skip to main content
10.1145/3209635.3209646acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswccceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Insights from the Application of Universal Design Principles to Support English Language Learners

Published:04 May 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

The rising number of international students who are English Language Learners (ELL) at English-speaking universities has introduced challenges and opportunities for these students and their instructors. In this paper we present a case study of our experiences using Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles to guide curriculum design that supports ELL students in a first programming course (CS1). We assess the success of our approach in terms of student grades with respect to the entire CS1 population, student feedback via surveys, and instructor reflections. Our contribution to the computer science education community is an argument for following UDL when designing curriculum to support language needs. We believe that this curriculum will benefit both ELLs and their native English speaking peers in a broad, linguistically diverse student population.

References

  1. Eric Bergman, Alistair Edwards, Deborah Kaplan, Greg Lowney, T.V. Raman, and Earl Johnson. 1996. Universal design: Everyone has special needs. In Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 153--154. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Sheryl Burgstahler. 2011. Universal design: Implications for computing education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 11, 3 (2011), 19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Do Coyle. 2008. CLIL--A pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In Encyclopedia of language and education. Springer, 1200--1214.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Do Coyle, Bernardette Holmes, and Lid King. 2009. Towards an integrated curriculum--CLIL National Statement and Guidelines. The Languages Company (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Do Coyle, Philip Hood, and David Marsh. 2010. Content and language integrated learning. Ernst Klett Sprachen.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. K. Anders Ericsson, Ralf T. Krampe, and Clemens Tesch-Römer. 1993. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological review 100, 3 (1993), 363.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Matthias Felleisen, Robert Bruce Findler, Mathhew Flatt, and Shriram Krishnamurthi. 2001. How to Design Programs. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Alexandria K. Hansen, Eric R. Hansen, Hilary A. Dwyer, Danielle B. Harlow, and Diana Franklin. 2016. Differentiating for Diversity: Using Universal Design for Learning in Elementary Computer Science Education. In Proc. SIGCSE '16. 376--381. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Seunghyun Tina Lee, Yilin Elaine Liu, Ljilja Ruzic, and Jon Sanford. 2016. Universal design ballot interfaces on voting performance and satisfaction of voters with and without vision loss. In Proc. CHI '16. ACM, 4861--4871. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Ronald Mace. 1985. Universal Design, Barrier-free Environments for Everyone. Designers West (1985), 147--152.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Anne Meyer and David H. Rose. 2000. Universal design for individual differences. Educational Leadership 58, 3 (2000), 39--43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ann S. Williams. 2009. Universal Design in Diabetes Care An Idea Whose Time Has Come. The Diabetes Educator 35, 1 (2009), 45--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Insights from the Application of Universal Design Principles to Support English Language Learners

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      WCCCE '18: Proceedings of the 23rd Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education
      May 2018
      86 pages
      ISBN:9781450358057
      DOI:10.1145/3209635

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 4 May 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      WCCCE '18 Paper Acceptance Rate19of29submissions,66%Overall Acceptance Rate78of117submissions,67%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader