to 21 years and
Ronald Mace’s work at The Center for Universal applies mainly to K-12 educational settings, the
Design (CUD) at North Carolina State University in the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 more broadly
1980s and 1990s used architecture as a framework for affects individuals with disabilities throughout their
understanding multiple means of providing options for life span, guaranteeing them access to lifelong
everyone. As an architect, product designer, and learning programs on an equal basis with other
educator, Mace used the term universal design “to citizens (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016).
describe the concept of designing all products and the In addition to the policy sphere, several social forces
built environment to be aesthetic and usable to the have driven the application of CUD’s design features to
greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of their the educational environment, including,
age, ability, or status in life” (North Carolina State
University [NCSU], CUD, 2008). Story, Mueller, and (1) the pressures of the expanding diversity of
Mace (1998) recognized the key feature of universal today’s student population, (2) the social and
design as its shift away from accommodating pedagogical challenges of integrating digital
disabilities and creating barrier-free buildings to technology into higher education, and (3) political
building structures whose design is beneficial for all pressures for greater accessibility and the regional
individuals whether disabled or not. The traditional accrediting agencies’ evolving mandates for
mind-set is turned on its head. They pointed out that outcome assessment. (Zeff, 2007, p. 28)
traditional accommodations tended to be unattractive,
segregated persons with disabilities, and were more By eliminating obstacles to learning, accommodating
expensive. Building and product features using individual needs, and challenging learners, UDL offers
universal design benefit disabled and nondisabled more flexibility in how students access, engage with,
alike, and they are inclusive and often less costly. There and respond to information; it also provides alternative
are seven principles of universal design encompassing ways for students to demonstrate the skills they have
equitable use, flexibility in use, simple and intuitive acquired (NCUDL at CAST, 2012). True to Ronald
use, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low Mace’s original concept, UDL benefits all students, not
physical effort, and size and space for approach and only those with disabilities, with a lack of language
use (NCSU, CUD, 2008). UDL incorporates these ideas fluency, or with weak basic skills.
in educational settings by condensing them into the
UDL and Adult Learners Online
three guiding principles mentioned above: multiple
means of representation, multiple means of action and Epistemology, Practice, and Justice
expression, and multiple means of engagement (CAST, The policy environment and the social forces
2015). From these broad guiding principles, an array of mentioned above create an emergent and dynamic
approaches and practices to accessible learning design context for the teaching–learning transaction.
is generated. Responding to this dynamic situation, UDL asks
The motivation for greater inclusivity and educators to reframe their understandings of
accessibility in education came, in part, from policy knowledge and the way that knowledge is
innovations. The call for inclusive education had been operationalized within the learning environment.
established by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Similar to the shift from “the disabled student” to the

