Study | Participants: - # of SDs:SwoDs (Students w/o disabilities) - Courses - Delivery Modes | Independent Variables, Dependent Variables | Findings, Effectiveness of the Implementation | Elements |
[20] | - 78 students (0:78) - Two special education classes at two postsecondary institutions - Blended with online and traditional class elements | Independent variables: Design/implementation of instruction using UDL principles to facilitate computer-mediated communication (CMC), in which multiple elements of online learning and instructional collaboration were infused between two teacher preparation courses at two higher education institutions. Dependent variables (Data collection: Mixed method): - Ways students used CMC tools: Analysis of chat log (# of login, frequency of chats, length of chats, and discussion boards); theme analysis using data coding patterns. - Course evaluation: Students’ ratings of the collaborative UDL-based course. | - Significant success in students’ class interaction and participation. - Elements of UDL principles enhanced students’ participation in discussion. - Increased variation of types of students’ communication (e.g., chat, discussion board, asynchronous/synchronous). - Increased course ratings from the previous semesters without the implementations. - Themes of chatting corresponded to existing literature: Philosophy of teaching, behavior, technology, and methods of teaching. - Themes of chatting were emergent from this research: Socioeconomic status, race and culture, beliefs or philosophy of individuals with disabilities, legal requirements, and other. - Categorized as effective. | - Multiple means of representation: Implementation of F2F meetings, video, text, and audio for students at two universities; provision of discussion and highlighted essential elements; use of various formats of media. - Multiple means of expression: Students’ choice of study topic, students’ expression of their knowledge of a topic during online presentations; various ways of access to the course materials. - Multiple means of engagement: Groups’ choices of learning goals and schedules for work and presentations; provision of focused goals allowing multiple layers of engagement; provision of asynchronous and/or synchronous discussion boards. |
[21] | - 369:271 faculty for survey: 63 faculty and 35 administrators for web-based, on-demand curricular (Faculty and Administrator Muddles in Higher Education (FAME) - Web-based | Independent variables: Implementation of web-based FAME: Web-based curricular FAME made up of five instructional modules, including accommodation, UDL, web accessibility, college writing, and climate assessment; FAME was to enhance faculty members’ understanding of effective instructional practices. Dependent variables (Data collection: Mixed method: Surveys): - Faculty’s preferred training subject and modes of delivery. - Perceptions of training SD. - Teaching methodologies that the faculty used. - Professional development needs. - Evaluation on the effectiveness of web-based on-demand curricula (called FAME). | - Preferred subjects listed in order from most to least preference: UDL, web accessibility, distance education, adaptive technology, computer lab accessibility, and accommodations. - Preferred training modes listed in order from most to least preference: On demand, web-based, two- or three-hour workshop, one-hour or daylong workshop, handouts, training or resources available anywhere and anytime. - Instructional method in order from most to least use: Lecture, class discussion, critical thinking, or problem solving. - Faculty’s evaluation of FAME: An average of 94% of faculty agreement on the appropriateness of contents and information on professional development and the needs of SDs. - 92% agreement on the enhanced comfort as a result of FAME implementation. - Categorized as effective. | - Multiple means of representation: Representing concepts with multimedia; participants’ ideas shared using video clips that were captioned and included transcripts used for strategic engagement. - Multiple means of expression: Applied case scenarios with feedback, pre- and post-assessment and practice. - Multiple means of engagement: Videos of participants’ testimonials, including both faculty and students. |
[22] | - 50 (2:48) undergraduates - Health science - F2F | Independent variables: Implementation of the course using UDL principles. Dependent variables (Data collection: Mixed method: Course evaluation and interview): - Course evaluation: Course materials the students accessed and the degree of helpfulness; students’ perceived impact of course components on learning. - Interviews: Flexibility, social presence, stress, success. | - Overall benefits from the course for students. - Reduction in design accommodation for SDs manually performed by university office of disabilities. - 97% of participants reported the following to be helpful: Access to text descriptions of images in PowerPoint, detailed topic outline, and lists of key concepts in study guideline. - Course components that more than 90% of participants perceived to be very impactful on their learning: Choice of completing elective activities or taking a final exam, individual or group assignment types and paper due dates; posting instructional materials before class; consistent format of instructional material organization on WebCT pages. - High flexibility of resources. - Critical factors of social presence: Instructor’s availability outside of class session and his/her immediacy. - Shared information using discussion board. - Stress reduction: Course design and organization, study guidelines, flexibility of deadlines. - Students’ success: The attributes of UDL design. - Categorized as effective. | - Multiple means of representation: WebCT, electronic course material, an online lecture for a topic, video tutorial, subtitles, PowerPoint slides, hands-on demonstrations, display of videos, rubrics, and examples of two formats of presentations. - Multiple means of expression: Students’ choices with regard to due dates of assignments, individual or group assessments, presentation format and date; multiple-question style on tests; various types of assignments. - Multiple means of engagement: Instructor’s welcome email to complete a student profile before class; multiple types of discussions in class by email and discussion forums. |