CHAPTER ?

Applying the Principles of Universal Design for Learning in General Music Alice-Ann Darrow Florida State University All learners exist somewhere on the continuum of human abilities. Universal Design for Learning embraces the notion that instruction can be compatible with the abilities of all learners. By designing instruction that it is accessible to the widest range of learners, all students have an opportunity to succeed. Universal Design for Learning is a framework for education that provides multiple means of presenting, engaging with, and responding to instruction, while taking account of students broad range of learning styles and preferences. Universal Design for Learning, sometimes referred to as Universal Design Instruction, operates on the premise that the planning and delivery of instruction, as well as the evaluation of student learning, can incorporate inclusive attributes that accommodate learner differences without excluding learners, and without compromising academic standards (Bowe, 2000; Rose & Meyer, 2006). Examples of universal design instruction are real-time captioning of lectures for students with hearing losses, use of text-to-speech technology or tactile graphs and maps for students with vision losses, and electronic communication boards for students with physical disabilities. Applying the principles of UDL necessitates flexible goals, instructional methods, materials, and assessments. If UDL principles are applied appropriately, accommodations for students of varying abilities are imperceptible to the casual observer. When applying the principles of UDL, music educators have options in the approaches they will use to meet students diverse needs, and learners have options in how they will respond to these instructional approaches. Application of

2 UDL suggests: (1) multiple means of representation (options for perceiving and comprehending information), (2) multiple means of action and expression (options for learners to navigate a learning environment and express what they know), (3) multiple means of engagement (options to capture learners interest, challenge appropriately, and motivate) (Rose & Meyer, 2006). Rather than designing instruction for students with a specific disability, the music educator employs Universal Design for Learning principles for students with a broad range of skills, reading levels, learning styles, and personal motivations. Application of UDL principles to music education practices reduces barriers to learning by accommodating students with varying skill sets. Origins of Universal Design for Learning Universal Design for Learning was an outgrowth of Universal Design, also called inclusive design, design-for-all, lifespan design or human-centered design (Institute for Human Centered Design, 2013). The term Universal Design emerged from the accessibility movement of the 1970s, which followed the social policies that moved people with disabilities from institutional settings into the communities (Nielson, 2012). Barrier-free designs were intended to assist in more fully integrating people with physical disabilities into society. In the 1970s, an American architect, Michael Bednar, introduced the idea that everyone's functional capacity is enhanced when environmental barriers are removed (Institute for Human Centered Design, 2013, p. 1). He suggested a new concept was needed that addressed more than accessibility issues, a concept that would be broader and more universal. The term Universal Design was later coined by architect, Ronald Mace, who envisioned designs that not only addressed building accessibility, but also product use such as light switches accessible to persons of varying heights, and commodity featuressuch as making

3 book print audible. Inherent in Maces vision of Universal Design was that buildings and products be designed at the outset for general use without the need for adaptations or specialized design.

Mace had polio as a child, and as a result used a wheelchair that greatly impeded his ability to enroll in architectural classes at North Carolina State University. He was carried up and down stairs to attend classes and his wheelchair did not fit into the university restrooms. Nevertheless, he prevailed and graduated with a degree in architecture from the University's School of Design and later founded the Universitys Center for Universal Design (Saxon, 1998). Mace recognized that the term universal was not ideal, that it could be interpreted to promise an impossible standard. He recognized that there would always be a small number of people for whom an individual design would not work (Institute for Human Centered Design, 2013, p. 1).

4 More appropriately, Universal Design is a philosophy by which designers strive to incorporate features that make each design more universally usable (Rose & Myer, 2002, 2005). Principles of Universal Design for Learning Universal Design for Learning, an outgrowth of Universal Design, expanded the concept of making buildings, products, and services accessible to the widest range of consumers to making instruction and learning accessible to the widest range of students. The framework of UDL adapts the concept of physical accessibility to cognitive and affective accessibility by modifying and implementing instructional materials and strategies for all students. The two essential features of UDL are built-in tools that promote access to learning and flexible presentation of the curriculum (CEC, 2005). The three guiding principles of UDL call for (1) multiple means of representation, or a variety of ways that information can be presented, (2) multiple means of action and expression, or multiple ways that students can demonstrate their understanding of the information, and (3) multiple means of engagement, or utilizing various ways to motivate, capture and sustain students interests and attention (CAST, 2008). By designing instruction and materials around these global features and principles, all students benefit and have the greatest possibility for academic success. Universal Design for Learning benefits not only students with disabilities, but students without disabilities as wellsuch as those for whom English is a second language who may also benefit from alternative instructional materials and approaches (Adamek & Darrow, 2010).