22
Vol. 29  No. 1 ADULT LEARNING

“disabled curriculum” mentioned above, this reframing 1998; Bernal, 1998; Scheurich & Young, 1997). UDL
represents an epistemological shift away from stubborn can also help adult educators address these matters.
teacher-centered approaches and frameworks to more An individualistic model of learning relying on a
student-centered approaches and frameworks. In flawed epistemology reduces education from a
facilitating an epistemological shift, UDL also addresses teaching–learning transaction to a relationship
exclusionary educational practice issues and between things. Michael Welton (1995) has developed
concomitant social justice concerns. Adult education as this concept more fully as it relates to Habermas’
a field has long been at the forefront of notion of the colonization of the lifeworld. Moving
reconceptualizing the learning transaction: From Paulo away from this colonization makes adult education
Freire’s (1972) critique of “banking style” education (p. more holistic and learner-centered. Education in
58) to Stephen Brookfield’s (2001) notion of ideology general, and online adult education in particular, has
critique to Michael Welton’s (1995) robust critical struggled to actualize its visions of justice. Even
alternatives to individualistic models of learning, though we recognize that education often serves to
lifelong learning has benefited from creative and useful reinforce existing stereotypes and inequities, change in
characterizations of epistemological foundations. With the direction of greater inclusivity has been slow
these seminal thinkers, the door has been opened for (Cincinnato, De Wever, & Valcke, 2014; Edwards, 2015;
educators to think differently about how knowledge is Kvasny, 2006; Naidoo, 2004; Seale, Georgeson, Mamas,
constructed. The epistemological shift that UDL & Swain, 2015; Van Deursen, van Dijk, & Peter, 2015).
facilitates is that the knowledge and truths that humans Students with disabilities, language barriers, lower
grow into are not abstract things existing independently socioeconomic status, and other less traditional
of the sociocultural realities of the humans themselves. backgrounds struggle more in formalized educational
To teach, to learn, to develop programs and curricula is settings (Aronson, 2008; Gregg, 2007; Kanno &
to engage, develop, and appreciate, not simply the Kangas, 2014). Traditional curricula and methods,
content and learning objectives themselves, but also, based on individualistic models of learning, cannot
primarily, the interaction of learners’ unique histories, ameliorate these difficulties even though we recognize
abilities, cultures, and characteristics. Moving beyond that these difficulties exist (Patton, 2016; Welton, 2014).
individualistic and behavioristic models of learning Developments in brain science also reinforce this
requires moving beyond the traditional models of the move away from traditional curricula and methods,
teaching–learning transaction that continue to be reliant supporting a UDL approach. The study of neuroscience
on a dualistic ontological foundation, and has determined that there are several networks within
epistemologically, a correspondence theory of truth. the brain that are activated in the learning process,
Modeling instruction as either the sage on the stage or
the guide on the side (King, 1993) can buy into an one that learns to recognize objects or patterns in
individualistic and behavioristic framework—both the external environment, one that learns to
immersed in these philosophical fallacies. From an generate effective patterns of action or response,
instructional design perspective, “[m]any of the basic and one that learns to evaluate the significance or
assumptions and characteristics of behaviorism are importance of the possible patterns we encounter
imbedded in current instructional design practices” or generate. (Rose et al., 2006, p. 5)
(Ertmer & Newby, 1993, p. 8). To date, the field of
adult education, especially as it is lived out in the Recognition networks support content acquisition,
online context, has been ineffective in generating the strategic networks reveal the methods of learning, and
widespread use of methods developed with affective networks relate to the reasons for learning.
epistemological diversity in mind. UDL is one strong These networks reflect the multiple means of
option for enabling adult educators to practice the representation, expression, and engagement that form
diversity that they preach. the foundation of UDL (Rose et al., 2006).
Flowing from these epistemological concerns are In terms of educational practice, the reoriented
issues of social justice and educational practice (Agada ontological and epistemological foundations of UDL

23
ADULT LEARNING February 2018

open new doors as well. The development of UDL as “action and expression require a great deal of strategy,
discussed above characterizes an important outgrowth practice, and organization” (CAST, 2012), and attention
of these different foundations. In particular, UDL guides to executive functioning differences is significant. The
us to orient our practices around eliminating concepts of UDL have also been applied to assessing
assumptions of a common background, moving in a what students have learned in ways that are not only
learner-centered and collaborative direction, utilizing accessible to all learners but also “authentic, accurate,
multiple means of representation, engagement, and and authoritative for a student population that is
expression, and focusing on content relevance, value constantly growing in diversity” (Zeff, 2007, p. 41).
and authenticity, real-life tasks, and flexibility.
Improving practice through cultural and developmental
Improving practice through flexibility and reducing barriers sensitivity
Focusing on flexibility and reducing barriers to The concepts behind UDL acknowledge that “affect
learning, UDL acknowledges that students learn represents a crucial element to learning, and learners
differently and suggests that students with sensory differ markedly in the ways in which they can be
disabilities, learning disabilities, and language or engaged or motivated to learn . . . including [with
cultural differences need learning environments that regard to] neurology, culture, personal relevance,
meet their particular ways of learning. At the same subjectivity, and background knowledge” (CAST, 2012),
time, neurotypical learners may also comprehend particularly adult learners. Corroborating the need for
information more quickly or effectively in a visual or this sensitivity, according to cultural neuropsychology,
auditory format rather than only through textual means; developmental trajectories are varied even at the
therefore, they would benefit as well from multiple societal level, with different societies presenting
means of representation that encourage making differentiated patterns (Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan,
connections between concepts (CAST, 2012). Adult 2010). The work of Luria and Vygotsky with the Uzbek
distance learners, in particular, benefit from UDL design population shows the sociocultural embodiment of
features that “disrupt the traditional dependency on visual ability when capturing pictorial illusions. It
text with the thoughtful addition of visual and auditory demonstrates how cultural and environmental aspects
interfaces which tend to be more inclusive” (Crichton & influence an adult’s cognitive skills. In particular,
Kinash, 2013, p. 216), yet course designers must also residents in urban versus nonurban environments
recognize that some features of online technology can reveal significant difference in spatial abilities (Ardila &
be disabling for students, especially those learners who Keating, 2007). For instance, adults in modern urban
are not neurotypical, and implementation of UDL is areas have a stronger tendency to be mediated by
necessary to ensure inclusivity. Two important UDL maps, charts, and diagrams, which they frequently use
guidelines include “providing the same information on a daily basis, whereas inhabitants in less populated
through different modalities . . . [and] providing environments such as deserts, jungles, or tundras apply
information in a format that will allow for adjustability spatial and natural elements for their cognitive process.
by the user” (CAST, 2012). Inclusion of both linguistic As such, a cross-cultural comparison between urban
and nonlinguistic materials and scaffolding are both and nonurban individuals unveils different perceptual
important as well. constancy and learning based on living environments
Learners also need different methods to present (Myambo, 1972). Recognizing that knowledge is
what knowledge they have acquired. A student lacking constructed by learners in this more holistic manner
language fluency may have difficulty expressing her and acknowledging a subsequent epistemological shift,
knowledge in written words, but she may be effective UDL can provide optional learning materials through
when she uses visual, oral, or graphical techniques. multimodal sources of information such as a
Varied organizational skills can lead to some learners combination of text, graphics, audio, and video that
presenting knowledge in a linear fashion whereas can best serve the needs of adult learners from diverse
others’ thinking is more circular. Students may social and cultural backgrounds. Acknowledging the
approach their learning in very different ways as various developmental trajectories of adult learners, the

