The HOW and WHY of UDL Implementation in the Classroom and School-Wide: Part 2 of 3

HOW

As I’ve mentioned in previous blogs, I began this blog as part of a requirement for a UDL course at George Washington University. As such, this week’s assignment is to discuss how to approach UDL systemic change. One of the questions posed is “What UDL tools might be used to evaluate barriers and opportunities in my particular setting?”  Since I am a learning support teacher and support students in a variety of different ways (within their career & technical education programs, with transition related activities, in math or English, etc.), I am approaching this question in a very broad way.

I would like to see UDL implemented across the school setting.  However, I know that systemic change (school-wide change) cannot occur overnight. It must be carefully planned out to create “buy-in” across the board. Additionally, it must have the infrastructure of technology and staff support.  I will talk more about that in a bit.

Because many people do not like change, and many teachers feel possessive of their classes or program, introducing change too quickly can be problematic. And, yet, we know that administrators are aware that educational systems need change to keep pace with our global society (Anderson, 1993). I believe, for this reason, that change must come from a variety of directions; administratively it must be supported, teachers need to see the value of this new approach, students need to understand how they learn and why they will benefit, and in my case, the sending districts must support the change, as they can provide further resources and direction.

Administrative support and direction is paramount.  The previously mentioned brain research can help support and defend this systemic change. Obtaining buy-in from teachers is the biggest challenge that administration may face. Teachers would benefit from hearing from other CTE instructors across the state who have implemented UDL systems. They must hear about the challenges as well as the benefits.  Providing instructional coaches is one method that has worked at other CTCs.  An Instruction Coach is usually a learning support teacher who supports teachers in developing lessons that embed UDL principles and methods into their lesson.  The Instructional coach then supports the teacher and co-teaches for a few lessons until the teacher is comfortable with the UDL tool used.  I think it is crucial that positive support is provided when we ask teachers to “change” what they are doing.

I believe that we already know what barriers students with learning disabilities face in different classrooms. For instance, in the Health Professions Program reading is a huge barrier for students who may struggle with decoding, comprehension, or fluency.  However, I would assert that reading is also a barrier for several students who have not been identified to receive special ed. services. So why not encourage the teacher to embed UDL techniques in the curriculum?  (Examples like this can be found in all 20 programs that we have at our school).

One method to create “buy in” from the teachers, a method that worked in the Concord New Hampshire school system, begun in 1994 (Rose & Meyer, 2002), is to allow the teachers and the students to generate the momentum for the use of UDL.  This is accomplished by approaching teachers in small gropus and sharing excitement for the concept and then showing them the benefits. Instead of a drastic restructuring of the school, I would encourage our administration as well as myself to approach those teachers who are most likely to be open and accepting of UDL strategies and help support them in their use of these tools. I would then encourage them to share with their colleagues the benefits of using these tools. I believe that when teachers talk to other teachers and share ideas, they will listen far more openly than when they are directed to do something by the administration.

Finally, time must be allotted for the implementation; the exploration of ideas, the development of materials, collaboration, and reflection.  This is probably the biggest hurdle in our school. Our teachers don’t even have a planning period. The administration may have to look at grants to be able to offset the costs of hiring substitute teachers to come in and allow teachers planning time.

For additional material; a template for creating systematic change to apply the Concord Model; http://www.cast.org/Teachingeverystudent/model

Concord Administration describes UDL’s Systemic Implementation:  http://www.cast.org/Teachingeverystudent/UDLImplementation

References

Anderson, B.L. (1993). The stages of systemic change. Educational Leadership, 51, 14-17.

Rose, D.H. & Meyer, A. (2002).Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: ASDC.

“Teaching style does matter; you get what you give out.” (Click for an example of how NOT to teach)

%d bloggers like this: