Inclusive Education Does Not Mean Lowering the Bar

Jul 06 2025 By Figen Sekin Education 0 Comments

Inclusive education is too often mistaken for lowering academic standards, but it actually ensures equitable opportunities for all students – regardless of abilities, backgrounds, or needs – while upholding rigorous expectations.

By leveraging Universal Design for Learning (UDL), educators can create flexible, accessible learning environments that support diverse learners without compromising academic integrity.

Developed by CAST, UDL is a neuroscience-based framework that removes learning barriers through three core principles:

• multiple means of engagement
• representation
• action/expression.

In this article I will debunk the myth that inclusion sacrifices rigor, detail UDL principles in the context of inclusive education. I’ll also provide practical implementation tips, and present real-world examples of success and failure, supported by data in tables.

Why Inclusive Education Doesn’t Mean Lowering the Bar

Inclusive education is about providing all students – those with and without disabilities – access to the same high-quality, standards-based curriculum through tailored supports and equitable opportunities. Far from diluting expectations, it emphasizes high academic standards by adapting teaching methods, materials, and environments to meet diverse needs.

UDL is central to this approach, offering a blueprint for creating flexible learning experiences that uphold rigor. And here’s why inclusive education, grounded in UDL, maintains high standards:

• High Expectations Drive Growth: Setting high expectations for all students, including those with disabilities, leads to better academic outcomes. UDL’s engagement principle motivates students to tackle challenging material through personalized, interest-driven approaches.
• Differentiated Instruction Maintains Rigor: Teachers deliver the same content using varied strategies (e.g., visual aids, hands-on activities), ensuring all students engage with grade-level material. UDL’s representation principle ensures accessibility without compromising complexity.
• Equity, Not Equality: Inclusion provides tailored accommodations (e.g., extra time, assistive technology) to level the playing field, enabling all students to strive for the same goals. UDL’s action/expression principle allows diverse ways to demonstrate mastery.
• Social and Academic Benefits: Inclusive settings foster peer learning, where diverse students challenge and support each other, enhancing engagement and achievement. UDL’s engagement principle promotes collaborative, motivating environments.
• UDL Ensures Accessibility and Challenge: By designing curricula with UDL principles, educators ensure all students access rigorous content in ways that suit their needs, removing barriers without lowering benchmarks.

Understanding UDL Principles in Inclusive Education

UDL, developed by CAST, is a framework that ensures inclusive education is accessible, engaging, and rigorous for all learners. It is based on three principles that address the variability in how students learn, ensuring equitable access to high standards in inclusive classrooms.

1. Multiple Means of Engagement

• Definition: This principle focuses on motivating and sustaining student interest by offering varied ways to engage with learning, recognizing differences in curiosity, effort, and persistence.
• Application in Inclusive Education: In inclusive classrooms, students with disabilities, language barriers, or diverse backgrounds may disengage if teaching is rigid. Engagement ensures motivation to tackle rigorous material. For example, offering topic choices (e.g., a student with autism researching ancient technology for a history project) or fostering peer collaboration, as in Spain’s Interactive Groups, aligns with grade-level standards.
• Impact: Engagement ensures all students, including those with disabilities, are motivated to meet high expectations, preventing disengagement that could lead to lowered standards.

2. Multiple Means of Representation

• Definition: This principle emphasizes presenting information in varied formats (e.g., text, audio, visuals) to ensure accessibility for learners with sensory, cognitive, or linguistic differences.
• Application in Inclusive Education: Students with disabilities (e.g., visual impairments, dyslexia) need alternative ways to access grade-level content. For instance, a science lesson on ecosystems might include videos, diagrams, and tactile models, ensuring all students engage with complex material.
• Impact: Representation prevents the need for simplified curricula, maintaining rigor by making content accessible, as seen in Brazil’s use of braille and audio materials.

3. Multiple Means of Action and Expression

• Definition: This principle allows students to demonstrate knowledge in varied ways (e.g., oral, written, creative projects), accommodating differences in physical, cognitive, or communication abilities.
• Application in Inclusive Education: Traditional assessments (e.g., written tests) may disadvantage some students, even if they understand the material. Flexible options, like oral reports or projects, allow students to show mastery of rigorous content, as in Canadian UDL-based schools.
• Impact: Flexible expression ensures students are evaluated on their understanding, not their ability to navigate inaccessible formats, upholding high standards.

UDL principles ensure inclusive education provides equitable access to rigorous curricula, fostering motivation and enabling all students to demonstrate mastery without lowering expectations.

