by Megan Mocko
In previous blogs, I wrote about representation and engagement as two of the guidelines for Universal Design for Learning (UDL). In this blog post, I am going to concentrate on the final guideline: action and expression.
Action and Expression
While representation is processed in the back portion of our brains and engagement is processed in the middle, action and expression are processed in the front portion. The action and expression guideline focuses on the “how,” which includes how students physically complete an assignment, communicate what they have done, or plan their work. There are nine checkpoints for this guideline, so once again, I am going to focus on a subset of them: “Provide scaffolds that can be gradually released with increasing independence and skills,” “Optimize access to tools and assistive technologies,” and “Vary the methods for response and navigation.” More information can be found at Cast.org.
Scaffolding
Scaffolding refers to “a variety of instructional techniques used to move students progressively toward stronger understanding and, ultimately, greater independence in the learning process” (Scaffolding, 2015). I try to incorporate scaffolds in my assignments when appropriate. For example, to help students better understand what is expected in a writing assignment, we do an activity in the class where they critique a poorly written writing assignment. To aid in this evaluation, they are asked to score the work based on a provided rubric. We then review the assignment as a class and discuss the scoring process. The second part of the activity involves students working on their own or in pairs to re-write sections of the poorly written writing assignment. The groups share their revisions in a collaborative document that I use to put together an exemplary writing sample. This scaffolding activity aims to prepare students to create their writing assignment that is submitted later in the week.
Vary the Methods for Response
To vary the methods for response, the students have the option to submit their “writing” assignment as a short video (< 5 minutes). Not surprisingly, most students prefer written assignments. For those who did end up submitting a video, they tended to submit videos for every assignment. These options provide students a choice in how they express their understanding throughout the course.
Access to Tools & Vary the Methods for Navigation
Students encounter statistical software to learn statistical concepts as well as a tool for data analysis. I use JMP in my statistics classroom. To evaluate the accessibility of the tool, I asked myself the following questions:
- Are there alternative ways to navigate the program? For example, can they use a mouse or a keyboard? Can students navigate the software effectively with one hand?
- How easy is it to modify the audiovisual accessibility options? For example, is it easy to change the size and color?
In regards to JMP, there are multiple ways to navigate the program and many of the commands have shortcut keys listed. For example, at the beginning of the term, I demonstrate two ways to import a data set: copy/paste or using the import wizard. Both of which can be done with the mouse or with the keyboard. All of these methods also can be done with one hand.
Additionally, I make a point to show students how to change the fonts and colors in their visualizations (as an aside, I have found that students seem to really like changing the color!). Customizing graphs also have multiple navigation options, for example, right-clicking on the background, using a keyboard shortcut, or using the menu dropdown all allow the user to change the marker size, shape, and color. One of my favorite quotes is, “We are not brains on sticks, and neither are our students” (Hrach, 2021, p. xiv). By using Universal Design Guidelines when considering course design, we acknowledge student differences while maintaining the same learning goals and expectations for the course.
Contributing author Megan Mocko is a lecturer at the Warrington College of Business. She teaches statistics to undergraduate and graduate students. Before that, she rose through the ranks from lecturer to senior lecturer and master lecturer in the Department of Statistics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences also at UF. Megan has taught statistics in multiple formats: face-to-face, hybrid, and completely online.
In addition to her teaching, Megan’s involvement in statistics education led to her work as co-chair on the 2016 GAISE (Guidelines for Assessment and Instruction in Statistics Education) report. The American Statistical Association endorsed the revised 2016 GAISE report. Megan was also program chair for the eCOTS (electronic Conference on Teaching Statistics) in 2022 and 2020. In the Fall of 2022, she began her doctoral journey in Curriculum and Instruction with an emphasis in Educational Technology at the UF College of Education. Her area of specialization is Virtual Exchange. She is interested in engaging everyone in the classroom using educational technology and using virtual exchange to promote communication about data across international boundaries.
References
CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org
GAISE College Report ASA Revision Committee, “Guidelines for Assessment and Instruction in Statistics Education College Report 2016,” http://www.amstat.org/education/gaise.
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995–1006. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.995Neumann, D. L., Hood, M., & Neumann, M. M. (2013). Using real-life data when teaching statistics: Student perceptions of this strategy in an introductory statistics course. Statistics Education Research Journal, 12(2), 59-70.
StatTLC 
Leave a comment