Sheryl Burgstahler
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Universal design (UD), a concept that grew from the field of architecture, has recently emerged as a paradigm for designing instructional methods, curriculum, and assessments that are welcoming and accessible to students with a wide range of characteristics, including those related to race, ethnicity, native language, gender, age, and disability. This proactive approach holds promise for more fully including underrepresented groups in computing studies and for decreasing the need, and thus costs, for academic accommodations for students with disabilities. This article summarizes the history and development of UD, references research and practices that support the UD approach, provides examples of the strategies that apply UD to instruction and assessment, and recommends topics for future research. Although the application of UD to teaching and learning is in its infancy, the potential of UD to improve computing instruction should not be ignored. Further research could test the efficacy of specific UD practices in promoting learning in computing fields.
- AccessComputing. 2009. Equal Access: Universal Design of Computing Departments. University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Available online at http://www.washington.edu/accesscomputing/equal_access_csd.html.Google Scholar
- AHEAD. n.d. Universal design. Available online at http://www.ahead.org/resources/universal-design.Google Scholar
- Assistive Technology Act of 1998. 29 U.S.C. 3002.Google Scholar
- Auburn University. n.d. Personal computer applications at Auburn University. Available online at http://pca.eng.auburn.edu/.Google Scholar
- Barker, L. J. and Garvin-Doxas, K. 2004. Making visible the behaviors that influence learning environment: A qualitative exploration of computer science classrooms. Comput. Sci. Educ. 14, 2, 119--145.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barr, R. B. and Tagg, J. 1995. From teaching to learning---A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change 27, 6, 12--25.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barron, B., Martin, C., Roberts, E., Osipovich, A., and Ross, M. 2002. Assisting and assessing the development of technical fluencies: Insights from a project-based approach to teaching computer science. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community. G. Stahl Ed. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 668--669. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Beckman, P. 2009. Universal design for learning: A field experiment comparing specific classroom actions. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (ACIS’09). Available online at http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2009/10.Google Scholar
- Ben-Ari, M. 1998. Constructivism in computer science education. SIGCSE Bull. 30, 1, 257--261. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bottge, B. A. and Hasselbring, T. S. 1993. A comparison of two approaches for teaching complex, authentic mathematics problems to adolescents in remedial math classes. Exceptional Children 59, 6, 556--566.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bowe, F. G. 2000. Universal Design in Education: Teaching Nontraditional Students. Bergin and Garvey, Westport, CT.Google Scholar
- Bruch, P. L. 2003. Interpreting and implementing universal instructional design in basic writing. In Curriculum Transformation and Disability: Implementing Universal Design in Higher Education. J. Higbee Ed. University of Minnesota, Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy, Minneapolis, MN, 93--103.Google Scholar
- Buck, D. and Stucki, D. J. 2001. JKarelRobot: A case study in supporting levels of cognitive development in the computer science curriculum. SIGCSE Bull. 33, 1, 16--20. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Buerck, J. P., Malmstrom, T., and Peppers, E. 2003. Learning environments and learning styles: Non-traditional student enrollment and success in an Internet-based versus a lecture-based computer science course. Learn. Environ. Res. 6, 2, 137--155.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Burgstahler, S. 2007a. Equal Access: Universal Design of Computer Labs. University of Washington, Seattle. Available online at http://www.washington.edu/doit/Video/equal.html.Google Scholar
- Burgstahler, S. 2007b. Equal Access: Universal Design of Instruction. University of Washington, Seattle. Available online at http://www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/equal_access_udci.html.Google Scholar
- Burgstahler, S. 2008a. Universal design in higher education. In Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice. S. Burgstahler and R. Cory Eds. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA, 3--20.Google Scholar
- Burgstahler, S. 2008b. Universal design of instruction: From principles to practice. In Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice. S. Burgstahler and R. Cory Eds. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA, 23--43.Google Scholar
- Burgstahler, S. and Doe, T. 2006. Improving postsecondary outcomes for students with disabilities: Designing professional development for faculty. J. Postsecondary Educ. Disability 18, 2, 135--147.Google Scholar
- Burgstahler, S., Corrigan, B., and McCarter, J. 2005. Steps toward making distance learning accessible to students and instructors with disabilities. J. Inf. Technol. Disabilities 11, 1. Available online at http://people.rit.edu/easi/itd/itdv11n1/brgstler.htm.Google Scholar
- Center for Universal Design. n.d. About UD. Available online at http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/about_ud/about_ud.htm.Google Scholar
- Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T, and Chen, S. F. 2001. Learning through computer-based concept mapping with scaffolding aid. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 17, 21--33.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Chickering, A. W. and Gamson, Z. F. 1987. Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. Amer. Assoc. High. Educ. Bull. 39, 7, 3--7.Google Scholar
- Claxton, C. S. and Ralston, Y. 1978. Learning styles: Their impact on teaching and administration. American Association for Higher Education, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., et al. 1997. About UD: Universal design principles. Available online at http://www.design.ncsu.edu/cud/about_ud/udprincipleshtmlformat.htm.Google Scholar
- Cunningham, A. 2003. Supporting student-centered teaching and learning: Technology in Wake Forest University education programs. Contemp. Issues Technol. Teach. Educ. 3, 1.Google Scholar
- Darr, A. and Jones, R. 2008. The contribution of universal design to learning and teaching excellence. In Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice. S. Burgstahler and R. Cory Eds. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA, 105--108.Google Scholar
- Davis, H. C., Carr, L., Cooke, E., and White, S. 2001. Managing diversity: Experiences teaching programming principles. Paper presented at the 2nd Annual Conference on the Teaching of Computing (CTC’01). Available online at eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/9666/1/FinalPaper.pdf.Google Scholar
- DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology). 2007. AccessCollege: Systemic Change for Postsecondary Institutions. University of Washington, Seattle. Available online at http://www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/access_college.html.Google Scholar
- DO-IT. 2009. Final Report of the AccessCollege Project to the Office of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education. University of Washington, Seattle.Google Scholar
- DO-IT. The Center for Universal Design in Education. University of Washington, Seattle. Available online at http://www.washington.edu/doit/CUDE/.Google Scholar
- Dunn, R. and Griggs, S. A. 2000. Practical Approaches to Using Learning Styles in Higher Education. Bergin and Garvey, Westport, CT.Google Scholar
- Durre, I., Richardson, M., Smith, C., Shulman, J. A., and Steele, S. 2008. Universal design of instruction: Reflections of students. In Universal Design in Higher Education: From Principles to Practice. S. Burgstahler and R. Cory Eds. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA. 83--96.Google Scholar
- Gardner, H. 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
- Getzel, E. E., Briel, L. W., and Mcmanus, S. 2003. Strategies for implementing professional development activities on college campuses: Findings from the OPE-funded project sites (1999--2002). J. Postsecondary Educ. Disability 17, 1, 59--78.Google Scholar
- Gill, C. J. 1987. A new social perspective on disability and its implications for rehabilitation. Occupat. Ther. Health Care 4, 1, 49--55.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Golden, D. C. 2002. Instructional software accessibility: A status report. J. Spec. Educ. Technol. 17, 1, 57--60.Google Scholar
- Gordon, D. T. 2002. Curriculum access in the digital age. Harvard Educ. Lett. 18, 1.Google Scholar
- Gordon, D. T., Gravel, J. W., and Schifter, L. A., Eds. 2009. A Policy Reader in Universal Design for Learning. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Gradel, K. and Edson, A. 2009--2010. Putting universal design for learning on the higher ed agenda. J. Educ. Technol. Sys. 38, 2, 111--121.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hackman, H. and Rauscher, L. 2004. A pathway to access for all: Exploring the connections between universal instructional design and social justice education. Equity Excell. Educ. 37, 2, 114--123.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hahn, H. 1988. The politics of physical differences: Disability and discrimination. J. Social Issues 44, 1, 39--47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hall, T., Strangman, N., and Meyer, A. 2003. Differentiated Instruction and Implications for UDL Implementation. National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum at CAST, Wakefield, MA. Available online at http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac/ncac_diffinstructudl.html.Google Scholar
- Harrison, E. G. 2006. Working with faculty toward universally designed instruction: The process of dynamic course design. J. Postsecond. Educ. Disability 19, 2, 152--162.Google Scholar
- Hitchcock, C. and Stahl, S. 2003. Assistive technology, universal design, universal design for learning: Improved learning opportunities. J. Spec. Educ. Technol. 18, 4.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Holmboe, C., Mciver, L., and George, C. 2001. Research agenda for computer science education. In Proceedings of the 13th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group. G. Kadoda Ed. Bournemouth University, London, England, 207--223.Google Scholar
- Horn, L. and Nevill, S. 2006. Profile of Undergraduates in U.S. Postsecondary Education Institutions: 2003--04. Tech. rep. NCES 2006-184. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- Johnson, D. M. and Fox, J. A. 2003. Creating curb cuts in the classroom: Adapting universal design principles to education. In Curriculum Transformation and Disability: Implementing Universal Design in Higher Education. J. Higbee Ed. University of Minnesota, Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy, Minneapolis, MN, 7--22.Google Scholar
- Jones, S. R. 1996. Toward inclusive theory: Disability as social construction. NASPA J. 33, 347--354.Google Scholar
- Kleinman, J. and Entin, E. 2002. Comparison of in-class and distance-learning students’ performance and attitudes in an introductory computer science course. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 17 6, 206--219. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Knowles, M. S. 1980. The Modern Practice of Adult Education. Cambridge Adult Education Prentice Hall Regents, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
