Interpretation
I presented at a conference on Saturday about UDL. I had an interesting comment- isn't universal a concept that should apply for all. I had not thought of it that way. I looked it up in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_design and I see how that could be an interpretation of universal design. How can we make the distinction? I also got the question "how is Universal Design different from differentiated learning?" Tough questions. Wish you guys had been with me to help field these questions :-)
posted by S McPherson @ 7:58 PM
2 Comments:
I think Universal Design will result in differentiated instruction. For example, Thinking Reader
http://www.tomsnyder.com
offers different supports that can be adapted to the individual needs of students. Does this make sense?
Thanks guys. Your responses are similar to mine in that differentiation is starting with the same content and adjusting to accommodate differences. UDL is thinking of flexibility and choice from the get-go. The article Hope posted, (thanks Hope) focuses on flexibility and choice in curriculum planning to maximize the number of children included. This is in contrast to presenting the material to a select group and then making adaptations for others. In response to the question I also mentioned that UDL principles are based on brain-research in how learning occurs. The neural networks are considered in curriculum development so that the 3 major ones identified for recognition, strategic, and affective are addressed. However, it's a fine line and both UDL and differentiation may be appropriate. At the end of the day both approaches are attempts to increase access so that learning occurs.
Post a Comment
<< Home