Postsecondary education has experienced rapid change in its student population. College students with learning disabilities (LD) represent a growing presence on college campuses across the country. Traditional means of meeting the learning needs of college students with LD through retrofitted changes and accommodations to classroom instruction have proven limited. Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) offers a new paradigm for approaching equal educational access. This article will describe UDI and discuss its implications for enhancing learning for students with learning disabilities and other diverse learners.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Almanac Issue. (2000, September 1). The Chronicle of Higher Education, 67(1).
2.
Alper, S., Ryndak, D.L., & Schloss, C.N. (2001). Alternate assessment of students with disabilities in inclusive settings. Boston: Allyn & Bacon
3.
American Council on Education. (1999). Facts in brief: Students of color experience enrollment gains. Higher Education and National A fairs, 48(19), 1—2.
4.
American Council on Education. (2000). Facts in brief: At-risk students succeed in high school and beyond . Higher Education and National A fairs, 49(14), 1—2.
5.
American Council on Education & American Association of University Professors. (2000). Does diversity make a di ference? Three research studies on diversity in college classrooms . Washington, DC: Authors.
6.
Bigaj, S.J., Shaw, S.F., & McGuire, J.M. (1999). Community-technical college faculty willingness to use and self-reported use of accommodation strategies for students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Vocational Special NeedsEducation, 21(2), 3—14.
7.
Bowe, F. (2000). Universal Design in education: Teaching nontraditional students. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
8.
Brinckerhoff, L.C., McGuire, J.M., & Shaw, S.F. (2002). Postsecondary education and transition for college students with learning disabilities (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
9.
California community colleges improve access to alternate media. ( 2001, June). Disability Compliance for Higher Education, 6, 4.
10.
11.
Center for Applied Special Technology. (1999 ). Peabody, MA: Author. Retrieved March 28, 2000, from the World Wide Web : http://www.cast.org
12.
The Center for Universal Design: Environments and products for all people . (1997). Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University, The Center for Universal Design. Retrieved June 18, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/index.html
13.
Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. American Association for Higher Education, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED282491)
14.
Covington, G., & Hannah, B. (1997). Access by design. New York : Van Nostrand Reinhold.
15.
Dukes, L.L. (2001). The process: The development of the AHEAD Program Standards. Journal of Postsecondary Education andDisability , 14(2), 62—80.
16.
Finn, C., Rotherham, A., & Hokanson, C. (2001). Rethinking special education for a new century . Washington, DC: The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
17.
Henderson, C. (1999). College freshmen with disabilities, Statistical Year 1998. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
18.
Houck, C., Asselin, S., Troutman, G., & Arrington, J. (1992). Students with LD in the university environment: A study of faculty and student perceptions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 678—684.
19.
20.
Kameenui, E., & Carnine, D. (1998). E fective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21.
Kauffman, J.M., & Hallahan, D.P. (1995). (Eds.). The illusion of full inclusion: A comprehensive critique of a current special education band-wagon . Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
22.
Lords, E. (2000). Campuses will become increasingly diverse, report says. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved May 25, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/cgi2-bin/printable.cgi
23.
Magner, D. (1998, January 9). Survey suggests teaching may be getting more emphasis at research universities. Chronicle of Higher Education.
24.
Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (2000). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for e fective instruction. Columbus, OH: Merrill /Prentice Hall.
25.
McGuire, J., & Scott, S. (2002). Universal Design for Instruction: A promising new paradigm for higher education. Perspectives, 28(2), 27—29.
26.
Morelli, R.A. (1999). The World Wide Web and the liberal arts: Threat or opportunity? In M. W. McLaughlin, D. A. Hyland, & J. R. Spencer (Eds.), Teaching matters: Essays on liberal education at the millennium (pp. 168—182). Hartford, CT: Trinity College.
27.
National Center for Education Statistics. ( 1999). Students with disabilities in postsecondary education: A profile of preparation, participation and outcomes (NCES 1999-187). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education .
28.
Rothstein, L.F. (2002). Judicial intent and legal precedents. In L. C. Brinckerhoff, J. M. McGuire, & S. F. Shaw (Eds.), Postsecondary education and transition for students with learning disabilities (pp. 71—106). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
29.
Scotch, R. (2000). Disability policy: An eclectic overview. Journal of DisabilityPolicy Studies, 11(1), 6—11.
30.
Scott, S., & Gregg, N. (2000). Meeting the evolving needs of faculty in providing access for college students with LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 33, 158—167.
31.
Scott, S., McGuire, J., & Foley, T. (2001). Universal Design for Instruction: An exploration of principles for anticipating and responding to student diversity in the classroom. Storrs, CT: Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability.
32.
Scott, S., McGuire, J., & Foley, T. (2003). Universal Design for Instruction: A framework for anticipating and responding to disability and other diverse learning needs in the college classroom. Equity and Excellence in Education , 36(1), 40—49.
33.
Shaw, S.F., & Dukes, L.L. (2001). Program standards for disability services in higher education. Journal of Postsecondary Education andDisability , 14(2), 81—90.
34.
Shaw, S.F., McGuire, J.M., & Madaus, J.W. (1997). Standards of professional practice. Journal of Postsecondary Education andDisability, 12(3), 26—35.
35.
Shaw, S.F., Scott, S.S., & McGuire, J.M. (2001). Teaching college students with learning disabilities (ERIC Digest E618). Arlington, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education.
36.
Silver, P., Bourke, A., & Strehorn, K. (1998). Universal instructional design in higher education: An approach for inclusion. Equity and Excellence in Education , 31(2), 47—51.
37.
Stodden, R.A. (2000). Postsecondary education and employment for students with disabilities: Executive summary. National Center for the Study of Postsecondary Educational supports, University of Hawaii.
38.
Texas Education Agency. (2001). Division of textbook administration: Overview, textbook adoption and distribution [Online]. Available: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/Textbooks/adoptprocess/overview.htm
39.
Upcraft, M. (1996). Teaching today's college students. In R. J. Menges, M. Weimer , & Associates (Eds.), Teaching on solid ground: Using scholarship to improve practice (pp. 21—41). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
40.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000a). Learning without limits: An agenda for the O fice of Postsecondary Education . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
41.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000b). National Center for Education Statistics, The Condition of Education 2000 (NCES 2000-602). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
42.
U.S. Department of Education. (2000c). Twenty-second annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
43.
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Quality higher education programs: The power of one [Brochure]. Washington, DC: Author.
44.
Welch, P. (Ed.). (1995). Strategies for teaching Universal Design. Boston: Adaptive Environments.
45.
Wilkoff, W., & Abed, L. (1994). Practicing Universal Design: An interpretation of the ADA. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
