There has been a growing interest for Universal Design for Learning (UDL) as a framework for inclusion in both the K-12 and post-secondary sectors over the last decade, and this momentum has been noticeable globally. The body of literature which evidences the pedagogical benefits of UDL implementation for the inclusion of diverse learners is now broad and diversified. There is also growing interest in examining UDL implementation from a leadership and administrative perspective, examining it as a management of change process. In the K-12 sector, this scholarship is not as developed as it could be if it is going to effectively support and guide the efforts of teachers as they attempt to scale up their initiatives and achieve sustainable integration across schools. There are many variables teachers seeking to adopt UDL have to battle with, and the roles and positions of school principal is a factor often cited. This presentation will explore in an interactive format the much under-researched impact of the know-how, disposition, and commitment of school principals towards UDL integration. An awareness of this variable and its impact is crucial when designing future blueprints for the effective growth of UDL across schools. The session will be run in a workshop format that will encourage participants to share their experiences authentically and to build on some of the frustrations that will be expressed about the frequent ambivalence of school leaders in the process of UDL growth. The anticipated outcomes are as follows. Participants will: - Reflect on the impact of school leadership on the success of UDL implementation - Examine the resources and training school principals are in need of to more effectively support UDL initiatives - Explore the challenges faced by school principals when trying to support UDL projects, within a wider landscape of neoliberal pressures

1. Can we do it without school principals’
commitment? Exploring the complex impact of
school leadership on UDL implementation
UDL Workshop, 1st International Universal Design for Learning
Symposium Learning Together.
Maynooth University, June 8th, 2023
Frederic Fovet, PhD.

2. Land Acknowledgement
• I acknowledg that I work on the
traditional lands of the
Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc within
Secwépemc'ulucw, the
traditional and unceded
territory of the Secwépemc. I
also acknowledge that I live on
the unceded an traditional lands
of the Sylx people. I
acknowledge their language,
their culture, their elders and
recognize their claims to land.

3. Objectives of the Session
• Examine UDL implementation in schools with leadership as a lens
• Explore what the literature tells us about leadership for inclusion
• Examine data collected among Canadian teachers about their views on leadership
and UDL implementation
• Consider possible leadership solutions, needs and strategies to support teachers
seeking to grow UDL in their schools

4. Personal lens and methodological stance
• Act as a UDL consultant with schools and
school boards in Canada
• My research and scholarship focuses on UDL
• Have worked as a teacher and principal for
over 15 years, using the key features of UDL
within a clientele of students with social,
emotional and behavioural issues
• Also have a privilege perspective as I teach
mostly mid-career teachers within MEd
courses
• The data presented here merges (i)
phenomenological data collected by the author
as part of my lived professional experience s
consultant in the K-12 sector and (ii) qualitative
data collected among Canadian K-12 teachers
within a study on UDL growth in schools

5. Getting to know you
• By show of hands, who in the room is:
- A teacher currently involved in curriculum delivery
- A teacher by training occupying a non-classroom role
- A school support staff
- A school leader
- A researcher/ higher ed faculty

6. Modelling UDL in the session format
• It can be challenging and frustrating to discuss UDL in virtual workshop sessions which are
inherently traditional and ‘sage on a stage’ in format.
• Becomes increasingly contradictory when UDL advocates present in non-UDL ways.
• UDL is not just about the classroom; these principles of inclusive design apply to all our
interactions with others (PD, conferences, campus services, HR communications, etc.)
• Within the parameters we are given today:
- Personalized communication beyond the session itself with the help of a Padlet:
https://edswgrad.padlet.org/ffovet1/can-we-do-it-without-school-principals-commitment-
exploring--gbzkmy84emohnpy2
- Continues interaction and dialogue on social media
- Interactive tasks: some small group work & we will be using Menti.com
- Time will be set aside for questions at the end; conversations can continue face to face after
the session
- Personalized interaction possible through email
- Will share by slides again through SlideShare

7. Gauging the perceptions of the room – what are your
feelings about leadership and UDL
• We will use Menti (www.menti.com) to gauge your perceptions anonymously about
leadership and UDL implementation in schools
• I will generate a code that will allow you to use the poll
• Do you feel that in schools leadership currently plays:
• No role at all
• A limited role in the sense that leadership acknowledge the work
• A fair role in the sense that leadership provide resources for UDL growth
• A significant role in the sense that they trigger and monitor UDL implementation
projects
• A central role in the sense that they oversee and manage UDL initiatives

