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

Autores/as

  • José Manuel Sánchez-Serrano Universidad Complutense de Madrid

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1344/joned.v3i1.39657

Palabras clave:

diseño universal del aprendizaje, formación docente, atención a la diversidad, educación inclusiva, revisión sistemática

Resumen

A lo largo de las últimas dos décadas el diseño universal para el aprendizaje (DUA) se ha ido configurando como uno de los enfoques más prometedores para orientar la atención a la diversidad del alumnado. Este modelo, que justifica sus principios a partir de diferentes investigaciones sobre neuroaprendizaje, ha sido adoptado por la legislación española en materia educativa como marco de referencia para optimizar la respuesta educativa a las diferentes formas de aprender de los estudiantes por parte del profesorado. La incorporación de los principios del DUA a la práctica docente puede resultar compleja si no se posee un adecuado conocimiento de sus fundamentos teóricos y de su marco de pautas y puntos de verificación. En este sentido, la formación docente en DUA va a desempeñar un rol fundamental. Resulta preciso garantizar, pues, que dicha formación sobre DUA es efectiva en el desarrollo de competencias docentes para la atención a la diversidad. El objetivo de este trabajo es explorar la evidencia empírica existente sobre la eficacia que ha demostrado tener la formación docente en materia de DUA. La metodología consistió en una revisión sistemática de literatura para conocer qué tipo de investigaciones basadas en intervenciones formativas sobre DUA se han desarrollado y qué resultados se han obtenido. Durante todo el proceso se siguieron las orientaciones del PRISMA Statement. De los 507 registros identificados inicialmente en diferentes bases de datos (ERIC, Scopus, PsycInfo® o ProQuest Central, entre otras), 27 cumplieron los criterios de elegibilidad y fueron incluidos en la revisión. La síntesis y discusión de resultados se enfoca a describir la información referida a diferentes variables de interés, como el tipo de formación en DUA que se proporcionó, el contexto en que se desarrolló, los contenidos incluidos, el perfil de los docentes participantes o los hallazgos obtenidos. Las conclusiones apuntan a que la formación en DUA resulta eficaz para el desarrollo de la capacidad para incorporar los principios y pautas de dicho marco en la práctica, así como para el desarrollo de percepciones positivas por parte de los docentes sobre el potencial y beneficios del DUA.

Citas

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

Descargas

Publicado

2022-07-07