Apply UDL principles to a university course

Context

A university or post-secondary instructor who wants to review the design of a course through the lens of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), to reduce access barriers for students with functional diversity —diagnosed or not— without creating parallel content tracks or lowering academic rigor.

Originally written for Chilean classrooms. References to specific Chilean legislation (Ley 21.091, Ley 19.628) have been adapted to generic institutional policy language. Apply your institution's accessibility or inclusion policy and applicable local law where referenced.

Paste first

Before opening the model, have ready:

• The course learning outcomes (CLOs) exactly as they appear in the official syllabus
• The course syllabus (or a summary: units, main methodologies, assessments)
• A functional description of the group: what barriers do you observe? (no names or individual diagnoses)
• Your institution's inclusion policy or reasonable accommodations protocol, if one exists
• Real constraints: delivery mode (in-person / hybrid / online), available technology, weekly contact hours

Privacy rule: Never paste names, student IDs, psychoeducational reports, disability certificates, or records from your disability services office. Describe observed difficulties in functional, group-level terms: "several students mentioned difficulty following long lectures," "two students formally requested reasonable accommodations." Your institution's data-privacy policy and applicable accessibility law protect this information.

Act as a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) specialist with experience in higher education. I'll share a course syllabus and I need you to analyze it under the three UDL principles — multiple means of representation, multiple means of action and expression, and multiple means of engagement — to identify barriers and propose concrete adjustments.

**Course information:**
- Institution: {{institution name, e.g.: State University, community college, professional school}}
- Program and level: {{program and year/semester, e.g.: "Social Work, third year"}}
- Course name: {{exact course name}}
- Delivery mode: {{in-person / hybrid / online}}
- Number of students: {{approximate enrollment}}
- Weekly workload: {{contact hours per week + expected independent study}}

**Course learning outcomes (CLOs):**
{{paste the exact CLOs from the official syllabus}}

**Syllabus description (units, methodologies, assessments):**
{{summary of the syllabus or paste the relevant sections}}

**Barriers observed in the group (no individual data):**
{{describe functionally what you observe — e.g., "several students report difficulty sustaining reading of long academic texts," "students rarely participate in whole-class discussion," "some have formally requested accommodations through the disability services office"}}

**Available resources:**
{{what you have: projector, LMS (Canvas, Moodle, Blackboard, etc.), extra tutoring time, access to captions, etc.}}

**What I need:**

1. A UDL diagnosis of the current syllabus: what concrete barriers does it present under each of the three principles? Be specific about the activities and assessments you identify.
2. For each UDL principle, two to three adjustments prioritized by impact, achievable within the current semester without rewriting the entire course.
3. A summary table with columns: UDL Principle | Identified barrier | Proposed adjustment | Estimated effort (low / medium / high) | Who benefits (all students / students with functional difficulties / both).
4. A recommendation for which adjustment to implement first if I can only do one this semester, with a pedagogical rationale.
5. A caution about which adjustment could be misread as "lowering standards" and how to communicate it to students to prevent that.

Don't give me definitions of UDL or a list of its principles — I already know them. I need specific analysis of this syllabus and adjustments I can implement next week.

Expected output

Real example (abridged):

Diagnosis (excerpt):
- Representation: 20–40 pages of weekly readings, some in a second language — single channel of access to content. No glossary or advance concept map.
- Action and expression: 50% of the grade from written exams; grading criteria opaque until after assessment.
- Engagement: participation only in whole-class discussion with 38 people; no intermediate space to process ideas before speaking.

Summary table (excerpt):
| UDL Principle | Barrier | Adjustment | Effort | Who benefits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Representation | No scaffolding before readings | Reading guides (1 page) with glossary and orienting questions | Medium | Both |
| Action and expression | No public grading criteria | Share rubrics before each assessment | Low | All |
| Engagement | Only whole-class discussion | Think-pair-share before opening to the full group | Low | All |

If you can only do one this semester: publish the rubrics before the next assessment. It acts on all three principles at once and takes 30 minutes to draft.

Watch out for

• UDL in higher education does not mean removing cognitive challenge: if the model suggests simplifying readings or shortening assessments without further argument, ask it to reformulate the adjustment maintaining the level of complexity and changing only the format or scaffolding.
• Your institution's accreditation body may require inclusion standards; the model might cite generic commitments that don't match your specific institution's policies. Verify any specific regulatory reference with your academic affairs office or disability services office.
• Do not paste the formal reasonable accommodations plan agreed with a specific student — that document is confidential. If you need to align UDL adjustments with an existing accommodation plan, describe the plan generically.

Suggested iteration

If the proposed adjustments are too general, ask: "The barrier that concerns me most is oral participation in class. Give me three concrete ways to offer multiple means of action and expression in that space, using only what I have available in an in-person classroom with no additional technology." If you want to bring the analysis down to a specific assessment, ask: "Now analyze only the final exam under the principle of multiple means of action and expression: how do I adjust it so it continues measuring the CLOs without written format being the only path to demonstration?"