Making Learning Accessible is Important, but how can This be Accomplished?

In this week’s reading, I had many moments where I felt like I was finishing the thought of the authors before I finished reading their sentences. This usually happens when I am in most, if not full agreement with the author/s. The article that elicited this reaction was “A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO RTI: EMBEDDING UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING AND TECHNOLOGY” which spoke about providing effective and accessible classroom instructional practices by using the epistemology of Response to Intervention, (RTI) along with Universal Design Learning (UDL) to form what is described as an “ecological framework,” which can be defined as the multi-layer approach for addressing effective and accessible learning.

Before discussing how the ecological framework will be created, the authors define RTI and UDL since they help to form the central assertion of their study. RTI can be defined as a proactive approach to creating personalized strategies for students to help in their learning and development. On the other hand, UDL can be defined as the creation of accessible learning spaces to accommodate and support diverse learning. After defining these key terms, the authors highlight that RTI and UDL have similar goals in addressing learning accessibility, and combine both concepts to accentuate the ecological framework that they claim is missing in scholarly conversations, “...there is a lack of literature on a wider ecological approach to Rtl that considers the merit of instructional strategies as well as variables such as purposeful instructional design and technology to support all learners” (Basham et al., 2010). 

After identifying the problem and proposing a coherent response by combining RTI and UDL practices, the authors provide specifics on how to deal with their identified issue, which is using principles from other research, academic fields, and laws. The example of this I would like to focus on is their description of the three tiers, a concept they argued had origins in the field of Public Health. These tiers are essentially the author’s suggested stepping stones to addressing the problem, which includes using scientific data to validate and support learning strategies that have a successful track record (tier 1) focusing on prevention, specifically, not waiting on students to get to a critical point where their acutely struggling, (tier 2) and finally, having methods prepared to help those who need additional, individualized support, although according to the authors, this is a small population of usually just five percent. (tier 3) 

This article connects to my lesson plan in a myriad of ways, especially in the accessibility aspect. In my lesson plan, I focus on students utilizing an intentionally planned collaborative activity and using technology to promote peer learning. In my opinion, one of the most accessible ways of learning is through collaboration, and by students receiving feedback from their peers, they are taking part in a learning process that supports their growth and others by learning various perspectives. Also, while looking at the CAST Universal Design for Learning website, I would like to incorporate Clusive and Corgi as learning tools. These tools are perfect for my lesson plan since Clusive can serve as a more accessible way for students to gather their secondary resources since I can upload them there, and for Corgi, students will have a useful way of commenting on each other's work live while using those comments to improve their work. It is essentially a well-detailed peer review tool. Overall, I enjoyed this week’s article, and I look forward to taking my knowledge to the classroom and joining in the implementation of effective and accessible learning. 

References 

Basham, J. D., Israel, M., Graden, J., Poth, R., & Winston, M. (2010). A comprehensive approach to rti: embedding universal design for learning and technology. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(4), 243-255.