24
Vol. 29  No. 1 ADULT LEARNING

provision of textual, auditory, and visual information online course. Informal learning is considered “the
resources will foster naturally embodied and preferred natural accompaniment to everyday life” (European
learning by allowing active self-customization of Commission, 2000, p. 8) and is found to happen in
materials. For learning to be effective, these kinds of most adults’ routines. Unlike formal learning, which
differences must be acknowledged and addressed. The takes place under institutional settings, informal
learning materials need to be relevant and in line with learning occurs through “very normal, very natural
the goals of the learner to enhance motivation, and human activity” (Tough, 2002, p. 2). Even in formal
students must be provided opportunities for both educational settings, informal learning can take place
spontaneity and routine, independence and (Jarvis, 2008) through personal interaction and
collaboration, and instructor direction and autonomy unstructured processes (Gofton & Regehr, 2006) that
(CAST, 2012). Given the characteristics of various reflect social norms (Ozolins, Hall, & Peterson, 2008).
development trajectories of adult learners in general, The qualities of informal learning can enhance the
and adult learners in the online context in particular, educational experience of an adult learner, but are
incorporating UDL principles is beneficial and moves often ignored as design considerations.
our educational practice away from individualistic and According to Rao (2012), the challenges for adult
behavioristic approaches that rely on a false learners in online courses are threefold: uncertainty
epistemology. about expectations, insufficient learning community,
and technology challenges. Lack of face-to-face
Adult learner/learning characteristics supported by UDL interactions deprives learners of the opportunity to
In the current educational environment, the adult verify and understand the instructor’s expectations.
population is called to participate in continuous Students can discuss various course-relevant issues
learning to fit changing market needs and participate from an assignment’s approach to course climate
more fully in the knowledge economy. Regardless of through informal encounters and conversations if they
ability or demographics, adults are pressured to meet in a face-to-face class. Also, in a face-to-face
become lifelong learners equipped with technology setting, personal difficulties and concerns can be
skills and fluency with information and communication shared more effectively to determine a clear response
technologies (ICT; World Bank, 2003). Under these to the expectations of the course. It is not only a sense
circumstances, greater numbers of adults are returning of ambiguity, but also one’s feeling of isolation due to
to engage in learning activities, and this also means the lack of a learning community that is troublesome to
that there is greater diversity in this population of online adult learners. For example, in behavioristic
students (Hannah, 2017; Kasworm, 2003; Willans & frameworks, students might respond to weekly
Seary, 2011). assignments to complete mandatory tasks rather than
Despite the fact that there is not a universal theory engage each other in constructive and collaborative
to explain how adults learn and that epistemological discussions. These challenges are often attributable to
diversity is a fundamental characteristic of the teaching the simple use of technology that stipulates work-to-do
and learning transaction, UDL provides a broad based on due dates. In response to these challenges,
conceptual framework to accommodate the current UDL can provide ways to introduce informal aspects
diverse population of adult learners. Many returning into the adult learning sphere by reinterpreting,
adult students perform multiple roles and expanding, and reconstructing the traditional
responsibilities while also seeking to improve epistemology of the non-UDL online sphere.
themselves through lifelong learning. Bounded to
Consideration of various learning styles and provision
multiple duties at home and in the workplace, and
of multiple learning options will be the beginning point
having limited time and energy, adults have few
of accommodating flexible informal learning spheres.
chances to fully indulge in learning activities. This lack
of individual resources creates pressure and anxiety for Distance learner/learning characteristics supported by UDL
adult learners in this situation. Understanding the Because many distance learners are adults and online
competing demands in adult learners’ lives, UDL can course offerings provide access to students whose
integrate the qualities of informal learning into an circumstances may limit their ability to participate in

