Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 19th Aug 2026, 20:19:00 EET
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | ||
04 SES 14 B: Advancing Inclusion Through Universal Design for Learning
Paper Session | ||
    | ||
04. Inclusive Education
Paper Inclusion In VET Through Universal Design For Learning Copenhagen University College, Denmark Presenting Author:This paper draws on a larger, ongoing action research project investigating how Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (CAST, 2018; Tobin & Behling, 2018) can be applied as a pedagogical and didactic framework to strengthen inclusion in vocational education, using the Danish Pedagogical Assistant Program (PAU) as a case. Across Europe, vocational education programs are characterized by increasing student diversity, including higher proportions of students with disabilities. In Denmark, vocational education has experienced the steepest rise in students requiring special educational support, particularly related to dyslexia, ADHD, and autism (EVA, 2023). While individualized support schemes reduce dropout risks for students who receive them, many students remain unserved due to lack of diagnosis or awareness, underscoring the need for inclusive approaches embedded in everyday teaching practice. Despite strong political and legal commitments to inclusive education—reflected in the Salamanca Statement (1994) and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006)—teachers and support staff in vocational education often lack structured pedagogical tools for designing inclusive learning environments (VIVE, 2024). Responsibility for inclusion has largely been placed on individual teachers, and vocational education has not historically been subject to the same pedagogical competence requirements as other upper secondary or higher education programs. The broader project addresses this gap by examining UDL as a structured approach to inclusive pedagogy. UDL is an internationally recognized framework that conceptualizes learner diversity as the norm rather than the exception and emphasizes proactive instructional design through multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression. While UDL has been extensively researched in primary and higher education, empirical research in vocational education—particularly in Nordic and European contexts—remains limited. The study is theoretically informed by inclusive and resource-oriented perspectives on learning and participation, which conceptualize inclusion as a contextual and relational process rather than an individual deficit (Ringø & Falster, 2025). The overall project is guided by three research questions: Research Question 1: Research Question 2: Research Question 3: The focus of this paper presentation is Research Question 1. Drawing on preliminary qualitative data from teachers and SPS counsellors, the paper explores early professional reflections on UDL, emerging understandings of inclusive pedagogy, and perceived possibilities and challenges in applying UDL within vocational teaching. Student perspectives and broader implementation conditions are part of the larger project but fall outside the empirical scope of this paper. By focusing on professional learning and pedagogical sense-making, the paper contributes empirically to European discussions on teacher professionalism, inclusive pedagogy, and the translation of international inclusion frameworks into vocational education practice. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used The larger project is grounded in action research, selected for its capacity to combine systematic knowledge production with the development of educational practice (Reason & Bradbury, 2013). Rather than adopting a top-down approach, the research builds on teachers’ and SPS counsellors’ experiences, focusing on concrete challenges in creating inclusive teaching environments. Action research is well established within educational research (Hiim, 2015; Laudonia & Elks, 2018) and has proven particularly relevant in vocational education contexts (Kamstrup & Brodersen, 2024). The methodology follows iterative cycles of planning, action, observation, and reflection (Miedijensky & Sasson, 2020). Participants analyze their teaching practices through the lens of Universal Design for Learning, design and implement small-scale UDL-informed interventions, and engage in collaborative reflection with researchers. This close researcher–practitioner collaboration supports professional development while generating empirical insights into how inclusive pedagogy is understood and enacted in vocational education. The pilot is conducted across three PAU locations and involves 15–24 teachers and 5 SPS counsellors, alongside student participants. However, the data presented in this paper draw exclusively on qualitative material generated with teachers and SPS counsellors, including semi-structured interviews, reflective activities, and documentation from professional development workshops and early intervention planning. Qualitative data are analyzed thematically using a combination of inductive coding and deductive coding aligned with UDL’s core principles (engagement, representation, and action/expression). Analysis focuses on participants’ emerging understandings of inclusive pedagogy, perceived changes in professional competence, and reflections on opportunities and constraints in applying UDL within vocational teaching. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings At the time of the conference, data collection will be in its early stages, and the findings presented will therefore be preliminary, exploratory, and primarily descriptive. Drawing on initial interviews and early professional development activities, the paper is expected to highlight how teachers and SPS counsellors begin to make sense of UDL as a framework for inclusive pedagogy. Preliminary reflections suggest that participants may develop increased awareness of how instructional design choices—such as modes of engagement, representation, and expression—relate to student participation and learning. A key anticipated finding concerns the professional translation of UDL into a vocational education context. While UDL has been widely developed in more scholastic educational settings, its application in vocational education—where learning is closely tied to practice, professional identity, and workplace relevance—may prove challenging. Teachers and counsellors may experience tensions between UDL principles and existing curricular demands, assessment practices, and time constraints. These tensions are expected to generate important insights into the professional and structural conditions required for meaningful implementation. The paper acknowledges that early reflections may reflect initial engagement rather than sustained pedagogical change, and that enthusiasm for UDL does not automatically translate into long-term transformation of practice. Nevertheless, these preliminary insights are valuable precisely because they illuminate how vocational educators interpret, negotiate, and adapt an internationally recognized inclusion framework in their own context. In doing so, the paper contributes to understanding what may be needed to successfully draw on UDL in vocational education and informs future phases of the larger project. References CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning guidelines, version 2.2. Retrieved August 28, 2025. CAST Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Evalueringsinstitut, EVA. [Report] Viden om frafald og trivsel på erhvervsuddannelserne Hiim, H. (2015). Educational action research and the development of professional teacher knowledge. In Action research for democracy (pp. 147-161). Routledge. Kamstrup, A. K., & Brodersen, A. H. (2024). Gode overgange mellem FGU og EUD: Evaluering af et pilotprojekt. Københavns Professionshøjskole. https://fgu.dk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/evalueringsrapport-gode-overgange-mellem-fgu-og-eud-1.pdf Laudonia, I., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Abels, S. & Eilks, I. (2018). Action research in science education – an analytical review of the literature, Educational Action Research, 26(3), 480-495, OI: 10.1080/09650792.2017.1358198 Miedijensky, S., & Sasson, I. (2020). Participatory action research as a way to innovate mathematics and science teaching, teachers’ professional development perceptions and performances. Educational Action Research, 30(1), 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2020.1802320 Ringø, P., & Falster, E. S. (2025). Beyond the buzzword: unpacking ‘Special needs’ in Denmark. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 27(1), 173-185. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjdr.1060 Reason, P. & Bradbury-Huang, H. (2013). The Sage handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. Second edition. Sage. Salamancaerklæringen (1994). Salamanca Erklæringen og Handlingsprogrammet for Specialundervisning. Retrieved August 31, 2025. Salamanca Erklæringen Tobin, T. J., & Behling, K. T. (2018). Reach everyone, teach everyone: Universal Design for Learning in higher education. Virginia University Press. United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (A/RES/61/106). https://www.refworld.org/legal/agreements/unga/2006/en/90142 [accessed 27 August 2025]. VIVE (2023). Frafald på erhvervsuddannelserne – En undersøgelse af frafaldsmønstre, frafaldsårsager og tiltag til fastholdelse. [Report]. Frafald på erhvervsuddannelserne - En undersøgelse af frafaldsmønstre, frafaldsårsager og tiltag til fastholdelse 04. Inclusive Education
Paper Beyond Individual Self-Regulated Learning: Examining Help-Seeking, Peer Networks, and Achievement Through Social Network Analysis 1: University of California, San Diego, United States of America; 2: TED University, Ankara, Turkey; 3: Independent Researcher Presenting Author:Self-regulated learning research increasingly recognizes that learning is not an isolated process as students regulate their learning in classrooms that contain peers, norms, expectations, and relational structures. One of the clearest socially dependent SRL strategies is help-seeking, which requires learners to identify knowledgeable others, navigate social costs, and build relational capital. Yet, despite its inherent social nature, help-seeking is still predominantly studied through surveys and individual-level variables. In parallel, research in social network analysis provides robust tools to capture the structure of peer interactions, including who students turn to for help, who they trust, and how access to peers relates to academic success (Tabassum et al., 2018). This study brings these fields together by examining classroom help-seeking through network indicators, most centrally in-degree, representing how many peers nominate a student as a source of help. By embedding SRL processes within peer networks, we aim to better understand how students’ access to social resources supports or constrains achievement. We focus on two aspects of social positioning: (a) being sought out for help (help-seeking in-degree) and (b) reciprocal friendship ties. These constructs allow us to investigate how peer structures shape learning outcomes, moving SRL theory toward a more socialized understanding of help-seeking. 