I’ve had the pleasure of working with a group of colleagues from across our university in a faculty seminar focused on finding ways to personalize learning for our students. We’ve approached this using Universal Design for Learning (UDL) as a framework to guide our discussion and design efforts. Recently, I wrote about an activity in which we focused on removing unnecessary barriers from our teaching. We’ve each chosen to work on one element of a course we teach. I decided I’d analyze and revise the syllabus for one of my courses to more fully integrate UDL principles.
 
The process
For this exercise I selected a course that I teach each year, Designs for Technology-Enhanced Learning. The course is part of our teacher preparation program and challenges students to identify, assess, and select technologies to support their teaching practice. It’s a two-credit course that meets once a week for 15 weeks. You’ll see the basic outline of the course below.
 
In order to analyze my course, I dissected the process of the course in terms of the three UDL principles:
 
- Principle 1 – how do students access content and concepts in the course (e.g., readings, materials, presentations, etc.)?
- Principle 2 – how do students interact with each other and express their understanding?
- Principle 3 – how are students engaged in their learning (e.g., real world audience, authenticity)?
 
Rather than try to make sure that each week of the schedule addresses all of the principles, I focused on taking the semester-long view to create a balanced experience for the students. Below I discuss a summary of what I learned about my course and how I plan to modify it for the fall semester.
 
The (old) course
In terms of principle 1, my analysis revealed that I relied almost exclusively on Web-based readings and class discussion to introduce students to the course content. In some cases, I gave students some choice in their reading – but all text-based readings. I also noted that during class I only used one brief slide-based presentation the entire semester. Instead, I relied on class discussions and demonstrations. While this would be considered a more student-centered approach, many students enjoy and benefit from brief lectures and the ability to access the slides afterwards.
 
For principle 2, I think the projects I employed provided at least some options for presenting their understanding. For the first assignment, students had the option of writing a paper or creating a Web resource. They also had choice in terms of the focus of their research and curriculum development project. I also set up some course experiences where they worked together in class and through asynchronous online work.
 
For engagement, I relied mostly on student choice to motivate students in their learning. Many of the projects they completed and materials they developed could be used in their teaching placement. This contributed to authenticity for the assignments. In reviewing the syllabus I also realized that there were opportunities to frame the work in more interesting ways as well as to provide students with an authentic audience for their work.
 
The (revised) course
After I realized that I relied so heavily on Web-based texts and class discussion, I made a concerted effort to provide more variety for my students to access the course content. The first change I plan to make is to incorporate five brief slide-based lectures to introduce topics. I will then post these slides on the class Web site so that students have access to them for future reference. I also have identified several video clips, podcasts, and infographics that connect with course topics. I plan to allow students to select from among these different options for each outside reading. I like the idea of one core reading (or video) with additional options in different formats.
 
I don’t have any major changes in mind for principle 2. I may offer multiple options of “deliverables” for the major topics, but there is already a good variety of ways for students to express their understanding during the semester. I think I may also formalize an opportunity for students to propose an alternate product that would meet the learning goals.
 
In terms of engagement, the one real missed opportunity I identified relates to audience. One way to encourage students to really grapple with the content and maximize their effort is to provide an audience beyond the class. Because the products they create are digital (slides, Web-based content, etc.), it’s easy for them to share their work. In the course, we explore social networks (particularly blogs and Twitter) as important elements of their personal learning networks (PLN). It would only be natural to ask students to consider how they can share what they learn and create to “pay it forward” to others in their PLN. It could be different for each student, but if they know they will share what they create, I suspect they will have more ownership and invest themselves more in the process.  
 
While I’m not sure I identified any mind boggling new opportunities in this process, I found it helpful to see the course through my students’ eyes in these three areas. I teach about UDL (including in this course) and have significant experience in UDL course design, but I still found multiple ways I could strengthen my approach. I hope that this simple process may inspire you to consider your own course with a UDL lens.

What might you change about your course to better incorporate UDL principles?
Please post your comments below.

