







































 Khatri 94 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

Universal Design for Learning: Its Application to  

English for Academic Purposes Classrooms in Canada 

 

Raj Khatri 

George Brown College 

 

Abstract 

 

In a time when students around the globe continue to pursue their higher studies in English-

speaking countries, educators also continue to explore innovative teaching methods and 

approaches in order to support learning. Universal design for learning (UDL) is an innovative 

teaching framework that has recently drawn considerable attention among educators and 

researchers alike in Canada. A UDL framework helps educators, including English-for-

academic-purposes (EAP) and English-as-an-additional-language (EAL) instructors, consider 

learner variability, motivate and engage learners in in multiple ways, provide instructional 

resources and materials in various forms, and offer learners opportunities to demonstrate learning 

in alternate pathways. This article presents three core UDL principles: multiple means of 

engagement, multiple means of representation, and multiple means of action and expression and 

establishes connections to teaching EAP. The purpose is to interpret these three UDL principles 

and respective guidelines in EAP contexts and discuss how these principles and guidelines can 

be applied to EAP classrooms in order to support language learning in Canada. 

 

Introduction 

 

There has been a surge in the number of international students in English-speaking countries, 

including Canada, where the number of international students has also increased at institutions of 

higher education (Allen et al., 2018; Khatri, 2018). Upon arrival in a foreign country where they 

plan to pursue their higher studies, these learners not only have to adapt to the different teaching 

methods and approaches of their instructors but also have to adjust to a new culture (Ortmeier-

Hooper, 2008). While an increase in learners from around the world provides instructors with an 

opportunity to expand their teaching experience, this increase also contributes to the growing 

challenges instructors and learners face daily in the course of their teaching and learning 

activities (Ryan & Carroll, 2005). To provide these learners with necessary support in their 

academic pursuits, institutions of higher learning are offering English for academic purposes 

(EAP) courses that are crucial to learner success (Huang, 2018). In addition, instructors also 

continue to explore and implement innovative curriculum and teaching methods and approaches 

in their teaching (Boothe et al., 2018). As teaching is an “intentional and reasoned act” 

(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p. 3), it is important for instructors to effectively engage in both 

the “intentional” and “reasoned” parts of teaching. While teaching as a reasoned act is associated 

with what learning objectives instructors include in their teaching, teaching as an intentional act 

points to how instructors support their learners in meeting those objectives. As a tool for EAP 

instructors to effectively and efficiently navigate both the “what” and “how” of teaching and to 

address the needs of their international students, universal design for learning (UDL) can be a 

powerful educational framework to draw on. As such, UDL principles and guidelines can 

enhance learner engagement and task performance (Kumar & Wideman, 2014). 

  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 95 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

UDL in Education 

 

Universal design for learning was influenced by architecture’s design concept that a building can 

be designed to be accessible by everyone, regardless of the level of ability (Hutchinson & 

Specht, 2020; Rose & Mayer, 2002; Story et al., 1998). When a building is designed with 

accessible features, such as wide doorways, level entrances, and ramps, there is no need for 

retrofitting it upon the arrival of a person with accessibility needs. Indeed, the accessibility 

features that are “essential for some,” that is, people with disabilities, are almost always “good 

for all,” that is, for everyone (Meyer et al., 2014, p. 90), whether that be an individual with 

rolling luggage bags or baby strollers. Initially the concept of UDL was applied to environments 

that served learners with disabilities. However, UDL principles and guidelines have now been 

found to work effectively among learners from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds as 

well as learners with varied language proficiencies (e.g., Allen et al., 2018; Tobin & Behling, 

2018).  

 

In the early 1990s, Meyer et al. (2014) developed an approach that addressed the 

“disabilities of schools rather than students,” an approach that was later named UDL (p. 5). Their 

intention was to develop curriculum that helped promote interactions between the learners and 

the curriculum and to support all learners rather than simply address the needs of the 

hypothetical average student. UDL holds that the curriculum, learning goals, instructional 

methods and materials, and assessment tools are the problem—not the learners. UDL provides 

opportunities for learners to interact with the curriculum in a way that helps them engage in their 

learning outcomes, the methods and approaches used, the instructional materials and assessment 

tools, and the strategies applied for language development. Brown (2020) considered UDL a 

promising pedagogical philosophy. To use UDL is to assume that no learners are disabled or 

unable to learn but to acknowledge that the curriculum is disabled and interferes with learners 

accessing content and benefiting from the teaching methods and resources (Meier & Rossi, 

2020). 