2. Theoretical Framework Zimmerman’s (2000) cyclical SRL model consists of forethought, performance, and self-reflection phases. Help-seeking is located in the performance phase as a resource management strategy. It includes adaptive help-seeking (seeking hints, explanations, scaffolds), instrumental help-seeking (aiming to understand, not just get answers) and peer-directed help navigation (selecting appropriate peers) (Gonida et al. 2019; Newman, 1994). Zimmerman (2000) emphasizes that successful self-regulators do not only rely on internal strategies but also on strategic use of environmental resources, including peers. Effective SRL therefore requires the capacity to evaluate who to approach, when, and how (Karabenick & Berger, 2013). Studies (e.g. Fong et al., 2023) also show that students who engage in adaptive help-seeking demonstrate higher engagement, motivation, and achievement. However, help-seeking is constrained by classroom social norms; students with fewer friendships or lower social status may be less likely to seek help even when needed (Liu, 2017). Therefore, help-seeking should be understood as both a metacognitive and a relational process. However, typical SRL studies measure help-seeking as self-reports, largely missing its relational and social components. When help-seeking is conceptualized structurally, as patterns of nominations within a classroom, SRL becomes more aligned with actual learning environments. Our study operationalizes help-seeking as network in-degree, meaning the extent to which a learner is recognized by peers as a source of assistance. This view integrates SRL strategy use with social recognition and embeddedness. 2.2 Social Network Analysis and Learning Social network analysis (SNA) examines social interactions as relational data rather than individual attributes. In education, it has been used to study academic support, friendship, collaboration, and sense of belonging (Mamas et al., 2019). Key SNA concepts relevant to this study include:
Research shows that students who are central in academic support networks typically perform better, possibly due to increased access to explanations, feedback, and cognitive elaboration opportunities (Black et al., 2025; Saqr et al., 2022). Yet studies rarely connect these network benefits to SRL constructs such as help-seeking. By integrating SRL and SNA, we position help-seeking not merely as “asking for help” but as an embedded resource management strategy shaped by the peer ecology of the classroom. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used Research questions: RQ 1. To what extent do students’ in-degree centrality in the help-seeking network predict their end-of-term achievement scores? RQ 2. Does the number of reciprocated friendship ties correlate with the frequency of being nominated as a help source, and does this combination relate to higher achievement? The study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional social network analysis design embedded in classroom-based self-regulated learning research. Peer nomination data were used to construct classroom-bounded help-seeking and friendship networks. Help-seeking was operationalized as in-degree centrality, representing the extent to which a student was nominated by peers as a source of academic assistance. Academic achievement was measured using end-of-term performance scores. Linear regression analyses with classroom fixed effects were conducted to examine the extent to which network-based help-seeking and reciprocated friendship ties predicted academic achievement. Data were collected from 10 elementary classrooms in a school in Cyprus. A total of 227 students were enrolled across classrooms. Of these, 213 students (93.8%) completed the network questionnaire and were included in inferential analyses. • Gender: 108 female (50.7%), 105 male (49.3%) • Language background: o English-dominant: 46% o Greek-dominant: 38% o Other languages (Syrian, Romanian, Bulgarian, Russian, Arabic): 16% • Ethnic origin reflected a multicultural population typical of international schooling. • Special Educational Need and Disability (SEND): 8% of students were identified with SEND and retained in descriptive analyses. Across classrooms, students received an average help-seeking in-degree of 3.21 nominations (SD = 1.87), indicating moderate differentiation in perceived academic support roles. The number of reciprocated friendship ties ranged from 0 to 7, with a mean of 2.64 (SD = 1.55). 