Indeed, this approach has driven some of the greatest disruptions in the consumer marketplace, such as those caused by Uber and Amazon Prime. Small behavioral changes enabled by technology have contributed to the success of each.
I don't think we should mention these without raising some concerns about the ethical nature of these business models...
First, the nature of customer experiences is unlike anything that could have been predicted. Increasingly, customers can’t describe the experience they want to have, let alone begin to imagine what they expect in the future. Second, completely new competitive models have entered the picture, disrupting old rules of engagement. These developments make it imperative to understand human behaviors in new ways.
Okay, so this isn't HCD here. Central to HCD is understanding the experiences of the user... and if the user doesn't know what they want... I guess I'm thinking of things like the iPad - how many us knew we wanted one, until it was invented, right?
With a deeper understanding of what makes people tick, technology and business leaders can make better technology decisions and create more meaningful digital transformations, engaging experiences, and valuable disruptions.
But isn't this just human centred design? Is that really something new?
In fact, according to Gallup Research, companies that apply the principles of behavioral economics outperform their peers by 85 percent in sales growth and more than 25 percent in gross margin. Nonetheless, many organizations still take a technology-first approach.
This is very interesting in light of Tim Fawn's work on entangled pedagogy. I agree about the dangers of a technology first approach, but when it comes to learning, is the answer always people first? Or is it both, together?
When technology is more TECHNICAL and less usable, this means the level of support given is primarily going to be of that nature – to fill that support need. When technology is more usable, intuitive and self-describing, users are able to figure it out on their own much easier, meaning the support practices that involve “let me show you how to click the correct button” fades away, leaving support staff and resources to focus on other things.
Yes, I absolutely agree with this part. So true. It's kind of 'don't make me think' territory, isn't it?
To start, if the technology being used is antiquated, then we can assume it’s pretty challenging to use.
Not trying to be particularly difficult here, but I'm not sure this follows. Some technologies might be 'antiquated' - but it doesn't mean it's hard to use. I'm thinking pretty broadly about technology here - e.g. wheelie chairs, rather than 'computer' technology, but...
What’s true, is that none of us can teach online without help. We always need dedicated and expert support staff to help us with a variety of needs, based upon our experience, ideas, time constraints and the availability of learning technologies.
I think it's more than that (although I agree with this statement). I think we teach better when we teach as a group. It's more creative, more inclusive, more contextual. A polyphonic learning design, right? The challenge is making this work less isolating, more collaborative, and finding the resources that allow for that.
Flash forward to 2021 and many of us who have been teaching online for a long time, and those of us who have been thrown into teaching online as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic have recognised the opportunities and challenges that come with teaching with technology.
I know I will sound like a broken record here, but I think this point is worth repeating. Lots of educators were already well experienced online practitioners before COVID19. So, while teaching online is unprecedented for many, it is by no means the case for everyone!
UDL is not just a premixed alcopop in a can, though perhaps the association with bad undergrad hangovers is why it has yet to take hold at Australian universities?
Ha ha! This is a very niche joke!
panic and reduction but with planning for hybridity and transformation.
Such an important point. The role of design - iterative, planned, intentional design - is crucial. ULD cannot be an afterthought.
It wasn’t until 2000 that UD properly established itself in digital education with Rose and Meyer’s book Teaching every student in the Digital Age : universal design for learning. Since then, UDL has become a familiar concept across North American institutions. More recently, whilst it is generally felt that the COVID crisis has improved awareness of accessibility, inclusion and supported wider UDL adoption, the pandemic also created and highlighted more barriers. In Australia, the ADCET was recently launched and partnered with the LX.lab inclusive practices team to support educators to teach in accessible ways at UTS.
Another interesting reflection - at least based on my own experience - is that UDL was often, initially, popular amongst teachers or educators with a focus on students will special or additional needs. In some ways, this is the exact opposite of what should be happening - as UDL is about designing for all, not making adaptations for differentiation...
Universal
As an aside, I've always wrestled with the term 'universal' in UDL - simply because it's not universal (as in applicable to all). Instead, it's applicable to as many as possible. I'm conscious that this might be an impossibility - it just seems like the wrong word.
Exploring UDL: design with everyone in mind
Welcome everyone to our reading for June. This month, we're going to focus on looking at UDL, as that's a hot topic in HE at the moment. It's not new, especially to those of us who've worked in school education - but I've never seen it gain traction as much as I think it should! This article by David Yeats (who might be joining us in the reading group) discusses the reasons for this - and more!
Professional learning communities have been, at least in theory, one staff development avenue used with various degrees of success in different contexts and at different levels of the education system.
I think this is a crucial point. I've worked in HE, corporate education and school education and only very rarely have these PLCs been anything more than a chore/ extra work for all to be involved. Sustainability has been a real issue too. I think people like the idea, but it needs to be carefully deployed so that it's integral - i.e. it saves people time, not adds to workload