- Kolb, D. 1981. Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In The Modern American College. A. W. Chickering Ed. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
- Kortering, L., Mcclannon, T., and Braziel, P. 2005. What algebra and biology students have to say about universal design for learning. National Center for Secondary Education and Transition Research to Practice Brief 4, 2.Google Scholar
- Lewis, L. and Farris, E. 1999. An institutional perspective on students with disabilities in postsecondary education. Education Statistics Quarterly 1, 3. Available online at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/quarterly/vol_1/1_3/4-esq13-b.asp.Google Scholar
- Linn, M. C. 1995. Designing computer learning environments for engineering and computer science: The scaffolded knowledge integration framework. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 4, 2, 103--126.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mason, C. and Orkwis, R. 2005. Instructional theories supporting universal design for learning---Teaching to individual learners. In Universal Design for Learning: A Guide for Teachers and Education Professionals. Council for Exceptional Children Ed. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
- Marghitu, D., Fuller, M., and Brahim, T. B. 2009. Using Web technologies to maximize the universal usability and pedagogy of Auburn University information technology minor. Paper presented at the Transdisciplinary Conference on Integrated Systems, Design, and Process Science (SDPS’09).Google Scholar
- Marghitu, D., Zylla-Jones, E., and Kulkarni, S. B. 2008. Use of technology enhanced education to improve the teaching and learning process. Int. J. Virtual Real. 7, 1, 45--52. Available online at http://www.ijvr.org/issues/issue1-2008/6.pdf.Google Scholar
- McAlexander, P. J. 2003. Using principles of universal design in college composition courses. In Curriculum Transformation and Disability: Implementing Universal Design in Higher Education. J. Higbee Ed. University of Minnesota, Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy, Minneapolis, MN, 105--114.Google Scholar
- Mino, J. 2004. Planning for inclusion: Using universal instructional design to create a learner-centered community college classroom. Equity Excell. Educ. 37, 2, 154--160.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moriarty, M. A. 2007. Inclusive pedagogy: Teaching methodologies to reach diverse learners in science instruction. Equity Excell. Educ. 40, 3, 252--265.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moskal, B., Lurie, D., and Cooper, S. 2004. Evaluating the effectiveness of a new instructional approach. In Proceedings of the 35th Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’04). 75--79. Available online at http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/sigcse/sigcse2004.html. Google ScholarDigital Library
- National Center on Universal Design for Learning. n.d. UDL guidelines--Version 1.0: Research evidence. Available online at http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines.Google Scholar
- O’Leary, C. and Gordon, D. 2009. Universal design, education and technology. Paper presented at the 9th IT and T Conference (ITT’09), 75--79. Available online at http://arrow.dit.ie/ittpapnin/10/.Google Scholar
- O’Loughlin, M. 1992. Rethinking science education: Beyond Piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 29, 8, 791--820.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Office of Postsecondary Education. n.d. Demonstration projects to ensure students with disabilities receive a quality higher education. U. S. Department of Education. Washington, D.C. Available online at http://www.ed.gov/programs/disabilities/index.html.Google Scholar
- Orkwis, R. and McLane, K. 1998. A curriculum every student can use: Design principles for student access. ERIC/OSEP Topical Brief. ERIC/OSEP Special Project. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED423654.Google Scholar
- Ouellett, M. L. 2004. Faculty development and universal instructional design. Equity Excell. Educ. 37, 135--144.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pargas, R. P. 2006. Reducing lecture and increasing student activity in large computer science courses. SIGCSE Bull. 38, 3, 3--7. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pedelty, M. 2003. Making a statement. In Curriculum Transformation and Disability: Implementing Universal Design in Higher Education. J. Higbee Ed. University of Minnesota, Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy, Minneapolis, MN, 71--78.Google Scholar
- Pieper, M. 2005. Digital divide and learning disabilities---Counteracting educational exclusion in information society. Access. Comput. 83, 37--41. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pisha, B. and Coyne, P. 2001. Smart from the start: The promise of universal design for learning. Remedial Spec. Educ. 22, 4, 197--203.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pliner, S. and Johnson, J. 2004. Historical, theoretical, and foundational principles of universal instructional design in higher education. Equity Excell. Educ. 37, 105--113.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pollard, S. and Duvall, R. C. 2006. Everything I needed to know about teaching I learned in kindergarten: Bringing elementary education techniques to undergraduate computer science classes. In Proceedings of the 37th Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’06). 224--228. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pryor, J. H., Hurtado, S., Saenz, V. B., Santos, J. L., and Korn, W. S. 2006. The American Freshman, Forty Year Trends. Higher Education Research Institute, University of California--Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
