Jane Sparrow 20144178
Jane Sparrow 20144178
Jane Sparrow 20144178
Over the years Australia has created inclusive schools for non-disabled
recently has society started to embrace the educational and human rights that
children with disabilities have to be a part of these inclusive schools. With the
and cater for all students no matter their difference. This has had a large
and curriculum design. One of the many responsibilities that teachers are now
1994) all support these environments for full inclusivity. This paper is based
upon the summary and analysis of Foreman and Arthur-Kelly’s (2014) article
Design for Learning (UDL). It is essential for teachers when planning and
designing an inclusive classroom that they adopt key strategies such as UDL
1
Jane Sparrow 20144178
discusses the benefits of inclusive education and how it caters for students
with diversity. Foreman and Arthur-Kelly (2014) define the term ‘diversity’ in
their intellectual and physical abilities. The article discusses the statistics that
classrooms in the 21st century are likely to include a minimum of one child
and Arthur-Kelly, 2014). This is a result of the ever growing acceptance of the
value of every young Australian, with or without a disability, having the same
The article defines many of the conventional disabilities that teachers may
however the article continuously promotes the idea that inclusion requires
teachers to be able to cater to all individual needs of students rather than one
specific disability (Foreman and Arthur-Kelly, 2014). This suggests that for a
Arthur-Kelly, 2014).
2
Jane Sparrow 20144178
The article asks readers why students’ abilities are being grouped when, in
the same context, students are not grouped by other physical characteristics,
for example height and weight (Foreman and Arthur-Kelly, 2014). Affirming
the article’s point of view, the Salamanca Statement’s (United Nations, 1994)
guiding principle, that any ordinary school should accommodate all children,
than just an action but is a human right. This is also supported in the UN
education systems to provide access that includes those with diverse needs
and backgrounds, as in not doing so they are withholding a basic human right.
uphold that can amount to added stress among professionals. Foreman and
Arthur-Kelly (2014) discuss the general animosity that can occur among staff
members in the education systems regarding the belief that including students
with special educational needs will create further challenges and stress for
discredits this argument, suggesting that a sound teacher already caters for
individual needs, whether for a student with disabilities or not, and that
challenges in the classroom do not necessarily come from those students with
Australian society have departments and specialists in whom they can consult
3
Jane Sparrow 20144178
2014). Changes to the classroom and school environment can range from
individual children’s needs (Foreman and Arthur-Kelly, 2014). The aim for full
and provides all students with the least restrictive environment so that they
Strategy
Teachers in western society are faced with the every day challenge of
education seeks to create access and support the social and academic
(Courey, Tappe, Siker & Lepage, 2013). The framework supports the design
of instructions that ensures diverse learners are able to access the curriculum
along with any other student (Newman Thomas, Van Garderen, Scheuermann
4
Jane Sparrow 20144178
(MYCEETA, 2008) and fulfils these goals through three key principles that
2001). Each of the UDL principles is defined here with relevant examples to
model the application and its usefulness. It is also essential to consider when
using the strategy of universal design that what might change for one student
is then made available for every other student, with or without a disability
(Katz, 2013).
usefulness)
2015).
information and content for the learner (Newman Thomas, et al., 2015). As
students learn differently to each other excluding their abilities and learning
5
Jane Sparrow 20144178
concrete, representational and abstract form (Mancl, Miller & Kennedy, 2012).
the independence to find spelling or words without the direct assistance from
the teacher.
that they are able to assimilate new information with prior knowledge
(Newman Thomas, et al., 2015). Highlighting and colour coding key texts or
6
Jane Sparrow 20144178
et al., 2015).
This principle addresses the alternative means in which students can make
Options for expressive skills and fluency allow students to display what has
been learnt along with the ability to develop fluency of the skills and in turn
7
Jane Sparrow 20144178
interacting with the main ideas of the activity (Capp, 2016). Technology-based
well as peer learning can develop fluency (Newman Thomas, et al., 2015).