25
ADULT LEARNING February 2018

face-to-face classes, it is necessary to understand the and clarifying guidance, assessing learning, and creating
variety of students who participate in online learning knowledge (Moore, 1993). Multiple means of
(Moore & Kearsley, 2011). The flexibility of UDL-designed representation, expression, and engagement are essential
courses provides opportunities to meet the needs of this elements of each process. Friesen and Kuskis (2013)
diverse population. One reason that adjustability is considered both pedagogy and technology in terms of
particularly important in distance education is that the online interaction and concluded that “the mediated
online environment allows students to interact with the context of distance education has compelled distance
content, the instructor, and peers in various settings that educators to consider more seriously interactions between
may present distractions not found in a face-to-face students and diverse educational media” (p. 351), focusing
classroom. Because students taking distance education on student interaction with content; however, multiple
courses may also be nontraditional students, particularly effective communication options also enhance the
adults with nonacademic responsibilities in their lives, to development of positive social presence that increases
be successful, they must be self-directed, motivated, and learning. When designing a course using UDL, flexibility
interested in their own learning. Motivation is an and choice can enhance interaction so that it meets the
important requirement for successful online learning, and goals of distance educators and fulfills instructional
following the UDL model with multiple forms of objectives, addresses student diversity, and increases
engagement is effective. Distance education teachers access (Friesen & Kuskis, 2013). Because effectively
serve a somewhat different role than traditional instructors designing a distance education course does not mean
and students are much more autonomous. Learners also simply transferring face-to-face content and activities to an
have more control of their learning in an online online format, but requires rethinking and redesigning
environment and make their own decisions about how to (Dennen, 2013), UDL can be a useful tool for instructional
learn. Because there is no single best method for students designers. CAST emphasizes the need to apply UDL by
to access content and reveal their understanding, UDL’s “building courses and classroom activities from inception
focus on providing options is significant. It is important to to meet the learning needs of the greatest number of
recognize that adult distance learners want to exercise students” (Zeff, 2007, p. 30).
control over their own learning, define what it is they will The role of the teacher in distance education
learn, make their own decisions about how to learn, use matches particularly well with the fundamentals of UDL
their personal life experience in the learning process, as adult distance learners demand that “teachers gain
apply their knowledge to solving real-life present-day authority from what they know and the way they deal
problems, and have intrinsic motivation (Moore & with their students, not from any external symbols or
Kearsley, 2011). Because of the diversity of distance titles. Physical distance tends to further reduce the
learners and their autonomy, providing multiple ways to dominant psychological position of the teacher” (Moore
acquire knowledge and demonstrate comprehension is & Kearsley, 2011, p. 151). With UDL, the instructor,
beneficial. with content and pedagogical knowledge, designs a
Moore’s (1993) theory of transactional distance course that allows the students to determine what and
highlights the separation of the student from the instructor how they will learn. Elements of online courses that
that is both physical and psychological. Teachers and contribute to student success such as applicability and
students navigate this separation in very different ways; relevance of content, prompt and meaningful instructor
“[e]ven though there are clearly recognizable patterns, feedback, and clear, easily understood guidelines,
there is also enormous variation in these strategies and course materials, and assignment parameters (Moore &
techniques and in the behaviour of teachers and learners” Kearsley, 2011) are highlighted when UDL principles
(Moore, 1993), thus supporting the principles of UDL. In are employed effectively.
designing distance learning experiences, Moore argued
that there must be a focus on structure, dialogue, and Applying UDL Principles to an
learner autonomy with particular emphasis on the Existing Online Course
processes of presenting content, supporting student What follows is an example of how UDL principles
motivation, developing critical analysis, giving supportive were applied in redesigning an online course. An