The Center on Applied Special Technology (CAST) has provided an explanation for the three primary UDL principles (see Table 1.). Below in Table 1 are the necessary options to be

5 considered in order to implement each principle. Music educators can use this outline as a checklist for determining the accessibility of any given lesson. As an example for principle 1, provide multiple means of representation, a teacher needs to consider those students who have hearing or vision losses, or those who have auditory or visual processing difficulties, or those who are second language learners when presenting material in class. When material to be learned is presented, such as a song being sung, the teacher must ask: How can I make this information available to my student who has a hearing loss or to my student who does not understand English? Can I provide pictures or act it out such that these students will have an understanding of the lyrics? Likewise, if a music teacher to pointing to musical notation, consideration should be given to the student who is blind. Is there a tactile way the student can experience musical notation such as pipe cleaners shaped to feel like notes or rests, or can a verbal explanation be given? Similarly, for the principle 2, provide multiple means of response, can the student who is deaf sign the lyrics of the song rather than sing them? Can the student who is nonverbal point to the lyrics on a song sheet? These options can be provided as multiple means of response to instruction. Considerable research exists to support and illustrate each of these options found in Table 1. This research can be found at the following link on the website of National Center on Universal Design for Learning (http://www.udlcenter.org/research/researchevidence). The research is categorized in the same configuration as the outline below and is easily accessible. This robust body of evidence convincingly demonstrates the benefits of making instruction available to all students on the continuum of abilities. In the following section, examples are given of ways these options can be applied to music learning.

6 Table 1 . Universal design for learning guidelines (CAST, 2008) Provide Multiple Means of Representation Provide options for perception Customize the display of information Provide alternatives for auditory information Provide alternatives for visual information Provide options for language and symbols Define vocabulary and symbols Clarify syntax and structure Decode text and mathematical notation Promote cross-linguistic understanding Illustrate concepts non-linguistically Provide options for comprehension Provide or activate background knowledge Highlight critical features, big ideas, and relationships Guide information processing Support memory and transfer

Provide Multiple Means for Action and Expression Provide options for physical actions Provide varied ways to respond Provide varied ways to interact with materials Integrate assistive technologies

7 Provide options for expressive skills and fluency Allow choices of media for communication Provide appropriate tools for composition and problem solving Provide ways to scaffold practice and performance Provide options for executive functions Guide effective goal setting Support planning and strategy development Facilitate managing information and resources Enhance capacity for monitoring progress

Provide Multiple Means for Engagement Provide options for recruiting interest Increase individual choice and autonomy Enhance relevance, value, and authenticity Reduce threats and distractions Provide options for sustaining effort and persistence Heighten salience of goals and objectives Vary levels of challenge and support Foster collaboration and communication Increase master-oriented feedback Provide options for self-regulation Guide personal goal-setting and expectations

8 Scaffold coping skills and strategies Develop self-assessment and reflection

To future guide teachers in their thinking of the universally designed classroom, Burgstahler (2007a, 2007b) categorized guidelines and performance indicators to consider when planning for instruction: 1) Class climate high value demonstrated for all students; avoid stereotyping; be approachable and available; address individual needs inclusively rather than segregating or drawing attention to an individuals need for special accommodations 2) Interaction encourage cooperative learning with varying leadership roles; communication accessible to all group members 3) Physical environments and products make sure equipment is available and accessible to all students; organize a physical environment that is safe for all students 4) Delivery methods utilize flexible, accessible instructional methods that motivate and engage all learners 5) Information resources and technology ensure that course materials are accessible to all students; utilize flexible technology to assist in delivery of information 6) Feedback provide feedback on a regular basis to all students 7) Assessment assess student progress regularly and in a variety of ways 8) Accommodation plan for specific accommodation needs for students whose needs are not met by UDL, specifically for students with severe disabilities.

9 Application of UDL Principles to Music Learning Music can provide rich, meaningful, and creative options for student learning. There are multimodal opportunities for the presentation of music content (Glass, Blair, & Ganley, 2012). To apply the principles of UDL to music learning, music educators first begin by assessing their students abilities, and then identifying and removing barriers to learning. Inherent in this process is the presentation of various options for learning, and identifying those that seem to be successful and those that thwart rather than facilitate learning. Also inherent in this process is teaching students to explore the various options for learning, to be self-advocates in regard to their learning preferences, and to be accepting of classmates who may respond to instruction in different ways. Providing inclusive musical experiences is a process of principled design, identification of barriers to learning, problem solving, and responsive teaching (Glass, Blair, & Ganley, 2012). To apply the principles of UDL, music educators must reach beyond their typical approaches to the subject matter. First, they must consider how they plan to present information to their students, and then be mindful to explore as many other ways as possible that the same material can be presented. Second, they must determine how they expect students to respond, and then consider the many other avenues that students might utilize to express their understanding of the information. Presentation of the learning material, and students responses to it, may incorporate visuals, manipulatives, and technology or other assistive devices. Third, music educators must consider that all students do not share the same interests and motivations, and consequently determine how they can best stimulate and encourage student learning. For example, a teacher may typically teach a rote song by singing each phrase or line of the song and asking students to sing back the phrase or line. In applying the principles of UDL, the teacher