9. Whole room activity
• What do you think the
literature tells us about
school leadership and UDL
implementation? (3 minutes)

10. Literature on school leadership and UDL
implementation
• Very little literature currently on this specific topic (Grillo, 2022)
• Some graduate level thesis explorations (Boaki, 2019)
• We do have a significant body of literature on school leadership and inclusion (Cobb,
2015; Monsen et al., 2014; Thompson, 2015)
• Mostly simply states the obvious: leadership has a significant impact on inclusive
policies and school culture (Barrett & Breyer, 2014)
• The terms leadership for inclusion or leadership for social justice are increasingly
being used in the field and in scholarship (Fitzgerald & Radford, 2022; Neves et al.,
2023)
• What do we mean by this?
• Is argued the terms are relatively void of meaning at present as they do not relate to
specific leadership strategies/ models/ or outcomes

11. Breakaway group activity (4 minutes)
• What according to you should
‘leadership for inclusion’ –
and hence leadership for UDL
implementation – mean and
involve?

12. Some of the socio-historical variables that
come into play
• Certain socio-historical variables help us understand the general haziness that is
characteristic around leadership positions towards inclusion
• Desegregation of special needs schools around the world – on the basis of the social capital
argument (learners need to have equal opportunities to develop rich and wide networks)
• The closure of special needs school was intended to lead to a transfer of funding to
mainstream schools and to a cross-pollination between content specialist and special
education experts.
• These shifts never did happen (Lanterman & Applequist, 2018)
• Intentional post-modern move away from ‘special education’ has occurred for now two
decades (notion that discourse shapes perceptions and that removing special needs
terminology prevents teachers from making attributions vis-à-vis students)
• A case of the best intentions…
• These large policy changes have created a certain vacuum around expectations for inclusive
outcomes

13. Second part: Examining some data on teachers’
perceptions about UDL and leadership
• Exploration of qualitative data collected from Canadian teachers who have been
exploring and implementing UDL for over a year
• 10 participants from across provinces
• Various degrees of expertise, teaching experience, job security, and comfort levels
represented in the sample.
• Rich ethnographic flavour to the semi-directive interviews
• Participants were discussing their successes and their hurdles widely
• Several of these variables involved leadership as a ‘code’ in the analysis
• Short overview of the detailed sub-themes within this code

14. Key sub-themes discussed by participants
• Empathetic support that does not materialize in tangible resources
• Involvement in funding of initial pilot program but no suggestions as to sustainable
funding solutions
• Usually secured a PD envelope for a one-off visit by a UDL consultant or scholar (day
or half day)
• Some small teaching releases to acknowledge mentoring role with peers
• No leadership support in the establishing of community or networks (virtually or
physically) with other classroom practitioners doing similar UDL work

15. Key sub-themes discussed by participants
(contd.)
• Little communication about school or school board strategic direction with UDL
• No discussions around job creation, formal structures for UDL implementation
• Some formal encouragement in relation to the creation of in-school communities of
practice
• Little knowledge or support with regards to tangible UDL PD resources (sites,
courses, PD opportunities)
• No formal discussions with unions around UDL implementation and the needs this
represents from an HR perspective

16. Examining these outcomes through the
lens of literature on leadership
• Laissez faire approach to leadership in this area (enormous amounts of freedom and
autonomy, no prescriptive instructions, trust openly verbalized,
• Some elements of transformational leadership (teacher perceptions of good will
and motivational support, general feeling of encouragement and empathy, etc.)
• Both of these approaches – while clearly not hindering UDL implementation – ignore
the realities of the field in relation to workload, performance review, resource
allocation, and strategic growth.

17. Whole room activity (4 minutes)
• What are your reactions to these findings?
• How do they relate to your own contexts and realities?
• How do they perhaps differ from your own perceptions?

18. Third part: Brainstorming around needs,
solutions, and strategies
• Breakout group activity (4 minute):
• What are the refection this may have triggered for you around leadership
needs, solutions and strategies?