Tips for Implementing Inclusive Education with UDL Principles

To create inclusive classrooms that uphold high standards, educators can integrate UDL principles with practical strategies. Below are actionable tips, each aligned with UDL:

• Use Flexible Grouping (Engagement)
  • Group students by skill, interest, or learning style for tasks, ensuring collaborative rigor. For example, pair students with varying abilities to solve math problems, fostering peer support. 
  • UDL Alignment: Enhances engagement by tapping into interests and promoting collaboration.
• Incorporate UDL in Lesson Design (All Principles)
  • Offer multiple ways to engage (e.g., videos, discussions), represent content (e.g., text, audio, visuals), and express knowledge (e.g., essays, presentations). For instance, a science lesson might include videos and hands-on experiments. 
  • UDL Alignment: Applies all three principles for accessibility and rigor.
• Provide Scaffolding (Representation)
  • Break tasks into manageable steps with supports like graphic organizers. For example, provide a writing template for students with dyslexia to meet essay standards. 
  • UDL Alignment: Supports representation by presenting information accessibly.
• Leverage Assistive Technology (Representation, Expression)
  • Use tools like text-to-speech or speech-to-text to access and express rigorous content. For example, a student with visual impairments uses screen readers for advanced literature. 
  • UDL Alignment: Enhances representation and expression for equitable access.
• Set Clear, Individualized Goals (Engagement)
  • Use IEPs to align supports with high expectations, such as a student with autism mastering algebra via visual aids. 
  • UDL Alignment: Supports engagement through motivating, tailored goals.
• Train Teachers in UDL Practices (All Principles)
  • Provide professional development on UDL and differentiation to design inclusive lessons. 
  • UDL Alignment: Equips educators to apply all principles effectively.
• Foster Peer Collaboration (Engagement)
  • Encourage cooperative learning, as in Spain’s Interactive Groups, where diverse students work on challenging tasks. 
  • UDL Alignment: Enhances engagement through peer support.
• Monitor and Adjust (Engagement, Expression)
  • Assess progress with UDL-aligned methods (e.g., oral exams, projects) and adjust strategies to maintain challenge. 
  • UDL Alignment: Supports engagement and expression through flexible assessments.

Examples Supporting Inclusive Education with UDL Principles

The following examples, supported by data, show how UDL-aligned inclusive education maintains high standards.

1. Collaborative Team Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms (United States)

• Context: U.S. schools under IDEA use co-teaching, pairing general and special education teachers to deliver standards-based instruction. 
• Evidence: Hanushek et al. (2002) found students with disabilities in inclusive settings with UDL supports (e.g., visual aids, extended time) outperformed those in segregated settings in reading (65% vs. 40% proficiency) and math (60% vs. 35%), with higher graduation rates (Table 1). 
• UDL Alignment:
  • Engagement: Collaborative teaching fosters motivation. 
  • Representation: Multimodal content (e.g., videos, adapted texts) ensures accessibility. 
  • Expression: Varied assessments (e.g., oral responses) maintain rigor.
• Example: A student with a learning disability passed AP Calculus using adapted texts and assistive technology, meeting high standards.

Academic Outcomes in Inclusive vs. Segregated U.S. Classrooms
Source: Hanushek et al. (2002), National Council on Disability (2018).

Setting	Student Group	Reading Proficiency (%)	Math Proficiency (%)	Graduation Rate (%)
Inclusive (>80% in general ed.)	Students with Disabilities	65%	60%	85%
Segregated Special Education	Students with Disabilities	40%	35%	60%
Inclusive	Non-Disabled Students	70%	68%	90%

Notes: Inclusive settings used UDL strategies, maintaining rigor; segregated settings lowered expectations, reducing outcomes.

2. UDL Implementation (Global)

• Context: Schools worldwide adopting UDL provide flexible learning experiences. 
• Evidence: The National Center on UDL reports that UDL-based schools see 70% of students with disabilities meeting state standards, compared to 45% in non-UDL settings (Table 6). 
• UDL Alignment:
  • Engagement: Topic choices motivate learners. 
  • Representation: Multiple formats (e.g., text, audio) ensure access. 
  • Expression: Varied assessments (e.g., projects) demonstrate mastery.
• Example: A Canadian school using UDL saw above-average provincial test scores for all students, including those with disabilities.

UDL Implementation Outcomes (Global)
Source: National Center on Universal Design for Learning.

School Type	UDL Implementation	% Meeting State Standards (All Students)	% Meeting State Standards (Students with Disabilities)
UDL-Based	High	75%	70%
Non-UDL	Low/None	60%	45%

Notes: UDL ensures accessibility and rigor, improving outcomes for diverse learners.

3. Inclusive Education in Brazil (Policy Shift)

• Context: Brazil increased mainstreaming of students with disabilities from 23% in 2003 to 81% in 2015, emphasizing accessibility and teacher training. 
• Evidence: The 2020 GEM Report notes a 15% improvement in literacy and math scores and a reduced dropout rate (Table 2). 
• UDL Alignment:
  • Engagement: Peer interactions foster motivation. 
  • Representation: Accessible materials (e.g., braille) deliver rigorous content. 
  • Expression: Flexible assessments (e.g., oral presentations) maintain standards.
• Example: In São Paulo, students with sensory disabilities used assistive technology to achieve comparable science test scores.

Brazil’s Inclusive Education Policy Impact (2003–2015)
Source: UNESCO 2020 GEM Report.

Year	% in Mainstream Schools	Test Score Improvement	Dropout Rate (%)
2003	23%	Baseline	30%
2015	81%	+15% (Literacy/Math)	15%

Notes: UDL-aligned supports improved access to national curriculum standards.

