Eficacia de la formación docente en diseño universal para el aprendizaje: Una revisión sistemática de literatura (2000-2020)

  1. Sánchez-Serrano, José Manuel 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Revista:
Journal of neuroeducation = revista de neuroeducación = revista de neuroeducació

ISSN: 2696-2691

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 3

Número: 1

Páginas: 17-33

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1344/JONED.V3I1.39657 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Journal of neuroeducation = revista de neuroeducación = revista de neuroeducació

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

Al llarg de les darreres dues dècades, el disseny universal per a l’aprenentatge (DUA) s’ha anat configurant com un dels enfocaments més prometedors per orientar l’atenció a la diversitat de l’alumnat. Aquest model, que justifica els seus principis a partir de diferents investigacions sobre neuroaprenentatge, ha estat adoptat per la legislació espanyola en matèria educativa com a marc de referència a fi d’optimitzar la resposta educativa a les diferents maneres d’aprendre dels estudiants per part del professorat. La incorporació dels principis del DUA a la pràctica docent pot resultar complexa si no es té un coneixement adequat dels seus fonaments teòrics i del seu marc de pautes i punts de verificació. En aquest sentit, la formació docent en DUA exercirà un rol fonamental. Cal garantir, doncs, que aquesta formació sobre DUA és efectiva en el desenvolupament de competències docents per a l’atenció a la diversitat. L’objectiu d’aquest treball és explorar l’evidència empírica existent sobre l’eficàcia que ha demostrat tenir la formació docent en matèria de DUA. La metodologia va consistir en una revisió sistemàtica de literatura per conèixer quins tipus d’investigacions basades en intervencions formatives sobre DUA s’han desenvolupat i quins resultats se n’han obtingut. Durant tot el procés es van seguir les orientacions del PRISMA Statement. Dels 507 registres identificats inicialment a diferents bases de dades (ERIC, Scopus, PsycInfo® o ProQuest Central, entre d’altres), 27 van complir els criteris d’elegibilitat i van ser inclosos a la revisió. La síntesi i la discussió de resultats s’enfoca a descriure la informació referida a diferents variables d’interès, com ara el tipus de formació en DUA que es va proporcionar, el context en què es va desenvolupar, els continguts inclosos, el perfil dels docents participants o les troballes obtingudes. Les conclusions apunten que la formació en DUA resulta eficaç per al desenvolupament de la capacitat per incorporar els principis i pautes de l’esmentat marc a la pràctica, així com per al desenvolupament de percepcions positives per part dels docents pel que fa al potencial i els beneficis del DUA.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Ley Orgánica 3/2020, de 29 de diciembre, por la que se modifica la Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de mayo, de Educación.
  • Real Decreto 95/2022, de 1 de febrero, por el que se establece la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Infantil.
  • Real Decreto 157/2022, de 1 de marzo, por el que se establecen la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Primaria.
  • Real Decreto 217/2022, de 29 de marzo, por el que se establece la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas de la Educación Secundaria Obligatoria.
  • Real Decreto 243/2022, de 5 de abril, por el que se establecen la ordenación y las enseñanzas mínimas del Bachillerato.
  • Rose DH, Meyer A. Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 2002.
  • Burgstahler S. Universal Design: Implications for computing education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE). 2011; 11(3): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/2037276.2037283
  • Meyer A, Rose DH, Gordon DT. Universal Design for Learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing; 2014.
  • CAST, Center for Applied Special Technology. Universal Design for Learning guidelines. Version 2.0. Author; 2011. http://udlguidelines.cast.org/more/downloads
  • Sánchez-Serrano JM. Eficacia de la formación inicial del profesorado en Diseño Universal para el Aprendizaje en el desarrollo de competencias para la atención a la diversidad. Universidad Complutense de Madrid; 2022.
  • Al-Azawei A, Serenelli F, Lundqvist K. Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A content analysis of peer reviewed journals from 2012 to 2015. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 2016; 16(3): 39-56. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v16i3.19295
  • Capp M J. The effectiveness of Universal Design for Learning: A meta-analysis of literature between 2013 and 2016. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2017; 21(8): 791-807. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1325074
  • Rao K, Ok MW, Bryant BR. A review of research on Universal Design educational models. Remedial and Special Education. 2014; 35(3): 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513518980
  • Spooner F, Baker JN, Harris AA, Ahlgrim-Delzell L, Browder DM. Effects of training in Universal Design for Learning on lesson plan development. Remedial and special education. 2007; 28(2): 108-116. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325070280020101
  • Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis, JPA et al. The PRISMA Statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7): 1-28. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
  • Higgins JPT, Green S. (Eds.) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. https://training.cochrane.org/cochrane-handbook-systematic-reviews-interventions
  • Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med. 2009; 6(7), 1-6. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
  • Cooper-Martin E, Wolanin N. Evaluation of the Universal Design for Learning projects. Montgomery County Public Schools; 2014. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED557728
  • Katz J. Implementing the Three Block Model of Universal Design for Learning: Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy, stress, and job satisfaction in inclusive classrooms K-12. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2015; 19(1): 1-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.881569