 

UDL and Additional Language Learning 

 

At the heart of the UDL framework is its support for learner variation. Individuals’ 

characteristics and abilities are not uniform or static. Rather, traits regularly shift as individuals 

interact with their environment. As Meyer et al. (2014) argued, “Each individual varies over 

time, and responses across individuals to the same environment also vary…variability is the rule 

both within and between all individuals” (pp. 81–82). As these authors discussed, learner 

variability is systematic and predictable and learners’ capacity to learn is context dependent. 

Therefore, this predictability supports instructors in planning their lessons based on UDL 

principles (Rose & Strangman, 2007). Because learner variability is systematic and predictable, 

educators can design their curriculum and lesson plans knowing learners in their classrooms will 

more likely be motivated to learn, engage in tasks, take in information, and demonstrate their 

learning in multiple ways.  

 

In an additional language (L2) context, there is considerable learner variability among 

EAP learners when it comes to their personal experience and background, individuality, 

including their “shyness versus gregariousness,” as well as their exceptionalities or disabilities 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 96 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

(Rao & Torres, 2016, p. 461). As learners vary in their interactions with their environment, so 

does their level of motivation to learn about and complete their tasks, their use of strategies, and 

their apprehension of information. Therefore, planning lessons based on the variability of 

learners and providing multiple avenues for learning is of paramount importance in their effort to 

learn and succeed in EAP and English as an additional language (EAL) programs. Meier and 

Rossi (2020) argued that instructors can proactively address learner needs and minimize the 

instructional barriers they face in the classroom by developing curriculum and lesson plans that 

capture learner variability in their classrooms. They can then provide support that caters to 

learner strengths, needs, and other traits and thus provide multiple, flexible pathways for learners 

to succeed in language learning.  

 

UDL Principles and Guidelines 

 

Studies in education and technology continue to shape the UDL framework. However, the 

development of UDL is mainly influenced by neuroscience research that involves studying 

interconnected networks for learning in the brain that affect individual learning (CAST, 2021), 

namely, learners’ affective, recognition, and strategic networks (CAST, 2018; Meyer et al., 

2014). These are the three major types of networks that constitute a large part of the human brain 

and contribute to learning. Affective networks, which are located in the central part of the brain, 

constitute the “why” of learning and are associated with learner motivation and engagement. 

Recognition networks are located at the back of the brain and are associated with the “what” of 

learning. They are used for apprehending information and processing it into knowledge. Strategic 

networks are located in the front part of the brain and dictate the “how” of learning. They involve 

executive functioning and make possible planning, organizing, and launching actions. It is 

important that a positive atmosphere be created for these three networks to be active among 

learners in classrooms and beyond. Based on this three-network model of learning, UDL is built 

on three core principles: multiple means of engagement, multiple means of representation, and 

multiple means of action and expression, which together provide a structured framework that 

supports educators in exploring avenues to address learner variability and help all learners 

succeed in their academic endeavours. Each of these UDL principles contributes to helping 

learners become experts (Meyer et al., 2014).  

 

Studies have suggested that EAP educators acquaint themselves with and operationalize 

these three UDL principles in order to address the diverse linguistic and cultural contexts of their 

students as well as learner variability (Lopes-Murphy, 2012; Rao & Torres, 2016). They can also 

be used in designing curriculum and lessons when working with EAP learners in an academic 

language context (Rao & Torres, 2016). By designing curriculum and instructional materials 

according to learner variability, that is, presenting information in multiple ways and helping 

learners comprehend information and meet their outcomes using alternative methods, instructors 

can motivate learners and help them engage in and stay focused on their tasks throughout their 

learning process. For that to happen, instructors should engage in practices that respect and value 

diversity and inclusivity, which is possible via UDL. At the same time, it is also essential that the 

physical environment be safe for everyone and be conductive to learning. Instructional resources 

and materials as well as technological tools should be engaging, varied, and flexible and used in 

multiple ways for all learners to access these resources as well as engage in and demonstrate 

their learning in multiple ways.   

