In the last two decades, there has been a global movement towards pedagogies that create more inclusive school environments in order to meet the needs of diverse learners. One such approach is Universal Design for Learning (UDL), which foregrounds the design of flexible and accessible learning experiences for all, regardless of learner characteristics. Technology is a key enabler in this. To date, much of the research on UDL has focused on its impact in higher education, with less evidence available on the use of UDL within second‐level education. This systematic literature review of n = 15 empirical studies selected from a wide‐ranging search that returned an initial result of n = 1253 explores how the affordances of digital technology have been harnessed for UDL enactment at second level. The findings show that, to date, empirical research at second level has focused mostly on the easy wins within the UDL principle of Representation, where educators offer choice about how learners access content. However, there is a clear gap in UDL research on the use of technologies to support the Engagement and Action & Expression principles of UDL, supporting student self‐regulation and self‐assessment, and on technology‐mediated communication and collaboration. The paper highlights the potential for future cross‐pollination of research in educational technology with UDL. Practitioner Notes: What is already known about this topic: Universal Design for Learning has been extensively researched in higher education and special education contexts but much less so at K‐12, in particular at second level. Technology offers many affordances that can provide choice and variation in the learning process, which can be harnessed in a UDL approach. The transformative potential of technology in educational contexts was not fully realised pre‐COVID. The COVID pandemic saw an acceleration in technology adoption for learning, but it remains to be seen whether technology is being deployed to complement or transform existing practices. What this paper adds: This paper clearly identifies which affordances of technology are commonly deployed in UDL implementations, particularly noting the provision of choice through multi‐media options for Representation and expression. There is a clear gap in UDL research on the use of technologies to support self‐regulation and self‐assessment, (eg, peer, teacher and automated feedback tools) and on technology‐mediated communication and collaboration. The UDL literature does not address the potential negative impacts of technology within the learning context or the short‐lived nature of positive impacts (novelty effect). Implications for practice and/or policy: While technology affords great opportunities for choice and Engagement, the design of the learning experience must take priority, availing of technology as needed. There are great opportunities for cross‐pollination of research at the forefront of educational technology and universal design to address any gaps in technology use in UDL implementations.

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities have proclaimed the basic right of people to make one’s own choices, have an effective participation and inclusion. Research in the field of disability have stressed self-determination as a key construct because of its impact on their quality of life and the achievement of desired educational and adulthood related outcomes. Self-determination development must be promoted through specific strategies and especially, by providing tailored opportunities to practice those skills. Providing these opportunities across environments could be especially relevant as a facilitator of self-determination development. This manuscript aims to ascertain if opportunities at home and in the community to engage in self-determined actions are mediating the relationship between people intellectual disability level and their self-determination. Results have confirmed direct effects of intellectual disability level on self-determination scores. Indirect effects also predicted self-determination and almost all its related components (self-initiation, self-direction, self-regulation, self-realization, and empowerment) through opportunities in the community and at home. Autonomy was predicted by the intellectual disability level through an indirect effect of opportunities at home, but not in the community. These results highlight the need for further research to better operationalize and promote contextually rooted opportunities for people with intellectual disability to become more self-determined.

ResumenEste artículo aborda la necesidad de formación del profesorado en metodologías que atiendan a la diversidad en la universidad. Por un lado, se defiende la obligación legal de asegurar la igualdad de oportunidades para todos los estudiantes. Por otro lado, también se plantea que una de las vías de mejora debe ser la formación del profesorado en paradigmas de referencia creados para atender a la diversidad de estudiantes, especialmente, el diseño universal para el aprendizaje. También se revisan los resultados de un estudio en el que las demandas de adaptaciones curriculares de estudiantes universitarios con discapacidad se ponen en correspondencia con los principios y pautas del diseño universal para el aprendizaje. Los resultados permiten aventurar que el diseño curricular bajo los principios del diseño universal para el aprendizaje podría minimizar las demandas de adaptaciones especiales, incluso en grupos de estudiantes con mayores dificultades. Por último, se revisan algunas experiencias de formación del profesorado en diseño universal para el aprendizaje y se describe una experiencia formativa específica puesta en marcha en un plan de formación de personal docente universitario. Con todo ello, pretendemos acercar a la comunidad universitaria nuevos modos de afrontar el reto de diseñar currículos inclusivos que tengan en cuenta a todos los estudiantes.AbstractThis paper looks at how diversity is dealt with in university from a teacher training perspective. On the one hand, it is a legal obligation of universities to ensure equal opportunities for all students. On the other hand, it is argued that teacher training in paradigms and frameworks created to deal with diversity are also a way of improving. In this context, a universal design for learning paradigm will be presented, describing some research outcomes on its application. The article also reviews the results of an investigation into the demands by students with disability for adaptations to the curriculum, and their relationship with the universal design for learning principles. These results suggest that curriculum design following the principles of universal design for learning could minimize the demands for curriculum adaptations, even for students groups that experience more difficulties. Lastly, some experiences of teacher training with the universal design for learning will be reviewed, as well as the specific experience in implementing a plan for university teacher training. With all this, the intention is to bring new ways to meet the challenge in the design of inclusive curricula for ALL students to the university community

