22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
A mapping review of UDL-based teacher training in Higher Education
Andrea Fiorucci2, Annalisa Morganti1, Silvia Dell'Anna3, Francesco Marsili1, Alessia Bevilacqua2
1Università di Perugia, Italy; 2University of Salento, Italy; 3Free University of Bozen, Italy
Presenting Author: Dell'Anna, Silvia;
Bevilacqua, Alessia
Our research focuses on Universal Design for Learning (UDL), a comprehensive framework for designing and implementing teaching strategies across diverse educational settings, with a particular emphasis on higher education (CAST, 2018). Recognizing the positive impact of training teachers in UDL guidelines on both student skills and the overall quality of teaching (Rusconi & Squillaci, 2023), our study seeks to contribute to the existing body of knowledge.
While previous synthesis studies have explored UDL at the university level (Cumming & Rose, 2021; Roberts et al., 2011) and its application in teacher education (Rusconi & Squillaci, 2023), there is a notable gap in reviews that concurrently consider these two critical dimensions. To address this void, our proposed mapping review aims to answer the following key questions:
-
What types of studies have been conducted at the university level regarding teacher professional development with Universal Design for Learning?
-
What benefits emerge from these programs or training initiatives in terms of enhancing teaching skills and practices?
A mapping review is chosen as the research method to systematically identify, evaluate, and synthesize existing literature within this specific niche of interest. By adopting this approach, we aim to provide valuable insights into the predominant trends, methodological approaches, and thematic gaps in the literature related to UDL in higher education teacher professional development (Grant & Booth, 2009).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedA list of eligibility criteria was adopted to select relevant studies for this mapping review:
Study Design: qualitative, quantitative, mixed-method or multi-method studies;
Language: studies carried out in any country, but published in English;
Publication time frame: 2014-2023;
Setting: studies need to present the results of a professional development programme or teacher training on UDL conducted in higher or tertiary education;
Outcomes: studies investigate the impact of training or interventions on teachers’ knowledge and skills to design and implement inclusive teaching strategies.
Relevant works were searched electronically through general and educational databases (SCOPUS, Web of Science, ERIC, PsycInfo) using a combination of keywords. Additional works were included through handsearching and citation chasing practices and databases of unpublished studies (ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global). Handsearching and citation chasing are complementary methods employed in systematic reviews to retrieve potentially overlooked but pertinent records (Cooper et al., 2018). Handsearching entails two steps: 1) identifying key journals and conferences, and 2) reviewing the contents of each issue or program. Citation chasing, or snowball search, comprises backward and forward approaches. Backward citation chasing involves assessing records in the bibliography of articles, while forward citation chasing entails finding records that cite a particular article or set of articles.
The title and abstract screening phase will be conducted by two independent researchers using the ASReview software, enabling the utilization of machine learning to identify relevant studies and expedite the workflow.
The studies selected were coded independently by two researchers, referring to a shared table containing a list of aspects related to the setting (country, type of university context, faculty, teaching area), to the type of training intervention or programme implemented on the UDL (duration, intensity, content, etc.), to the participants in the study (university lecturers, administrative staff, etc.), to the beneficiaries of the interventions (students with disabilities, non-traditional students, all students), to the type of outcome measured or observed (e.g. improvement in teaching skills, strategies, motivation or learning outcomes) and to methodological aspects (research design, sample, information source, instruments, etc.).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe results of the review highlight certain trends in the international literature, such as the bias towards specific research designs or the over-representation of some countries. They also indicate some perspectives for the expansion of future research in the field, particularly with regard to the types of intervention that can be carried out in a university context on the subject of UDL. Finally, issues that have already been raised by other synthesis studies (Rao et al., 2011) emerged, such as fidelity in the application of UDL principles to teaching practices.
ReferencesCAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Cooper, C., Booth, A., Varley-Campbell, J., Britten, N., & Garside, R. (2018). Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: A literature review of guidance and supporting studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 85. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0545-3
Cumming, T.M., & Rose, M.C. (2021). Exploring universal design for learning as an accessibility tool in higher education: a review of the current literature. The Australian Educational Researcher, 49, 1025-1043. https://doi.org/s13384-021-00471-7
Grant, M.J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, 91-108. Doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Rao, K., Ok, M. W., & Bryant, B. R. (2014). A Review of Research on Universal Design Educational Models. Remedial and Special Education, 35(3), 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513518980
Roberts, K.D., Park, H.J., Brown, S., & Cook, B. (2011). Universal Design for Instruction in Postsecondary Education: a systematic review of empirically based articles. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(1), 5-15.
Rusconi, L., & Squillaci, M. (2023). Effects of a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) training course on the development of teachers' competences: a systematic review. Education Sciences, 13, 466. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050366
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Accessibility and Universal Design in University Programs of Study: Results of the ATHENA Project for the Case of Cyprus
Katerina Mavrou, Maria Mouka, Eleni Theodorou
European University Cyprus, Cyprus
Presenting Author: Mavrou, Katerina;
Theodorou, Eleni
Higher education as a sector is increasingly required to incorporate accessibility and universal design in its curricula to facilitate the development of ‘proactive approaches to accommodations’ (Nieminen 2022), but there is a long way to go in achieving this. The Erasmus+ ATHENA project consortium, led by the European Disability Forum and comprised of the Johannes Kepler Universität Linz, Masarykova Univerzi,ta (Muni Teiresias), European University Cyprus, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, and EURASHE, aims to develop a set of recommendations on how to broadly integrate Accessibility and Universal Design into higher education curricula. To do so, the project first sought to examine how and to what extent accessibility and universal design are incorporated into higher education curricula in four European countries: Spain, Austria, Cyprus, and Czechia. The study was conducted by applying two methodological approaches: corpus linguistics and thematic analysis of university curricula and syllabi. The main research questions guiding this were: (a) Is the Accessibility and Universal Design approach included in the sample of HE curricula in the selected domains? (b) How is the Accessibility and Universal Design approach applied in the sample of HE curricula in the selected domains, in terms of construction and conceptualisation and curricula aim? This paper presents the findings of this task for one of the four countries, Cyprus.
In the context of this study, accessibility is defined as a fundamental principle that ensures equal access for all individuals, particularly those with disabilities (UN, 2007). To attain full inclusion, communities need to tackle multiple barriers that prevent individuals with disabilities from accessing facilities, goods, and services. These challenges encompass physical barriers such as stairs, information presented in non-universal formats, and services that aren't easily understandable for those with disabilities. It embraces the core values of human diversity, social inclusion, and equality, fostering an environment where everyone, regardless of age, ability, or background, can engage with and benefit from the designed solutions. Although certain accessibility initiatives might come with high expenses, affordable, immediate remedies exist that can still have a considerable impact. Accessibility is about developing solutions to achieve universal design. Universal Design (UD) is conceptualized as a comprehensive approach to design that seeks to create products, environments, and systems that can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability (Centre for Excellence in Universal Design, 2023). Universal Design for Learning is an inclusive and non-discriminatory approach aimed at introducing curricula, teaching and assessment methods that foster accessible and engaging learning environments to accommodate students’ diverse needs and modalities of learning. ( Dell et al. 2015). Even though this approach provides conceptual and pragmatic tools to implement educational differentiation of curricula and pedagogical interventions, the application of the latter is limited in Higher Education (Turner et al 2017).
