Presentation at the Pacific Rim Conference on Disability and Diversity

1. Exploring the Potential of Universal Design for
Learning with Regards to Mental Health Issues
in Higher Education
Tuesday March 2nd, 2020
Frederic Fovet, School of Education and Technology, RRU
#PacRim2020

2. Key issue discussed in this workshop
• Even UDL advocates shy away when comes the time to discuss the impact of
the design for the learning experience on Mental Health (MH) of students.
• Key issue: we globally revert to a medical model perspective when faced with
MH in higher education (HE)

4. Personal introduction as it pertains to my
methodology
• Currently Associate Professor in Education at Royal Roads University in BC, Canada
• Previously Director of the Office for Students with Disabilities at McGill for 4 years
• Continue to act as consultant to colleges and universities on matters of accessibility
and Universal Design for Learning
• Heavily involved in UDL promotion in HE in Canada
• Have been Academic Lead on an MEd for 3 years at UPEI and am now Program Head
on an MA in Educational Leadership and Management.
• Identify seamlessly with each stance discussed here: accessibility services personnel,
faculty and instruction design specialist

5. Interactive interlude
• We thought it might be useful to gauge the room a little before I begin.
• By show of hands/ object raised or waved, or say “agree” who feels that in general
terms in North America:
(a) Who feels that MH issues in the classroom are sometimes caused or exacerbated
by the design of instruction or assessment?
(b) Who feels campuses are aware of the impact of bad learning design on student
MH?
(c) Who feels campuses are tackling the impact of bad design on student MH?
(d) Who feels UDL is explicitly used on their campus to reduce MH issues among
students?
(d) Who is actively using UDL to redesign instruction or assessment to reduce MH
issues in the class?

6. Session objectives
• Explore the literature on UDL and MH
• Examine MH issues reported as emerging from classroom practices, or as being
exacerbated by classroom practices
• Explore the process of reflection instructors are required to engage in in order to
genuinely gauge the impact of faulty learning design on student MH
• Explore how instructional design can erode or even eliminate practices that
exacerbate MH issues in students
• Reflect on the multidisciplinary processes needed to achieve this shift in mindset
• Develop awareness of the silo mentality we develop in HE

7. Format of workshop
• Originates organically from an interactive workshop offered during the Third Pan-
Canadian Conference on UDL at Royal Roads University in 2019.
• I offered a workshop on this topic in collaboration with the Associate Director of
Instructional Design services (CTET) and the Director of Student Services
• We engaged with the audience from three distinct perspectives, and then reflected
on what we and the participants had learnt from the process.
• I decided to develop this initiative into a fully fledged research study involving
accessibility services personnel, faculty and instructional designers.
• Grant funded (RRU Internal Research Grant)

8. Context: What is UDL?
• Universal Design for Learning is a sustainable, environment
focused framework to manage Diversity in the classroom, which (i)
rejects the deficit model, (ii) shifts the spotlight away from the
learner and onto the instructor, (iii) brings to the forefront the
notion of user-friendly design (instruction and assessment). It
translates the Social Model of Disability into classroom practices.
• How does it do that? By offering to the instructor three
dimensions within which to reflect on eliminating barriers and
widening access: multiple means of representation, multiple
means of action and expression, and multiple mean of
engagement.

9. Literature on UDL and MH
• MH is generally absent from the UDL literature (Al-Azawei, Serenelli & Lundqvist,
2016)
• Relevance of UDL within CBT approaches with youth (Reid, Grills, Mian, Reid, Merson
& Langer, 2017)
• Hint that UDL is effective in eroding MH challenges, but no concrete illustrations
(Rao, Ok & Bryant, 2014)
• Paucity of work around UDL and MH
• Even among UDL advocates there tends to be a reluctance to engage around the
topic of MH
• Why?
• What do you think causes this state of affairs?

10. The accessibility services perspective on
MH in the classroom
• Interactive activity – Take a few minutes to discuss with your
colleagues, what you feel might be the most common challenges
reported to accessibility services personnel by students with MH
issues.

11. Issues that are frequently mentioned by
students as triggers to MH
1. Timed assignments or exams
2. Participation grades
3. Team assignments
4. Assignment Deadlines
5. Lack of flexibility in assignment format
6. Tension in the relationship with the instructor
7. Unnecessary textbooks or disproportionate reading lists
8. Triggers present in course content
9. Learning outcomes that are not clear or easy to understand
10. Course schedules that are not clear or easy to understand
11. Course activities (field trips etc.) that are not accessible or viable for students with MH
issues
12. Content that is not accessible/ in itself creates stress, anxiety, frustration
13. Overreliance on leave as a way of addressing MH issues in the classroom – frustrating
response as of itself

12. Additional Considerations:
• We can build intentional learning communities by discussing upfront how members
of the community can communicate with one another, engage with the instructor,
raise concerns, or offer support
• We can recognize the student in a holistic way
• We can frame sensitive topics in advance, so that all students are aware that the
topic is coming and sensitive to how to engage in the topic respectfully

13. Further interactive question
• How often do accessibility services personnel have time to discuss the design
perspective of the challenges just highlighted?
• What pathways exist for disability service staff to engage authentically with
faculty on these design considerations?
• What are some of the obstacles in this relationship?
• The two solitudes?

14. The instructor perspective
• Interactive activity – Take a few minutes to discuss with your
tables, what you feel might be the tension instructors experience
in course delivery or assessment, with regards to student MH.