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 97 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

Table 1 presents the three core UDL principles and their respective guidelines (CAST, 

2021) that can be used in L2 classrooms to help enhance language learning. However, these 

guidelines are not prescriptive, and EAP instructors can choose certain guidelines to work with at 

particular times in their classrooms (Rao & Torres, 2016).  

 

Table 1 

 

Universal Design for Learning Principles and Guidelines 

 
Multiple Means of 

Engagement 

Purposeful, motivated  

learners 

Multiple Means of 

Representation 

Resourceful, knowledgeable 

learners 

Multiple Means of Action and 

Expression 

Strategic, goal-directed  

learners 

Provide options for  

Recruiting interest 

 

✓ Optimize individual choice 

and autonomy 

✓ Optimize relevance, value, 

and authenticity 

✓ Minimize threats and 

distractions 

 

Provide options for  

Perception 

 

✓ Offer ways of customizing 

the display of information 

✓ Offer alternatives for 

auditory information 

✓ Offer alternatives for visual 

information  

Provide options for 

Physical Action 

 

✓ Vary the methods for 

response and navigation 

✓ Optimize access to tools and 

assistive technologies 

Provide options for  

Sustaining effort & persistence 

 

✓ Heighten salience of goals 

and objectives 

✓ Vary demands and 

resources to optimize 

challenge 

✓ Foster collaboration and 

community 

✓ Increase mastery-oriented 

feedback 

 

Provide options for  

Language & Symbols 

 

✓ Clarify vocabulary and 

symbols 

✓ Clarify syntax and structure 

✓ Support decoding of text, 

mathematical notation, and 

symbols 

✓ Promote understanding 

across languages 

✓ Illustrate through multiple 

media 

Provide options for 

Expression & Communication 

 

✓ Use multiple media for 

communication 

✓ Use multiple tools for 

construction and 

composition 

✓ Build fluencies with 

graduated levels of support 

for practice and 

performance 

Provide options for  

Self-Regulation 

 

✓ Promote expectations and 

beliefs that optimize 

motivation 

✓ Facilitate personal coping 

and strategies 

✓ Develop self-assessment 

and reflection 

 

Provide options for 

Comprehension 

 

✓ Activate or supply 

background knowledge 

✓ Highlight patterns, critical 

features, big ideas, and 

relationships 

✓ Guide information 

processing and visualization  

✓ Maximize transfer and 

generalization 

Provide options for 

Executive Functions 

 

✓ Guide appropriate goal-

setting 

✓ Support planning and 

strategy development 

✓ Facilitate managing 

information and resources 

✓ Enhance capacity for 

monitoring progress 

 
Universal Design for Learning Guidelines © 2021 CAST. Used with permission. All rights reserved. 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 98 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

Principle 1: Multiple Means of Engagement (Affective Networks) 

 

UDL stresses helping learners become experts. For learners to engage in and stay motivated as 

they carry out their tasks, UDL Principle 1: Multiple Means of Engagement provides options for 

developing interest, purpose, and self-regulation among learners. Given the wide range of 

environments learners come from, they vary in the way they are motivated to learn and engage in 

their tasks. In addition to helping learners develop strong self-regulation, which is tied to their 

ability to find purpose and set goals, this principle recommends supporting learners in 

developing self-assessment and reflection skills as well as in sustaining their efforts to reach the 

goals they set at the beginning of the learning process.   

 

This principle is aligned with the importance of motivation, which is often explored in L2 

acquisition (Masgoret & Gardner, 2003; Ushioda, 2014). Krashen’s (1982) affective filter, which 

conceptualizes language acquisition as a cognitive process in which negative feelings and 

emotions can block comprehensible input, is also relevant in that he recommended creating 

learning environments that help lower the affective filter, including learner anxiety, in order to 

motivate learners. Rao and Torres (2016) also recognized the importance of this lowering of 

emotional barriers when discussing the UDL framework in an L2 context. Similarly, this 

principle, which fosters collaborative work and a community of learners in teaching and 

learning, compliments Vygotsky’s (1978) social constructivism that is crucial to L2 learners’ 

meaning making in social interactions and cooperative learning. Therefore, providing learners 

with multiple means to engage in learning plays a critical role in language learning.  

 

 Using this principle, instructors in EAP and EAL programs can motivate learners and 

help them engage in their learning in multiple ways. While some learners may prefer to read a 

print book for their reading assignments, others may want to engage digitally because of the 

interactive features and augmented reality experience that e-books often provide. Still others may 

be interested in listening to an audio book. While some learners may find classroom time 

sufficient for interaction and may comprehend the materials, some others may require additional 

time. If necessary, learners can be provided with ways to connect with each other and the 

instructor in and outside of their classes (Tobin & Behling, 2018). At the same time, there might 

be a few learners who may not get anything from their reading until they have access to an 

appropriate amount of scaffolding or receive peer support, which may warrant the use of 

different group configurations for collaboration and cooperative learning. Regardless, it is 

important for instructors to pay attention to learners’ enthusiasm and flexibility when it comes to 

group work. It may be possible that a learner is comfortable speaking in the target language in a 

one-on-one conversation with their peer or instructor, but at the same time, this learner may not 

use the target language effectively to communicate their message during a group discussion. 

Providing learners with varied opportunities to work on their tasks in ways that suit them 

diminishes learners’ off-task or confused behaviour and helps them demonstrate their learning 

and meet their outcomes as articulated in their course. Types of resources or grouping patterns 

are not the only aspects that contribute to learner motivation or engagement. Among other 

factors, a variety of tasks (including real world ones), assessment tools (including rubrics), and 

context or environment also contribute to learner motivation in L2 classrooms. Therefore, it is 

important that learner variability be studied and multiple opportunities for engagement be 

provided in and outside of EAP classrooms.   

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 99 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

EAP instructors can provide opportunities for learner engagement in a wide variety of 

ways, but considering UDL principles well in advance of their lesson planning and acting 

proactively is of utmost importance in this regard. Meier and Rossi (2020) recommended helping 

learners use a checklist in a multi-step assignment in order for them to identify the steps 

completed and those that still require the learner’s attention. This process, as the authors 

indicated, helps learners stay motivated, self-regulate, and independently complete complex 

tasks. To sustain learner engagement, concepts can be repeatedly presented and discussed 

through classroom activities, homework, lab assignments, and fieldwork (Allen et al., 2018). 

Learners can regularly be provided with mastery-oriented feedback so that learners remain 

motivated and engaged in their tasks until their tasks are successfully completed.  

 

UDL Principle 2: Multiple Means of Representation (Recognition Networks) 

 

This principle is designed to support learning through recognition networks, and the use of 

multiple means for learning comprehension, vocabulary, syntax and structure, and perception in 

addition to options for developing expertise in content areas are recommended. Learners differ in 

the ways they comprehend information from discussions. In this regard, this principle focuses on 

activating background knowledge, highlighting critical features, clarifying vocabulary, syntax, 

and structure, customizing the display of information, and providing alternatives for auditory and 

visual information in order to provide input that is comprehensible and create a nuanced learning 

experience for learners. This principle is in line with Krashen (1982), who focused on the 

provision of comprehensible input as a critical factor in language acquisition. When the language 

input is challenging and is at a level above the learner’s state of knowledge (i+1), then learning 

takes place progressively. Similarly, Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proximal development and the 

notion of scaffolding are also evident in this UDL principle. This UDL principle thus effectively 

includes both of these theories although one (Krashen’s) operates from an innatist perspective 

and the other (Vygotsky’s) from a sociocultural framework. In addition to comprehensible input 

and scaffolding, this principle also addresses focus on forms that plays a role in language 

learning through learner awareness, consciousness, or noticing of linguistic forms (Long, 1991; 

Schmidt, 1990, 1992), which was also pointed out in Rao & Torres (2016). Similarly, as 

mentioned above, activating background knowledge is one of the support criteria that is 

explicitly mentioned in Principle 2 and its guidelines. According to studies of cognitive 

processing, learner background or prior knowledge is crucial in supporting learners’ 

understanding of new ideas/concepts and their construction of new knowledge. This knowledge 

is stored in networks in the brain known as schemata (Zadina, 2008); these schemata must be 

activated for learners to relate to and comprehend the content (Vogt, 2005). Therefore, by 

providing background information on concepts being studied, EAP instructors can support 

learner comprehension of the new concepts and demonstration of their understanding of the 

concepts.  

