Universal Design for Learning (UDL): Foundation

Embraced by a majority of institutions, UDL is helpful in creating more accessible learning environments. BCcampus, in its open text on accessibility, curated a clear and concise overview of the principles of UDL:

Universal Design is the process of creating products (devices, environments, systems, and processes) that are usable by people with the widest possible range of abilities, operating within the widest possible range of situations (environments, conditions, and circumstances). Universal Design emerged from the slightly earlier concept of being barrier-free, the broader accessibility movement, and adaptive technology and assistive technology. It also seeks to blend aesthetics into these core considerations. (https://opentextbc.ca/accessibilitytoolkit/)

Two common definitions of Universal Design provide a solid foundation:

Definition 1

Universal Design or Universal Instructional Design (UID) is an approach to teaching that consists of the proactive design and use of inclusive instructional and evaluation strategies. This approach provides academic access to a broad range of learners, including those with disabilities, while:

Definition 2

Universal Instructional Design (UID)  is an approach to designing course instruction, materials, and content to benefit people of all learning [preferences] without adaptation or retrofitting. UID provides equal access to learning, not simply equal access to information. UID allows the learner to control the method of accessing information while the instructor monitors the learning process and initiates any beneficial methods. …It should be noted that UID does not remove academic challenges; it removes barriers to access.

A picture is worth at least 500 words

CAST (Center for Applied Special Technology) is a leader in growing awareness and practice of UDL. Access CAST’s UDL Graphic Organizer with active links or review the graphic below with its hotspots (+) highlighting how Open at Scale plans to support and foster UDL principles.

Point people, with advanced experience and knowledge of accessibility in design, will also be attached to the Open at Scale projects.

Growing beyond UDL: Inclusive design

Although it does not have the permeation in colleges and universities, Inclusive Design stacks additional benefits and considerations on top of our understanding of UDL.

As communicated by Ontario’s own Inclusive Design Research Centre at OCADU, Inclusive Design is, “…design that considers the full range of human diversity with respect to ability, language, culture, gender, age and other forms of human difference” (https://idrc.ocadu.ca).

Three dimensions of Inclusive Design

1: Recognize diversity and uniqueness

Inclusive design keeps the diversity and uniqueness of each individual in mind. As individuals spread out from the hypothetical average, the needs of individuals that are outliers, or at the margins, become more diverse. Most individuals stray from the average in some facet of their needs or goals. This means that a mass solution does not work well. Optimal inclusive design is best achieved through one-size-fit-one configurations. Flexible or adaptable systems such as digital systems are most amenable to this. Inclusively designed personalization and flexible configurations must be integrated to maintain interoperability and currency. This also does not imply adaptive systems that make choices for the user. Instead, inclusive design recognizes the importance of self-determination and self-knowledge.

2: Inclusive process and tools

The process of design and the tools used in design are inclusive. Inclusive design teams should be as diverse as possible and include individuals who have a lived experience of the “extreme users” (as coined by Rich Donovan) the designs are intended for.  This also respects the edict “nothing about us without us,” without relegating people with disabilities to the role of subjects of research or token participants in design exercises. To support diverse participation and enable the design to be as closely linked as possible to the application, the design and development tools should become as accessible and usable as possible. This dimension does not denigrate the skills of professional designers but calls for those skills to become more accessible and for the design process to become more inclusive of diverse designers and consumers.

3: Broader beneficial impact

It is the responsibility of inclusive designers to be aware of the context and broader impact of any design, and to strive to effect a beneficial impact beyond the intended beneficiary of the design. Inclusive design should trigger a virtuous cycle of inclusion, leverage the “curb-cut effect,” and recognize the inter-connectedness of users and systems. Realizing this broader positive impact requires the integration of inclusive design into design in general. This third dimension supports healthier, wealthier, and wiser societies.

Why not use the term Universal Design?

Inclusive Design can be seen as Universal Design with a number of provisos. Leading the understanding of Inclusive Design, in Canada and beyond, is OCAD U and its Inclusive Design Research Centre (IDRC). It provides concise information and distinction.

Inclusive Design wants to distinguish itself from the current associations with the term Universal Design. The associations  to avoid are not necessarily part of any formalized definition of Universal Design, but nevertheless are part of the popular assumptions about the term.

The distinctions Inclusive Design wants to make are:

The context: Universal design has its origins in architectural and industrial design – in education and its digital realm the constraints, design options, and design methods are very different. The most important difference is that designers in education do not need to design one-size-fits-all; the flexibility of the digital allows for a one-size-fits-one personalized design approach to inclusion.

The user: Universal Design has become associated with disabilities and a fairly constrained categorization of disabilities. Other than the commonly quoted principles of Universal Design, much universal design guidance categorizes design advice according to constrained categories of disability. Inclusive Design wants to stress that the individual is multi-faceted and the constraints or design needs they have may arise from a number of factors or characteristics.

The method: Because educators are dealing with digital design, the design considerations are very different from the non-digital. With the common goal of inclusion, educators can have a differently configured “entrance” for each person. In fact, they can have multiple entrances for one person, each for a different context. Similarly, educators can have a different “handle” for each person, each context, or each goal. The design constraints are very different from the domain in which Universal Design originated. While Universal Design is about creating a common design that works for everyone, educators have the freedom to create a design system that can adapt, morph, or stretch to address each design need presented by each individual.

The common notions with Universal Design that Inclusive Design espouses and stresses are:

1. Designing systems so that they accommodate people with disabilities results in systems that work better for everyone.
2. Segregated, specialized design is not sustainable and does not serve the individual or society in the long run.

Source: https://idrc.ocadu.ca/resources