16 Unpacking the Universal Design for Learning Framework

Chapter Overview

This chapter introduces an instructional planning approach known as the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework. The UDL framework is an approach to instruction that can be applied to computer science education (CS Ed) to benefit all students and meet their different needs. The chapter explores mindsets that support using UDL to design instruction, provides an explanation of the UDL framework, and considers how CS teachers might use the framework in their planning.

Chapter Objectives

After reading this chapter, I can:

• Identify mindsets that support designing instruction with the UDL.
• Describe components of the UDL framework and explain how those components inform instructional design.

Key Terms:

accessibility; accommodations; advocacy; deficit narratives; Individualized Education Program (IEP); neuro-variability; othering; Universal Design for Learning (UDL)

Hana’s Story

Hana^[1] is a technology teacher who teaches elementary CS. At her school, CS is an elective, so Hana sees most of the students on a weekly basis. Because she teaches so many different students, Hana has become very aware of the diverse backgrounds and needs of her learners, including those who have Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) and need additional learning supports. She wants to learn more about how to design and plan inclusive lessons that meet the needs of all her students. She has heard about one approach that might help — the UDL framework. Hana plans to talk more with colleagues who use this approach and explore how it can help her create a CS learning environment that is more welcoming to her students’ diverse needs.

Meeting All Students’ Needs

Hana’s situation is not unique. Many educators feel ill-prepared to meet students’ different learning needs. In this chapter, we’ll examine a framework called the Universal Design for Learning (UDL). UDL can help us develop and create instruction that better meets the needs of all of our diverse learners. To get started, use the prompt below to reflect on what a classroom that meets all students’ needs might be like.

Supporting all learners in CS Ed requires three things: (1) inclusive mindsets and beliefs that all learners can learn CS and deserve to be included in CS Ed; (2) equity-focused pedagogical practices that actively incorporate supports, strategies, and accessible tools that meet the needs of students with disabilities but also help all learners; and (3) advocacy to ensure that all learners can enjoy full participation in CS Ed. Let’s look at how the UDL framework provides us with the resources listed above that we need to support all learners in CS Ed.

What Is Universal Design for Learning?

Before we explore the details of UDL, let’s begin by reflecting on your own teaching.

If you answered yes to any of the instructional practices above, you have implemented aspects of UDL! While some parts of UDL may be new — like the framework itself or its applications to CS Ed — when teachers learn about the UDL framework for the first time, they often indicate that they already use some, if not many, of the practices. However, they have not yet had the opportunity to think about those practices in terms of the overall UDL framework. As you learn about UDL, you’ll notice the practices that you already implement and identify new practices to incorporate into your teaching that will increase accessibility and full participation in your classroom.

So what is UDL? UDL is an instructional planning approach that focuses on how to include the broadest range of learners by reducing barriers to learning, considering accessibility, and increasing the flexibility of instruction (Center for Applied Special Technology [CAST], 2018). Essentially, UDL helps us answer a fundamental teaching question: How can we plan and teach in ways that include all learners? UDL draws on our increasing understanding of neuroscience and how the brain works to think about learning through a commitment to the full participation of all learners.

Mindsets for Using UDL

Before designing instruction using UDL, it’s important to understand the foundational mindsets that support a UDL approach. As an entry point into exploring these mindsets, take a moment to reflect on your students.

UDL Mindset 1: There is no such thing as the “average learner.”

As your reflection probably showed, your learners are very diverse. In fact, while society perpetuates the myth of an “average learner” who should be able to do certain things in a classroom, neuroscience has shown that an average learner does not exist! In his book The End of Average, scientist Todd Rose explains that there is so much variation among humans that there is no such thing as the average learner (Rose, 2016). We each have a unique learning profile that reflects our preferences, strengths, and areas of challenge. The differences between our learning profiles are more diverse than our fingerprints! So to take up a UDL mindset, we first need to debunk the myth of the average learner.

Instead of learning patterns that follow a non-existent “average” student, we each have an individual, jagged learning profile. Our jagged learning profiles reflect how we are each inclined toward some tasks while we struggle with others. Similarly, we have deeper background experiences (including power dynamics we may have encountered) in some areas than in others and that can affect us in positive or negative ways. Our learning profiles also change based on whether we are tired, hungry, energized, happy, and many other factors.

Rose (2016) shared a story of what can happen when we try to design for “average.” During World War II, the U.S. Air Force tried to design a “perfect” seat in their fighter planes that would fit all pilots. To try to meet everyone’s needs, they built a seat that fit the average of measurements from many pilots. Instead, the seat didn’t work for any of the pilots because none of them had measurements that fit the average. Learning from this experience, they instead designed a seat that was adjustable to each pilot’s unique measurements.