Last week, my colleague in Hispanic Studies, Jonathan Arries, led a faculty seminar exploring personalized learning through an engaging, thought-provoking exercise. And despite all my experience with UDL (yes, I know, I’ve written about it quite a bit here), it led me to acknowledge and confront a major disconnect in a course I teach every year. In fact, I’ve replicated this mistake approximately 12 years in a row. This post will help you to learn from my less-than-optimal practice.
 
UDL meets UbD
Jonathan structured the seminar session around a classic reading in K-12 instructional design called Understanding by Design (or UbD). Developed by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, UbD encourages instructors to design their instruction “backwards.” In this backwards design approach, rather than jumping right from learning goals to instructional strategies or learning activities, Wiggins and McTighe encourage teachers to think first about what kind of performance or product students could create that would demonstrate mastery of the learning goal. While not rocket science, this is a powerful and productive reframing of what I think is more typical practice. It also connects masterfully with UDL, which we’ll explore below.
 
In the exercise, Jonathan shared this planning document that we used together to explore a unit of study in one of the courses we teach. He asked us to begin individually first to identify the two to five “priority understandings or skills” connected with the content/skill focus we’d selected. We then shared these ideas with another participant in the seminar. Then, for one of the priority understandings/skills, he asked us what might serve as evidence that the students had mastered the understanding or skill. In this case, he challenged us to identify four different alternatives. As time permitted, we repeated this process for the other priority skills. We then shared these ideas with our partners and often identified several other possible performances/products that might serve as well or better than those we’d identified individually.
 
The exercise to this point was classic UDL principle II – identifying alternate means for students to present their understanding. The “ah-ha” moment came for me in the next part of the experience. In this next step, for each performance or product identified in the previous step, we were challenged to identify the knowledge (facts, concepts, principles) and/or skills (processes, procedures, strategies) that students would need to possess or draw upon to successfully complete the performance or product. We then shared these with our partners. In this process, I identified a major mistake (in UDL terms) that I’d made in a core assignment in a class I teach every year – a mistake I’d repeated 12 years in a row.
 
The Case of the Unnecessary Barriers
The assignment I unpacked in this exercise was from my Designs for Technology-Enhanced Learning course that I teach in our teacher preparation program at William & Mary. I approach the course like a teaching methods course, encouraging students to bridge theory and practice to identify ways to and design lessons that integrate educational technologies to support curriculum-based learning. One of the signature assignments focuses on how K-12 students learn from digital media and technologies. I’m most interested in students making connections between multimedia research and classroom teaching practice. I’ve always had them complete some form of a research synthesis paper as their learning product.
 
In this exercise, however, I identified several other possible performances/products that would also connect with this learning goal. I realized that they might also read research to prepare to engage in a case study to apply the findings and principles they explored. They might also create a concept map or table with evidence to present their understanding. Finally, they could create a brief presentation that they could share with colleagues in their placement schools as an authentic means to teach others. If I’d had the Higher Education Learning Activity Types Taxonomy handy, I could probably have identified even more.
 
When I unpacked the facts/skills, concepts/procedures, and principles/strategies that were required in the research paper assignment, I realized that this type of product introduced a number of extraneous barriers to students’ learning and most likely has limited the utility and effectiveness of the assignment. I realized that in addition to students needing to read, analyze and synthesize the research – the core elements of the learning goal – the research paper also required the students to organize their ideas for writing, adopt an academic tone to convey their ideas, and navigate the intricacies of APA style. I realized that none of these intellectually demanding aspects of the assignment really contributed to the learning goal. Is it important for students to write academic papers? Sure. Was it important for this learning goal? Nope.
 
Lesson Learned
In my conversation with my partner, I was able to think through other possible products that my students could create. We determined that some form of concept map or table with evidence would not only reduce the complexity of the assignment, but also make it easier for students to make literal and conceptual connections to the ideas they had explored. This approach would also help them to connect what they learned to classroom practice more effectively. The format and tool that students could use to create their concept maps/tables (e.g., Word, Google Docs, Mindmeister) was not important. In fact, allowing students to choose their tool and how they present their work is a nice way to connect UDL principle III – multiple means of engagement.
 
