Bartholomew’s Elevated Path Leads Through UDL

Seven years ago, the Bartholomew Consolidated School Corp. in central Indiana adopted the universal design for learning as the framework for curriculum and instruction for all students. The journey to full implementation has been bumpy at times, but we believe the results outweigh the challenges.

From 2009 to 2014, BCSC, a preK-12 district with 12,000 students who speak 54 languages at 18 schools, saw significant increases in the percentage of students passing the Indiana state assessment known as ISTEP. This included 24 percent gains in special education, 20 percent gains among those qualifying for free and reduced-price lunch, 48 percent gains among African-American students and 22 percent gains for Hispanic students. The graduation rate for those in special education increased 22 percent. Advanced Placement enrollment and exam passage also increased.

We attribute these gains, in large part, to improved learning environments based on the principles and guidelines of UDL. However, not all teachers embraced the concept immediately, nor did our implementation proceed without a hitch.

This is how we got there.

Districtwide Deployment

Focused on individualized learning, our district already had pursued the practices of inclusion and small learning communities. The more we learned about UDL, the more we realized how well the concept supported the district’s beliefs and values. As a result, we began by implementing UDL in one pilot school, then took it districtwide.

An initiative like UDL must be supported by a districtwide conceptual framework that is grounded in a compelling “why.” To be widely understood and accepted, the framework must be based in both research and common sense.

Neuroscience and brain research provide a solid research foundation for UDL, and the UDL core principle of individual variability appeals to the common-sense notion we all are different. School district leaders provided stakeholders with the clear, concise and compelling rationale to drive the initiative.

Taking advantage of our circumstances, we saw an opportunity to align the UDL framework with Indiana’s requirements for a new teacher evaluation process. We built our evaluation system around the instructional practice of UDL and weighted that component as the heaviest domain in the evaluation rubric. That alignment drove the UDL framework into every classroom.

We received no additional funds to implement UDL, so we shifted some funds to support implementation and to make that support accessible to teachers and site administrators. Over time and with professional development, we retooled some existing positions, redeploying them as UDL building coaches and district-level UDL coordinators.

The realignment of resources and staff led to some difficult conversations about current practices. Teachers and site administrators had to rethink their own teaching and learning frameworks. Our district’s forward-thinking teachers’ union embraced the challenge of collaborating with the district’s leadership team to meet the new accountability standards while staying true to our core beliefs. The teachers’ association and district administration learned together why and how UDL would support instruction. This collaborative relationship was essential throughout many contract discussions.

Not Fade Away

Although our initial results varied, several years of student assessment results and other academic measures, as well as the data obtained through our teacher evaluation rubric, point to the positive outcomes of UDL.

The reluctant veterans who were standing on the sidelines waiting to see if this initiative would stick now have a clear answer. The teachers who saw UDL as just good teaching and did not understand the intentionality of using the new lens to reflect on and improve their practice now understand the importance of UDL principles and guidelines. Teachers receive training to guide students toward identified learning outcomes supported by building coaches and district-level UDL coordinators.

In retrospect, we realize that clearly showing the alignment of current practices and programs with the UDL conceptual framework would have helped dispel the notion by some teachers, especially veterans, that UDL was just a ”flavor of the day” initiative directed by the central office that would fade away if ignored.

Now, in our eighth year of universal design for learning in BCSC, our commitment remains strong. We have institutionalized UDL as the framework for curriculum and instruction for all students and have added a focus on creating schoolwide learning outcomes based on the characteristics of expert learners developed by CAST, an excellent resource center. We are creating learners who are knowledgeable, resourceful, strategic, goal directed, motivated and purposeful.