A critical analysis of the research evidence behind CAST’s universal design for learning guidelines

Abstract

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a highly influential source of educational policy. CAST, a nonprofit educational organization, created UDL guidelines that they claim have a basis in research on learning, cognitive psychology, and the brain. The purpose of the current research was to evaluate the empirical studies cited on CAST’s UDL website as support for its guidelines. This review sampled articles provided as evidence for three UDL guidelines and analyzed their relation to choice, learning, and brain function. Results indicated that the cited studies provided little evidence for claims about UDL. Most of the studies did not offer a choice to learners or measure learning. None of the studies were related to brain function. Rather than supporting CAST’s UDL guidelines about the choice of multiple means of learning, the studies mostly provided support for single, effective instructional techniques. Overall, this study suggests that the cited evidence behind CAST’s UDL guidelines is weak and both basic research and implementation research are needed to establish the framework’s validity and effectiveness.