Talk:Universal Design for Learning

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles

Education

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 September 2021 and 8 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cagos068. Peer reviewers: KarenM.Cook, KennyOkg.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UDL vs learning design and design for learning

Hi there. The article subject overlaps - at least semantically - with the established field of learning design [1] [2], as well as initiatives in British learning design that come under the heading Design for Learning [3] Contextualising UDL could benefit understanding. Cheers, Lurch61 08:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC) As a teacher, I can attest to the growing significance of UDL. (I am sitting at a presentation on it now.) Although it may be embraced by a larger category, such as "Design for Learning," it is important enough, and expanding enough, that it deserves its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferrarama (talk • contribs) 18:19, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please Do Not Merge

We need more clarity on Universal Design for Learning not less. CAST= udlcenter.org has a set of clear UDL principles and methodologies. UDL exists as defined concept. It is listed in the in the Assistive Technology act of 1998, NCLB, IDEA 2004, and the Higher Education Opportunity Act (Public Law 110-315) (HEOA)Cspooner (talk) 18:58, 8 March 2011 (UTC).[reply]

It would be a major mistake to take this important defined term and mush it together with mainstreaming and inclusion. One of our major problems as educators is that we frequently mix and match terms so we have no idea what we are talking about. UDL is a real framework that is important. It also has benefits outside of just students with disabilities thus the term universal design. While UDL has connections to other movements in education it is an important framework for designing instruction and assessment that is heavily represented in US education law. It would be a shame to merge this article and lose that focus.

Don, user (macddm)Macddm (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2011 (UTC)--Macddm (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, do not merge

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) already has sufficient depth and history to warrant its own article in Wikipedia. In the literature, UDL is often grouped with similar education-related offshoots of the original Universal Design principles--frameworks like universal design of instruction (UDI), universal design for instruction (also UDI), universal instructional design (UID), etc. Universal Design for Learning, with its three guiding principles rooted in neuroscience, is perhaps the farthest outlier, yet it still belongs in this group due to its strong philosophical ties to the UD philosophy of proactive inclusiveness, anticipation of diverse learner needs, and distinction from disability accommodation. For these reasons, I believe it should remain its own topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cspooner (talk • contribs) 23:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

removed merge banner

I removed the merge proposal banner. I agree with the consensus that UDL should be its own article, and, frankly, the proposed merge doesn't make any sense. UDL encompasses a set of curriculum design and pedagogical principles. Mainstreaming and inclusion are concerned with organization of time and space for learners with special needs within a school setting. They are somewhat related, but surely distinct. I hope to contribute to this article in the upcoming weeks, making it more robust.

Mcuringa (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Universal Design for Learning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]