6.2 RQ1: Help-Seeking In-Degree and Achievement A linear regression model predicting academic achievement from help-seeking in-degree (controlling for classroom membership) revealed a significant positive effect, β = .34, p < .001. Students who were more frequently nominated as help sources demonstrated higher end-of-term performance. This effect remained stable across classrooms, suggesting that social recognition as a help provider constitutes a meaningful academic resource beyond individual ability alone. 6.3 RQ2: Friendship Reciprocity, Help-Seeking, and Achievement Reciprocated friendship ties were positively correlated with help-seeking in-degree, r = .41, p < .001, indicating that trusted peer relationships increase the likelihood of being approached for academic help. A multiple regression including both predictors showed that: • Help-seeking in-degree remained a significant predictor of achievement (β = .29, p < .001), • Reciprocated friendship ties also contributed uniquely (β = .18, p = .014). Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Together, these findings indicate that academic support roles are embedded within reciprocal, trust-based peer relationships that jointly support learning outcomes. 6.4 Gender Moderation Analysis The interaction between help-seeking in-degree and gender was not statistically significant (β = .05, p = .42), indicating that the relationship between being nominated as a help source and academic achievement did not differ meaningfully between boys and girls. 7. Discussion This study provides empirical evidence that help-seeking, a core SRL strategy, functions as a socially embedded learning resource rather than merely an individual regulatory behavior. Students who occupy central positions in help-seeking networks demonstrate higher academic achievement, likely due to increased opportunities for explanation, elaboration, and metacognitive engagement. The strong association between reciprocated friendship and help-seeking highlights the role of relational trust in enabling adaptive SRL strategies. These findings extend Zimmerman’s SRL model by showing that effective regulation involves not only strategic action but also social recognition and embeddedness within peer ecologies. Furthermore, the absence of gender moderation suggests that network-based academic advantages operate similarly across genders in this context, reinforcing the generalizability of socially situated SRL processes. 8. Limitations and Implications While the cross-sectional design limits causal inference, the study demonstrates the methodological value of integrating SNA with SRL research. Practically, educators may support SRL by fostering collaborative norms and peer trust structures that facilitate adaptive help-seeking. 9. Conclusion By operationalizing help-seeking as a structural network indicator, this study advances a socially grounded understanding of self-regulated learning and underscores the importance of peer ecologies in shaping academic success. References Black, A., Warstadt, M. F., & Mamas, C. (2025). It's who you know: a review of peer networks and academic achievement in schools. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1444570. Gonida, E. N., Karabenick, S. A., Stamovlasis, D., Metallidou, P., & Greece, T. C. (2019). Help seeking as a self-regulated learning strategy and achievement goals: The case of academically talented adolescents. High Ability Studies, 30(1-2), 147-166. Fong, C. J., Gonzales, C., Hill-Troglin Cox, C., & Shinn, H. B. (2023). Academic help-seeking and achievement of postsecondary students: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(1), 1. Karabenick, S. A. (2003). Seeking help in large college classes: A person-centered approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00012-7 Karabenick, S. A., & Berger, J. L. (2013). Help seeking as a self-regulated learning strategy. Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman, 237-261. Karabenick, S. A. (2004). Perceived achievement goal structure and college student help seeking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.569 Liu, S. H. (2016). The help-seeking from social capitals and self-regulated learning among pre-service teachers. Asian Social Science, 12(4), 171-178. Mamas, C., Daly, A. J., Struyve, C., Kaimi, I., & Michail, G. (2019). Learning, friendship and social contexts: Introducing a social network analysis toolkit for socially responsive classrooms. International Journal of Educational Management, 33(6), 1255-1270. Newman, R. S. (1994). Adaptive help seeking: A strategy of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 283–301). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203763353-12 Saqr, M., Elmoazen, R., Tedre, M., López-Pernas, S., & Hirsto, L. (2022). How well centrality measures capture student achievement in computer-supported collaborative learning?–A systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 35, 100437. Tabassum, S., Pereira, F. S., Fernandes, S., & Gama, J. (2018). Social network analysis: An overview. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 8(5), e1256. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50031-7 04. Inclusive Education