10 might also present illustrations that correspond to each phrase or line or use action movements that indicate the mean of the words. Likewise, students who are nonverbal, may also respond in a similar fashion by pointing to the illustrations or acting out the lyrics. If there are students who only speak Spanish, or who use manual communication, the teacher may also sing the song in Spanish or use sign language as she sings. Obviously, applying the principles of UDL requires that teachers know their students needs and plan accordingly. The principles of Universal Design for Learning can be applied in various music settings and to various music materials. The following example is an application of UDL principles to the teaching of Grizzly Bear, a well-known childrens song. The example also includes application of UDL principles to the way children can respond to instruction: Lyrics to Grizzly Bear A grizzly bear, a grizzly bear is sleeping in a cave, Please be very quiet, very very quiet, If you wake him, if you shake him, He gets very mad! Based on the lyrics, children are asked the following Wh questions: Who is in the cave? What is the bear doing in the cave? When does the bear get mad? Where is the bear? Why should you be very quiet? What happens if you wake or shake the sleeping bear?

11 To assist the children in answering the Wh questions, the teacher provides multiple means of presenting the song: The teacher can sing the song The teacher can sign the song The teacher can present the lyrics captioned on an overhead screen where students can follow along with the teacher, or the teacher can provide individual print copies to students that are enlarged, (in Braille, in other languages, etc.). The teacher can present and point to picture illustrations along with the lyrics. The teacher can use puppets to act out the lyrics. The teacher or children can act out the lyrics with props such as a cave made from chairs.

To provide all students with the greatest possibility for answering the Wh questions successfully, they may engage in multiple means of response: The students can verbally answer the questions. The students can point to the written lines in the lyrics that answer the questions. The students can sign the answers to the questions. The students can sing the lyric lines that answer the questions. The students can point to the pictures that answer the questions. The students can color the pictures that answer the questions. The students can act out or use puppets to act out the answers to the questions.

To provide students with multiple means of engagement, the teacher offers visual, auditory and kinesthetic experiences by using: Singing Signing

12 Coloring Acting Visuals Manipulatives To implement UDL in their classrooms, music educators must be flexible as they think about instruction, student response, assessments, and what motivates student learning. Unlike some other subjects, music naturally provides opportunities for alternative means of presenting and responding to the subject matter. In addition, the creative music educator can find meaningful and natural motivators to actively engage students in the music learning process. Many music educators already utilize Universal Design strategies by implementing visual, auditory and kinesthetic musical experiences. Music, as subject matter, is highly conducive to multiple means of representation, expression, and engagement (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). Important to UDL is the incorporation of technology (CEC, 2005; Hall, Meyer, & Rose, 2012). Music educators have long used digital and other technological media in the classroom. Technology expands the possibilities for instruction and provides alternative paths for music learning. IDEA (1997) mandates that assistive technology be considered when preparing a students individual education plan (IEP). Assistive technology is defined as any item piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of children with disabilities (IDEA, 1997). The main categories of assistive technology are reading and vision aides, computer and musical instrument aides, and communication aides (McCord & Watts, 2010). Adapted acoustic instruments and other assistive technology are frequently advertised at professional conference exhibits and in many music catalogues. Various electronic instruments

13 present possibilities for color coding, or changing the volume, timbre, tempo, and method of playing the instrument. To incorporate the principles of UDL, and to maximize means of representation and response, music educators need to be aware of the various technologies available to them. In addition, students today are accustomed to and highly motivated by contemporary technology, though for some students with severe disabilities, technology is required for participation. For example, students with severe physical disabilities or limited range of motion in their arms may not be able to play traditional hand bells, but apps such as Golden Handbells, allow students to play specific bells by lightly touching the icon on an iPad. Preparing Music Educators to Implement UDL Most often, music educators address diversity by modifying an existing curriculum. Applying the principles of UDL requires that educators engage in a new way of thinking about and planning for instruction. A UDL music curriculum is designed from inception to meet the needs of as many students as possible. Doing so eliminates the need for after-the-fact adaptations and modifications. Teacher education programs can best prepare preservice teachers by requiring that they demonstrate knowledge of how to organize and manage differentiated instruction. Ayala, Brace, and Stahl (2010) suggest that teacher education programs first provide preservice teachers with an introduction to UDL and its essential features and guiding principles. Preservice teachers can be introduced to UDL through lectures, online resources, assigned readings and in-class activities. In addition, application of UDL principles can be demonstrated through the structure of teacher preparation coursework. Preservice teachers knowledge of UDL principles is obviously essential to implementation.

14 After preservice teachers introduction to UDL, Ayala, Brace, and Stahl (2010) recommend they be engaged in structured discussion and guided practice. Students can first brainstorm in groups to identify UDL solutions to potential learning barriers, to construct lesson plans that maximize opportunities for the presentation of music information and student response, or to share technologies. Given a class description and a musical goal, students can be asked to respond to the following questions: What pedagogical approaches/methods can be utilized? What are some potential barriers to student learning? What aspects of UDL might remove those barriers? How many ways can the information be presented? How many ways can students respond to that information? What technologies are available that might be useful? What motivators might be used to engage students? Where would be a good place to start?

