Review: "Assistive Technology and Universal Design for Learning: Two Sides of the Same Coin"
David H. Rose, Ted S. Hasselbring, Skip Stahl, and Joy Zaba
Assistive technology (AT) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) are neither identical nor antithetical-- they are complementary. The advancing of one leads to the advancing of the other, both resulting in educational improvements for people with disabilities. Both approaches aim to increase independent access of students to their education. UDL is the idea of designing to fit a wide range of ability and disability from the outset -- making This is how I have conceptualized the relationship between UDL and AT. education inherently accessible. The goal of UDL in education is to make the curriculum, classroom and education flexible to the learner. On the other hand, AT works in reverse. Rather than making the broader context open to the learner, AT helps the learner adapt to the environment and improves their functional capacity to learn. This includes a wide variety of technologies specific to the user and their needs. When AT and UDL work in concert, the environment is inherently designed to be more accessible to diverse users and the users have technology to overcome challenges to inaccessibility. It is as if the two are working toward the same goal of accessibility, but from two different directions. UDL is broad and serves everyone; AT is specific and targeted to one learner.
Focusing too heavily on either UDL or AT is inefficient or ineffective. If we don't take a UDL perspective, the environment will be full of barriers to students, necessitating complex and expensive AT solutions to the problems created by poor design. If we depend solely on UDL, we provide solutions which still cannot serve everyone and are expensive to build and maintain. A marriage between the two approaches helps ensure both that barriers are removed and support is provided. Moving toward and increasingly digital classroom is one way to improve accessibility (UDL) and thus power the individual AT of students (speech-to-text, zoom, increased contrast, different modes of control etc). Studies have shown that using technology has yielding gains with students with a variety of disabilities.
This paper helps to clarify the relationship between the two key terms. I now have developed a schema into which I can assimilate my learning and research. As I learn about AT and UDL, I can see how one supports the other and seek solutions in my classroom that involve both in order to maximize student access and progress.
Comments