UDL tries to do the same. Rather than teaching to the “average” student, UDL seeks to widen what “counts” as average. UDL intentionally designs for student variation and builds in options so that each student can adjust the learning experience to fit their specific needs.

UDL Mindset 2: All students deserve access to CS education.

We use the term “CS for all” a lot in CS Ed. But what does this mean? We’ve explored some definitions elsewhere in this guide (see Chapters 1 and 4). From a UDL perspective, CS for all means recognizing the following:

• All students can learn CS, but not all students will learn CS in the same way.
• All students can participate in CS in a meaningful way, even if what they learn is modified to meet their needs. Expectations and outcomes for learners may be different. However, to ensure justice, we must keep expectations true to a learner’s abilities and be careful not to impose limitations based on our own biases or preconceived ideas of what learners are or “should” be capable of doing.

As teachers, what we do matters! Even small changes to our mindsets and actions can result in big differences that shape how students feel included, valued, and part of the classroom community.

UDL Mindset 3: We are not trying to “fix” our learners. Instead, we are trying to remove barriers in the learning environment.

After reading the above statement for mindset 3, take a moment to reflect on your own settings. What are some barriers that you have noticed during CS instruction or in CS Ed settings?

When we plan our CS instruction, we try to anticipate the barriers that would prevent all of our students from being able to fully participate. Sometimes, considering barriers leads us to identify challenges that the students are facing, and we frame the barrier as something that the students need to change or fix. For example, a teacher might notice, “My students can’t read the directions in this CS assignment.” The teacher might “blame” students for failing to succeed at the CS assignment because of their reading levels or other “problems” located within the student. Framing barriers in this way often perpetuates deficit narratives about students’ (lack of) abilities.

Thinking about barriers from a UDL perspective allows us to flip the narrative. Instead of naming the problem in terms of the student, we can consider how students’ struggles indicate a challenge in the accessibility of the learning materials. Taking a UDL mindset would lead us to frame the teacher’s noticing instead as, “The text complexity and formatting of the directions are barriers to understanding this CS assignment.” A teacher facing this challenge from a UDL perspective might simplify the language in the directions, break down the directions into smaller steps, and use fonts and formatting that make the directions easier to read and follow for students with different needs. This shift moves us away from pathologizing and othering our students. It also provides us with clear directions toward solutions. See Resource 1 for an activity to practice flipping deficit narratives about students to framings that take up UDL perspectives.

Unpacking UDL

Now that we’ve thought about the mindsets that teachers should have to adopt UDL approaches, let’s examine the framework itself more closely. UDL is an instructional planning and teaching approach based on research about how people learn (CAST, 2018). It helps us think about our learning environments, our curriculum, and our instructional approaches to proactively meet the needs of all learners by reducing barriers to learning. Because UDL is intended to be universal, it seeks to meet all students’ needs, regardless of background, language, abilities, and physical limitations. UDL offers a strong foundation for teachers to provide accommodations and modifications required for students with IEPs.

The UDL approach and framework was developed by the CAST based on neuroscience research. Our brains are made up of billions of neurons that receive information from the world around us and process it. Those neurons are wired together in unique ways for each individual person. This explains why there is no such thing as an average learner. CAST uses the term neuro-variability to describe how no two human brains are alike (CAST, 2018). Just as no two fingerprints are the same, there are infinite possibilities in the variation of human brains. Neuro-variability provides evidence that learners do not have a single learning style, despite popular beliefs to the contrary. Instead, learners rely on many parts of the brain working together, which changes in different contexts and in response to different conditions (CAST, 2018).

UDL seeks to capture how we are each unique in why we want to learn, what information we take in and how we process it, and how we demonstrate our understanding of what we have learned. To accomplish this, UDL is based on three networks within our brain: recognition networks that impact “what” we learn, strategic networks that impact “how” we learn, and affective networks that impact “why” we learn. The video UDL at a Glance provides an overview of the different components of UDL that are built based on our understanding of the three networks above.^[2]

Universal Design for Learning draws on (1) an understanding of the brain’s affective networks to design for multiple means of engagement, (2) an understanding of the brain’s recognition networks to design for multiple means of representation, and (3) an understanding of the brain’s strategic networks to design for multiple means of action and expression. These three principles are the foundation of UDL (CAST, 2024). Engagement allows us to attend to the “why” of learning, representation allows us to think about the “what” of learning, and action and expression allows us to consider the “how” of learning.

Within each of the three overarching principles, UDL provides guidelines to think about how to enact each principle. In turn, each guideline has considerations that teachers can incorporate into their instructional design. All the guidelines for a principle work together to provide students with access, support, and executive functioning through the learning process (CAST, 2024). Let’s explore each of the principles in more detail.

