UDL and Art Education for Students with Disabilities and Physical Impairments

This issue of NASET’s Practical Teacher was written by Josefina M. Beyra of Florida International University. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in the art classroom. UDL is a research-based approach that makes learning accessible to diverse students that has been practiced for decades yet it is not widely known. Unfortunately, the current literature on art education as an inclusive classroom is also limited. Because art elective courses serve large populations of students with disabilities, it is crucial that art teachers and all teachers that incorporate the arts are aware of UDL as an approach to teaching diverse students.

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) in the art classroom. UDL is a research-based approach that makes learning accessible to diverse students that has been practiced for decades yet it is not widely known. Unfortunately, the current literature on art education as an inclusive classroom is also limited. Because art elective courses serve large populations of students with disabilities, it is crucial that art teachers and all teachers that incorporate the arts are aware of UDL as an approach to teaching diverse students.

The art studio is a safe haven for experimentation and self-expression. It is a place where students can be themselves, share ideas and use their imaginations without inhibitions. For students with disabilities, the art room becomes the perfect setting for achievement. Art electives offer a sense of flexibility unlike any other classroom. For the most part, art courses do not operate under the shadow of standardized testing or district mandated pacing guides, which can be discouraging for students of varying abilities – and consequently their parents and teachers. Instead, art education pedagogy focuses on a wide range of methods for creative development that will benefit diverse students. Indeed, diversity is a major factor of art education programs nationwide. It is common for art classrooms to host students of different ages, grade levels, and learning abilities. Grouping students of varying grade levels in art electives is a common practice especially at the high school level, yet few research studies focus on multi-level groupings in the arts and training for teachers (Broome, 2009). When considering students with disabilities, the differences are even higher and more critical. Students that are mainstreamed into general education courses such as the art elective may have varying cognitive and/or physical impairments. The effectiveness of inclusion and the training of general education teachers to be proactive in inclusive methodology for students with physical impairments is also lacking research (Singh, 2007). With this in mind, it is critical that art teachers consider research-based methodologies that will personalize instruction for diverse populations.

One particular approach is Universal Design for Learning (UDL). Essentially, UDL is a framework composed of three guiding principles that are based on the learning sciences and how the brain processes learning (Glass, 2013). The beauty in the UDL framework is in its focus on varying modalities of teaching and learning. UDL encourages teachers to embrace differences of each individual student while providing a research-based and organized pedagogical system.

Purpose

This literature review will examine UDL as an evidence-based practice that can facilitate art instruction for students with disabilities and physical impairments. A common issue in the art classroom is providing appropriate accommodations and modifications that will yield in successful instruction of the visual arts. Children with disabilities that affects their motor skills and/or their senses will have major challenges in creating art projects. There is no doubt that art instruction is greatly beneficial to students by promoting critical thinking skills, life skills and while working on dexterity and other fine motor skills. In advocating for art education, Bobick and DiCindio discuss the intrinsic value of art as pointed out in “Gifts of a Muse,” a study by the Rand Corporation on the benefits of arts education (Bobick, 2007, p. 22). Therefore, art instruction must be seen as a valuable resource for students with disabilities that will require proper training in effective strategies for pre-service and current teachers alike.

Methodology

A detailed search of on art education and UDL was conducted using the databases JSTOR, PsychINFO and ERIC, which house education and psychology scholarly articles. The search included the key-terms: “art education,” “art classroom,” “art instructional strategies,” “UDL,” “Universal Design for Learning,” “disabilities,” and “special education.” For the purpose of analyzing the most relevant scholarship on this topic, a final selection of articles were chosen from peer-reviewed publications between 2007-2016. This literature uses a traditional approach in summarizing findings of current literature on art education, students with disabilities, inclusion, general education and the use of UDL. The results and conclusions of the various studies reviewed were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of UDL in the art classroom and implications for art educators of students with disabilities in an inclusion setting.

Results

General Education and Inclusion

A research study on inclusion by Dr. Delar K. Singh indicate that general education teachers are not prepared, no do they feel prepared to teach students with physical impairments and disabilities (2007). The study investigated 115 teachers in Connecticut that hosted pre-service teachers for the local state university. These teachers were mostly elementary school teachers and serviced rural areas. A questionnaire divided into five sections was used to gather information about the general education teacher and their understanding on various issues related to inclusion, special education and students with disabilities. The results show that an overwhelming 77.4% of the selected sample report the need for more training (Singh, 2007). While the author does report that the sample may not be adequate enough to make any final conclusions, the study itself does show a need for investigating the training of general educators on strategies for teaching and making accommodations for students with disabilities and physical impairments. Singh’s study makes a grand statement about the need to raise awareness and critical research questions on the preparation of general education teachers and the available resources in general education classrooms for special education students.

Art Education and Special Education

Consequently, it is no surprise that if the average general education teacher feels challenged in teaching students with disabilities, the art teacher possibly has even more challenges. In most cases, the art classroom sees more special education students as class size and related laws are often overlooked in elective courses. To make matters worse, some research on class size conclude that students in many courses such as the visual arts are “unaffected by class size” (Cheng, 2011):

Administrators concerned with budget cuts and educational outcomes may find that some subjects can “afford” to increase class sizes more than other subjects (p. 989).

This study, however, looks at the effects of higher education classrooms and does point out that the literature K-12, though undecided, favors small class size. Still, the study did not discuss any implications in regards to students with disabilities as many research studies fail to do so, particularly in art education. This, however, is ironic as art education and special education share many similarities and professionals in the field need more collaboration (Malley, 2014).

In order to shed light on critical issues, the John F. Kennedy Center of Performing Arts alongside its affiliate organization, VSA, convened a forum to discuss the “intersections” between art education and special education (Malley, 2014). In one of their publications, an essay focused on the need for art teachers to have “adaptive art specialists” as a resource to discuss strategies for working with students with disabilities due to highly specialized needs (John F. Kennedy Center of Performing Arts, 2012):

Students with disabilities need access to art making experiences as much as or more than their peers. Students with physical disabilities need more and longer opportunities to move their hands and bodies and to increase their strength and independence (p. 48).

UDL in the Art Classroom

Knowing how valuable, yet how challenging art education can be for students with disabilities, it is imperative that art educators become aware of strategies that will serve students best. One research study that provides a comprehensive understanding of how to serve students with very particular sensory issues discusses the importance of preparing the art room itself for appropriate instruction (Wexler, 2015).

The authors of this article discuss the importance of creating an optimal learning space that considers the physical and sensory needs of students of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

From this perspective, a logical approach to use in the art classroom seems to be Universal Design for Learning. This notion is supported in the following statement:

To be effective in a more inclusive, more demanding teaching environment, arts educators will have to be more responsive to individual differences by recognizing the variation in difficulties that their students will have and addressing them in productive ways. At its roots, UDL is a framework for understanding and responding effectively to individual differences (Glass, 2013, p. 104)

When using the UDL approach, a teacher considers the three main guidelines, which allow for learning through “multiple means of representation,” “multiple means of action and expression,” and “multiple means of engagement” (Glass, 2013, p. 102). Art instruction heavily depends on visual demonstration and experience. UDL can bring a personalized touch to this instruction for students that may need an alternative way to perceive the lesson.

Some of these solutions might require teachers to integrate assistive technology (Coleman, 2015). Assistive technology includes no tech, low tech, and middle to high tech tools and devices that assist students in completing a task. These devices allow students to participate as much as possible in their courses.

Implications for Art Educators and School Leaders

The results of the literature show that the UDL approach is an effective and research-based practice that will allow art educators to tailor instruction for individual needs. Moreover, the research shows the value of art education for students with disabilities and implies that art teachers will need more training, resources and support from administrators as well as specialists trained in the arts and special education. At the very least, the literature does show a need for all general education teachers to have become more aware of disability issues and provide instruction that is more accessible. Further research in teacher training of UDL for art education will greatly assist in teachers in designing classroom environments and curricula for ALL students. While there is enough research to recognize that UDL is a valuable approach in art education, there is not enough literature on how to support art teachers and their inclusive classrooms nor are there enough resources on how to set up a classroom and types of projects to focus on for varying disabilities. This is precisely why UDL is a recommendation. UDL encourages new ways of doing and thinking as well as delivery. It might be the case that the art teacher will continuously make revisions in lesson planning based on data from performance and needs of the student. As a result of this, further research on class size, particularly in elective courses such as visual arts, might show that the personalized instruction for inclusion classrooms will need smaller classes. School leaders will need to consider whether budget cuts take priority over using effective strategies, which may require smaller student to teacher ratios.

References

Bobick, B., & DiCindio, C. (2012). Advocacy for art education: Beyond tee-shirts and bumper stickers. Art Education, 65(2), 20-23. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/925645473?accountid=10901

Broome, J. L. (2009). A descriptive study of multi-age art education in florida.Studies in Art Education, 50(2), 167-183. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/199839600?accountid=10901

Cheng, D. A. (2011). Effects of class size on alternative educational outcomes across disciplines. Economics of Education Review, 30(5), 980-990. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/898325857?accountid=10901

Coleman, M. B., & Cramer, E. S. (2015). Creating meaningful art experiences with assistive technology for students with physical, visual, severe, and multiple disabilities. Art Education, 68(2), 6-13. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1675842096?accountid=10901

Glass, D., Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2013). Universal design for learning and the arts. Harvard Educational Review, 83(1), 98-119. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1651827908?accountid=10901

Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 39-43. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1651839582?accountid=10901

Malley, S. M., ed. 2012. The intersection of arts education and special

education: exemplary programs and approaches. Washington, DC: John

F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

Singh, D. K. (2007). General education teachers and students with physical disabilities. The International Journal of Learning, 14(7), 205-214. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/61941987?accountid=10901

Wexler, A., & Luethi-Garrecht, A. (2015). Beyond accommodations: Designing for Nonverbal/Nonauditory learners in the inclusive art room. Art Education,68(2), 14-21. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1675842140?accountid=10901

About the Author

Josefina Beyra serves Miami-Dade County Public Schools as a sculpture teacher and Department Chair of Fine Arts for an urban, inner-city high school. Beyra studied art history, architecture and art education as well as special education and is currently pursuing a Doctorate in Special Education at Florida International University. Her research interests are in Autism Spectrum Disorder, Applied Behavior Analysis and innovative strategies for art educators and families of children with disabilities. She enjoys working with the youth and writing grants for community outreach projects in the art classroom. When she isn’t covered in paint or clay, Beyra spends quality time with her family running around her two toddlers, one of which is in the spectrum.