(Ayala, Brace, & Stahl, 2010, p.142) Finally, preservice teachers must have the opportunity to create lesson plans that incorporate multiple means of representation, expression, and motivation that they then implement in their practice teaching. In the end, preservice teachers will hopefully adopt several assumptions: learners are diverse, it is the curricula and not the students that need to be fixed (Ayala, Brace, & Stahl, 2010, p.143), curricula need to be flexible, and successful teaching requires careful planning.

15 Applying UDL to Approaches in General Music The application of UDL to any curriculum improves access, participation, and student advancement. The flexibility of UDL has the potential to increase access to the music curriculum for all students, but particularly for those with disabilities. Rose and Meyer (2002) promoted the notion that the malleability of a curriculum rich in contemporary digital media and technology tools would support the needs of all learners. A curriculum that is fixed or static has proved to be inadequate for many students. The traditional, one-size-fits-all curriculum is particularly inaccessible to students who learn differently or who have sensory, cognitive, or physical challenges. For example, a recorder curriculum requires that students have use of their breath, hands and fingers. Some students with physical disabilities such as cerebral palsy will have difficulty unless adaptations are made such as alternative fingerings, modified arrangements that require they only play one or two notes, use of recorder iPad apps such as Ultimate Instrument Combo Pack, or partner playing where they blow into the instrument while a partner fingers the notes, Music educators have frequently argued over content versus process, and which is more important and pertinent to student learning. Regardless of ones viewpoint, at some point all educators must be able to define what they intend to teach. To that end, the topic of curriculum is essential to the music education process (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1994). What constitutes a curriculum, however, is open to interpretation. Some educators may loosely define a curriculum as any series of learning activities that occur in the classroom. This definition is rarely satisfactory to administrators or others who may believe a curriculum must have defined goals and competencies that can be evaluated. Furthermore, there are some educators who state that a curriculum must also be founded on a specific educational philosophy (Orff, 1966).

16 How a curriculum is presented in the classroom is also open to interpretation. Variables that may dictate how a curriculum is implemented in the classroom are: the teachers opinions about the curriculum, the teachers skills, the student population, the teaching materials available, as well as the time and space available. How familiar a teacher is with a curriculum is also an important variable. Teachers who are well versed with a specific curriculum may be less open to modifying the curriculum, or conversely, may be more flexible with the curriculum due to their familiarity with the content. In any case, it is the teacher who has the greatest control and responsibility for how a curriculum is implemented in the classroom. Certainly, the final outcome is that all students, regardless of abilities, are performing, reading, listening to, describing, and creating music; and that they are making music, understanding and knowing music, and valuing music (Hoffer, 1991). To explore existing curricula in relation to UDL, it seems sagacious to examine each in terms of the three main UDL design principles and the essential components of a curriculum: its goals, methods, and materials. The following section will include an overview of three widely used approaches in general musicthe approaches of Emile Jaques-Dalcroze, Zoltn Kodly, and Carl Orffin terms of UDL. These approaches were selected for examination because they are the most frequently cited approaches in texts on general music (Mark & Madura, 2013, Shehan Campbell & Scott-Kassner, 2002), and because each has a certification process, indicating a somewhat standardized curriculum and approach to instruction. As increasing numbers of students with disabilities have entered public schools, music educators have found that certain aspects of these European approaches are useful in teaching students with special needs. Students have benefited from the movements used in the Dalcroze approach, or from the use of visual aids found in the Kodly approach, or from the kinesthetic function of playing large

17 instruments used in the Orff approach. Because many music therapists have backgrounds or degrees in music education, and many educators have certification in these European approaches, it is not uncommon to find these approaches used with students who have disabilities (Darrow, 2008). Each approach has both challenges and advantages when examined with the UDL principles of curriculum design in mind. Application of UDL to the Dalcroze Approach in General Music The music education approach of Emile Jaques-Dalcroze is based on the premise that rhythm is the primary element in music, and that this element can be found in the natural rhythms of the human body (Frego, Liston, Hama, & Gillmeister, 2008). The Dalcroze approach consists of eurhythmics, solfge, and improvisation. Though eurhythmics is often considered the core of the Dalcroze approach, it was actually the last part to be developed and is equal to the solfge and improvisation components (Frego, Liston, Hama, & Gillmeister, 2008). Dalcroze found that his students had difficulty in interpreting the rhythmic aspects of music, and consequently, in feeling and expressing music. After observing rhythmic difficulties in his students, and experiencing disenchantment with his own musical study at the Vienna Conservatory, he began to question the teaching philosophies and methods of his time (Landis & Carder, 1972). As a result of his questioning, he began to experiment with exercises that combined hearing and physical response, singing and physical response, and reading, writing, and physical response. As he observed his students engaging in these exercises, he found that something was missing, and it was the natural acts of rhythm and movement. He began to explore the notion that the human body and it muscles could be trained to exert the correct rhythmic proportions of time, space, and energy, and found that real teaching begins when a student has a problem with rhythmic execution. Through his study of kinesthesia, combined