 

Using this principle, EAP instructors can help their students learn through the use of a 

wide range of instructional methods and resources that include multimedia, demonstrations, 

audio-visuals, realia, hands-on manipulatives, adapted texts, graphic organizers, and outlines 

among other tools. Because learners vary in their ability to understand and learn information, 

which is dependent on the types of instructional resources and methods available to them (Meyer 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 100 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

et al., 2014), instructors should present information in a variety of ways that support learning 

(Meier & Rossi, 2020).  

 

When learners are provided with multiple opportunities to comprehend information, they 

can choose the option they are most comfortable with. For teaching and learning, UDL 

recommends that course outcomes be created in a way that addresses learner variability and 

learning preferences and highlights critical information, that transcripts of audio/visual 

presentations be provided, that feedback be prompt and mastery-oriented, and that social media 

be used (Boothe et al., 2018). Depending on the context learners are associated with, some 

learners may need to access the same material repeatedly in order to identify the process 

involved and understand the content. In such circumstances, recording the lesson or providing 

screencast walkthroughs on the particular concept or process being discussed can be very 

helpful. For instance, screencasting a process that demonstrates how L2 learners can extract 

academic words out of their reading text using Cobb’s (2021) Compleat Lexical Tutor can be 

extremely useful for both learners and instructors. Apprehending the process that involves 

multiple steps from a one-time demonstration of it can be daunting when there are 15 to 25 

learners in class, especially in an online environment, and not all learners may promptly be able 

to grasp the process during the demonstration process. Therefore, if learners can access it 

multiple times following the initial demonstration, they can practise the process at their own 

pace, saving the instructor from having to demonstrate it several times. Allen et al. (2018) 

suggested the use of videos and screencasts as well as vocabulary/concepts augmented with 

hyperlinked glossaries and explanations as well as exposing learners to these vocabulary and 

concepts multiple times. The COVID-19 pandemic has “fundamentally reshaped many aspects of 

teaching and learning” (Yi & Jang, 2020, p. 1), and institutions have moved from their traditional 

face-to-face teaching to online facilitation of classes (Payne, 2020). During online classes that 

include both synchronous and asynchronous environments, EAP instructors can motivate and 

engage their learners through online interaction and provide their instructions and resources in 

multiple ways, using multiple tools and formats, and on multiple platforms, including Google 

Docs, MS Word, MS Sway, MS Forms, Socrative, Nearpod, Flipgrid, and H5P, in addition to 

different learning management systems, including Blackboard Collaborate, MS Teams, Adobe, 

and ZOOM among several viable options. This allows L2 learners to access instructional 

materials and content in multiple ways, which can positively contribute to their learning. 

 

UDL Principle 3: Multiple Means of Action and Expression (Strategic Networks) 

 

Learners vary in the ways they approach, interact with, and strategically navigate their learning 

environment. Therefore, as this principle makes clear, it is important that learners be provided 

with multiple opportunities or avenues to demonstrate their learning. This principle also 

underscores how strategic networks in the brain are vital for academic language and skill 

development. EAP instructors can support learners in their use of multiple media and technology 

for developing communication and writing skills as well as for demonstrating their learning. In 

addition, this principle also emphasizes the importance of having multiple options for executive 

functions directly related to learners engaging their cognition for planning, organizing, and 

monitoring their own task performance, which they strategically engage in during their learning 

process. 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 101 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

 EAP learners can be supported in their learning by being encouraged to demonstrate their 

learning in multiple ways. While some learners may want to deliver an oral presentation to show 

their understanding of the task, others may want to demonstrate their learning through a written 

report. If the outcomes are UDL friendly and do not specify the methods learners are required to 

use, learners can choose to demonstrate their learning in different ways and still meet their 

outcomes. For instance, a learning outcome such as “Deliver an effective and engaging oral 

presentation on a researched topic for 7 to 10 minutes” instead of “Deliver an effective and 

engaging in-class oral presentation on a researched topic for 7 to 10 minutes” offers leeway for 

learners who experience speaking anxiety in front of their peers. Some learners may prefer to 

