Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Projects and researches
Published: 2023-06-26

Universal Design for Learning, Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, and School Performance in Inclusive Classrooms

University of Bucharest
universal design for learning current school conditions teachers’ self-efficacy students’ performance

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate the extent to which teachers apply the principles of UDL in classroom context and the current conditions existing in schools for the implementation of these principles. The relationships between implementation of UDL principles, teachers' self-efficacy and students' school performance were also analyzed. A number of 151 teachers from Brașov county, aged between 21 and 63, M = 44.75, AS = 9.06 participated in the present study, of which 138 women (91%) and 13 men (9%). The implementation of UDL principles was measured through a list of specific UDL activities, organized into four categories (use of technology, diversified teaching, cooperative teaching, individualized assessment). Current conditions in schools were measured by means of a list of situations, organized into three categories (material resources, teachers' concern, modern applications). Self-efficacy was measured with General Self-Efficacy Scale, GSE (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995). Students’  performance was measured by a computational algorithm. The results showed that teachers report high levels of application of UDL principles and that the main condition in schools that facilitate UDL is teachers' concern. Among the UDL principles, only the use of technology was positively associated with student performance, and among the current conditions in schools, only teachers' concern was positively associated with school performance. Teacher self-efficacy was positively associated with school performance and UDL principles. Practical implications are discussed and future research directions are established