18 with his observations of students, he began to understand the chain of nervous system connections. He realized that students had to be made aware of these mind-body connections that generally occur subconsciously; therefore, his primary goals were: 1. development of attention 2. conversion of attention to concentration 3. social integration (awareness of similarities and difference and appropriate responses between oneself and others) 4. responses to and expression of all nuances of sound-feeling (Choksy, Abramson, Gillespie, Woods, & York, 2001): Ultimately, the goals of Dalcroze were summarized as follows): A. Mental and Emotional 1. awareness 2. concentration 3. social integration 4. realization and expression of nuances B. Physical 1. ease of performance 2. accuracy of performance 3. personal expressiveness through performance, using the laws of timespaceenergybalancegravity field C. Musical: Quick, accurate, comfortable, expressive personal response to hearing, leading to performance, analysis, reading, writing, and improvising.

19 With these goals, it is obvious that students with attention deficits or social interaction problems, along with students who obviously have certain mobility limitations or severe hearing loss, would need additional options for setting goals, and for methods to meet those goals. The movement vocabulary used in the Dalcroze approach provides possible options, as long as a music educator employing this approach accepts alternatives to prescribed movements (Choksy, Abramson, Gillespie, Woods, & York, 1986, p. 37): Movements in Place Clapping Swinging Turning Conducting Bending Swaying Speaking Singing Many children with cognitive disabilities have difficulty mentally discerning the degree of energy that needs to be expended in order to execute a particular movement; thus, resulting in what might be considered their characteristic awkward or uncoordinated movements (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). Music educators need to offer options for expression, such as moving a different part of the body, or manipulating an objectsuch as a scarf or dollin a similar way. Some teachers in physical education classes who employ principles of UDL provide a list of alternative movements as possible options to a required physical action (Lieberman, Lytle, & Clarcq, 2008). Movements in Space Walking Running Crawling Leaping Sliding Galloping Skipping

20 Students with attention deficits or vision and sensory losses would need additional options for presentation of the learning material. Engaging in Dalcroze movements requires attention, concentration, and personal awareness of self and surrounding space. Students need to attend to the elements of the music, and often to attend to a teachers movement model. Individualizing or broadening the way instructional material is presented to students is feasible if a variety of tools and media are available. Visuals representing the musical elements of the music (tempo, dynamics, form) for students with hearing loss or cognitive disabilities, iPads with finger motion sensors that control images of human bodies, or visuals with stick figures depicting the desired movement are optional means for information presentation and for student response. In turn, these added materials potentially provide the motivation needed for student engagement. One of the tenets of UDL is that these options for representation and response are provided at the outset, not as add-ons, or only when a student fails with the original approach to learning. The instructional environment must have options available to all students such that they have preferred ways of learning available to them, and they can engage at the outset of instruction in ways that address their learner differences. If illustrations are used with any song sung in the classroom, all children will have a better understanding of the lyrics, not only those who are second language learners or non-readers. Solfge, another component of Dalcroze may obviously present challenges to students who are nonverbal, or who cannot physically hear certain melodies. Students who are nonverbal, such as those with autism, cognitive disabilities, or those who are electively mute, may nevertheless have good hearing and thus be able to respond by using Curwen hand signs, written notation, or iPad apps where they touch notes or keys to demonstrate what they hear or wish to sing. Again, whatever options are used should be embedded in the curriculum and available to

21 all students. If all cymbals used in the classroom have either enlarged knobs or Velcro straps, a child with physical disabilities who must use such adapted instruments will not be stigmatized by using them. Improvisation is the final component of the Dalcroze approach. The goal of improvisation is to produce ways of using movement and sound materials to create music (Frego, Liston, Hama, & Gillmeister, 2008). The act of improvisation provides many natural options for presentation and response. In addition, many students find that opportunities for self-expression and creativity are intrinsically motivating. Provided there are multiple options for the demonstration of expression and creativitynot just through bodily movementimprovisation should be the Dalcroze component to which UDL principles can be most easily applied. Options for stimulating and demonstrating improvisation should be embedded, flexible, and available to all students. An alternative action for a child who is non-ambulatory may be to manipulate a doll in some improvised way, but it is important that this option to be available to other students as well, not just to the student with the disability. Dalcroze himself realized the value of movement and music for students in special education schools and classes. He reportedly worked with students with physical disabilities, particularly those who were blind. He believed that these students could be taught to develop a more skilled sense of space by engaging in specialized exercises. He included such exercises for students with visual disabilities in his book Eurhythmics, Art, and Education (Mark & Madura, 2013). They were categorized as exercises for developing: the sense of space and the muscular sense, tactile sensibility and muscular consciousness, and the auditory faculties in their relation to space and the muscular sense. The rhythmic aspects of the Dalcroze approach have also been applied to other populations of persons with disabilities or special needs (Brick, 1973; Frego,

22 Liston, Hama, & Gillmeister, 2008; Gauge, 1995; Hidden, 1991). These applications of the Dalcroze approach were traditional and did not utilize multiple means of representation or response; therefore, it would be interesting to determine how the reported outcomes would differ should UDL principles be applied to the interventions. Application of UDL in the Orff Approach Carl Orffs approach to music education for children developed from his idea that music, movement, and speech are related, and that together, they form elemental music (Landis & Carder, 1972). The natural behaviors of childhoodsinging, saying, dancing, playing, along with improvisation and creative movementform the basis of Orff Schulwerk (or school work). The Orff approach, as adapted in the United States, includes four stages for instruction: imitation, exploration, literacy, and improvisation. Imitation may be practiced through singing, moving, or performing on pitched or non-pitched percussion instruments. Exploration is finding new ways of applying learned information, such as asking children to explore how many different timbres they can make on the hand drum. Literacybased on childrens musical experiences and a means to preserve the music they createinvolves using graphic and conventional staff notation. Like the Dalcroze approach, the final stage of the Orff process is improvisation with the purpose of promoting musical invention (Shehan Campbell & ScottKassner, 2002). The Orff process includes well-known features such as songs in the pentatonic mode, ostinato patterns, tonic drones or pedal tones, and static and moving bordun accompaniments on barred and other percussion instruments. These features are employed as children speak, move, sing, or play. Through these musical behaviors children build a vocabulary of rhythmic, melodic, and harmonic patterns that they can use in making or creating music (Mark & Madura, 2013),

23 though they begin with rhythm, and subsequently, the other musical elements emerge. Rhythmic chants and vocal sounds are some of childrens first musical experiences and so aptly serve as the basis for sequential developmental activities in the Orff process. These vocal chants are later clapped, played, and sung. Many of the examples used for movement in the Dalcroze section will apply as well to the movement elements of the Orff approach. Unlike the Dalcroze approach, instruments are a distinctive element of Orffs instructional approach. The use of both pitched and unpitched instruments provides opportunities to extend the forms of music expression available to children. Kinesthetic activities are transferred from the body to the instruments, thus providing multiple opportunities for movement and the physical expression of music. The Orff instruments (xylophones, metallophones and glockenspiel) are media commonly used in this approach. Many of the lessons found in pedagogical books and demonstrated in workshops utilize these instruments. Fortunately, the many types and sizes of instruments used in the Orff approach make applying UDL principles feasible. Instrumental alternatives are inherent in the Orff process . Arrangements are often written with multiple instruments assigned to one part; therefore, if students have difficulty playing one instrument, they have a built-in option to play another perhaps more suitable instrument. Even when Orff arrangements are written for specific instruments, it is not uncommon for instrumental substitutions to be made without a noted difference in the quality of the arrangement or musical product. Several aspects of the Orff approach make it particularly conducive to applying the principles of UDL. Its emphasis on exploration of space, sound, and form allow for multiple means of response. Children are encouraged to explore the many ways in which the body can move in space, the many sounds that instruments can make, and the many ways music can be

24 organized. Exploration indicates that one specific response is not expected, but that children have options in how they explore and thus respond to teachers directives. The multisensory approach also allows children to speak, sing, move, or play in response to music. Teachers who present information through a variety of musical media, and who accept responses from their students by speaking, singing, moving, or playing are inherently applying the principles of UDL. Even children who are nonverbal and use communication boards where they point to words, pictures or icons, or those who use other alternative speech-producing communication devices are still able to participate. Children who use wheelchairs can still move in ways that interpret the music. As with any curriculum, however, these avenues of participation should be presented as part of the Orff process, and not as alternative options for students with disabilities. In the early stages, the emphasis on imitation allows children with cognitive disabilities who may have difficulty reading print, or children with vision loss who cannot read print, the ability to participate in meaningful and appropriate ways that are true to the approach. The material to be imitated can also be presented in multiple ways: sung, played on an instrument, written, or illustrated with puppets or other props often used in the Orff approach. Likewise, children can respond in similar ways. In addition, many of the percussion instruments used in the Orff process have factory available modifications, such as enlarged knobs, Velcro straps, or rubber wraps on the handle of mallets. In order to adhere to the goals of UDL, these modifications should be available on all the instruments used, thus making them truly universal. The barred instruments used in the Orff process often present challenges for students with impulse control, or those with physical disabilities who cannot manipulate a mallet. Teachers

