My Universal Design

How many times have you heard the phrase, "You are what you teach?"

In my middle school we say it jokingly. We laugh at ourselves and our follies quite a bit. But when it comes down to the quick, we are in many ways what we teach.

For example, I start many sentences with conjunctions, although I know I shouldn't. And, like middle school students, we often hop on the band wagon of fads. Of course our fads are in education, but they are still fads. We are always looking for the next big thing, the next great educational strategy.

This is good and bad. It is good because we are a community of learners, willing to take risks. We want to be better teachers and are willing to go the extra mile to do it.

It is bad, because occasionally we, read I, get all the acronyms confused. Am I working with NWEAs DRAs, MEAs, UBDs, UDs, RTIs, SATs, SITs, or CMPs? Is my UD really a UBD on CMP? Does that count for my RTI? And is that student an SAT student or does she have an IEP? Am I 504ing it or what?

I hate to admit it but I thought the SRO had something to do with reading my first year of teaching. I wasn't sure why he had a gun, but I thought I should know....

When Cynthia and I first met to discuss this grant, I knew I had taken a workshop or class on UD before. I knew UD was Universal Design. I could vaguely remember a special education professor discussing the concept and I could recall writing a UD at some point. But in my brain it got all twisted, and shifted, and equated, until UD was synonymous with UBD. Understanding by Design being the lesson planning program my district has adopted.

I knew that wasn't right, but I needed a few minutes to assimilate the concept, reach back into the nether regions of my brain and pull that file. It went to the top of my to do list.

That didn't happen until around August.

I did find the old unit I created. It was in college, it was in a special education class, and it was a great unit. I was pretty proud of it, all things considered. It had nothing to do with what I actually teach, and to whom I actually teach, but it was colorful. And surprisingly helpful. It provided me with the "gotcha" moment I had been missing.

My first thought was that UD was for special education. Probably because the place I encountered it first was in a SED class. In addition to that, the unit I reread had a list of accommodations for everything from a student with one arm, to ADD, to Aspergers. The whole unit was at least 75 pages long, and had twelve alternate assessments for every lesson. (I was completely obnoxious in college.)

As I was flipping through the unit, all I could think was, "I don't have any of these kids. I just have regular kids." Whatever I meant by regular kids. Not that kids with exceptionalities are irregular. However, looking at my class lists, and trying to determine how to approach the kids this year, none of the kids I was dealing with had diagnosed exceptionalities. Hence the regular.

This is where I learned a very valuable lesson. Universal Design isn't targeting the exceptionalities. It is targeting the "regular", for lack of better term, kids. The kids who sit in the back and hope that I don't notice they can't see the board, hear what I'm saying or understand the lesson. It targets the kids that aren't sure why the letters on the page dance around when they are tired, the ones who stayed up too late because no one makes them go to bed, and the ones who are really, really hungry. Universal design is a way of making my teaching accessible to them.

Sometimes those strategies look like IEP modifications. However, I am nothing if not egalitarian. I have always figured that if I provide copies of my notes to one student, all students should have access to them. I've never believed in timed tests, as everyone works at different speeds. It was with relief that I realized that UD wasn't a fad, it was just Best Practice.

Since the beginning of the year, I've had to really look at my teaching in careful detail. It is one thing to plan out the lessons and make sure there are multiple assessments. It is a whole different ball game to actually teach Universally. I've had to really think about what I'm teaching. Ask my self questions about priorities.

For example, the Lab Reports. Science teachers love Lab Reports. I love Lab Reports. I capitalize Lab Reports in my mind. But, what do I love about Lab Reports? I love that the kids have to reflect and draw conclusions about what they have learned. Is it really that important that they write out the lab instructions that I gave them? Is it really imperative that they type out the materials they used? What am I trying to get them to learn?

When I thought about it, I'm trying to get them to learn the format. They'll have to use the format for the rest of their science days. So the format needed to stay. And I'm trying to get them to be aware of the scientific method. But I'm also hoping the lab teaches them a concept. Therefore, when I looked at the lab report rubric, I realized I could make many changes. Instead of having the kids type out the procedure, I had them simply attach it as Appendix A. I did have them go back and think about, brainstorm and record all the materials they used. I still felt that part was important.

But did they really need to make their own chart of results? Couldn't they just use the one I gave them? Did it have to be a "final copy", of their results? No, it really didn't.

By pulling out the most important aspects of the Lab Report, and focusing on that, I was able to get really high quality work from the kids. They focused on reflecting on what the lab taught them, what they had learned as well. I saw this in my parent teacher conferences. The kids remembered what they did in the lab, and could explain the procedure to their parents. But then they went on to have really advanced discussions about what they learned about dormancy, life, and all the other concepts of the lab. In all 25 conferences I never had to ask the kids to explain the point to their parents. It was the one portfolio entry that spoke for itself.

This has been a learning experience for me in many ways. I have great new technology skills, and I feel really great about how that has enhanced my teaching. But I feel better about the way the UD format has allowed me to look at my classes and really think about the most important parts.

I like that I don't have to give up my lab report. I like that I can just make it better.