Hmelo-Silver, Duncan & Chinn (2007) suggest that these should be done
through faded scaffolds that support the progress of independence and critical
thinking.
monitor and evaluate progress toward goals” (Newman Thomas, et al., 2015,
pg. 221). Students who experience difficulties with classroom activities may
also find difficulty in planning and organising their own progress and goals
providing student with diaries and checklists, as well as clear instruction and
Chinn, 2007).
2015).
Generally being the “why” of learning (Newman Thomas, et al., 2015), this
8
Jane Sparrow 20144178
choices in how they are going to learn, this can include choosing their own
topics for writing (Rose, Hasselbring, Stahl & Zabala, 2005). Learners are
al., 2015).
with long-term objectives broken down into shorter more approachable tasks
they can establish and monitor their progress such as checklists (Rose &
9
Jane Sparrow 20144178
With any strategy it is essential to look at ways in which it will not benefit.
Kortering, McClannon & Braziel, (2008) suggest that a limitation of UDL is the
guarantee that all teachers will be motivated to develop and implement UDL
Resources are also another limitation of the UDL framework, as some schools
simply do not have the funds to provide further access and support materials
for students with disabilities (Tzivinikou, 2014). For example, the use of
may be unable to cater for students who require digital texts or programs such
as text-to-speech.
content” (pg. 359) including final grades, NAPLAN and other standardised
be obstructed.
10
Jane Sparrow 20144178
the UDL principles with evidence-based practices to further cater for individual
Conclusion
teachers the ability to design a curriculum and environment that can be readily
disabilities. As stated previously in this paper, every child has the right to
education and that includes being able to attend a regular school. Therefore, it
is essential and integral to all education systems and schools that they
incorporate and base their curriculum and environmental strategies upon the
References:
11
Jane Sparrow 20144178
Capp, Matt. (2016)Is your planning inclusive? The Universal Design for
Learning framework for an Australian context. [online]. Australian
Educational Leader; v.38 n.4 p.44-46; Retrieved from: https://search-
informit-com-au.ipacez.nd.edu.au/fullText;dn=214257;res=AEIPT
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2011). Universal design for
learning guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author.
Courey, S. J., Tappe, P., Siker, J., & Lepage, P. (2013). Improved Lesson
Planning With Universal Design for Learning (UDL). Teacher Education
and Special Education, 36(1), 7-27. doi: https://doi-
org.ipacez.nd.edu.au/10.1177/0888406412446178
Foreman, P., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2014). Inclusion in action (4th ed.). South
Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning Australia.
12
Jane Sparrow 20144178
Mancl, D. B., Miller, S. P., & Kennedy, M. (2012). Using the concrete‐
representational‐abstract sequence with integrated strategy instruction
to teach subtraction with regrouping to students with learning
disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(4), 152-166.
Newman Thomas, C., Van Garderen, D., Scheuermann, A., & Ju Lee, E.
(2015). Applying a Universal Design for Learning Framework to
Mediate the Language Demands of Mathematics. Reading & Writing
Quarterly, 21(3), 207-234. doi: https://doi-
org.ipacez.nd.edu.au/10.1080/10573569.2015.1030988
Katz, J. (2013). The Three Block Model of Universal Design for Learning
(UDL): Engaging students in inclusive education. Canadian Journal of
Education / Revue Canadienne De L'éducation, 36(1), 153-194.
Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ipacez.nd.edu.au/stable/canajeducrevucan.36.1.15
3
13
Jane Sparrow 20144178
Rose, D. H., Hasselbring, T. S., Stahl, S., & Zabala, J. (2005). Assistive
technology and universal design for learning: Two sides of the same
coin. Handbook of special education technology research and practice,
507-518.
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age:
Universal design for learning. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 1703 N. Beauregard St., Alexandria, VA
22311-1714
United Nations. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action
on Sprecial Educational Needs. Salamanca: Ministry of Education and
Science. Retrieved from
http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF
14