Universal Design for Learning and Instruction: Perspectives of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Universal design in the setting of education is a framework of instruction that aims to be inclusive of different learning preferences and learners, and helps to reduce barriers for students with disabilities. The principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and Universal Design for Instruction (UDI) were used as the framework for this study. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the perspectives of university students with disabilities on teaching methods and strategies conducive to their learning, and evaluate how their perspectives align with UDL/UDI. The findings of this study revealed that there are barriers to learning for students with disabilities. Students with and without disabilities reported having a variety of learning preferences, and rated UDL/UDI principles as useful in improving their learning. The students gave several perspectives that supported the principles of universal design in higher education to enhance the learning of students who have disabilities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it