25 who are well versed in the principles of UDL will offer students options to play with peer partners, to touch or point to bars, to remove bars, to color-code bars, or to respond on a totally different instrument. Instruments are available to children tactilely, visually, auditorily, or kinesthetically. Fortunately, intrinsic to the Orff process is multiple means of responding to music. For students with social or communication disabilities, the Orff process offers opportunities for practicing skills that promote peer integration. Orff ensembles that are popular in many schools give students the possibility to interact with their classmates, to participate in a valued group, and to practice social skills that are necessary to establishing relationships with others. Orff ensembles also offer students a variety of ways to communicate with fellow ensemble members: through call and response pieces, improvisation, and imitation, all of which require attention and concentration, and are flexible enough to incorporate multiple means of presentation and response. Even for children who may not be able communicate verbally with their peers, the instruments provide an intermediary or a conduit to others. A number of authors have cited several premises when implementing the Orff process with children of differing abilities, all of which promote the principles of UDL: that materials must be appropriate to the abilities of the students, that flexibility is important to the process, that material should be conducive to risk taking and open-ended, and that the environment should be positive and nonthreatening (Bitcon, 2000, Colwell, Pehotsky, Gillmeister, & Wolrich, 2008). These characteristics of the approach are motivating to students, and to the teachers who must meet the needs of students with a wide range of abilities. It is not surprising then that Orff has been used in a variety of therapeutic settings (Colwell, Pehotsky, Gillmeister, & Woolrich, 2008).

26 Application of UDL to the Kodly Approach The underlying philosophy of Zoltn Kodly, that music belongs to everyone, is certainly appropriate to the inclusion of students with disabilities. Kodly maintained that everyone has a right to music, not just the talented (Campbell & Scott-Kasner, 1995). Kodly actively promoted the musical education of all Hungarian citizens. He believed in using the natural music of childrenthe folk songs of Hungryand in using the fundamentals of childrens playsinging and moving. Like Orff, he believed that music could become a part of every child through singing and moving. Unlike Orff, he believed these musical behaviors were strictly prerequisites to instrumental play, and that the natural instrument of the child was the voice. The major components of the Kodly approach include a system of rhythm duration symbols, the movable do system, and a series of hand signs that aid in the development of tonal relationships (Mark & Madura, 2013). His materials include chants, singing games, and simple nursery songs. Kodly believed the songs used in his approach, songs of a childs own linguistic heritage, constitute a musical mother-tongue. The natural rhythm of the childs language facilitates music learning and enculturation. Kodly also believed that folk songs were ideal for early musical training because of their short forms, pentatonic style, and simplistic language. The melodies of these songs are used to teach solfge, intervallic identification and other concepts (Landis & Carder, 1972). Kodly collected and published Hungarian folk music, including many childrens songs. Much of this literature was used in his approach (Brownell, Frego, Kwak, & Rayburn, 2008; Choksy, 1981; Mark & Madura, 2013). Kodly also believed that only music of quality, whether

27 folk songs or classically composed, should be used in the education of children (Choksy, 1981). To that end, he also composed many classical pieces as well as childrens songs. Kodly viewed his approach to be a music education method that should be delivered in a systematic, predetermined manner (Mark & Madura, 2013); thus, making its application to UDL principles somewhat more challenging than Dalcroze or Orff approaches. However, the moving and singing activities used in both Orff and Kodly allow for some flexibility in content delivery and in acceptable student responses. Like the Dalcroze and Orff approaches, bodily movement is an integral part of Kodly approach. As stated earlier, when options are given for possible movements, even this musical behavior can be accessible to students with mobility disabilities and those who use wheelchairs. The Kodly approach, the elements of which are singing, folk music, and movable do solmization, all present a challenge to any student who has difficulty with verbal or oral skills and with reading. Fortunately, contemporary technologies provide many sources to interpret print to sound, or to manipulate pitches manually on iPads or computers. A student might also respond with hand signs to produce what might ordinarily be sung. Technologies also have options for enhancing reading material by enlarging it, translating it to different languages, converting it to Braille, providing illustrations, or through hot links, defining any unknown term or word. In addition, iPad apps are available to tutor students in solfge, such as Simple Solfge and SolfgeNoteReading. There are other computer program apps that are available to tutor students in rhythm reading. Furthermore, computers and iPads have many built-in accessibility features which allow for enlarging the screen, highlighting text or symbols, converting text-tospeech, changing the volume, changing speech rate or music tempo, and providing tactile shortcuts. All of these technological features build flexibility directly into the curriculum; thus,

28 allowing embedded, flexible supports for student learners. Universal design engineers and educators interested in providing inclusive curricula are constantly researching and developing other similar responsive tools and materials. Fortunately for students with disabilities and those with other learner differences, the Kodly approach emphasizes that innate musicality is present in all children and should be developed to the fullest extent possible. Kodlys belief that the great music of the world should be available and accessible to all children provides an inclusive curricular attribute for second language learners or any child for whom language is a challenge. Finally, Kodly also believed that music is necessary for human development; thus, supporting the inclusion of music for all children. These Kodly beliefs align well with the concept of universality, the major tenet and impetus for the development of Universal Design for Learning. Conclusions Any curriculum can be presented in ways that promote the learning of all children. The principles of UDL can be applied to all music curricula, provided music educators are aware of and understand the principles of UDL, are conscious of the many learner differences represented in their classrooms, and are aware of all the resources available to make a curriculum truly universal. Spooner, Baker, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Browder, & Harris (2007) found that teachers who received training in UDL were better able to design lesson plans that included all students. The ability to design inclusive lessons is a prerequisite skill to implementation; however, teachers must also be motivated to prepare the materials and carry out the lessons. All music educators would do well to adopt Kodlys belief that music belongs to everyone. It is the responsibility of music educators to ensure that music is accessible to all students.

29 References Abeles, H. F., Hoffer, C. R., & Klotman, R. H. (1994). Foundations of music education. New York, NY: Schirmer Books. Adamek, M. A., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in special education. Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Ayala, E., Brace, H. J., & Stahl, S. (2010). Preparing teachers to implement universal design. In T. E. Hall, A. Meyer, and D. H. Rose (Eds). Universal design for learning in the classroom (pp. 135-152). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Bacon, D. (1970, April-May). Can the Kodly method be successfully adapted here? Musart, 22, 14. Bitcon, C. (2000). Alike and different: The clinical and educational uses of Orff Schulwerk (2nd ed.). Gilsum, NH: Barcelona. Bowe, F. (2000). Universal design in education: Teaching nontraditional students. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. Brownell, M. D., Frego, D., Ewak, E., Rayburn, A. M. (2008). The Kodly approach to music therapy. In A. A. Darrow (Ed.). Introduction to approaches in music therapy (pp. 37-46). Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Burgstahler, S. (2007a). Universal designing of instruction (UDI): Definition, principles guidelines, and examples. Seattle: DO-IT, University of Washington. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://www.washington.edu/doit//Brochures/Academics/instruction.html Burgstahler, S. (2007b). Equal access: Universal design of instruction. Seattle: DO-IT, University of Washington. Retrieved May 15, 2013, from http://www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/equal_access_udi.html

30 Burgstahler, S., & Cory, R. C. (Eds.). (2009). Universal Design in Higher Education. Available from http//www.washington.edu/doit/ CAST (2011). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Rose. Retrieved May 15, 2013, from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines/downloads Choksy, L. (1981). The Kodly context: Creating an environment for musical learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Choksy, L., Abramson, R. M., Gillespie, A. E., Woods, D., & York, F. (2001). Teaching music in the twenty-first century (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Colwell, C., Pehotsky, C., Gillmeister, G., & Woorich, J. (2008). The Orff approach to music therapy. In A. A. Darrow (Ed.). Introduction to approaches in music therapy (pp. 11-24). Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) (2005). Universal design for learning: A guide for teachers and education professionals. Arlington, VA: The author. Darrow, A. A. (2008). Introduction to approaches in music therapy. Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Edyburn, D., & Gardner, J. E. (2009). Readings in special education technology: Universal design for learning [Special issue]. Journal of Special Education Technology, Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children. Frego, D., Liston, R., Hama, M., & Gillmeister, G. (2008). The Dalcroze approach to music therapy. In A. A. Darrow (Ed.). Introduction to approaches in music therapy (pp. 25-36). Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Glass, D., Blair, K., & Ganley, P. (2012). Universal design for learning and the arts option. In

31 T. E. Hall, A. Meyer, and D. H. Rose (Eds). Universal design for learning in the classroom (pp. 106-119). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Hall, T. E., Meyer, A. & Rose, D. H. (2012). Universal Design for Learning in the classroom: Practical applications. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Hoffer, C. R. (1991). Teaching music in the secondary schools. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. IDEA, (1997). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (1997). Institute for Human Centered Design (2013). Retrieved May 15, 2013 from http://www.humancentereddesign.org. Jackson, R., Harper, K., & Jackson, J. (2001). Effective teaching practices and the barriers limiting their use in accessing the curriculum: A review of recent literature. Peabody, MA: CAST. Landis, B. & Carder, P. (1972). The eclectic curriculum in American music education: Contributions of Dalcroze, Kodaly, and Orff. Reston, VA: MENC. Lieberman, L., Lytle, R., & Clarcq, J. (2008). Getting it Right from the Start: Employing the Universal Design for Learning Approach to Your Curriculum. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 79(2), 32-39. Mark, M. & Madura, P. (2013). Contemporary music education (4th ed). New York, NY: Cengage. McCord, K. A., & Watts, E. H. (2010). Music educators involvement in the individuals education program process and their knowledge of assistive technology. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 28(2), 79-85. Nielsen, K. (2012). A disability history of the United States. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Orff, C. (1966). Orff-Schulwerk: Past and future. In MENC (Ed.). Perspectives in Music

32 Education (p. 386). Washington, DC: Music Educators National Conference. Rose, D. & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Rose, D. H., Meyer, A., & Hitchcock, C. (Eds.). (2006). A practical reader in universal design for learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Shehan Campbell, P. & Scott-Kassner, C. (2002). Music in childhood: From preschool through the elementary grades (2nd ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group. Saxon, W. (1998). Ronald L. Mace [Obituary]. (1998, July 13). The New York Times, B9. Spooner, F., Baker, J. N., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Browder, D., & Harris, A. (2007). Effects of training in universal design for learning (UDL) on lesson plan development. Remedial and Special Education 28(2): 108-116(9).