26
Vol. 29  No. 1 ADULT LEARNING

important element in applying UDL is that it begins providing accessibility to individuals with varied
with course design, “building out curriculum and abilities as the need for accommodating assistive
lessons from a set of goals” (Zeff, 2007, p. 30), rather devices such as a text reader would segregate and
than trying to meet the needs of diverse students only possibly stigmatize specific students (Story et al., 1998).
when problems develop. The principles of UDL can be The written text did not meet the needs of all
applied to course objectives, teaching techniques, students, even if it was used with a text reader.
learning materials, and assessment methods, so that no Students need options for accessing the course content.
matter what skills, needs, motivations, or interests an Visual representations can enhance learning for some
individual student brings, she will be able to learn. students. When applying UDL, it is important to
The purpose of the course that was redesigned is to recognize that merely adding a text-reader function or
introduce future teachers to principles of effective closed captioning a video is not a significant way to
communication in ways that educators will typically address disability and diversity. The new book options
experience. It included the design and presentation of for the course offer multiple means of representation as
individual speeches, videos, and other common forms students may read a traditional text-based work, listen
of educational communication. Assessment included to a text reader, study from an outline and visual
evaluation by examination, product review, and other version of the book, or use a Kindle reader format.
activities focused on the use of communications for Each version of the content provides an option for a
educators. Students learned about a variety of different type of student. The images of the books we
communications technologies that are specifically provided on the syllabus also provide a link for
useful for teachers within the framework of a deeper purchasing the book.
understanding of basic rhetoric including rhetorically
effective communication. The goal of the course is to Syllabus format
master the process of communication within the The syllabus also did not offer multiple means of
pedagogical setting. In evaluating the effectiveness of representation and engagement. We needed to provide
the course, we noted a lack of flexibility and limited information, particularly about assignments, in different
options available to diverse students. We planned ways that were more stimulating to students. It was
revisions that would strengthen learner engagement, clear we had to revise the syllabus to meet Mace’s
increase performance, and meet the needs of all principles. It needed to be “eas[ier] to understand,
students. We recognized the need for shifting the regardless of the user’s experience, knowledge,
instructional focus away from a traditional behavioristic language skills, or current concentration level” (Story
methodology that accommodates individuals viewed et al., 1998). We focused revisions on simplifying the
outside of the norm to one that addresses the needs of document, making it more intuitive, and rearranging
all learners in increasingly diverse classes. We followed the content to reflect its importance, thus
the model of Rose et al. (2006) in their redesign of a accommodating a much greater range of student
graduate education course. In following this approach, abilities (Story et al., 1998). To enhance the
the movement beyond an individualistic and communication of information, we “[used] different
behavioristic learning environment takes priority as the modes (pictorial, verbal, tactile) for redundant
UDL framework allows learners’ unique histories, presentation of essential information . . . [m]aximize[d]
abilities, cultures, and characteristics to become ‘legibility’ of essential information . . . [and] ma[d]e it
opportunities rather than deficiencies. easy to give instructions or directions” (Story et al.,
1998). The original syllabus was entirely textual,
Text choice presented in paragraphs and lists; it required constant
After reviewing the presentation of course scrolling to identify needed information. It did not
information and content through the lens of UDL, we engage the students. Visual elements, such as book
realized that it did not provide multiple means of cover images, were added to engage the students. An
representation, and it also did not contribute to student interactive course calendar, text and content links, and
motivation through multiple means of engagement. It navigation arrows were provided to make it easier to
did not meet Mace’s first principle of design of find necessary information. Color was included to

