Universal Design for instruction in Postsecondary Education: A Systematic review of Empirically Based Articles

Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) in postsecondary education is a relatively new concept/framework that has generated significant support. The purpose of this literature review was to examine existing empirical research, including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods, on the use of UDI (and related terms) in postsecondary education. The criteria used to select articles included in this review were: (a) empirical studies in peer-reviewed journals, (b) articles published in 2000 or after, and (c) articles on the use of UDI, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), Universal Instructional Design (UID), and Universal Design (UD) in postsecondary education settings. Eight articles met the search criteria. This limited number of empirically based articles led to the conclusion that more research needs to be conducted on the use of UDI in postsecondary education. The primary recommendation for future research is to operationalize the principles of UDI and investigate its impact on the outcomes of postsecondary education students with and without disabilities. Diversity in postsecondary education has expanded over the past two decades, creating a need for colleges and universities to reassess traditional instructional strategies to better meet the needs of all students (Newby, 2005; Scott, McGuire, & Shaw, 2003). As reported in the Chronicle of Higher Education (2008), this increase in higher education diversity includes (a) 35.35% of students being of minority status, (b) 11.3% of students reporting a disability, (c) 45.3% of students attending part-time, and (d) 21.5% of students being ages 25 to 34 with 18.4% being over age 34. This increasingly varied student body presents diverse learning needs often not addressed through traditional instructional approaches in higher education (e.g., lecture). Many recent principles for designing instruction and instructional environments to address student diversity have been based on the principles of Universal Design (UD). This article presents the background and history of UD principles and how they became applied in postsecondary education. This is followed by a discussion of terminology, and a presentation of the method used to conduct a systematic review of the empirically based, peer-reviewed journal articles on UD for learning/instruction in postsecondary education. The article concludes with the results and discussion of the systematic review, limitations of the review, and conclusions. Background and History of UD Principles Universal Design began to be considered in the 1950s in Europe, Japan, and the United States and focuses on removing physical and environmental barriers (e.g., providing flat entries to buildings designed with stairways leading to the entry and lowered ATM machines reachable by individuals of various heights) that prevent access for individuals with disabilities. In the 1970s, the concept of UD evolved from one of removing physical barriers to people with disabilities to integration of all people within all environments. This evolution coincided with passage of legislation encouraging and mandating civil rights for individuals with disabilities, including the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Education of the Handicapped Act of 1975 (now Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act). The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which included Section 504, the first civil rights legislation about disability, is especially important in the history of UD because Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(1) 6 it mandated physical access in buildings for any U.S. program receiving federal funding. With the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, UD expanded to public and private facilities and no longer depended upon entities receiving federal funds. Title III of the ADA specifically emphasizes access to public facilities. The late Ron Mace, founder of the Center for Universal Design in North Carolina and an architect with a disability, identified with, defined, and popularized UD. Mace once commented that UD is a “commonsense approach to making everything we design and produce usable by everyone to the greatest extent possible” (Institute for Human Centered Design, 2008). The Center for Universal Design published seven principles applicable to environmental accessibility (Connell et al., 1997): Equitable use: Design should be usable 1. and marketable to diverse individuals. For example, a curb cut that someone riding a wheelchair, a parent pushing a stroller, a bike rider, and a delivery person can use and benefit from. Flexibility in use: Design accommodates pref2. erences and abilities. For example, scissors usable by someone who is right-hand dominant and someone who is left-hand dominant. Simple and intuitive use: Easily used by indi3. viduals of diverse knowledge, literacy levels, and background experiences. For example, a menu using both language and pictures. Perceptible information: Information is pro4. vided with ease of use regardless of sensory needs. For example, elevators that have buttons for each floor available at wheelchair height, in Braille, and with sound as each floor is passed. Tolerance for error: Consequences or potential 5. hazards are minimized. For example, automatically saving computer documents while in the process of writing. Low physical effort: Design can be used com6. fortably and with minimal effort. For example, a levered door handle, as opposed to a knob. Size and space in approach and use: Design 7. accounts for users of different shapes, sizes, and agility. For example, accessing an office mailbox from a sitting or standing position with minimal reaching effort. UD in Postsecondary Education Historically the seven UD principles promoted architectural and environmental designs to enhance accessibility and usability for as many people as possible. In the past decade, educators have expanded these principles to include educational access. This expansion is supported in recent legislation including the Reauthorization of the Higher Education Opportunity Act, 2008, where UD is referred to eighteen times. One such reference, which is found in SEC. 762 (G) – “Making postsecondary education more accessible to students with disabilities through curriculum development, consistent with the principles of universal design for learning” is indicative of the future of UD in higher education A future that began, in part, in 2001 when Shaw, Scott, and McGuire published nine principles of UD for instruction (UDI). These nine principles applied the seven UD principles of Connell et al. (1997) to postsecondary education instruction and added two additional principles Principle 8: A community of learners, and Principle 9: Instructional climate. Examples based on these nine principles include: Equitable use: Accessing course information, 1. such as syllabi, in a variety formats, including print, disk, and online. Flexibility in use: Varying instructional 2. methods, including lecture, discussion, and individual and group activities. Simple and intuitive: Clearly describing course 3. expectations for grading, in different formats, for example narrative and rubrics. Perceptible information: Using videos that 4. include subtitles, or captioning, for those who may not hear, for whom English is not a first language, or for those who have trouble processing verbal information. Tolerance for error: Providing ongoing and 5. continual feedback on coursework rather than at specified interim periods, such as mid-term or final exams. Low physical effort: Providing lecture notes, 6. so students who have difficulty taking notes do not need to take notes. Size and space for approach and use: Mak7. ing seating easily accessible, if possible, so everyone can see each other and communicate with one another directly. Circular seating may address this principle. Community of learners: Creating a variety 8. Roberts, Park, Brown, & Cook; UDI Literature Review 7 of learning settings, for example, use of email groups, social networking sites, or chat rooms. Instructional climate: Including a statement in 9. the syllabus indicating the desire to meet the instructional needs of all students and for students to convey their needs to the instructor. In summarizing the nine principles of UDI, one can describe them as presenting multiple means of representation, engagement, and expression (Center for Applied Special Technology, 2008). Although UDI is a relatively new framework in postsecondary education, it has generated significant support. For example, Newby (2005) suggested approaches based on UDI “bring flexibility and creativity to instructional delivery and management” (p. 600), stating the framework “allows our students to gain knowledge by taking advantage of their strengths” (p. 601). Rickerson and Deitz (2003) advocated the use of UDI principles in occupational therapy education, noting UDI is in line with the values of their profession. In addition, organizations have recognized the importance of UDI. For example, the Association on Higher Education And Disability (AHEAD) published an entire journal (i.e., Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability Vol. 19, Issue 2) dedicated to UD in higher education (Ofiesh & McAfee, 2006). As indicated previously, UD is written into the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 where it is described as a “scientifically valid framework for guiding educational practice” SEC. 762 (G) (SEC. 103 (C)). Inclusive and accessible postsecondary education is an exciting prospect and one that UDI is purported to help obtain. This literature review is designed to provide an understanding of the research that supports this claim while providing evidence to justify the ongoing use of UDI in postsecondary education settings. Terminology As indicated, UD principles are being applied to educational settings. This has brought about the use of a variety of related terms, in literature, to describe these efforts. Three of the most prominent terms are UDI, UDL, and Universal Instructional Design (UID). Some researchers appear to use these terms interchangeably (e.g., Koch, Hennessey, Ingram, Rumrill & Roessler, 2006), whereas others describe distinctions among them (e.g., McGuire & Scott, 2006). Despite the different terms, each refers to the application of UD principles in the instructional environment. Accordingly, we used all three terms while conducting the literature review. However, to avoid confusion, the term UDI is used throughout this article and encompasses all similar terminology.