Compliance to collaboration: UDL framework for student-led IEP meetings
Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is defined by the Higher Education Opportunity Act (2008) as a scientifically valid framework for guiding educational practice that (a) provides flexibility in the ways information is presented, in the ways students respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills, and in the ways students are engaged; and (b) reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate accommodations, supports, and challenges, and maintains high achievement expectations for all students, including students with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient. Bross and Craig (2022) share key points to getting students to actively participate in the facilitation of their Individualized Education Plans.
Bross and Craig (2022) explore how the UDL framework can be applied to promote student-led Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings, particularly for transition-age youth with disabilities. The authors argue that while the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004) mandates student participation in transition planning, many students are not adequately prepared to take an active role. The article provides actionable steps for educators to teach students with disabilities how to participate in meetings actively. Applying UDL principles can reduce barriers, foster self-determination, and enhance meaningful participation in IEP meetings.
Key Point 1: Student Participation and Self-Determination
Research demonstrates that students with disabilities are capable of leading their IEP meetings when explicitly taught how to do so (Martin et al., 2006). Student leadership during IEP meetings builds self-determination, enabling them to act as “causal agents” in setting and achieving life goals. Higher levels of self-determination correlate with better postsecondary outcomes, including employment and independent living (Shogren et al., 2015). Thus, involving students directly in the IEP process strengthens their ability to advocate for themselves and prepares them for adulthood.
Key Point 2: UDL Principles as a Framework for Inclusive IEPs
The UDL framework, conceptualized by CAST in the late 1990s, provides three primary principles: (1) multiple means of representation, (2) multiple means of action and expression, and (3) multiple means of engagement (CAST, 2018). When applied to IEP meetings, these principles encourage flexible approaches tailored to diverse learners’ strengths and needs. For example, students may utilize multimedia presentations (representation), alternative communication devices (action and expression), or choice-making opportunities (engagement) to enhance their participation in planning (Bross & Craig, 2022).
Key Point 3: Reducing Barriers and Promoting Equity
Bross & Craig (2022) shared that traditional IEP meetings often create barriers for students and their families, especially for parents who are culturally and linguistically diverse. Challenges include inaccessible language, a focus on compliance rather than collaboration, and discomfort advocating within formal structures (Jung, 2011; Zeitlin & Curcic, 2014). UDL helps to dismantle these barriers by promoting clarity, flexibility, and culturally relevant supports. Embedding UDL practices also strengthens collaboration between students, families, and educators, making meetings more inclusive and personalized.
Bross and Craig (2022) conclude that UDL is a practical and effective framework for empowering students with disabilities to take leadership roles in their IEP meetings. By embedding multiple means of representation, action, and engagement into the IEP process, teachers can foster self-determination, reduce participation barriers, and improve postsecondary readiness. Ultimately, UDL shifts IEP meetings from compliance-driven events to meaningful opportunities for student growth and advocacy, thereby supporting successful transitions to adult life (Mazzotti et al., 2021; Thoma et al., 2009).
Resource
References
Bross, L. A., & Craig, S. L. (2022). Universal design for learning: A viable framework to support student-Led IEP meetings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 56(4), 218–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599221074267
Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2 [graphic organizer]. CAST.
H.R.4137 – 110th Congress (2007-2008): Higher Education Opportunity Act. (2008, August 14).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004)
Jung, A. W. (2011). Individualized education programs (IEPs) and barriers for parents from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. Multicultural Education, 19(3), 21–25.
Martin, J. E., Van Dycke, J. L., Christensen, W. R., et al. (2006). Increasing student participation in IEP meetings: Establishing the self-directed IEP as an evidence-based practice. Exceptional Children, 72(3), 299–316.
Mazzotti, V. L., Rowe, D. A., Kwiatek, S., Voggt, A., Chang, W. H., Fowler, C. H., Poppen, M., Sinclair, J., & Test, D. W. (2021). Secondary transition predictors of postschool success: An update to the research base. Career development and transition for exceptional individuals, 44(1), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143420959793.
Shogren, K. A., Wehmeyer, M. L., Palmer, S. B., et al. (2015). Relationships between self-determination and postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 48(4), 256–267.
Thoma, C., Bartholomew, C., & Scott, L. A. (2009). Universal design for transition: A roadmap for planning and instruction. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. [Available at the TTAC library]
Zeitlin, V. M., & Curcic, S. (2014). Parental voices on individualized education programs. Disability & Society, 29(3), 373–387.
For more information, contact LaTonja Wright ([email protected]), Program Specialist, T/TAC at VCU.
Categories Inclusive Practices, Transition PK-12