15. Exploringtheprocessofreflectioninstructorsarerequiredtoengagein,
inordertogenuinelygaugetheimpactoffaultylearningdesignon
studentMH
• Phenomenological exploration of teaching experiences at MEd level (45 odd
courses)
• Points of tension identified are:
- Rote use of oral presentation in class as a form of assessment
- Class participation marks
- Overreliance on term paper format in assessment
- Arbitrary deadlines
- Intrusive requirements for explanations from student and for disclosure
- At times accommodations themselves may create stress: exams away from a
class where prof interacts with other students during assessment

16. Search for solutions under a UDL lens
• If we tackle these issues through inclusive learning design rather than from a
purely medical (or pharmaceutical) perspective, gains can be made.
- Rote use of oral presentation in class as a form of assessment: if public
speaking is not being assessed, allow the student the freedom to pre-record
presentation.
- Class participation marks: Examine with care whether classroom participation
may place pressure on students who find it hard to interact face to face and
offer opportunities to contribute online
- Overreliance on term paper format in assessment: amend rubrics to allow
submissions in other formats if the skill being assessed is not academic writing

17. Search for solutions under a UDL lens
- Arbitrary deadlines: Offer some flexibility in submission dates if the
assignment is not being marked immediately. Also experiment with the notion
of personal bank of days of grace
- Intrusive requirements for explanations from student and for disclosure:
develop approaches that integrate flexibility so as not to have to ask intrusive
questions
- At times accommodations themselves may create stress: exams away from a
class where prof interacts with other students during assessment – Offer in
class flexibility rather than force a student to remove themselves from class for
accommodations.

18. Snap shot of the process of reflection
• This process of reflection was aligned with UDL
• It is based on common sense and requires to specialist knowledge regarding
access
• It requires no insight into the student’s diagnostic information
• It requires no financial or staffing resources
• It allows the faculty member to feel empowered within their own classroom
(elimination of the ‘culture of referral’)
• So why is this not happening systematically in our departments?

19. Canadian Case Law
• York University student wins mental health accommodation battle
• https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/programs/metromorning/york-
university-student-wins-mental-health-accommodation-battle-1.3402596
• https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/01/12/york-university-student-wins-
mental-health-fight.html

20. What are some of the variables that affect faculty as
they reflect on MH and course design
• Workload & their own mental health (impact of the increasing proportion of
contract faculty)
• Own MH issues may make faculty reticent to discuss these issues with
students
• Desire to remain inconspicuous even if they are sensitive to social justice
issues
• Expectations of department and departmental politics: do I fit in or rock the
boat?
• Unions: UDL is not sufficiently discussed with unions
• Institutional imperatives and mandated processes (extensions, resubmissions,
etc.)
• Feel threatened when staff comment on their pedagogy
• Letters of accommodations are disempowering, make little sense, and offer
no practical guidance

21. The instructional design perspective
• Interactive activity – Take a few minutes to discuss with your
colleagues what you feel might be the solutions instructional
designers can offer with regards to the tension identified in course
delivery or assessment, with regards to students with MH.

22. The instructional designer perspective
• Good understanding and mastery of design thinking and of UDL
• Rarely called upon to seek solutions with regards to barriers experienced in the
classroom with regards to MH
• Their expertise is entirely overshadowed by campuses’ medical model processes
• Have few organizational opportunities for contact with accessibility services
personnel
• On most campuses are unable to trigger contact with faculty unless this contact is
instigated by the instructor
• Often constrained by faculty’s lack of time/ availability
• Walking on eggshells when it comes to ‘models’, instructional design theory,
specialized terminology, etc. Fear of pushback, faculty exhaustion, of reform
overload.
• Their work is rarely embedded into mission statement, even if campuses are
changing vocation and increasingly claiming to be teaching universities

23. Conclusions and take away
• UDL is relevant to MH in the classroom. When we fail to acknowledge this, it
probably means we have a personal reticence to handle MH issues. We prefer to
medicalize the situation because it shifts the onus on someone else (a therapist or a
medical professional)
• Instruction and assessment design have key impact on student MH
• A redesign of assessment and instruction can erode MH issues in the classroom, or
at least avoid exacerbating them.
• The reactions of faculty can be ambivalent and PD is important to guide them
through the redesign and its implications
• UDL allows instructors to put an end to the ‘culture of referral’ and to re-empower
themselves as designers of the learning experience.

24. Additional observations
• Interest of this presentation is also its multidisciplinary approach.
• It is essential for a shift to happen that the various stakeholders
(accessibility staff, instructors, and instructional designers) begin
to brainstorm together in the way it has been modelled today.
• It is indeed impossible to fully gauge the impact of bad design on
MH when one sticks to a ‘silo’ vision of the process of learning,
one that is limited to a specific profession.
• Strategic planning needs to occur as to the most efficient way of
redesigning communication between these three sets of
stakeholders

25. References
• Al-Azawei, A., Serenelli, F., & Lundqvist, K. (2016). Universal Design for Learning
(UDL): A content analysis of peer-reviewed journal papers from 2012 to 2015.
Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(3), 39–56
• Rao, K., Ok, M. W., & Bryant, B. R. (2014). A review of research on universal design
education models. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 153–166.
• Reid, G. M., Grills, A. E., Mian, N. D., Reid, A. A., Merson, R. A., & Langer, D. A. (2017).
Using Research-Informed Pedagogical Practices to Maximize Learning in Youth
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Evidence-based practice in child and adolescent mental
health, 2(2), 82–95
• Shackle, S. (2019, September 27) ‘The way universities are run is making us ill’: inside
the student mental health crisis. The Guardian. Retrieved from:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/sep/27/anxiety-mental-breakdowns-
depression-uk-students

26. Contact details
• Frederic Fovet (PhD.)
• Associate Professor, School of Education and Technology, Royal Roads University
• Frederic.fovet@royalroads.ca
• @Ffovet
• www.implementudl.com