When considering the UDL Principles and framework, I do believe that traditional curriculum can often be rigid and make for a more challenging learning experience for many students because traditional curriculum is more content-driven and focuses on developing content knowledge versus skill-based knowledge (or procedural knowledge). For instance, limiting assignments (and therefore assessments) to one option does not encourage students to explore the material based on their own talents and interests (i.e. writing a paper versus creating a web page) and places the focus on "knowing the material" over building specific skills. However, I do also think it's important to note that the world does not always provide personalized opportunities and students need to develop coping skills in which they can deal with real-world situations that may be more "disabling" than what they've experienced in educational settings.
The benefits of analyzing the curriculum for strengths and weaknesses rather than focusing on the student's strengths and weaknesses places the focus on the lesson (and standards) at hand and not on any one student. This helps teachers to address the needs of all students in the classroom instead of only a select few. Though analyzing curriculum in this way can be challenging because it's more time-consuming and various points must be considered in the process, utilizing UDL principles encourages educators to create more authentic learning experiences through analyzing assessments under the UDL umbrella.
Here is the link to the Google Doc of my lesson modifications and my UDL Checklist.
No comments:
Post a Comment