video record their presentation rather than give an in-class presentation, which would meet UDL-

friendly learning outcomes. The intent is not to water down the content but to provide all learners 

with an equal opportunity to engage in their tasks. Given the learner variability in their 

classrooms, instructors should design a flexible curriculum and lesson plans with opportunities 

for learners to demonstrate their strengths (see Meyer et al., 2014). It is possible that instructors 

following this UDL process will have to create multiple rubrics for the same task to 

accommodate learners’ delivery modes. However, this allows EAP learners to reach competency 

and demonstrate their learning in alternate ways that include essays, oral presentations, and 

audio-video clips from among the many learning tools available. Singh and Wallace (2021) 

recommended that Jamboard be used for learner interaction, in place of breakout rooms that 

instructors may use as the only means of engagement. These authors emphasized that Jamboard, 

in this context, may also provide learners with opportunities to participate when they do not want 

to speak in breakout rooms. This process can help learners engage in their learning and gain 

confidence in their ability to perform challenging tasks (Meyer et al., 2014). Incorporating such 

flexibility would have a significant impact on student learning and also prevent the curriculum 

from being considered “disabled.”   

 

When designing courses and lesson plans, learning objectives can be flexible, which 

leaves room for EAP instructors to personalize their teaching and assessment tools and strategies 

for their learners and provide their learners with multiple paths to meet their objectives and 

demonstrate their learning. For example, learners in an EAP class could be asked to read Cry 

Freedom (Briley, 2008) and demonstrate their comprehension of the novel by writing an essay. If 

the learning outcome is to “comprehend the text” and not explicitly to “write an essay or 

summary,” there is room for instructors to personalize their assessment tools for learners who 

may prefer to demonstrate their comprehension in alternate ways. Some may want to 

demonstrate their comprehension of the novel by giving an oral presentation or producing a 

video recording. Others may dramatize a scene with commentary as a group project. By allowing 

for interactive options, learners can demonstrate their learning through multiple paths and still 

meet their learning outcomes.  

 

EAP instructors can also support their learners in the development of their executive 

functions, including using cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies. Inclusion of 

appropriate rubrics can contribute to learners self-monitoring and self-assessing their learning 

progress (Meyer et al., 2014). In other words, learners are not only able to monitor and adjust 

their learning but also be responsible for their own learning.  

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 102 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

 One of the approaches that recognizes learner diversity as per UDL principles and 

guidelines is differentiated instruction, which is a tool for instructors to help their learners work 

at a “moderately challenging, developmentally appropriate level” (Hutchinson & Specht, 2020, 

p. 227). Instructors can differentiate the content of the lesson, the delivery, and the product 

(Tomlinson, 2017). While instructors might include varied group configurations, they can also 

make groupings flexible. Providing tiered assignments and incorporating learning centres in 

classrooms contributes to the process of differentiating instruction (Chappuis, 2014). Hutchinson 

and Specht’s (2020) ADAPT framework can also be incorporated in differentiated learning: 

 

Account for students’ strengths and needs: Instructors gather information on learner strengths  

      and their academic, physical, social, emotional, and  

      behavioural needs. 

 

Demands of the classroom on students: Instructors study the social, emotional, and   

      behavioural demands of the classroom. 

 

Adaptations:     Instructors identify adaptations needed for   

      differentiated instruction. 

 

Perspectives and consequences:  Instructors critically reflect on adaptations and take  

      into account perspectives on these adaptations from  

      multiple angles. 

 

Teach and assess the match:   Instructors teach and assess their adaptations. 

 

Conclusion 

 

The UDL framework recognizes the need for creating curriculum and classroom materials and 

resources that address the varied needs of learners from a wide range of linguistic and cultural 

backgrounds, including learners with disabilities and diverse language skills and proficiencies 

(King-Sears, 2008; Meyer & Rose 2000). When properly applied, UDL principles and guidelines 

can help EAP instructors examine learner variability and prepare their lessons in advance of their 

classroom instructions. This process can help reduce or eliminate barriers that impede learners in 

their learning so that they can access content and resources and demonstrate their learning. 

Flexible options support learner engagement (Dickinson, 2018). Instructors can thus make 

informed decisions in a timely manner about incorporating flexible options to enhance learning.  