Engagement: The “Why” of Learning

Thinking about engagement allows us to consider what is important to our students and what motivates them. Learners come into CS Ed with different motivations, interests, challenges, and experiences. Providing students with multiple ways to engage allows them to connect to computing in ways that are relevant to them and that meet their different needs.

The three guidelines for the principle of designing for multiple means of engagement are:

• Welcoming interests and identities
• Sustaining effort and persistence
• Emotional capacity

Some considerations that teachers might think about as they design for multiple means of engagement include things like designing in ways that optimize choice and autonomy; nurture joy and play; optimize challenge and support; foster belonging and community; and promote individual and collective reflection. See all of the considerations for the principle of engagement in CAST’s full guidelines.^[3]

Representation: The “What” of Learning

Thinking about engagement allows us to consider how our students prefer to take in information. It also invites us to reflect on how those preferences might change based on the content area, students’ prior experiences with information, and even their mood. Providing students with multiple representations of information allows them to access content in relevant ways that meet their needs.

The three guidelines for the principle of designing for multiple means of representation are:

• Perception
• Language and symbols
• Building knowledge

Some considerations that teachers might think about as they design for multiple means of representation include things like supporting multiple ways to perceive information; clarifying vocabulary, symbols, and language structures; illustrating content through multiple media; connecting prior knowledge to new learning; and cultivating multiple ways of knowing and making meaning. See all of the considerations for the principle of representation in CAST’s full guidelines.^[4]

Action and Expression: The “How” of Learning

Thinking about action and expression allows teachers to consider students’ preferences for how they learn and strengths they bring to learning. Action and expression includes physical action and different types of communication. Designing for multiple means of action and expression enables students to learn in ways that work best for them and to show what they know in ways that are responsive to their different needs.

The three guidelines for the principle of designing for multiple means of action and expression are:

• Interaction
• Expression and communication
• Strategy development

Some considerations that teachers might think about as they design for multiple means of representation include varying and honoring different methods for response, navigation, and movement; using multiple media and tools for communication, construction, composition, and creativity; and helping students set meaningful goals and learn to anticipate and plan for challenges. See all of the considerations for the principle of representation in CAST’s full guidelines.^[5]

Why Use UDL?

UDL pushes back on traditional understandings of curriculum as a static whole, with lessons building on previous lessons in a single, established, linear way. In this traditional approach, each lesson needs to be differentiated with accommodations to learners’ needs. One of the advantages of designing for learning with the UDL framework is that you build the curriculum to be more accessible for all students from the beginning by removing barriers before they become a part of the learning environment. For example, if a lesson requires students to listen to an audio file, designing with UDL would ensure that students had access to a closed-captioned file, subtitles in multiple languages, or a file with someone signing the content. These different options could help all students, including those with different learning needs and preferences. The teacher may need to provide additional accommodations such as listening in a quiet setting to someone with a hearing impairment or sensory processing disorder. But designing curricula with UDL focuses on learners from the beginning to create an initial design that benefits all learners.

While a teacher reviewing the entire guidelines document might feel overwhelmed at first, it is important to not think of the guidelines as a giant checklist. Instead, it is a framework that with thought and consideration can help teachers create learning experiences that will be beneficial to all students. There is also a lot of overlap between the UDL principles and what teachers already do. The UDL framework provides a new way of thinking about learning as a whole, centering the goal of guiding students to become expert learners who are purposeful and motivated, resourceful and knowledgeable, and strategic and self-directed. UDL can be seen as a new lens to look through. Instead of traditional approaches that want to change the learner to fit the shoe, UDL empowers learners to find their own shoes and take meaningful steps toward limitless learning.

This kind of limitless CS learning is a journey, and an important part of that journey is advocating for all students to be included in CS opportunities. Advocacy involves publicly supporting a cause, idea, or policy and garnering support from colleagues and administrators. It requires listening to and learning from students and using our privilege to raise up the goals and interests of less-privileged groups (see Love, 2019). Advocacy also fosters and amplifies self-advocacy. It is an act of critical teacher-leadership (Bradley-Levine, 2018). UDL can be a key resource in our advocacy efforts.

At the same time, it is critical to remember that advocacy itself is a journey. You are not expected to fix a broken system single-handedly. Such expectations are neither fair nor healthy nor possible. Instead, focus on growth by taking steps to advocate where you are at, within your circle of influence. Wherever you are along the journey, you can make a difference. UDL allows you to make that difference in all instructional contexts and with all learner populations, working toward full participation in CS Ed.