I’m excited to try this new approach next semester. I honestly believe that not only will I reduce some barriers I’d inadvertently put in my students’ way; I think I’ll get products that are better developed as well. I’m also excited to have a new tool – Jonathan’s planning chart – at my disposal to serve as a “check” for my application of UDL principles in my teaching.  

What projects, assignments or experiences can you offer your students to help them provide evidence of their learning?
Please post your comments below.

I don't think any of us would argue that the students we have in our classes today are increasingly diverse. They bring different experiences with them to class, different learning styles and preferences, different levels of engagement with the content, and different goals for their learning. Fortunately, we have many different frameworks and ways to approach this challenge in our teaching.

However, whenever I talk with teachers (both K-12 and higher ed) about UDL, student choice, or personalized learning, I often get the same question: "By providing these modifications, aren't we just lowering the bar?" It's an interesting question if you think about it. If, when we provide choice, the different options don't address the same learning goals or require the same level of rigor, I think they might have a point. But just providing options or choices doesn't mean that the expectations are any different for student learning. In the end, it's all about the learning goal.

Considering barriers
Currently, I'm participating in a seminar with faculty members across our university focused on personalized learning and UDL. In our discussion last week, we talked a bit about different pathways to the same learning goal. One great contribution of UDL is the recommendation to consider unnecessary obstacles to students' learning. Sometimes, we unintentionally create unnecessary barriers for our students to demonstrate what it is that they know. 

For example, the type of question on an exam can make a big difference for students. One student might tend to overthink things and struggle with multiple-choice questions. Given the exact same topic, however, he might be able to write a very substantive response in a short answer version. Similarly, I might have difficulty conveying my ideas in the form of a written essay. If, however, I was able to create a short video or audio response to the question, I might be better able to articulate my thinking. And in the end, unless the ability to answer multiple-choice questions or write a structured academic essay is part of the actual learning goal, it doesn't seem to me that it should make a difference what format a student chooses to express him/herself.

Providing options without lowering the bar
If you are still reading this, I'm guessing there's a good chance that you agree with the benefits for providing students with some choice in their learning. Even still, it can be difficult to navigate this balance between providing choice and ensuring rigor. What are some simple modifications we can provide for our students to eliminate unnecessary barriers while maintaining the level of rigor?

1. Be clear about your learning goal. Before considering how you want students to demonstrate understanding, clearly define the learning goal. What are the critical components? What can be pruned away without sacrificing the intent of the experience? Once you're left with the essential elements of the learning goal, you're better able to determine different possibilities.
2.  Think outside the box for exams. Rather than having different sections of the exam be comprised of different question types, why not provide a menu of choices? For example, to gauge understanding of a particular topic or concept, you might normally develop a series of multiple-choice questions. Why not offer a parallel set of short answer questions covering the same content? The students could then choose which set of questions to answer.
3. Consider different forms of writing. Oftentimes, we default to two or three types of writing assignments for our students - brief reflection statements, structured essays, and longer form papers. Why not stretch our thinking out a bit? Students could share their reflections in the form of blog posts and comment on each other's work. They might also be challenged to write a white paper for public consumption. They could also write an editorial or contribution to a blog or newspaper. Having an authentic audience for their work can be quite motivating to encourage students to put more time and effort into their writing.
4. Provide students with voice. Audio recording tools on mobile devices and laptops make it very easy for students to record an oral response to a question or prompt. This can be a great option for students who are not fast typists or who have difficulty expressing themselves in writing. You can even use a tool like Voicethread  that enables students to respond to prompts through audio recordings rather than the typical threaded discussion board in BlackBoard or another learning management system.
5. Consider different modes altogether. Depending on your content area and learning goals, it can be productive to think about very different types of ways that students can present their understanding. You might provide options once a semester or for every major assignment. For example, a video can be a great way for students to express nuanced understandings of different topics. They might be able to express themselves through artwork – either digitally or in analog form. They could create a concept map to illustrate different relationships. Or why not let them propose a unique approach of their own?