Notwithstanding the importance of UD in creating accessible learning environments, a mono-dimensional focuson accessibility silences issues of difference and inequality to empower disenfranchised students. As pointed out by Knoll (2009: 124), ‘To apply only universal design or individual accommodation would either leave gaping holes in access to academia and courses by not seeing and addressing the intersecting dilemmas of privilege and oppression within the disability experience ‘. Hence, the necessity of developing universally designed curricula that problematize and destabilize power asymmetries and discourses of normality, such as eurocentric knowledge to create inclusive spaces in HE (Mole, 2012)
The main findings of this research endeavor revealed that accessibility and universal design do not appear frequently in university programs of study in Cyprus, and neither do they appear consistently in terms of frequency and conceptualization across domains.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedA two-step methodological approach to data analysis was followed for the aims of this study across the 4 partner countries, including Cyprus. The first stage included the selection and analysis of the sample of texts (program curricula and syllabi for different university study programs) via a corpus linguistics analysis. covering seven areas of knowledge from the ISCED fields of education and training 2013 (ISCED-F 2013): Education; Arts and Humanities; Social Sciences, Journalism and Information; Business, Administration and Law; Information and Communication Technologies; Engineering, Manufacturing and Construction; and Health and Welfare;. Based on the criteria decided by the consortium, a sample of at least twenty-one (21) undergraduate (Bachelor) and postgraduate (Master) program study curricula and syllabi were selected in each participating country: Spain, Austria, Cyprus, and Czechia. For Cyprus in particular, which is a small country compared to the other three, the search covered the websites of all nine public and private universities yielding a total of 175 texts of which 21 were eventually selected through the corpus linguistics analysis. Hence, following the determination of the selection criteria, a set of keywords related to accessibility, design for all, disability and inclusion were retrieved and analysed in the corpus in terms of absolute frequency, relative frequency and dispersion. The selected study programs needed to include at least one of the keywords determined by the consortium.
The first stage of analysis, using corpus linguistics analysis with the help of a suitable software (Sketch engine), resulted into two final datasets (corpora) for Cyprus, in Greek and English. Each corpora was comprised of program curricula and syllabi for each study program selected. For seven of the study programs the official language of instruction is Greek and fourteen are offered in English (14). The twenty-one study programs pertained to the seven domains selected by the consortium plus the Services domain which was deemed pertinent only to Cyprus. The corpus linguistics analysis allowed for the empirical discerning of the curricula and syllabi that incorporate accessibility and universal design and the fields under which these occur in the learning outcomes, content, university policy, etc.
As a second step, thematic analysis using a qualitative analysis software (Atlas.ti) was applied onto the sample of texts identified through the corpus linguistics analysis. The aim of the thematic analysis was to look deeper into how accessibility was conceptualized in the texts.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findingsfrequently in university programs of study in Cyprus. And when they do appear, the thematic analysis has shown that accessibility appears with different frequency and conceptualizations across domains. These findings are relatively consistent across the consortium partners (Austria, Czechia, and Spain). In specific, out of the 175 curricula originally sampled in the case of Cyprus, we were able to locate through linguistics corpus analysis relevant keywords in only 23 study programs, of which 21 were eventually selected for thematic analysis. This constitutes a rather small fraction of them at only 12%. When zooming in on these program curricula and syllabi, our thematic analysis revealed differences in terms of how, where and how often accessibility and universal design manifested in the various programs of study across all domains.
In Cyprus, generally references to accessibility and universal design were more frequent in undergraduate study programs and in mandatory courses, across all domains. These issues were mostly identified in the course content description, in course titles, and in the objectives and outcomes of the courses. In terms of domains in which accessibility and universal design appeared most, pertinent discourse emerges primarily in the domain of Education, which contained almost half of the courses in which such references were found in their syllabi. Arts and Humanities came in second, with topics related to user-centred design appearing mostly in mandatory courses. Regarding the construction of accessibility and disability in relation to the main models of disability, this was mostly related to the human rights approach and the social model of disability. Few references to the medical model were also identified mainly in the health and medical studies programs.
Overall, results from Cyprus suggest that accessibility and universal design appear in programs of study rather indirectly, and usually under overarching topics like diversity and human rights.