Paper The Implementation of Universal Design for Learning (UDL): Evidence from Austria Institute for Teachers Education and School Research, University of Innsbruck, Austria Presenting Author:This study examines how Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is understood and enacted as Tier 1 instruction in Austrian secondary schools and how it can promote instructional flexibility and equity in increasingly diverse inclusive classrooms. Within this context, UDL is positioned as a universal foundation for classroom support in a Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS), emphasizing flexible pathways for access, engagement, and success for all learners (CAST, 2023). Despite growing interest, systematic empirical research on UDL implementation and impacts in Austria remains limited, and European evidence on reliable effects is similarly scarce, indicating the need for clearer terminology, stronger practice-research alignment, and sustainable strategies that do not require additional resources. While initiatives such as the Erasmus+ TEP project (2018–2021) have promoted collaboration and teacher training, they do not replace broader, multi-level implementation and evaluation across the system. The study is guided by three research questions: (1) To what extent is UDL applied as a Tier 1 instructional approach? (2) Which UDL principles—Multiple Means of Engagement, Representation, and Action & Expression—are most frequently used? (3) What barriers limit effective UDL implementation? These questions respond to persistent practice-level challenges reported by pre-service teachers, who often conflate UDL with differentiation and tend to perceive it as a framework mainly for students with disabilities rather than a comprehensive approach for all learners. Accordingly, one core aim is to clarify UDL-related terminology and provide practical, feasible strategies that educators can integrate into everyday instruction. A second aim is to map patterns of use across the three UDL domains and examine whether their application differs in Austrian schools. A third aim is to identify barriers at classroom and system levels that constrain coherent Tier 1 implementation. More broadly, the study seeks to strengthen understanding and uptake of UDL as an inclusive framework that supports learning, instruction, and assessment for all students, not only for those with disabilities. The rationale for this research emerges from noticeable gaps between theory and practice. Although UDL features in teacher education coursework, empirical knowledge about how it is interpreted and applied in daily practice in Austria is limited; reliance on literature from outside the Austrian context remains common due to the lack of local evidence. The study therefore aims to establish an initial empirical baseline that can inform teacher education, support student research projects, and serve as a foundation for future Bachelor’s and Master’s theses focused on UDL in Austria. By addressing both conceptual clarity and practical implementation, the study seeks to bridge the gap between theoretical discourse and classroom realities and to inform policy and practice aimed at inclusive, flexible, and equitable instruction. Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources Used An exploratory mixed-methods design was adopted to capture both breadth and depth of understanding of UDL in Austrian secondary education. The approach prioritizes a practice-oriented perspective on current patterns, perceptions, and barriers reflecting the limited state of empirical research on UDL implementation in Austria. Quantitative component: A survey instrument based on the 2024 CAST UDL Guidelines (Version 3.0) was adapted by simplifying language and adding brief examples to improve clarity and accessibility. The instrument assessed the three UDL principles—Multiple Means of Engagement, Representation, and Action & Expression—using a 4-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree; 4 = strongly disagree), enabling analysis of frequency and intensity of UDL use and comparisons across domains. Data were analyzed using SPSS. Qualitative component: Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with eight secondary school teachers working in inclusive schools in Innsbruck. Interviews included brief UDL-aligned open-ended questions, lasted approximately 40 minutes, focusing on experiences and reflections on UDL in everyday practice. Data were analyzed using Thematic Analysis following Braun and Clarke’s six-phase approach. Sample and administration: The sample extended a prior pilot and comprised n=100 participants from the Institute of Teacher Education and School Research at the University of Innsbruck, including Bachelor’s and Master’s students from inclusive and general teacher education programs. Working students responded from their school-based practice; non-working students reflected on recent school experiences. Data were collected for the pilot (n=20) over a summer semester 2025 and completed research (n=100) over winter semester in 2025. The survey was administered during scheduled lectures via Microsoft Forms, with around 20 minutes allocated for completion. Ethical standards were followed; participation was voluntary, and responses were anonymous and used exclusively for research purposes. Hypotheses: The study was guided by three hypotheses—(H1) UDL strategies are applied but not explicitly recognized as UDL; (H2) UDL Multiple ways of engagement, representation and Expression & Action principles are implemented unevenly; and (H3) perceived barriers are primarily related to limited knowledge, practical skills, and school resources. Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or Findings Findings indicate that UDL is not systematically embedded at the universal (Tier 1) level in everyday classroom practice. Respondents report it is not commonly used and that teachers’ knowledge is limited, pointing to inconsistent uptake and a need for clearer Tier 1 implementation. Participants highlight needs for stronger sense of belonging, and timely, coherent feedback as key universal features not yet systematically embedded. Across UDL domains, Representation is normatively supported but inconsistently enacted: teachers value the use of multiple media and clear, consistent explanations, suggesting awareness of good practice that does not always translate into routine implementation. Action & Expression receives endorsement in principle, yet students’ authentic multimodal expression is often constrained by insufficient assistive technologies. Engagement practices appear least developed, with limited emotional and motivational supports and classroom environments that do not consistently promote belonging. These patterns suggest a more uneven distribution of UDL practices than anticipated and indicate the importance of distinguishing hypothesized expectations from empirically observed classroom realities. Key constraints include scarce funding and material resources, large and diverse classes, and heavy teaching loads that constrain preparation of UDL-aligned materials. By documenting current understandings and practices, the study offers an empirical baseline for Austria that can inform program design, support student research, and guide future investigations into implementation across educational levels. Beyond Austria, the findings contribute to European debates where robust empirical evidence on UDL implementation remains limited. The study’s conceptual clarifications and resource-neutral strategies provide transferable insights for cross-national comparisons, supporting teacher education and professional learning across diverse systems. In this way, the work complements existing initiatives while addressing the broader need for systematic, practice-aligned research across Europe. References Bauer-Marschallinger, S., Dalton-Puffer, C., Heaney, H., Katzinger, L., & Smit, U. (2023). CLIL for all? An exploratory study of reported pedagogical practices in Austrian secondary schools. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 26(9), 1050–1065. Galkienė, A., & Monkevičienė, O. (Eds.). (2021). Improving Inclusive Education through Universal Design for Learning. Springer. European Commission. (2023). Inclusive education in the EU: Ensuring equal opportunities for all learners. Brussels: European Commission. European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. (2020, September 15). Country information for Austria – Legislation and policy. Retrieved from https://www.european-agency.org/country-information/austria Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research. (n.d.). Integrative School / School of Special Needs. Federal Ministry of Social Affairs, Health, Care and Consumer Protection. (n.d.). UN-Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Statistics Austria. (2024, December 3). Number of pupils increased again in 2023/24 – Growth mainly due to immigration [Press release 13 480-246/24]. Statistics Austria. Hoffmann, T., Buchner, T., Gasteiger-Klicpera, B., Hofmann, M., & Proyer, M. (2025). Evaluierung der Vergabepraxis des sonderpädagogischen Förderbedarfs (SPF) in Österreich: Diskussion der zentralen Ergebnisse. Research Gate. CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Wakefield, MA: CAST. Liu, K. K., Thurlow, M. L., Quanbeck, M., Bowman, J. A., & Riegelman, A. (2024). Universal design and K-12 academic assessments: A scoping review of the literature (NCEO Report 442). National Center on Educational Outcomes. Almeqdad et al. (2023). The effectiveness of Universal Design for Learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 120, 103935. Timuș, N., Bartlett, M. E., Bartlett, J. E., Ehrlich, S., & Babutsidze, Z. (2024). Fostering inclusive higher education through universal design for learning and inclusive pedagogy – EU and US faculty perceptions. Higher Education Research & Development, 43(2), 473–487. Phelan, D., Maguire, H., & Finnegan, C. (2025). Scoping review of Universal Design for Learning principles embedded in subjects in secondary education. European Journal of Education, 60(1), e70016. Ewe, L. P., & Galvin, T. (2023). Universal Design for Learning across formal school structures in Europe—A systematic review. Education Sciences, 13(9), 867. Devitt, A., al. (2025). A systematic literature review on the effectiveness of Universal Design for Learning in second-level education. The International Journal of Universal Design and Universal Design for Learning 1(1). Zhang, L., Carter, R. A., Greene, J. A., & Bernacki, M. L. (2024). Unraveling challenges with the implementation of Universal Design for Learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Psychology Review, 36, Article 35. | ||