- Rose, D. H. and Meyer, A. 2002. Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA.Google Scholar
- Rose, D. H., Meyer, A., and Hitchcock, C., Eds. 2005. The Universally Designed Classroom: Accessible Curriculum and Digital Technologies. Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Rose, D. H., Harbour, W. S., Johnston, C. S., Dalye, S. G., and Abarbannel, L. 2006. Universal design for learning in postsecondary education: Reflections and principles and their applications. J. Postsecond. Educ. Dis. 19, 2, 135--151.Google Scholar
- Santangelo, T. and Tomlinson, C. A. 2009. The application of differentiated instruction in postsecondary environments: Benefits, challenges, and future directions. Int. J. Teach. Learn. Higher Educ. 20, 3, 307--323.Google Scholar
- Savidis, A. and Stephanidis, C. 2005. Developing inclusive e-learning and e-entertainment to effectively accommodate learning difficulties. SIGACCESS Access. Comput. 83, 42--54. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Scott, S., McGuire, J., and Shaw, S. 2003. Universal design for instruction: A new paradigm for adult instruction in postsecondary education. Remedial Spec. Educ. 24, 6, 369--379.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shaw, S. F. and Scott, S. S. 2003. New directions in faculty development. J. Postsecond. Educ. Dis. 17, 1, 3--9.Google Scholar
- Silver, P., Bourke, A., and Strehorn, K. C. 1998. Universal instructional design in higher education: An approach for inclusion. Equity Excell. Educ. 31, 2, 47--51.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Svinicki, M. D. 1999. New directions in learning and motivation. New Direct. Teach. Learn. 80, 5--27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Svinicki, M. D. and Dixon, N. M. 1987. The Kolb model modified for classroom activities. Coll. Teach. 35, 141--146.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Swain, J. and Lawrence, P. 1994. Learning about disability: Changing attitudes or challenging understanding? In On Equal Terms: Working with Disabled People. S. French Ed. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, England, 87--102.Google Scholar
- The Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA). 2008. P. L. 110--315. 2008.Google Scholar
- Waite, W. M., Jackson, M. H., Diwan, A., and Leonardi, P. M. 2004. Student culture vs group work in computer science. SIGCSE Bull. 36, 1, 12--16. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wilson, B. C. 2002. A study of factors promoting success in computer science including gender differences. Comput. Sci. Educ. 12, 1--2, 141--164.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wilson, B. C. and Shrock, S. 2001. Contributing to success in an introductory computer science course: A study of twelve factors. SIGCSE Bull. 33, 1, 184--188. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wooldridge, B. 1995. Increasing the effectiveness of university/college instruction: The results of learning style research into course design and delivery. In The Importance of Learning Styles. R. R. Simms and S. J. Sims Eds. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, 49--68.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Universal Design: Implications for Computing Education
Recommendations
Disability and Accessibility in Computer Science Education
SIGCSE 2024: Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 2Students with disabilities face a variety of challenges in computer science education including those related to stigma around disability, inaccessible curriculum, instruction and tools, disability disclosure, and a lack of mentors. In addition, few ...
Access to Computing Education for Students with Disabilities: (Abstract Only)
SIGCSE '18: Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationApproximately 10% of computer science and engineering majors have a disability. Students with disabilities are more likely to drop out of the major than those without disabilities. At the K-12 level, many tools used to teach computing have limited ...
Disability in Computer Science Education
SIGCSE '21: Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationStudents with disabilities face a variety of challenges including those related to stigma around disability, inaccessible tools and instruction, disability disclosure, and a lack of mentors. This BOF will bring together individuals who are interested in ...
Reviews
George Popescu
Universal design (UD) philosophy refers to a mix of educational strategies that address diversity with regard to students. By framing UD within computing teaching and assessment, this paper provides the reader with a short history and development of the field and examples of strategies emerging from the application of UD instructions and assessments. It also suggests future research directions for investigation. The highly relevant introduction describes the current context in which UD represents an effective and useful approach to diversity related to racial minorities, student age, and disabilities. The main diversity issues are clustered into a series of categories such as physical, visual, hearing, learning, attention, and communication differences. The central aim of UD is to address these issues by engaging students in classroom activities. Many quotations from research and practice focus attention on a general framework defining universal design. A key contribution of the paper is its presentation of a set of nine UD-for-learning guidelines, together with examples of course strategies, summarized in a Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology Center (DO-IT) checklist. A conclusive example further details implications of UD research in the classroom. The authors conclude with more general implications in the field of computing education with respect to diversity, existing practices, and learning theories. Online Computing Reviews Service
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments