Skip to main content
Log in

Design, Redesign, and Continuous Refinement of an Online Graduate Course: A Case Study for Implementing Universal Design for Learning

  • Published:
Journal of Formative Design in Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper explains how a graduate online course has been designed, redesigned and continuously refined in the last decade, applying the Quality Matters (QM) Framework and Universal Design for Learning Principles (UDL). To improve the course design, the course designers and instructors are engaged in a reflective process of examining relevant factors, including external contexts that demanded changes in the course, the course’s existing features, learner characteristics and needs, and the nature and requirements of the course content, activities, assessments. The paper provides detailed descriptions of the design process, as well as the modifications and changes made for the course over years and demonstrates how the design features adheres to the UDL principles. 

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Association of School Librarians (2019). ALA/AASL/CAEP School Librarian Preparation Standards. http://www.ala.org/aasl/sites/ala.org.aasl/files/content/aasleducation/ALA_AASL_CAEP_School_Librarian_Preparation_Standards_2019_Final.pdf.

  • Association for Educational Communications and Technology (2012). AECT Standards, 2012 version. https://www.aect.org/docs/AECTstandards2012.pdf.

  • Brown, A., & Green, T. G. (2010). The essentials of instructional design: connecting fundamental principles with process and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A., & Green, T. G. (2016). The essentials of instructional design: connecting fundamental principles with process and practice (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • CAST (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org/binaries/content/assets/udlguidelines/udlg-v2-2/udlg_graphicorganizer_v2-2_numbers-yes.pdf.

  • Crawley, A. (2012). Supporting online students: a guide to planning, implementing and evaluating services. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edyburn, D. L. (2010). 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, 33(1), 33–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., & Quinn, J. (2006). The ID casebook: case studies in instructional design (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P., Quinn, J., & Glazeeski, K. (2014). The ID casebook: case studies in instructional design (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, J., & Carder, B. (2018). Redesign of an introductory course in a master’s program in instructional design and performance technology. Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 7(1), 57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. C. (2010). The 2020 Campus Computing Survey. http://www.campuscomputing.net/2010-campus-computing-survey.

  • Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer: a general role for analogical encoding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Society for Technology in Education (2016). ISTE Standards for Coaches. https://www.iste.org/standards/for-coaches.

  • Harkness, S. S. J. (2015). How a historically black college university (HBCU) established a sustainable online learning program in partnership with quality maters. American Journal of Distance Education, 29(3), 198–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honebein, P. C., & Honebein, C. H. (2014). The influence of cognitive domain content levels and gender on designer judgments regarding useful instructional methods. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(1), 53–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, K., DiSilvestro, F. R., & Treff, M. E. (2017). Online graduate course evaluation from both students’ and peer instructors’ perspectives utilizing Quality Matters. Internet Learning, 5(1), 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowell, V. L., & Moore, R. L. (2020). Developing practical knowledge and skills of online instructional design students through authentic learning and real-world activities. TechTrends, 64, 581–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-020-00518-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaulay, C., & Cree, V. (1999). Transfer of learning: Concept and process. Social Work Education, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479911220181.

  • Merrill, M. D. (2015). A pebble-in-the-pond model for instructional design. Performance Improvement, 54(1), 42–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quality Matters Program (2008). Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2008–2010 Edition with Assigned Point Values. MarylandOnline, Inc. http://www.qualitymatters.org.

  • Quality Matters Program (2015). Non-annotated Standards from the QM Publisher Rubric, Third Edition. MarylandOnline, Inc. http://www.qualitymatters.org.

  • Quality Matters Program (2018). Standards from the Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric, Sixth Edition. https://www.qualitymatters.org/sites/default/files/PDFs/StandardsfromtheQMHigherEducationRubric.pdf.

