Learning is Personal: Our Experiences Define Our Reality
My personal educational philosophy is best described as a blend of constructivism and pragmatism. Consistent with constructivism, I recognize that each life experience I’ve faced shaped not only my understanding of the immediate context, but my understanding of reality in general, as they were assigned meaning. Consistent with pragmatism, the validity of those meanings was objectively judged by their outcomes, echoing William James sentiment that ideas only have value to us when they work (Costa, 2014).
My time in clinical practice and as a student has taught me experientially many truths about teaching, and I approach my future career through the lens of these lessons. This begins with the realization that learning was an active process on my account. Ambrose, Bridges, DiPietro, Lovett, & Norman (2010) offered a definition of learning I’d like to expand upon. To me, learning is the learner engaging their environment, discovering truth, and developing skills, enabling them to accomplish that which they could not before. I can’t learn for my students, just as my teachers could not learn for me. My role then becomes that of a facilitator (Merriam & Bierema, 2014). I’m to provide opportunities for discovery and help them make sense of the truths they find; not dictate these truths for them, limiting their interpretation to my perspective.
As all my patients have presented with their own needs and concerns, and no one treatment plan was right for all of them; my students are all individuals with unique needs that must be appreciated. Some of these are cultural, others physical or emotional, but all are important to that student’s identity and worthy of respect. However, a classroom does not consist of a single student, but a roomful of unique individuals. Personalization is a worthwhile goal (Dosch & Zidon, 2014); but because time is limited, the sheer volume of possibilities I could face means that efforts to tailor to one detracts from the others. My solution then becomes to anticipate, identify, and remove potential barriers rather than react to needs as they present. This is the logic behind universal design (McGill OSD, 2013); and I’ve chosen to embrace this model because it allows each student to personalize my instruction according to their need, fulfilling my responsibilities to them as individuals and as a class.
Universal Design
Using universal design (UD), products and environments are designed to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for further adaptation. Principles of UD include providing communication that is perceptible by users regardless of ambient conditions or the user's sensory abilities; and easy to understand, regardless of the user's experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level. (Connell, et al., 1997). It is based upon the socio-political model of disability, which views disability as a neutral difference in the interaction between an individual and society; as opposed to the medical model of disability, which views it as a condition of the individual which must be corrected (Missouri State University Disability Resource Center, 2020). Universal design principles can be applied to many products and services, including instruction. When this is done, it is often referred to as Universal Design for Learning (UDL). In UDL, the learning goals of the unit become achievable by individuals with wide differences in their abilities in various areas using flexible curricular materials and alternative activities that are built into the instructional design. This can minimize, but not necessarily eliminate the need for individualized accommodations (DO-IT, n.d.). As a result, a single set of tools designed to be accessible by all can be created, rather than creating new tools for each situation that arises. This is often the more economical option, in both time and financial resources (McGill OSD, 2013).
The application of UDL is built around the principles of providing multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression, addressing the “why”, “what”, and “how” of learning, respectively (CAST, 2018). Practical examples include using a variety of instructional methods when presenting materials and providing clear explanations and feedback (Missouri State University Disability Resource Center, 2020).
How I Use Universal Design in my Courses
In my online Human Anatomy & Physiology lab courses, content is presented through a combination of text files, PowerPoints which combine text with visual representations, and videos that combine visual and audio representations of the material. Additionally, users can add closed captioning to the videos through a button on the lower toolbar. This ensures that all users within the course have equal access to the material, in accordance with the principles of UDL. As an additional benefit, students with the ability to do so can engage the material through multiple formats (seeing, hearing, and reading it), strengthening their association with the material, improving retention, recall, and transfer (Clark & Mayer, 2016). This is beneficial to all and represents good pedagogical practice.
Considerations and Tips for Preparing UDL Content
If you’re interested in preparing UDL content for your course, here are a few tips to help you get started.
- Use headings to organize data, and high-contrast font when preparing written text.
- Ensure that information relayed graphically is supported by descriptive text.
- When preparing audio content, speak as clearly as possible, and avoid idioms.
- When preparing video content, make sure closed captioning is available or provide a written transcript. If your video presentation includes diagrams, verbally explain relevant content presented in the diagram.
- >When possible, record synchronous sessions and make these recordings available to students.
You can learn more about these considerations in the “Ableism” portion of the DiversityEDU training offered through Daytona State College. You may access that through the following link DiversityEDU.
Additional Considerations
Our students are unique, valuable individuals. Their experiences shaping their realities are different. This is good because different perspectives bring novel solutions by reframing the problem. If welcomed, these differences can benefit all involved. If dismissed, it could marginalize and alienate those we’re trying to help. When this happens, everyone in the class loses out on what that person had to offer. To avoid this, there are a few additional things to consider.
- Use correct terminology in all interactions.
- Set ground rules for discussions, and address infractions immediately.
- Model appropriate behavior.
- Privately discuss concerns with a student before making any assumptions.
By following these steps, you can create an online learning environment beneficial to all; where each student is free to express and share their ideas. This is how learning happens, and why we’re here.
Additional Help
Please contact the Faculty Innovation Center (Building 150, Suite 200 on the Daytona Beach Campus) anytime Monday - Friday, between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM if you would like more information about integrating these principles into your course. You can also contact us at x3485 or by email at fic@daytonastate.edu
While you're here reading this, don't forget to subscribe to the Faculty Innovation Blog to keep abreast of all our exciting news; along with tips and tricks to help improve your courses.
Christopher Smith
Instructional Designer, Division of Online Studies
christopher.smith@daytonastate.edu | 386-506-4277
Online Studies | Faculty Innovation Center (FIC)
References
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: 7 Research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., . . . Vanderheiden, G. (1997, April 1). The Principles of Universal Design. NC State University, The Center for Universal Design. https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm
Costa, L. (2014, March 13). Pragmatism [Video File]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkW3Zfptr2s
DO-IT. (n.d.). Universal design vs. accommodation. University of Washington. https://www.washington.edu/doit/universal-design-vs-accommodation
Dosch, M., & Zidon, M. (2014). The course fits us: Differentiated instruction in the college classroom. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(3). https://qpm.uni-pr.edu/uploads/files/2016/March/22/Differentiated_Instruction_in_the_College_Classroom1458677802.pdf
McGill OSD. (2013). Universal design at McGill University [Video file]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjUKGBipJZA
Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2014). Adult learning: Linking theory and practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Missouri State University Disability Resource Center. (2020, June 9). Universal design and the socio-political model of disability. https://www.missouristate.edu/disability/Philosophy.htm
If you're interested in reading any of the articles above, please contact your DSC librarians at DSC Library