ReferencesCentre for Excellence in Universal Design. National Disability Authority. Ireland (2023). https://universaldesign.ie/what-is-universal-design/. Last accessed 15 Oct 2023
Dell, C. A., Dell, T. F. & Blackwell, T. L. (2015) ‘Applying universal design for learning in online courses: pedagogical and practical considerations’, Journal of Educators Online, 12 (2), 166–192
Knoll, K. (2009) ‘Feminist disability studies pedagogy’, Feminist Teacher, 19 (2), 122–133.
Mole, H. (2012) ‘A US model for inclusion of disabled students in higher education settings: the social model of disability and Universal Design’, Widening Participation and Lifelong Learning, 14 (3), 62–86.
Turner, W. D., Solis, O. J. & Kincade, D. H. (2017) ‘Differentiating instruction for large classes in higher education’, International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29 (3), 490–500.
United Nations: UN Enable - Accessibility (2007), https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/disacc.htm. Last accessed 1 Nov 2023
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Learning Practices of university students: Before and After the Pandemic and the Introduction of ChatGPT
Michael Grothe-Hammer, Svenja Hammer
Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
Presenting Author: Hammer, Svenja
The literature on learning practices and strategies is rich with insights about the effectiveness of specific interventions and strategy instructions (e.g., Chamot, 1993; Spencer & Maynard, 2014), student’s perceptions and experiences (e.g., Ginns & Ellis, 2007; Nijhuis, Segers, & Gijselaers, 2007; Virtanen & Tynjälä, 2019), and cognitive and psychometric views on learning strategies and approaches (e.g., Biggs, Kember, & Leung, 2001; Neroni, Meijs, Gijselaers, Kirschner, & de Groot, 2019; Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, & Mckeachie, 1993). Such existing research is often psychologically framed, focusing on highly abstract aspects of learning like rehearsal, summarization, information organizing skills, and time management. However, when it comes to looking at students at universities, little is known about what they actually do in their everyday lives in order to learn. Do they, for example, meet with friends for sharing ideas? Do they converse with ChatGPT? Do they print out learning materials and use text markers? Do they listen to audio recordings of lectures when riding the bus? And so on.
Against this backdrop, we take a more sociological approach looking at what students do in their everyday lives. Adopting a practice-based perspective (Giddens, 1984), we aim at mapping the learning practices of university students, i.e., the micro-practices of their everyday lives enacted to learn. Our first main research question is, hence, the following:
1) How does university students’ learning look like in practice?
Furthermore, recent years have seen substantial changes in the education sector, especially due to the pandemic and the advent of new digital technologies like ChatGPT. Consequentially, there is a myriad of studies focusing on the impact of the pandemic and/or of new digital technologies on learning experiences and effectiveness (Carrillo & Flores, 2020; Orozco, Giraldo-García, & Chang, 2023). One big issue as of now is the opportunities and challenges that artificial intelligence (AI) poses for education in general (Zhu et al., 2023) and for higher education in terms of academic integrity in particular (Perkins, 2023).
However, empirical research on how the impact on the actual learning practices of students looks like, is yet to be conducted. Existing works are more based on assumptions and possibilities. We therefore see a lack of research, which we aim to overcome with our study comparing student’s learning practices before and after the pandemic and the introduction of artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT. Therefore, we have derived a second main question:
2) How have university students’ learning practices changed through the pandemic and the introduction of AI tools like ChatGPT?
In our study, we will answer these questions through a longitudinal interview study at a German university. Using our practice-based approach, we identify university students’ practices of learning and how these have changed through the pandemic and the advent of artificial intelligence technologies like ChatGPT.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo answer our research questions, we adopt an interpretative approach (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) and conduct an exploratory qualitative interview study. In particular, we conducted a series of 19 focus group interviews with 87 students involving 4 interviewers in 2019 and 2020, and will conduct another series of 12 focus group interviews between February and July 2024. All interviews are conducted with teacher education students in different social science study programs at the Ruhr-University of Bochum, Germany. The interviewers have not been involved in the teaching and/or examination of the interviewed students to ensure that students have been able to speak freely and without pressure. We have been using the method of the problem-centered interview (Witzel & Reiter, 2012), which combines elements of structured and unstructured interview techniques to achieve a process of discursive-dialogic knowledge production be-tween the interviewer and the interviewees. In doing so, we have been able to facilitate open and comprehensive discussions among the participating students about how they learn with whom and when.