27
ADULT LEARNING February 2018

visually separate and emphasize sections of the was expanded weekly and students’ individual
document. An effort was made to effectively create a contributions were graded, so students received
community by adding instructor photographs and an feedback on the topics prior to the final test creation.
inspiring message. This assessment effectively used collaboration and
scaffolding.
Assessment values and descriptions
It was also important to look at multiple means of Communication with students
representation with regard to assessments. Although As we worked to improve the course, by focusing
there were written descriptions of the assessments and on the principles of UDL, we recognized deficiencies
a breakdown of grade percentages, the assessment that had not been obvious to us. For example, this
summaries and directions did not provide an excellent course was designed to teach effective communication
model or an unacceptable product. Explanations about techniques, yet our own communication was weak.
what to do for specific assignments created confusion Acknowledging the need to increase instructor
and increased anxiety; these statements led to repeated presence in this online course, and thereby enhance
mistakes and low performance. Students did not correct student engagement, we implemented several ways to
their mistakes even after receiving feedback on communicate with students. Mace called for “effective
previous work. A color-coded pie chart was added to prompting and feedback during and after task
highlight the grade percentages for assessments, completion” (Story et al., 1998). We accomplished this
making their worth instantly visible. Rubrics and model through weekly class emails, weekly individual emails
student assignments were included to increase student providing feedback on discussion forum participation
understanding of expectations. Visual models were and homework assignment completion, and regular
created to demonstrate standards. Feedback was updates to content clarifications and assignment details
provided numerically using the rubrics and and models.
simultaneously with individual comments.
Conclusion
Assessment methods In the interest of greater accessibility, effectiveness,
Two factors we considered when evaluating and enjoyment of the learning process for all learners,
assessments were multiple means of expression and UDL offers principles and practices that shift to a
engagement. We needed formats that stimulated learner-centered approach and emphasize collaboration
student interest and motivated them to meet high and community. UDL represents an epistemological
expectations. In this area, flexibility, Mace’s second shift away from individualistic approaches to the
principle, was key (Story et al., 1998). We wanted to teaching–learning transaction, allowing course design
meet the needs of students with diverse abilities and and educational practice to directly address issues of
varied interests. Providing students with multiple justice and inclusion. Through the guiding principles of
options to show what they knew was essential. multiple means of representation, multiple means of
Originally a multiple choice midterm and final exam action and expression, and multiple means of
were offered as assessments of course content engagement, UDL encourages the design of learning
knowledge acquisition. These were the only summative environments that can accommodate the increasing
assessments. Because the course was online, it was diversity in the growing population of adult learners,
easy for students to use outside resources when particularly in the online context. In this way, UDL is
completing the tests so the scores were inflated and did also a justice-oriented approach, creating greater
not reflect students’ actual content comprehension. A opportunities for success for broader swaths of the
new assessment strategy was used that reflected more lifelong learning population.
problem-solving and real-world connections. As
education students preparing to teach in their own Conflict of Interest
classrooms, students designed their own tests from a The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest
class-generated question list and provided a with respect to the authorship and/or publication of
justification for their choices. The class list of questions this article.