La educación inclusiva como enfoque, así como la aplicación del Diseño Universal para el Aprendizaje (DUA), han sido ampliamente estudiados en la literatura académica de los últimos años. Este trabajo a modo de ensayo busca contribuir a la reflexión respecto de diversos aspectos que unen ambas cuestiones, poniendo el foco de atención en la importancia de contextualizar nuestras prácticas educativas para los estudiantes. Por ello, este artículo describe el concepto de Diseño Universal para el Aprendizaje Contextualizado (DUAC) como una manera de aterrizar las programaciones e implementar experiencias de aprendizaje que respondan a la realidad de los discentes, teniendo en cuenta la diversidad que caracteriza a cada aula. Finalmente, se concluye acerca de la necesidad de dotar de mayores recursos, espacios, tiempos para la formación y desarrollo profesional docente, a fin de avanzar hacia prácticas educativas contextualizadas teniendo como referencia los principios del DUA. Ello implica, ampliar el foco de la inclusión a otros colectivos en riesgo de exclusión por su situación personal, social, cultural o étnica, poniendo en práctica los principios y estrategias que propone el DUA y, con ello, superar la mirada centrada en los estudiantes con necesidades educativas especiales y/o discapacidad.

Las universidades son espacios a los que determinados estudiantes no acceden o en los que encuentran destacados obstáculos para permanecer. Avanzar hacia la construcción de universidades donde todos puedan aprender y participar es una tarea inaplazable que muchas instituciones desconocen cómo enfrentar. Este trabajo tiene como objetivo diseñar un sistema de indicadores que facilite a las instituciones universitarias la autoevaluación de las condiciones que ofrecen a sus estudiantes con respecto a la inclusión. Con una metodología basada en la revisión bibliográfica y la validación de indicadores por 18 expertos/as mediante el método Delphi, se presentan un total de 30 indicadores agrupados en seis dimensiones claves. Estas dimensiones hacen referencia a la cultura institucional, acceso equitativo, aprendizaje centrado en el alumnado, bienestar y participación, movilidad y empleabilidad y logro académico. Para facilitar el uso del instrumento, se acompaña cada indicador de una breve descripción, una medida o escala de evaluación, la periodicidad con la que conviene ser medido y el posible nivel de desagregación. Como conclusión, se reconoce la adecuación del método Delphi para la validación de indicadores y se destaca la contribución de los instrumentos de evaluación como herramientas que permiten evidenciar las situaciones de desigualdad universitaria. Se subraya la urgencia de revertir el modelo universitario hacia un modelo enfocado en el diseño de estrategias que permitan avanzar hacia la verdadera inclusión.

Bullying is a serious problem that particularly affects schoolchildren with disabilities. However, studies in this group have been carried out on smaller cohorts and the results obtained are, therefore, less representative and sometimes inconclusive. The purpose of this paper is to perform a systematic review of the work carried out in recent years, including the analysis of several variables related to the sample, the methodology applied and the type of bullying. The guidelines set down by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement were followed in three phases. The total sample consisted of 55 children who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The results reveal that half the studies were conducted in cohorts of less than 250 schoolchildren and drew no distinctions between the different types of disabilities. Furthermore, there is no consensus regarding the methodology used, and no specialized instruments were used. Hardly any specific interventions have been performed into the type of bullying investigated, in which victimization is the predominant mode. We concluded that there is an urgent need to increase the number of studies, including a larger number of individuals and using specialized instruments, in order to obtain more solid results. Such studies will allow us to create specific prevention and intervention programs to address the bullying of schoolchildren with disabilities.