Assessing different options
Once we get past the question of rigor, many teachers worry about how to assess learning in these different formats. It would be a huge effort to create different rubrics or assessment criteria for different student products. Surely you can't assess the quality of an essay and a video project, right? I'd actually argue that as long as you anchor different options to a particular learning goal in most cases, the various products can be assessed using the same grading criteria.

Reflection responses, blog posts, or audio responses can all be judged in the same way when your rubric assesses the clarity of ideas. A video and essay could be judged on the quality of the argument articulated in either.  Once we get past focusing on the form, we can consider multiple options that work to maintain rigor and provide them choice at the same time.

What strategies do you employ to provide students with choice?
Please post your comments below. 

For almost ten years, my children have attended a Montessori school. When we enrolled them, we hadn’t had any prior experience with the Montessori method. All we really knew was that the approach emphasized hands-on learning and a philosophy that allowed kids to work and grow at their own pace. What I’ve realized over these last ten years is that one of the primary benefits of the Montessori method is the personalized approach to learning that it affords to the students.
 
Increasingly, public charter schools and “regular” K-12 public schools are making efforts to personalize learning for their students. There are a variety of different efforts to provide students with more choice – in the courses they select, the delivery model, the location of classes, time of day, and dual enrollment in community college courses. Although it can be very difficult from a logistical perspective, many schools are exploring efforts to allow students to work at their own pace, base course completion on mastering competencies, and even build customized programs of study. Not exactly a “School of One,” but certainly a move in that direction.
 
Defining personalized learning
There are a number of ways to define personalized learning. I like the definition that emerged from a large-scale research project funding the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and conducted by the RAND Corporation. Their definition of personalized learning, summarized on pages 2-3, is characterized by three elements:

• "Systems and approaches that accelerate and deepen student learning by tailoring instruction to each student’s individual needs, skills and interests.
• A variety of rich learning experiences that collectively prepare students for success in the college and career of their choice.
• Teachers’ integral role in student learning: designing and managing the learning environment, leading instruction, and providing students with expert guidance and support to help them take increasing ownership of their learning.”

The framework for implementation includes the development of learner profiles, personal learning paths, competency-based progression, flexible learning environments, and emphasis on college and career readiness. You might be thinking that these examples and efforts are limited to K-12 schools. Obviously, the context is very different from higher education. I would suggest, though, that there is a great deal that colleges and universities can learn about personalized learning from our K-12 colleagues, particularly in terms of learner profiles and personal learning paths.
 
Learner profiles
Learner profiles, “seek to give teachers an up-to-date record that provides a deep understanding of each student’s individual strengths, needs, motivations, progress, and goals to help inform his or her learning” (p. 3). In smaller courses, it can be very rewarding and productive to take the time and make the effort to understand students’ prior experience with the course content, their motivations, and their individual strengths, weaknesses, and interests. One could even challenge students to develop individualized learning goals within the parameters of the course syllabus.
 
With larger courses – all the way up to large lecture classes – we can create a Web survey in the beginning of the course. In this way, we can glean information from the students that would enable you to group students with similar interests in terms of course topics that might inform research or project groups. We might also ask students about prior experience with the content to create discussion sections with students at similar levels. Finally, we could even ask students to take the Myers-Briggs assessment for personality type to form effective small groups for class activities.
 
The development of a learner profile can be particularly important in working with graduate students. The more that we can get to know them and customize a student’s program of studies, research and writing experiences, the more successful students will be. This kind of flexibility will help them to engage more fully and deeply in their study.
 
Personal learning paths
With personal learning paths, “students are able to make choices about the content or structure of learning and the school uses a variety of instructional approaches and curriculum materials to meet the learning needs of all students” (p. 3). I talked about this in relation to personalizing the learning experience for students. In this post, I explored options for giving students choices in terms of content, process, and product.
 
One thing that can be very important with providing personal learning paths for students that I haven’t touched on is the importance of mentoring and advising. We can build in a great deal of variability that may appeal to different students. The advantage in providing individual academic support is that we can help students to make better, more effective choices for their learning. We can also develop understandings that may inform additional personalization opportunities in our courses.
 
