Secret Boss Training: Engage Campus Leaders to Adopt Universal Design for Learning

This interactive session from the author of _Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: UDL in Higher Education_ (2018) focuses on how distance-learning professionals can get faculty and senior-leader colleagues to adopt the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework. Only about ten percent of faculty members across North America currently use UDL or inclusive-design strategies (CAST, 2015; DO-IT, 2015).

Addressing Barriers

The primary barrier that participants are likely to report is resistance from campus leaders who perceive inclusive-design techniques as a) being beneficial for only a small segment of learners, b) requiring a significant outlay of time, people, and work effort, and c) having a limited impact on learner outcomes. This session will provide attendees the tools needed to re-frame UDL in order to

• get campus leaders to adopt and champion UDL as a means to increase learner persistence, satisfaction, and retention;
• create learning interactions that save faculty members’ time while encouraging innovative ideas,
• provide distance-learning students with more time for study and practice in their busy days, and
• re-frame UDL away from a disability mindset and toward emerging technologies: especially learners interacting through their mobile devices.

Session Objective

This session posits diversity in its most inclusive form: instead of relying solely on providing accommodation services to learners with disabilities—which is most often a last-minute, ad-hoc, reactive process—adopting UDL as part of an institution’s culture of course design and teaching practices allows all learners to benefit, regardless of their place on the ability spectrum.

The not-so-secret goal is to enable participants to become “quiet evangelists” for UDL techniques and get buy-in, advocacy, and support from their presidents, provosts, and other campus leaders.. Attendees will be given practical, hands-on strategies for expanding learner access and increasing student persistence, retention, and satisfaction—an outcome for which we have 35 years of evidence-based practice and research (Fonosch & Schwab, 1981; Fichten, 1986; Nelson et al., 1990; Houck et al.,1992; Bento, 1996; Benham, 1997; Bigaj et al., 1999; Cook et al., 2009; Murray et al., 2009; Zhang et al., 2010; Lombardi & Murray, 2011; Murray et al., 2011).

Session Outcomes:

Participants will be able to

• create learning interactions that save faculty members’ time while encouraging innovative ideas,
• provide students with more time for study and practice in their busy days, and
• re-frame UDL away from a disability mindset and toward emerging technologies: learners on their mobile devices.

Engagement Strategies:

This session uses active-learning techniques and provides use-them-now resources for participants. The first 15 minutes will be an overview of techniques and ideas, and the second 15 minutes will be devoted to open conversation and application exercises. Especially by relating UDL to broader access benefits for all learners, this session’s activities serve as a model for participants to re-frame accessibility and inclusion conversations on their campuses. This is best accomplished through an incremental approach, using a “next-20” series of milestones that leaders can support—achievements that can be attained in the next 20 minutes, 20 days, and 20 months (Tobin & Behling, 2018).

Diversity and Inclusion Statement:

This session posits diversity in its most inclusive form: instead of relying solely on providing accommodation services to learners with disabilities—which is most often a last-minute, ad-hoc, reactive process—adopting UDL as part of an institution’s culture of course design and teaching practices allows all learners to benefit, regardless of their place on the ability spectrum.

References

Benham, N. E. (1997). Faculty members attitudes and knowledge regarding specific disabilities and the Americans with Disabilities Act. College Student Journal, 31, 124-129.

Bento, R. F. (1996). Faculty members decision-making about “reasonable accommodations” for disabled college students. College Student Journal, 30(4), 494.

Bigaj, S. J., Shaw, S. F., and McGuire, J. M. (1999). Community-technical college faculty members willingness to use and self-reported use of accommodation strategies for students with learning disabilities. Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education, 21(2), 3-14.

CAST. (2014). UDL on campus: Universal design for learning in higher education—a guide. http://udloncampus.cast.org.

CAST. (2017, December 2). New home and look for the UDL guidelines. https://twitter.com/CAST_UDL/status/936958391007809540.

Cook, L., Rumrill, P. D., and Tankersley, M. (2009). Priorities and understanding of faculty members regarding college students with disabilities. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 84-96.

DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology). (2015). Applications of universal design in postsecondary education. Center for Universal Design in Education. University of Washington. http://www.washington.edu/doit/programs/center-universal-design-education/applications-universal-design-postsecondary-education.

Fichten, C. S. (1986). Self, other, and situation-referent automatic thoughts: Interaction between people who have a physical disability and those who do not. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 10(5), 571-587.

Fonosch, G. and Schwab, L. O. (1981). Attitudes of selected university faculty members toward disabled students. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22(3), 229-235.

Houck, C. K., Asselin, S. B., Troutman, G. C., and Arrington, J. M. (1992). Students with learning disabilities in the university environment: A study of faculty members and student perceptions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(10), 678-84.

Lombardi, A. R., & Murray, C. (2011). Measuring university faculty members attitudes toward disability: Willingness to accommodate and adopt Universal Design for Learning principles. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 34(1), 43-56.

Murray, C., Lombardi, A., Wren, C. T., & Keys, C. (2009). Associations between prior disability-focused training and disability-related attitudes and perceptions among university faculty. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(2), 87-100.

Murray, C., Lombardi, A., & Wren, C. (2011). The effects of disability-focused training on the attitudes and perceptions of university staff. Remedial and Special Education, 32(4), 290-300.

Nelson, J., Dodd, J., & Smith, D. (1990). Faculty members willingness to accommodate students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23(3), 185-189.

Tobin, T. J. & Behling, K. (2018). Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Press.

Zhang, D., Landmark, L., Reber, A., Hsu, H., Kwok, O., and Benz, M. (2010). University faculty members knowledge, beliefs, and practices in providing reasonable accommodations to students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 31(4): 276-286.