  • Robinson, D., & Wizer, D. (2016). Universal design for learning and the Quality Matters guidelines for the design and implementation of online learning events. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 12(1), 17–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, F. G. (2012). Analyzing a college course that adheres to the universal design for learning (UDL) framework. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(3), 31–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, T. J. (2014). Increase online student retention with Universal Design for Learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 15(3), 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2014). Case study research: design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qijie Cai.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Standards from the Quality Matters Higher Education Rubric

 

2008–2010 edition

2018 edition

Course overview and introduction

1.1 Instructions make clear how to get started and where to find various course components

1.2 A statement introduces the student to the purpose of the course and to its components; in the case of a hybrid course, the statement clarifies the relationship between the face-to-face and online components

1.3 Etiquette expectations (sometimes called “netiquette” for online discussions, email, and other forms of communication are stated clearly

1.4 The self-introduction by the instructor is appropriate and available online

1.5 Students are asked to introduce themselves to the class

1.6 Minimum student preparation, and, if applicable, prerequisite knowledge in the discipline are clearly stated

1.7 Minimum technical skills expected of the student are clearly stated

1.1 Instructions make clear how to get started and where to find various course components

1.2 Learners are introduced to the purpose and structure of the course

1.3 Communication expectations for online discussions, email, and other forms of interaction are clearly stated

1.4 Course and institutional policies with which the learner is expected to comply are clearly stated within the course, or a link to current policies is provided

1.5 Minimum technology requirements for the course are clearly stated, and information on how to obtain the technologies is provided

1.6 Computer skills and digital information literacy skills expected of the learner are clearly stated

1.7 Expectations for prerequisite knowledge in the discipline and/or any required competencies are clearly stated

1.8 The self-introduction by the instructor is professional and is available online

1.9 Learners are asked to introduce themselves to the class

Learning objectives

2.1 The course learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable

2.2 The module/unit learning objectives describe outcomes that are measurable and consistent with the course-level objectives

2.3 All learning objectives are stated clearly and written from the students’ perspective

2.4 Instructions to students on how to meet the learning objectives are adequate and stated clearly

2.5 The learning objectives are appropriately designed for the level of the course

2.1 The course learning objectives, or course/program competencies, describe outcomes that are measurable

2.2 The module/unit-level learning objectives or competencies describe outcomes that are measurable and consistent with the course-level objectives or competencies

2.3 Learning objectives or competencies are stated clearly, are written from the learner’s perspective, and are prominently located in the course

2.4 The relationship between learning objectives or competencies and learning activities is clearly stated

2.5 The learning objectives or competencies are suited to the level of the course

Assessment

and measurement

3.1 The types of assessments selected measure the stated learning objectives and are consistent with course activities and resources

3.2 The course grading policy is stated clearly

3.3 Specific and descriptive criteria are provided for the evaluation of students’ work and participation

3.4 The assessment instruments selected are sequenced, varied, and appropriate to the content being assessed

3.5 “Self-check” or practice assignments are provided, with timely feedback to students

3.1 The assessments measure the achievement of the stated learning objectives or competencies

3.2 The course grading policy is stated clearly at the beginning of the course

3.3 Specific and descriptive criteria are provided for the evaluation of learners’ work, and their connection to the course grading policy is clearly explained

3.4 The assessments used are sequenced, varied, and suited to the level of the course

3.5 The course provides learners with multiple opportunities to track their learning progress with timely feedback

Instructional materials

4.1 The instructional materials contribute to the achievement of the stated course and module/unit learning objectives

4.2 The relationship between the instructional materials and the learning activities is clearly explained to the student

4.3 The instructional materials have sufficient breadth, depth, and currency for the student to learn the subject

4.4 All resources and materials used in the course are appropriately cited

4.1 The instructional materials contribute to the achievement of the stated learning objectives or competencies

4.2 The relationship between the use of instructional materials in the course and completing learning activities is clearly explained

4.3 The course models the academic integrity expected of learners by providing both source references and permissions for use of instructional materials

4.4 The instructional materials represent up-to-date theory and practice in the discipline

4.5 A variety of instructional materials is used in the course

Learning activities and Learner interaction

5.1 The learning activities promote the achievement of the stated learning objectives

5.2 Learning activities foster instructor-student, content-student, and if appropriate to the course, student–student interaction

5.3 Clear standards are set for instructor responsiveness and availability (turn-around time for email, grade posting, etc.)