This consultation and support can take a variety of forms. We can offer face-to-face and/or virtual office hours (Google Hangouts work great for this). We can offer small group mentoring sessions for interested students. We can even go so far as to work with students to design individual learning contracts – an approach that is particularly effective with adult learners.
 
Personalized learning provides a number of benefits for students, including a more metacognitive orientation and developing the habits of mind for independent learning. With some effort to develop learner profiles of our students and to support them in navigating personal learning paths, we can help students maximize their learning experience.

What efforts have you made to personalize learning in your courses?
Please post your comments below.

We're often surrounded by calls to increase the use and integration of technology in our teaching and learning? A recent survey commissioned by technology provider VitalSource and conducted by Wakefield Research indicates that college students want more technology in their learning experience. The 500 respondents suggest that they

• prefer digital texts and materials to traditional textbooks, 
  
• desire more interactive and media rich elements in their learning, 
  
• see opportunities for more regular communication with their professors through technology, 
  
• would like more opportunities to personalize their learning, 
  
• and increasingly prefer digital courses to the traditional classroom. 
  

While I don't see these findings as particularly surprising, it is interesting to me that they don't suggest how teaching and learning can be enhanced through technology. My read of these results is that students have a positive perception of technology in their learning, but I'm not seeing any specific approaches or even suggested practices.

The good news is that technology can enhance teaching and learning in a number of ways. In my opinion, a professor’s goals, values, and their understanding of students’ needs should drive the specific strategies, tools and resources selected. Here are five different reasons and approaches a faculty member might enhance teaching and learning with technology.

 How technology can enhance student learning

1. Amplify existing practice
   Integrating technology in the classroom doesn't have to radically alter your instructional approach. There are many ways that technology tools and resources can augment or enhance your current approach. We can tap into students' positive perceptions of technology in learning by integrating more digital media in our lectures, offer digital options for required texts, and offer additional ways that you can communicate with your students. 
2. Provide a more flexible delivery model
   In the VitalSource survey, 56% of respondents reported that they would feel more comfortable participating in a class digitally than in person. While some might scoff at this idea as simple laziness, I think there's more to it than that. The reality is that we've become an "on demand" society that highly values the kind of flexible, anytime/anywhere experience that many online courses afford. This doesn't mean that the rigor or content of the courses should be diluted in any way. Rather, if there are ways to provide students with a more flexible delivery model, their learning will integrate more seamlessly with their world.
3. Provide diverse learners with more choice 
   In addition to choice of when and where students learn, the diverse learners in our classes also benefit from more choice in their learning experience. Specifically, Universal Design for Learning suggests that we provide students with choice in terms of interacting with course content, options for demonstrating their knowledge and skill, and means to engage them in the learning process more fully. In many cases, systematically providing options over the course of a semester is not too taxing and can lead to more engaged students in your courses.
4. Help students build their skills
   One reason to consider exploring new ways to integrate technology in your courses is to help them build skills that they can leverage in their own learning and to contribute to the world beyond the university. One robust framework for these skills is the 21st Century Learning Design approach. This framework is comprised of the kinds of skills you probably already value: knowledge construction, skilled communication, real-world problem solving and innovation, collaboration, and self-regulation. These don't have to be technology-driven, but they can often be enhanced through the use of technology.
5. Go deeper into the content and application
   In my opinion, the best reason to integrate technology in your teaching is when it enables students to go deeper into the content and/or apply the course content and skills in authentic ways. In many ways, technology enables richer inquiry experiences and simulations, grounds learning in authentic cases or problems, and can enhance fieldwork or service projects. When these potential benefits are derived from the use of technology, it is worth the extra time and risk that is required.
   
   

These are just a few of the different ways technology may be leveraged to enhance teaching and learning. It's certainly not an exhaustive list, but I hope that it helps you to see the range of possibilities. In the end, the key isn't the amount or types of technology we use in our teaching. For me, the key is how well it connects with your teaching approach and supports student learning.

What other reasons or approaches do you consider when integrating technology in your courses?
Please post your comments below.