 

 UDL is an important framework for EAP instructors to design curriculum and facilitate 

their instruction to meet the demands of the growing number of diverse learners at institutions of 

higher learning (Rao et al., 2014). Instructors should expect and plan for systematic variability 

even before they design their lesson plans or develop or re-develop their course. Optimal levels 

of challenge as well as scaffolds should be supplied as necessary in order to help learners 

develop their academic language and skills. Including UDL principles and guidelines in 

classrooms and curriculum, EAP instructors can ensure that their instructional resources and 

materials, teaching methods, assessment tools, and strategies cater to the “why,” “what,” and 

“how” of learning and that all learners have access to these resources and tools in multiple ways 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447


 Khatri 103 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

and forms and can engage in and demonstrate their learning in alternate pathways. Doing so not 

only supports learners for whom specific adaptations are made but it also provides all learners in 

EAP classrooms with opportunities to engage, learn, act, and express in multiple ways and 

become expert learners.  

 

Acknowledgements 

 

The author would like to express his sincere gratitude to two anonymous reviewers for their 

constructive and insightful feedback and the editor of the BC TEAL Journal for his support.  

 

References 

 

Allen, M., Berg, C., Dawson, J. Q., & Leveridge, N. (2018). Insights from the application of 

universal design principles to support English language learners. Proceedings of the 23rd 

Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education. Association for Computing 

Machinery. https://dl-acm-org.ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/doi/10.1145/3209635.3209646  

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: 

A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete edition). 

Longman. 

Boothe, K., Lohmann, M. J., & Donnell, K. A. (2018). Applying the principles of universal 

design for learning (UDL) in the college classroom. The Journal of Special Education, 

7(3), 1–13.  

Brown, J. (2020, January). Interview with Jeff Brown. The SoTL-ESL News, pp. 5–8. 

https://sotlesl.files.wordpress.com/2021/01/winter-2020-sotl-esl-newslettter.inauguaral-

issue.pdf  

Burgstahler, S., & Chang, C. (2009). Promising interventions for prompting STEM fields to 

students who have disabilities. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 

5(2), 29–47.  

Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2021). About universal design for learning. 

CAST. www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl.html  

Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). (2018). Universal design for learning 

guidelines. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/  

Chappuis, J. (2014). Thoughtful assessment with the learner in mind. Educational Leadership, 

71(6), 20–26.  

Cobb, T. (2021). Compleat lexical tutor v.8.3. https://www.lextutor.ca/  

Dickinson, P. (2018). Addressing current and future challenges in EAL writing with Universal 

Design for Learning. In P. Taalas, J. Jalkanen, L. Bradley, & S. Thouësny (Eds.), Future-

proof CALL: Language learning as exploration and encounters—short papers from 

EUROCALL 2018 (pp. 41–46). Research-publishing.net. 

https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.26.810  

Hall, T. E., Cohen, N., Vue, G., & Ganley, P. (2015). Addressing learning disabilities with UDL 

and technology: Strategic Reader. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38(2), 72–83. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714544375  

Huang, L.-S. (2018). A call for critical dialogue: EAP assessment from the practitioner’s 

perspective in Canada. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 35, 70–84. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.07.005  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447
https://dl-acm-org.ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/doi/10.1145/3209635.3209646
https://sotlesl.files.wordpress.com/2021/01/winter-2020-sotl-esl-newslettter.inauguaral-issue.pdf
https://sotlesl.files.wordpress.com/2021/01/winter-2020-sotl-esl-newslettter.inauguaral-issue.pdf
http://www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl.html
https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
https://www.lextutor.ca/
https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.26.810
https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948714544375
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.07.005


 Khatri 104 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

Hutchinson, N. L., & Specht, J. A. (2020). Inclusion of learners with exceptionalities in 

Canadian schools: A practical handbook for teachers (6th ed.). Pearson.  

Khatri, R. (2018). The efficacy of academic reading strategy instruction among adult English as 

an additional language students: A professional development opportunity through action 

research. TESL Canada Journal, 35(2), 78–103. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v35i2.1291  

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.  