5.4 The requirements for student interaction are clearly articulated

5.1 The learning activities promote the achievement of the stated learning objectives or competencies

5.2 Learning activities provide opportunities for interaction that support active learning

5.3 The instructor’s plan for interacting with learners during the course is clearly stated

5.4 The requirements for learner interaction are clearly stated

Course technology

6.1 The tools and media support the learning objectives, and are appropriately chosen to deliver the content of the course

6.2 The tools and media support student engagement and guide the student to become an active learner

6.3 Navigation throughout the online components of the course is logical, consistent, and efficient

6.4 Students have ready access to the technologies required in the course

6.5 The course components are compatible with current standards for delivery modes

6.6 Instructions on how to access resources at a distance are sufficient and easy to understand

6.7 The course design takes full advantage of available tools and media

6.1 The tools used in the course support the learning objectives or competencies

6.2 Course tools promote learner engagement and active learning

6.3 A variety of technology is used in the course

6.4 The course provides learners with information on protecting their data and privacy

Learner support

7.1 The course instructions articulate or link to clear description of the technical support offered

7.2 Course instructions articulate or link to an explanation of how the institution’s academic support system can assist the student in effectively using the resources provided

7.3 Course instructions articulate or link to an explanation of how the institution’s student support services can help students reach their educational goals

7.4 Course instructions answer basic questions related to research, writing, technology, etc., or link to tutorials or other resources that provide the information

7.1 The course instructions articulate or link to a clear description of the technical support offered and how to obtain it

7.2 Course instructions articulate or link to the institution’s accessibility policies and services

7.3 Course instructions articulate or link to the institution’s academic support services and resources that can help learners succeed in the course

7.4 Course instructions articulate or link to the institution’s student services and resources that can help learners succeed

Accessibility and usability

8.1 The course incorporates ADA standards and reflect conformance with institutional policy regarding accessibility in online and hybrid courses

8.2 Course pages and course materials provide equivalent alternatives to auditory and visual content

8.3 Course pages have links that are self-describing and meaningful

8.4 The course ensures screen readability

8.1 Course navigation facilitates ease of use

8.2 The course design facilitates readability

8.3 The course provides accessible text and images in files, documents, LMS pages, and web pages to meet the needs of diverse learners

8.4 The course provides alternative means of access to multimedia content in formats that meet the needs of diverse learners

8.5 Course multimedia facilitate ease of use

8.6 Vendor accessibility statements are provided for all technologies required in the course

Appendix 2

Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.2

I. Provide multiple means of representation

II. Provide multiple means for action and expression

III. Provide multiple means for engagement

1. Provide options for perception

4. Provide options for physical action

7. Provide options for recruiting interest

1.1 Offer ways of customizing the display of information

4.1 Vary the methods for response and navigation

7.1 Optimize individual choice and autonomy

1.2 Offer alternatives for auditory information

4.2 Optimize access to tools and assistive technologies

7.2 Optimize relevance, value, and authenticity

1.3 Offer alternatives for visual information

 

7.3 Minimize threats and distractions

2. Provide options for language, mathematical expressions, and symbols

5. Provide options for expression and communication

8. Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence

2.1 Clarify vocabulary and symbols

5.1 Use multiple media for communication

8.1 Heighten salience of goals and objectives

2.2 Clarify syntax and structure

5.2 Use multiple tools for construction and composition

8.2 Vary demands and resources to optimize challenge

2.3 Support decoding of text, and mathematical notation, and symbols

5.3 Build fluencies with graduated levels of support for practice and performance

8.3 Foster collaboration and community

2.4 Promote understanding across language

 

8.4 Increase mastery-oriented feedback

2.5 Illustrate through multiple media

  

3. Provide options for comprehension

6. Provide options for executive functions

9. Provide options for self-regulation

3.1 Activate or supply background knowledge

6.1 Guide appropriate goal setting

9.1 Promote expectations and beliefs that optimize motivation

3.2 Highlight patterns, critical features, big ideas, and relationships

6.2 Support planning and strategy development

9.2 Facilitate personal coping skills and strategies

3.3 Guide information processing, visualization, and manipulation

6.3 Facilitate managing information and resources

9.3 Develop self-assessment and reflection

3.4 Maximize transfer and generalization

6.4 Enhance capacity for monitoring progress

 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cai, Q., Robinson, D. Design, Redesign, and Continuous Refinement of an Online Graduate Course: A Case Study for Implementing Universal Design for Learning. J Form Des Learn 5, 16–26 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-020-00053-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-020-00053-3

Keywords

Navigation