  • Katz J, Sokal L, Wu A. Academic achievement of diverse K-12 students in inclusive Three-Block Model classrooms. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2019; 25(12): 1391-1420. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1613450
  • McGhie-Richmond D, Sung AN. Applying Universal Design for Learning to instructional lesson planning. International Journal of Whole Schooling. 2013; 9(1): 43-59. http://www.wholeschooling.net/Journal_of_Whole_Schooling/IJWSIndex.html
  • Dalton EM, Mckenzie JA, Kahonde C. The implementation of inclusive education in South Africa: Reflections arising from a workshop for teachers and therapists to introduce Universal Design for Learning. African Journal of Disability. 2012; 1(1): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v1i1.13
  • Frey TJ, Andres DK, McKeeman LA, Lane JJ. Collaboration by design: Integrating core pedagogical content and special education methods courses in a preservice secondary education program. The Teacher Educator. 2012; 47(1): 45-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2011.632473
  • Lowrey KA, Classen A, Sylvest A. Exploring ways to support preservice teachers’ use of UDL in planning and instruction. Journal of Educational Research & Practice. 2019; 9(1): 261-281. https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2019.09.1.19
  • Craig SL, Smith SJ, Frey BB. Professional development with Universal Design for Learning: Supporting teachers as learners to increase the implementation of UDL. Professional Development in Education. 2019; 48(1): 22-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1685563
  • Davies PL, Schelly CL, Spooner CL. Measuring the effectiveness of Universal Design for Learning intervention in postsecondary education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability. 2013; 26(3): 195-220. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped/archived-jped/jped-volume-26
  • Schelly CL, Davies PL, Spooner CL. Student perceptions of faculty implementation of Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability. 2011; 24(1): 17-30. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped/archived-jped/jped-volume-24
  • Smith Canter L, King LH, Williams JB, Metcalf D, Rhys Myrick Potts K. Evaluating pedagogy and practice of Universal Design for Learning in public schools. Exceptionality Education International. 2017; 27: 1-16. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/eei/vol27/iss1/1
  • Dymond SK, Renzaglia A, Rosenstein A, Chun EJ, Banks RA, Niswander V, Gilson CL. Using a participatory action research approach to create a universally designed inclusive high school science course: A case study. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities. 2006; 31(4): 293-308. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F154079690603100403
  • McGuire-Schwartz ME, Arndt JS. Transforming Universal Design for Learning in early childhood teacher education from college classroom to early childhood classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education. 2007; 28(2): 127-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10901020701366707
  • Cunningham MP, Huchting KK, Fogarty D, Graf V. Providing access for students with moderate disabilities: An evaluation of a professional development program at a catholic elementary school. Journal of Catholic Education. 2017; 21(1): 138-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.15365/joce.2101072017
  • Evmenova A. Preparing teachers to use Universal Design for Learning to support diverse learners. Journal of Online Learning Research. 2018; 4(2): 147-171. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/181969/
  • Hutson B, Downs H. The college STAR faculty learning community: Promoting learning for all students through faculty collaboration. The Journal of Faculty Development. 2015; 29(1): 25-32. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1134352
  • Izzo MV, Murray A, Novak J. The faculty perspective on Universal Design for Learning. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability. 2008; 21(2): 60-72. https://www.ahead.org/professional-resources/publications/jped/archived-jped/jped-volume-21
  • Williams J, Evans C, King L. The Impact of Universal Design for Learning Instruction on Lesson Planning. International Journal of Learning. 2012; 18(4): 213-222. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v18i04/47587
  • Meo G. Curriculum planning for all learners: Applying Universal Design for Learning (UDL) to a high school reading comprehension program. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth. 2008; 52(2): 21-30. https://doi.org/10.3200/PSFL.52.2.21-30
  • Lanterman CS, Applequist K. Pre-service teachers’ beliefs: Impact of training in Universal Design for Learning. Exceptionality Education International. 2018; 28(3): 102-121. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/eei/vol28/iss3/8/
  • Edyburn K, Edyburn DL. Classroom menus for supporting the academic success of diverse learners. Intervention in School and Clinic. 2021; 56(4): 243-249. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220944381
  • Israel M, Ribuffo C, Smith S. Universal Design for Learning: Recommendations for teacher preparation and professional development (Document No. IC-7). University of Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability, and Reform Center; 2014. http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/innovation-configurations/
  • Rao K, Meo G. Using Universal Design for Learning to design standards-based lesson. SAGE Open. 2016; 6(4): 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016680688
  • King LH, Williams JB, Warren SH. Preparing and supporting teachers for 21st century expectations through Universal Design for Learning. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin. 2011; 77(2): 51-55. https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1P3-2257395031/preparing-and-supporting-teachers-for-21st-century
  • Wu X. Universal Design for Learning: A collaborative framework for designing inclusive curriculum. IE: Inquiry in Education. 2010; 1(2): 1-13. https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/ie/vol1/iss2/6/
  • Edyburn DL. 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. 2010; 33(1): 33-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/073194871003300103
  • Rosenthal R. The “file drawer problema” and tolerance for null results. Psychological bulletin. 1979; 86(3): 638-641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet