- # of SDs:SwoDs (Students w/o disabilities)
- Delivery Modes
Independent Variables, Dependent Variables
Findings, Effectiveness of the Implementation
- 78 students (0:78)
- Two special education classes at two postsecondary institutions
- Blended with online and traditional class elements
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.
- 369:271 faculty for survey:
63 faculty and 35 administrators for web-based, on-demand curricular (Faculty and Administrator Muddles in Higher Education (FAME)
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.
- 50 (2:48) undergraduates
- Health science
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.