28
Vol. 29  No. 1 ADULT LEARNING

Funding Edwards, R. (2015). Software and the hidden curriculum in

digital education. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23(2), 265-
The author(s) received no financial support for the 279.
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Edyburn, D. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for
learning if you saw it? Ten propositions for new directions
References for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disability
Agada, J. (1998). Multicultural education and the emerging Quarterly, 33, 33–41. doi:10.1177/073194871003300103
paradigm: An essay in cultural epistemology. The Urban
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism,
Review, 30(1), 77-95.
constructivism: Comparing critical features from an
Ardila, A., & Keating, K. (2007). Cognitive abilities in instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement
different cultural contexts. In B. P. Uzzell, M. Ponton, & Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
A. Ardila (Eds.), International handbook of cross-cultural
European Commission. (2000). A memorandum on lifelong
neuropsychology (pp. 109-125). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
learning (Commission Staff Working paper). Retrieved from
Erlbaum.
http://arhiv.acs.si/dokumenti/Memorandum_on_Lifelong_
Aronson, P. (2008). Breaking barriers or locked out? Class- Learning.pdf
based perceptions and experiences of postsecondary
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY:
education. Social Class and Transitions to Adulthood.
Herder and Herder.
New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development,
2008(119), 41-54. Friesen, N., & Kuskis, A. (2013). Modes of interaction. In M. G.
Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (3rd ed., pp.
Baggaley, J. (2008). Where did distance education go wrong?
452-466). New York, NY: Routledge.
Distance Education, 29(1), 39-51.
Gofton, W., & Regehr, G. (2006). What we don’t know
Bates, A. W. (2005). Technology, e-learning and distance
we are teaching: Unveiling the hidden curriculum.
education (2nd ed.). London, England: Routledge.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 449, 20-27.
Bernal, D. D. (1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/
educational research. Harvard Educational Review, 68(4), Glenn_Regehr/publication/7046749_What_we_don’;t_
555-583. know_we_are_teaching__Unveiling_the_hidden_curriculum/
Brookfield, S. (2001). Repositioning ideology critique in a links/54466b920cf2f14fb80f3a76.pdf
critical theory of adult learning. Adult Education Quarterly, Gregg, N. (2007). Underserved and unprepared: Postsecondary
52(1), 7-22. learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research &
CAST. (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Practice, 22, 219-228. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00250
(Version 2.0). Wakefield, MA: Author. Hall, T., Vue, G., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2004).
Cawthon, S. W., & Cole, E. V. (2010). Postsecondary students Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL
who have a learning disability: Student perspectives implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on
on accommodations access and obstacles. Journal of Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved from http://
Postsecondary Education and Disability, 23(2), 112-128. aem.cast.org/about/publications/2003/ncac-differentiated-
Center for Applied Special Technology. (2015). Until learning instruction-udl.html
has no limits. Available from http://www.cast.org/ Hannah, M. B. (2017). Experiences of learning online among
Cincinnato, S., De Wever, B., & Valcke, M. (2014). The learning adult learners and the relationship engaging activities
divide in formal adult education: Why do low-qualified have on satisfaction and retention (Doctoral dissertation).
adults participate less? In P. Guimarães, C. Cavaco, L. Northcentral University, Scottsdale, AZ.
Marrocos, C. Paulos, A. Bruno, S. Rodrigues, & M. Marques Henrich, S. J., Heine, J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). Most people
(Eds.), Local change, social actions and adult learning: are not WEIRD. Nature, 466, 29. doi:10.1038/466029a
Challenges and responses—Proceedings of the conference Hollingshead, A. (2017). Designing engaging online
(pp. 401-415). Lisbon, Portugal: University of Lisbon. environment: Universal Design for Learning principles. In
Crichton, S., & Kinash, S. (2013). Enabling learning for disabled K. L. Milheim (Ed.), Cultivating diverse online classrooms
students. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance through effective instructional design (Chap. 14). Hershey,
education (3rd ed., pp. 452-466). New York, NY: Routledge. PA: IGI Global.
Dennen, V. P. (2013). Activity design and instruction in online Jarvis, P. (2008). Democracy, lifelong learning and the learning
learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance society: Active Citizenship in a late modern age. London,
education (3rd ed., pp. 452-466). New York, NY: Routledge. England: Routledge.