Because you are likely already implementing many UDL practices even if you haven’t named them as such, we offer the following reflection activity as a way for you to think about how you are already applying the three UDL principles in your instruction.

The different answers you provided are evidence that you are already implementing aspects of UDL! As you continue to reflect, you may also identify ways that you are already taking up UDL mindsets and engaging in advocacy for all of your students. In the next chapter, we’ll explore how to integrate UDL into CS instruction specifically.

Revisiting Hana’s Story

As Hana talked with and learned from colleagues, she recognized several things she already did in her classroom that aligned with the UDL principles. For example, Hana prioritized representing information in multiple ways (through providing students with physical objects that they could manipulate, pictures, videos, written text and through reading text aloud). Thinking about her teaching from a UDL perspective helped Hana realize how these practices were supporting all her students, including her multilingual learners and students with disabilities, in ways that she hadn’t acknowledged before.^[6]

Hana decided to add a few more UDL options into her instructional design. As she developed her next CS unit, Hana focused on the principle of action and expression and empowered her students to work through their project with a variety of approaches, including videos, guided handouts, and paired work partners. Hana was excited to notice how these changes allowed all of her students to be more successful and deepened their engagement, including for some of her students with disabilities who had struggled in the past. Hana realized that they had likely struggled not because of their abilities but because of barriers that had been present in the learning environment. Now that Hana had removed those barriers, her students were finding new ways to succeed and enjoy CS.

At the same time, most of the changes that Hana made were ones that she felt applied to learning and classrooms generally. Hana wondered if there were specific things she could do to improve her students’ ability to learn and engage in computing. Chapter 17 explores Hana’s wondering further.

Reflection Questions:

1. Now that you have read the chapter, how would you describe an inclusive, accessible classroom? (See Reflection 1.)
2. How might you explain UDL and its associated mindsets to a colleague who believes very strongly in an average learner? Who doesn’t necessarily recognize the importance of giving CS learning opportunities to all learners? Who tends to describe students through deficit narratives?

Takeaways for Practice:

• Consider the classroom and educational spaces. How are the physical designs, technology, resources, curricula, interactions, and so on accessible (or not)? Identify one change that you can enact to make your space more accessible.
• Chapters 15 and 16 were written to incorporate UDL principles into their designs. Look back through the chapters, especially the embedded activities. Make a list of things you notice about how the chapters incorporate UDL.

Glossary

Term	Definition
accessibility	The process of making activities, environments, information, and interactions available to people with different needs.
accommodations	Changes to a learning environment or to the presentation of curricular content that are offered to help students access content and complete learning tasks that are a regular part of the curriculum. Examples include using a microphone, arranging seating to facilitate movement, or using assistive technologies.
advocacy	Publicly supporting and championing policies and changes that support equity-oriented CS education. Advocacy involves taking action to disrupt the status quo.
deficit narratives	Broadly held beliefs, including stereotypes, that identify groups of people as lacking or deficient in some way (Louie et al., 2021; Steele, 2011).
Individualized Education Program (IEP)	A legal document mandated by federal law (IDEA; U.S. Department of Education, 2004) that outlines services and support that a student with disabilities will receive as part of their public education.
neuro-variability	A term developed by CAST to describe how no two human brains are alike and that, consequently, there is no one “right” way to learn.
othering	The process of treating a group of people (often those with minoritized or marginalized identities) as intrinsically different from the dominant social norm.
Universal Design for Learning (UDL)	An instructional planning and teaching approach that seeks to meet the needs of all learners by reducing barriers to learning. The three principles of UDL include providing learners with (1) multiple means of engagement; (2) multiple means of representation; and (3) multiple means of action and engagement (CAST, 2024).

References

Bradley-Levine, J. (2018). Advocacy as a practice of critical teacher leadership. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 9(1), 47-62. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1182705

Center for Applied Special Technology. (2018). UDL and the learning brain. https://www.cast.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/cast-udlandthebrain-20220228-a11y.pdf

Center for Applied Special Technology. (2024). The UDL guidelines. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

Louie, N., Adiredja, A. P., & Jessup, N. (2021). Teacher noticing from a sociopolitical perspective: The FAIR framework for anti-deficit noticing. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 53, (95-107). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01229-2

Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Beacon Press.

Rose, T. (2016). The end of average: How we succeed in a world that values sameness. HarperOne.

Steele, C. M. (2011). Whistling Vivaldi: How stereotypes affect us and what we can do. W. W. Norton & Company.

U.S. Department of Education. (2004). Individuals with disabilities education act. Public Law 108-446. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 https://sites.ed.gov/idea/

Resource 1: Developing UDL Mindsets