19. Summary of my own suggestions
• Need for clarity in relation to leadership vision for inclusion (and UDL integration in
particular)
• Embedding of this vision into a strategic statement (importance for stakeholders and
advocate to be able to refer back to a central commitment)
• Strategic and sustainable planning around resources needed (PD, teaching releases,
virtual archiving of PD for sustainable use, supporting network and community
building around UDL, funding for initiatives that stretch beyond the pilot projects or
at the very least some staffing to support this search for funding)
• Legal and proactive engagement with teaching unions in relation to UDL

20. Summary of my own suggestions (contd.)
• Need for more in-depth technical understanding of UDL (PD specifically geared
towards leaders?)
• Need for more appreciation that UDL serves the need of a wide spectrum of diverse
learners (not just students with disabilities)
• Need for a modelling of UDL strategies by school principals in their interactions with
staff and teachers
• A shift is needed away from the mindset where leaders expect transformation to
come from pre-service teacher training innovation. A degree of ownership is
required by leaders over the issue - even if indeed teacher training needs to be
reformed to integrate more UDL content (Fovet, 2020)

21. A complex ecological landscape

22. A complex ecological landscape
• We have unearthed what may represent wider concerns about school leadership that have
root in a complex ecological landscape.
• In many global north jurisdiction, access to leadership position is dependent on seniority not
on specific leadership competencies
• Few requirements for formal leadership training
• Generational gap which mean that may senior leaders have not been exposed to EDI contexts
and concerns in their own teaching trajectory
• Competing nature of priorities in an increasingly neo-liberal landscape
• Pressure is on school visibility and branding, comparative quality analysis with neighbouring
schools, and objective quantitative student outcomes (standardized testing). These priorities
allow little room for inclusion or UDL.
• The Index for inclusion incorporates specific guidelines related to leadership but rarely used
in practice.
• Many leaders will assume the solutions to address these needs are the responsibility of pre-
service teacher training (which itself is regulated by universities and governments)

23. Questions

24. References & Resources
Barrett, C., & Breyer, R. (2014). The influence of effective leadership on teaching and learning. Journal of
Research Initiatives, 1(2), 1-9
Basham J. D., Gardner J. E., Smith S. J. (2020). Measuring the implementation of UDL in classrooms and
schools: Initial field test results. Remedial and Special Education, 41(4), 231–243.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932520908015
Bouaki, H. (2019) School leaderhip strategies for the implementation of Universal Design for Learning in
International Schools. MEd Thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
https://research.library.mun.ca/14306/1/thesis.pdf
Cobb C. (2015). Principals play many parts: A review of the research on school principals as special
education leaders 2001–2011. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(3), 213–234.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2014.916354
Fitzgerald, J., & Radford, J. (2022) Leadership for inclusive special education: a qualitative exploration of
SENCOs’ and principals’ Experiences in secondary schools in Ireland. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 26(10), 992-1007, DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2020.1760365
Fovet, F. (2020) Integrating Universal Design for Learning in Schools: Implications for Teacher Training,
Leadership and Professional Development. In: Al Mahdi, O. (Ed.) Innovations in Educational Leadership
and Continuous Teachers' Professional Development. CSMFL Publications.

25. References & Resources (contd.)
• Grillo, M. (2022). The Administrator’s Role in Universal Design for Learning’s Successful
Implementation. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 54(5), 372–379.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00400599211022030
• Lanterman C. S., Applequist K. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ beliefs: Impact of training in
Universal Design for Learning. Exceptionality Education International, 28(3), 102–121.
https://doi.org/10.5206/eei.v28i3.7774
• Monsen J. J., Ewing D. L., Kwoka M. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, perceived
adequacy of support and classroom learning environment. Learning Environments Research,
17(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-013-9144-8
• Neves, C., Almeida, A.P., Ferreira, M. (2023) Headteachers and Inclusion: Setting the Tone for
an Inclusive School. Education Sciences, 13, 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020129
• Ryan-Toye, M. (2018) Universal Design for Learning: An Examination of Leadership Promoting
Student Learning for All. PhD Thesis. Loyola University.
https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/2849
• Thompson C. (2015). The principals’ impact on the implementation of inclusion. Journal of
the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, (Winter), 136–141.

26. Contact details
• Frederic Fovet (PhD.)
• Implementudl@gmail.com
• School of Education, Faculty of Education and Social Work,
Thompson Rivers University
• ffovet@tru.ca
• @Ffovet
• www.implementudl.com