4. Interactive Group Learning (Spain)

• Context: Spanish schools use Interactive Groups (IGs), where heterogeneous groups work on academic tasks with volunteer support. 
• Evidence: Molina Roldán et al. (2021) found 20% literacy and 18% math gains for students with SEN, with high engagement (Table 3). 
• UDL Alignment:
  • Engagement: Peer collaboration motivates students. 
  • Representation: Diverse methods (e.g., discussions, visuals) ensure access. 
  • Expression: Group projects allow varied demonstrations of mastery.
• Example: A Barcelona school reported grade-level math proficiency for students with SEN.

Interactive Groups in Spain: Academic Outcomes
Source: Molina Roldán et al. (2021).

Group Type	Student Type	Literacy Improvement (%)	Math Improvement (%)	Engagement Score
Interactive Groups	Students with SEN	20%	18%	8.5/10
Interactive Groups	Non-SEN	22%	20%	8.7/10
Traditional Classrooms	Students with SEN	10%	8%	6.0/10

Notes: UDL-aligned collaboration improved outcomes for all students.

Examples Where Not Respecting UDL Principles Leads to Lower Academic Performance

Failing to implement UDL-aligned inclusive practices results in lower academic outcomes due to reduced access to rigorous curricula.

1. Segregated Special Education Classes (United States)

• Some U.S. schools place students with disabilities in separate classes with simplified curricula. Hanushek et al. (2002) and the National Council on Disability (2018) report lower proficiency (40% reading, 35% math) and graduation rates (60%) compared to inclusive settings. 
• UDL Misalignment:
  • Engagement: Isolation reduces motivation. 
  • Representation: Simplified curricula lack diverse formats. 
  • Expression: Rigid assessments limit mastery demonstration.
• As a result these segregated students with intellectual disabilities have lower test scores and college readiness.

2. Lack of Teacher Training (Low- and Middle-Income Countries)

• Untrained teachers in countries like Uganda fail to use UDL strategies, leading to exclusion. The Disabilities Inclusive Education Guide (2018) notes that only 16% of students with disabilities met literacy benchmarks, with an 84% dropout rate. 
• UDL Misalignment:
  • Engagement: One-size-fits-all methods reduce motivation. 
  • Representation: Limited formats exclude diverse learners. 
  • Expression: Inflexible assessments prevent mastery demonstration.
• The untrained teachers excluded students with disabilities, causing academic disengagement.

Teacher Training Impact in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Source: Disabilities Inclusive Education Systems and Policies Guide (2018).

Country Example	Teacher Training Level	% Meeting Literacy Benchmarks	Dropout Rate (%)
Uganda	Minimal/No Training	16%	84%
Brazil (Trained)	High (UDL-Informed)	70%	15%

Notes: UDL training improves outcomes; lack of training leads to exclusion.

3. Inflexible Assessment Practices (Global)

• Traditional assessments penalize students with disabilities who cannot use conventional formats. The 2020 GEM Report and a 2023 study in the International Journal of English for Academic Purposes show flexible assessments yield 85% of potential scores for students with disabilities, versus 50% with inflexible methods (Table 4). 
• UDL Misalignment:
  • Engagement: Rigid assessments discourage effort. 
  • Representation: Limited content delivery restricts access. 
  • Expression: Single-mode tests exclude diverse learners.
• In this case, students with dyslexia scored below potential due to lack of text-to-speech accommodations.

Impact of Inflexible Assessments (Global)
Source: UNESCO 2020 GEM Report, International Journal of English for Academic Purposes (2023).

Assessment Type	Student Group	Average Test Score (% of potential)	Disengagement Rate (%)
Flexible (UDL)	Students with Disabilities	85%	10%
Inflexible	Students with Disabilities	50%	40%
Flexible (UDL)	Non-Disabled Students	90%	5%

Notes: UDL-aligned assessments ensure equitable demonstration of mastery.

4. Segregation in Charter Schools and Academies (United States and United Kingdom)

• Some charter schools and academies segregate students with disabilities into less rigorous programs. Dudley-Marling and Baker (2012) and the National Council on Disability (2018) note lower achievement in segregated settings. 
• UDL Misalignment:
  • Engagement: Isolation reduces motivation. 
  • Representation: Simplified curricula lack diversity. 
  • Expression: Limited assessments restrict mastery.
• As a result students with autism in “resource rooms” have lower graduation rates.

Inclusive Education and UDL Go Hand in Hand

Inclusive education, grounded in UDL principles, upholds high academic standards by ensuring all students access rigorous curricula through flexible, equitable strategies. UDL’s principles of engagement, representation, and action/expression foster motivation, accessibility, and diverse demonstrations of mastery, as seen in U.S. co-teaching, Brazil’s policy shift, and Spain’s Interactive Groups.

Conversely, non-UDL practices – segregation, untrained teachers, and inflexible assessments – lead to lower outcomes, as evidenced in U.S. and U.K. charter schools, Uganda, and rigid testing environments.

The data you can find in the tables in this article clearly show that UDL-aligned inclusion drives academic excellence, ensuring no student is left behind while maintaining high expectations.