To analyze the material, we are using a grounded theory-based approach, specifically the so-called “Gioia method” (Gioia, Corley, & Hamilton, 2013), which combines open (first order) coding with theory-centric (second order) coding. This analytical method is particularly suited for practice-based studies, be-cause it allows to inductively identify first order categories from the interviews which are then collapsed into distinctive practices on the second order level by cycling between the first order categories and practice theory. Employing this method allows us to identify the distinctive practices of learning enacted by the university students. Our longitudinal approach thereby enables us to map the learning practices of students as they develop over time. Specifically, we will be able to inquire into the impacts of the pandemic and the advent of artificial intelligence chatbots like ChatGPT on learning practices.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsBy using focus group interviews we have been able to effectively gather diverse perspectives and foster dynamic, interactive discussions that provide rich qualitative data around shared beliefs and learning practices. We will present the learning practices of students and how these have changed through the pandemic and the advent of artificial intelligence technologies such as ChatGPT. Thoroughly mapping and understanding the learning practices of university students, will be an important contribution to improving effective learning methods, detecting potential areas for improvement in higher education curricula, and understanding the unique needs of university students. University teaching personnel is confronted with diverse students that exhibit a large diversity of learning practices outside of the classroom. For diversity to result in substantial and equitable learning gains, it needs to be accompanied by intentional and wide-spread inclusion. Inclusive practices can be challenging for educators when working with students who are diverse on multiple and intersecting dimensions. Our results are of relevance for researchers in higher education in Europe and world-wide as they offer insights into how students enact learning in their everyday lives. Our results have moreover the potential to inform educators at universities about the students’ micro-practices of learning, which will enable them to take these into account when designing their courses and teaching concepts.
ReferencesBiggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133.
Carrillo, C., & Flores, M. A. (2020). COVID-19 and teacher education: A literature review of online teaching and learning practices. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43, 466–487.
Chamot, A. U. (1993). Student Responses to Learning Strategy Instruction in the Foreign Language Class-room. Foreign Language Annals, 26, 308–320.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press.
Ginns, P., & Ellis, R. (2007). Quality in blended learning: Exploring the relationships between on-line and face-to-face teaching and learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 10, 53–64.
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE.
Neroni, J., Meijs, C., Gijselaers, H. J. M., Kirschner, P. A., & de Groot, R. H. M. (2019). Learning strategies and academic performance in distance education. Learning and Individual Differences, 73, 1–7.
Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2007). The interplay of perceptions of the learning environment, personality and learning strategies: A study amongst International Business Studies students. Studies in Higher Education, 32, 59–77.
Orozco, L. E., Giraldo-García, R. J., & Chang, B. (2023). Best practices in online education during COVID-19: Instructors’ perspectives on teaching and learning in higher education. Psychology in the Schools, 60, 4210–4228.
Perkins, M. (2023). Academic Integrity considerations of AI Large Language Models in the post-pandemic era: ChatGPT and beyond. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 20. https://doi.org/10.53761/1.20.02.07
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & Mckeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and Predictive Validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Mslq). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801–813.
Spencer, J., & Maynard, S. (2014). Teacher Education in Informal Settings. Journal of Museum Education, 39, 54–66.
Virtanen, A., & Tynjälä, P. (2019). Factors explaining the learning of generic skills: A study of university students’ experiences. Teaching in Higher Education, 24, 880–894.
Witzel, A., & Reiter, H. (2012). The Problem-Centred Interview. SAGE Publications.
Zhu, C., Sun, M., Luo, J., Li, T., Wang, M., & | |. (2023). How to harness the potential of ChatGPT in education? Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 15, 133–152.
|