King-Sears, M. (2009). Universal design for learning: Technology and pedagogy. Learning 

Disabilities Quarterly, 32, 199–201. https://doi.org/10.2307/27740372  

Kumar, K. L., & Wideman, M. (2014). Accessible by design: Applying UDL principles in a first 

year undergraduate course. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(1), 125–147. 

https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v44i1.183704  

Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. 

Foreign Language Research in Cross-Cultural Perspective, 2(1), 39–52. 

https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon  

Lopes-Murphy, S. (2012). Universal design for learning: Preparing secondary education teachers 

in training to increase academic accessibility of high school English learners. The 

Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 85(6), 226–230. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2012.693549  

Meyer, A., & Rose, D. H. (2000). Universal design for individual differences. Educational 

Leadership, 58(3), 39–43. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/universal-design-for-

individual-differences  

Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and 

practice. CAST Professional Publishing. 

Meier, B. S., & Rossi, K. A. (2020). Removing instructional barriers with UDL. Kappa Delta Pi 

Record, 56(2), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2020.1729639  

Ortomeier-Hooper, C. (2008). English may be my second language, but I’m not “ESL”. College 

Composition and Communication, 59(3), 389–419.  

Payne, J. S. (2020). Developing L2 productive language skills online and the strategic use of 

instructional tools. Foreign Language Annals, 53(2), 243–249. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12457 

Rao, K., Edelen-Smith, P., & Wailehua, C. (2014). Universal design for online courses: 

Applying principles to pedagogy. Open Learning, 30(1), 35–52. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2014.991300  

Rao, K., & Torres, C. (2016). Supporting academic and affective learning processes for English 

language learners with universal design for learning. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 460–472. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.342  

Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for 

learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 

Rose, D. H., & Strangman, N. (2007). Universal design for learning: Meeting the challenge of 

individual learning differences through a neurocognitive perspective. Universal Access in 

the Information Society, 5(4), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-006-0062-8  

Ryan, J., & Carroll, J. (2005). Canaries in the coalmine: International students in Western 

universities. In J. Carroll & J. Ryan (Eds.), Teaching international students: Improving 

learning for all (pp. 3–10). Routledge.  

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 

11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129  

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447
https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v35i2.1291
https://doi.org/10.2307/27740372
https://doi.org/10.47678/cjhe.v44i1.183704
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon
https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2012.693549
https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/universal-design-for-individual-differences
https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/universal-design-for-individual-differences
https://doi.org/10.1080/00228958.2020.1729639
https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12457
https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2014.991300
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.342
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-006-0062-8
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129


 Khatri 105 

BC TEAL Journal Volume 6 Number 1 (2021): 94–105 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447 

Schmidt, R. (1992). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied 

Linguistics, 13, 206–226. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002476   

Singh, E., & Wallace, A. (2021, Winter). Harnessing principles of university design to foster 

student engagement in online learning. TEAL News, pp. 12–13. 

https://www.bcteal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/TEAL-News-Winter-2021-

FINAL.pdf 

Story, M. F., & Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal design file: Designing for 

people of all ages and abilities. The Center for Universal Design. 

https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/pubs_p/pudfiletoc.htm  

Tobin, T. J., & Behling, K. T. (2018). Reach everyone, teach everyone: Universal design for 

learning in higher education. West Virginia University Press. 

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms 

(3rd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.  

Ushioda, E. (2014). Motivation, autonomy and metacognition: Exploring their interaction. In D. 

Lasagabaster, A. Doiz, & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), Motivation and foreign language learning: 

From theory to practice (pp. 31–49). John Benjamins Publishing Company.  

Vogt, M. E. (2005). Improving achievement for ELLs through sheltered instruction. Language 

Learner 1(1), 22–25.  

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. 

Harvard University Press. 

Yi, Y., & Jang, J. (2020). Envisioning possibilities amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications 

from English language teaching in South Korea. TESOL Journal, 11(3), 1–5. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.543  

 

 

 
The BC TEAL Journal is licensed under a 

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. 

Copyright rests with the author(s). 

 

 

https://doi.org/10.14288/bctj.v6i1.447
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002476
https://www.bcteal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/TEAL-News-Winter-2021-FINAL.pdf
https://www.bcteal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/TEAL-News-Winter-2021-FINAL.pdf
https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/pubs_p/pudfiletoc.htm
https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.543
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