29
ADULT LEARNING February 2018

Kanno, Y., & Kangas, S. E. (2014). “I’m not going to be, like, Rao, K. (2012, January). Universal design for online courses:
for the AP” English language learners’ limited access to Addressing the needs of nontraditional learners. Paper
advanced college-preparatory courses in high school. presented at 2012 IEEE International Conference on
American Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 848-878. Technology Enhanced Education, Kerala, India.
Kasworm, C. E. (2003). Setting the stage: Adults in higher Rappolt-Schlichtmann, G., Daley, S. G., & Rose, L. T. (2012). A
education. New directions for student services, 2003(102), 3-10. research reader in universal design for learning. Cambridge,
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. MA: Harvard Education Press.
College teaching, 41(1), 30-35. Rose, D. H., & Gravel, J. W. (2010). Technology and
Kurth, N., & Mellard, D. (2006). Student perceptions of the learning: Meeting special student’s needs. National
accommodation process in postsecondary education. Journal Center on Universal Design for Learning. Available from
of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 19, 71-84. http://www.udlcenter.org/sites/udlcenter.org/files/
TechnologyandLearning.pdf
Kvasny, L. (2006). Cultural (re) production of digital inequality
in a US community technology initiative. Information, Rose, D. H., Harbour, W. S., Johnston, C. S., Daley, S. G.,
Communication & Society, 9(2), 160-181. & Abarbanell, L. (2006). Universal design for learning in
postsecondary education: Reflections on principles and
Lee, K. (2017). Rethinking the accessibility of online higher their application. Journal of Postsecondary Education and
education: A historical review. The Internet and Higher Disability, 19, 135-151. Retrieved from http://files.eric.
Education, 33, 15-23. ed.gov/fulltext/EJ844630.pdf
Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2000). Universal design for individual Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2000). The future is in the margins:
differences. Educational Leadership, 58(3), 39-43. The role of technology and disability in educational reform
Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design (A report prepared for the U.S. Department of Education
for learning: Theory and practice. Retrieved from http:// Office of Special Education Technology). Washington, DC:
www.cast.org/our-work/publications/2014/universal-design- U.S. Department of Education.
learning-theory-practice-udl-meyer.html#.WIeCv7YrJ8c Rose, D. H., Meyer, A., & Hitchcock, C. (2005). The universally
Moore, M. (1993). “Theory of transactional distance. In D. designed classroom: Accessible curriculum and digital
Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education technologies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
(pp. 22-38). New York, NY: Routledge. Scheurich, J. J., & Young, M. D. (1997). Coloring
Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A epistemologies: Are our research epistemologies racially
systems view of online learning (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: biased? Educational Researcher, 26(4), 4-16.
Wadsworth. Seale, J., Georgeson, J., Mamas, & Swain, J. (2015). Not
Myambo, K. (1972). Shape constancy as influenced by culture, the right kind of “digital capital”? An examination of the
western education, and angel. Journal of Cross-Cultural complex relationship between disabled students, their
Psychology, 3(3), 221-232. doi:10.1177/002202217200300301 technologies and higher education institutions. Computers &
Naidoo, R. (2004). Fields and institutional strategy: Bourdieu Education, 82, 118-128.
on the relationship between higher education, inequality Shakespeare, T., & Watson, N. (2002). The social model of
and society. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 25(4), disability: An outdated ideology? Research in Social Science
457-471. and Disability, 2, 9-28. Retrieved from http://disability-
National Center for Universal Design for Learning at Center for studies.leeds.ac.uk/files/library/Shakespeare-social-model-
Applied Special Technology. (2012). Available from http:// of-disability.pdf
www.udlcenter.org/ Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal
North Carolina State University, Center for Universal Design. design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities.
(2008). About the center: Ronald Mace. Retrieved from Raleigh: NC State University Center for Universal Design.
https://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_us/ Tough, A. (2002). The iceberg of informal adult learning
usronmace.htm (New Approaches to Lifelong Learning, Working Paper
Ozolins, I., Hall, H., & Peterson, R. (2008). The No 49-2002). Retrieved from https://nall.oise.utoronto.ca/
student voice: Recognising the hidden and informal res/49AllenTough.pdf
curriculum in medicine. Medical Teacher, 30, 606-611. U.S. Department of Justice. (2016). Introduction to the ADA.
doi:10.1080/01421590801949933 Retrieved from http://www.ada.gov/ada_intro.htm
Patton, L. D. (2016). Disrupting postsecondary prose: Toward Van Deursen, A. J., van Dijk, J. A., & Peter, M. (2015).
a critical race theory of higher education. Urban Education, Increasing inequalities in what we do online: A longitudinal
51(3), 315-342. cross sectional analysis of Internet activities among the Dutch

30
Vol. 29  No. 1 ADULT LEARNING

population (2010 to 2013) over gender, age, education, and Author Biographies
income. Telematics and Informatics, 32(2), 259-272.
Carol Rogers-Shaw, MA, MS, is a PhD candidate at the
Welton, M. R. (Ed.). (1995). In defense of the lifeworld: Critical
perspectives on adult learning. Albany: State University of
Pennsylvania State University. Her research interests
New York Press. include educational accessibility for adult learners with
Welton, M. R. (2014). Habermas and the meaning of the disabilities, identity development in distance education,
post-secular society: Complementary learning processes. and nontraditional qualitative research.
International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and
Technology, 5(4), 57-69. Davin J. Carr-Chellman, PhD, is an assistant professor
Willans, J., & Seary, K. (2011). I feel like I’m being hit from of education at the University of Idaho in the Adult,
all directions: Enduring the bombardment as a mature-age Organizational Learning and Leadership Program. His
learner returning to formal learning. Australian Journal of research includes adult learning, ethics, and qualitative
Adult Learning, 51(1), 119-142. research methods.
World Bank. (2003). Lifelong learning in the global knowledge
economy: Challenges for developing countries (A World Jinhee Choi, MS, BFA, is a PhD candidate at the
Bank report). Washington, DC: Author. Pennsylvania State University. Her research
Zeff, R. (2007). Universal design across the curriculum. interests include lifelong learning policy, public
New Directions for Higher Education, 2007(137), 27-44. pedagogy, adult learning, and issues relevant to North
doi:10.1002/he.244 Korean defectors.

31