References

  1. Abell, M., Jung, E., Taylor, M. (2011). Students’ perceptions of classroom instructional environments in the context of Universal Design for Learning. Learning Environments Research, 14(2), 171-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10984-011-9090-2
  2. Ainscow, M. (2020). Promoting inclusion and equity in education: Lessons from international experiences. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 7e16. https://doi.org/10.1080/20020317.2020.1729587
  3. Antoninis, M., April, D., Barakat, B., Bella, N., D'Addio, A. C., Eck, M., Operation, F., Joshi, P., Kubacka, K., McWilliam, A., Murakami, Y., Smith, W., Stipanovic, L., Vidarte, R., & Zekrya1, L. (2020). All means all: An introduction to the 2020 global education monitoring report on inclusion. Prospects, 49, 103e109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09505-x
  4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H Freeman and Company.
  5. Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2011). Index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools (3rd ed.). Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education http://
  6. www.csie.org.uk/resources/inclusion-index-explained. shtml.
  7. Browder, D. M., Mims, P. J., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delsell, L., & Lee, A. (2008). Teaching elementary students with multiple disabilities to participate in shared stories. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 33(1-2), 3-12.
  8. Card, D., Krueger, A. (1996). School resources and student outcomes: an overview of the literature and new evidence from North and South Carolina. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10, 31–40.
  9. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). Universal Design for learning guidelines version 2.2. Center for Applied Special Technology. http://udlguidelines.cast.org.
  10. Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2015). Research & development. Accesat online la data de 15.04.2023 la adresa Transforming Education through Universal Design for Learning: http://cast.org/research/index.html.
  11. Coyne, P., Pisha, B., Dalton, B., Zeph, L. A., & Cook Smith, N. (2012). Literacy by design: A universal design for learning approach for students with significant intellectual disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33(3), 162.
  12. Dally, K. A., Ralston, M. M., Strnadova, I., Dempsey, I., Chambers, D., Foggett, J., Paterson, D., Sharma, U., & Duncan, J. (2019). Current issues and future directions in Australian special and inclusive education. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(8), 57e73. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol44/iss8/4
  13. Dixon, R., Woodcock, S., Tanner, K., Woodley, L., & Webster, A. (2017). Teaching in inclusive school environments (2nd ed.). David Barlow Publishing.
  14. Dolan, R. P., Hall, T. E., Banerjee, M., Chun, E., & Strangman, N. (2005). Applying principles of universal design to test delivery: The effect of computer-based read-aloud on test performance of high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 3(7).
  15. Edyburn, D. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for learning if you saw it? Ten propositions for new directions for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(1), 33.
  16. Faustino, A. C., Moura, A. Q., da Silva, G. H. G., Muzinatti, J. L., & Skovsmose, O. (2018). Macroinclusion and microexclusion on education context. Revista Eletronica de Educaçao, 12(3), 898e911. https://doi.org/10.14244/198271992212
  17. Fetler, M. (2001). Student mathematics achievement test scores, dropout rates, and teacher characteristics. Teacher Education Quarterly, 151–168.
  18. Finkelstein, S., Sharma, U., & Furlonger, B. (2021). The inclusive practices of classroom teachers: A scoping review and thematic analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 25(6), 735e762. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1572232
  19. Florian, L., & Spratt, J. (2013). Enacting inclusion: A framework for interrogating inclusive practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28(2), 119e135.
  20. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778111
  21. Friesen, S., Clifford, P., Francis-Poscente, K., & Martin, B. (2008). Learning mathematics in an accessible classroom. University of Calgary.
  22. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. Teachers' College Press. Fullan, M., Hill, P., Crevola, C. (2006). Breakthrough. Corwin Press Inc.
  23. Garvis, S. (2013). Beginning generalist teacher self-efficacy for music compared with maths and English. British Journal of Music Education, 30(1), 85e101.
  24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265051712000411
  25. Hakkinen, I., Kirjavainen, T., Uusitalo, R. (2003). School resources and student achievement revisited: new evidence from panel data. Economics of Education Review, 22, 329–335.
  26. Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. Pearson.
  27. Hanushek, E.A., Luque, J.A. (2003). Efficiency and equity in schools around the world. Economics of Education Review 22, 481–502.
  28. Katz, J. (2013). The three-block model of Universal Design for Learning (UDL): Engaging students in inclusive education. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(1), 153-194. King-Sears, P. (2014). Introduction to learning disability quarterly special series on universal design for learning: Part one of two. Learning Disabilities Quarterly, 37(2).
  29. King-Sears, M. E., Stefanidis, A., Evmenova, A. S., Rao, K., Mergen, R. L., Owen, L. S., Strimel, M. M. (2022). Achievement of learners receiving UDL instruction: A meta-analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 122, 103956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103956
  30. Lidner, K.-T., & Schwab, S. (2020). Differentiation and individualisation in inclusive education: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1813450
  31. Lieber, J., Horn, E., Palmer, S., & Fleming, K. (2008). Access to the general education curriculum for preschoolers with disabilities: Children's school success. Exceptionality, 16, 18-32.
  32. Merrill, M. D., Drake, L., Lacy, M. J., & Pratt, J. (1996). Reclaiming instructional design. Educational Technology, 36(5), 5-7.
  33. Metcalf, D., Evans, C., Flynn, H. K., & Williams, J. B. (2009). Direct instruction + UDL = Access for diverse learners: How to plan and implement an effective multisensory spelling lesson. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 5(6).
  34. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
  35. Muller, E., & Tschantz, J. (2003, April). Universal design for learning: Four state initiatives. Accessed online on 15.04.2023 at NASDSE: http://nasdse.org/Desktop Modules/DNNspotStore/ProductFiles/221_085a8d19-ca4f-4075-8f86-d784ec5acf1b.pdf.
  36. Nelson, L. L., & Basham, J. D. (2014). A blueprint for UDL: Considering the design of implementation. UDL-IRN.
  37. Niedo, J., Lee, Y., Breznitz, Z., & Berninger, V. W. (2014). Computerized silent reading rate and strategy instruction for fourth grades at risk in silent reading rate. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(2), 100. Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). The development of academic self-efficacy. In A. Wigfield, & J. S. Eccles (Eds.), Development of achievement motivation (pp. 15e31). Academic Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50003-6.
  38. Parcel, T.L., Dufur, J.M. (2001). Capital at home and at school: effects on student achievement. Social Forces, 79(3), 881–911.
  39. Qvortrup, A., & Qvortrup, L. (2018). Inclusion: Dimensions of inclusion in education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22(7), 803e817. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1412506
  40. Rivkin, S.G., Hanushek, E.A., Kain, J.F. (2005). Teachers, schools and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417–458.
  41. Rose, D. H. (2000). Universal design for learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15 (1).
  42. Rose, D. H., Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  43. Sanger, C. S. (2020). Inclusive pedagogy and universal design approaches for diverse learning environments. In C. Sanger, & N. Gleason (Eds.), Diversity and inclusion in global higher education (pp. 31e72). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1628-3_2.
  44. Saunders, R. (2012). Assessment of professional development for teachers in the vocational education and training sector: An examination of the concerns based adoption model. Australian Journal of Education, 56, 182.
  45. Savolainen, H., Malinen, O.-P., & Schwab, S. (2020). Teacher efficacy predicts teachers' attitudes towards inclusion e a longitudinal cross-lagged analysis. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1752826
  46. Schwarzer, R., Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35-37). NFER-NELSON. http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~health/engscal.htm
  47. Sharma, U., Sokal, L.,Wang, M., & Loreman, T. (2021). Measuring the use of inclusive practices among pre-service educators: A multi-national study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 107, 103506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103506
  48. Slee, R. (2013). How do we make inclusive education happen when exclusion is a political predisposition? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(8), 895e907. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2011.602534
  49. Subban, P., Bradford, B., Sharma, U., Loreman, T., Avramidis, E., Kullmann, H., Sahli Lozano, C., Romano, A., & Woodcock, S. (2022). Does it really take a village to raise a child? Reflections on the need for collective responsibility in inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2022.2059632
  50. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202e248. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002202
  51. Willms, D.J., Somers, M.A. (2001). Family, classroom, and school effects on children’s educational outcomes in Latin America. School Effectiveness and School Improvement 12(4), 409–445.
  52. Wilson, C., Woolfson, L. M., Durkin, K., & Elliott, M. A. (2016). The impact of social cognitive and personality factors on teachers' reported inclusive behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 461e480. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12118
  53. Woodcock, S., & Hardy, I. (2017). Beyond the binary: Rethinking teachers' understandings of and engagement with inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(6), 667e686. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1251501
  54. Woodcock, S., & Jones, G. (2020). Examining the interrelationship between teachers' self-efficacy and their beliefs towards inclusive education for all. Teacher Development, 24(4), 583e602. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2020.1803957
  55. Woodcock, S., Sharma, U., Subban, P., Hitches, E. (2022). Teacher self-efficacy and inclusive education practices: Rethinking teachers’ engagement with inclusive practices. Teaching and teacher education, 117, 103802. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103802
  56. Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. Y. (2016). Teacher self-efficacy and its effect on classroom processes, student academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 981e1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801

How to Cite

Piticari, P. (2023). Universal Design for Learning, Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, and School Performance in Inclusive Classrooms . Studia Doctoralia, 14(1), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.47040/sdpsych.v14i1.160