My students and I discuss goals a lot. We talk about what they need to learn and why they need to learn it. We break goals down into steps and talk about how to monitor progress along the way. We have discussions about goals as a whole class, in small groups, and I also meet with individuals as students may be taking different pathways toward meeting the same goal. Over time, through a gradual release approach, students take on a more active role in setting and managing their goals. Goal setting isn’t only important for my students to help them become expert learners; it is also an essential part of the process of improving my practice. In addition to managing the learning goals of every student in my classroom and facilitating a learning environment that equips every student to meet them, I continually set goals for myself as I embark on the journey of implementing UDL.

I have found it helpful to set manageable goals, reflect on progress, and adjust along the way as needed. I select one or two goals early in the school year and document them in my Professional Growth Plan (PGP). When selecting goals, I consider the CAST UDL Guidelines and the areas in which I can adjust my practice to implement UDL more fully. Depending on the requirements of your organization’s PGP, documenting goals can make one consider how UDL implementation aligns with school or district improvement plans, what resources are needed, and the observable criteria to determine whether or not goals have been met. When a goal has been met, it could be replaced by a different goal, or one could choose to develop the goal more fully and set new criteria to increase proficiency within a given area.

As teachers learn to set goals, create and follow a plan to meet goals, and reflect on progress along the way, we can also intentionally design lessons that model and teach these skills to our students, and in doing so we are implementing practices that are based in the UDL Guidelines. Following is an example of how a single checkpoint in the UDL Guidelines (8.1 – Heighten salience of goals and objectives) can be used to guide the implementation of UDL in an elementary school classroom:

_______________________________________________________________________________

Sample goal and action plan - phase 1
 
Goal: Increase student awareness of curriculum outcomes by heightening the salience of goals and objectives throughout instruction (CAST UDL Guidelines – checkpoint 8.1)
 
Action plan:

•  Display learning goals in student-friendly language and refer to them often 
• Discuss goals with students in whole class, small group, and individual contexts and document student progress
• Offer opportunities for students to reflect on progress toward meeting goals 

Resources needed:

• Time to collaborate with grade level team to develop bank of goals written in student-friendly language in all subject areas 
• Area in classroom to display learning goals in student-friendly language
• Template for conferring notes to document student progress

Evidence of achievement: 

• Learning goals in student-friendly language are visible in the classroom 
• Students can locate and explain posted goals
• Students can discuss personal goals and reflect on their progress 
• Conferring notes reflect discussions with students about progress and next steps

 _______________________________________________________________________________
 
Reflecting on progress toward meeting a goal is an ongoing process. Upon having met this goal, new goals could be added to continue to develop this checkpoint if desired. In addition to continuing the practice of displaying learning goals in the classroom in student-friendly language, one could further engage students by having them state the goals aloud at the beginning of the lesson. This can be executed in different ways. In my elementary classroom it is a class job and students take turns to be the “goal reader” each day. One could further heighten the salience of goals and objectives throughout a lesson by having goals visible on activities and assessments. We can also intentionally create opportunities for students to reflect on their progress toward meeting goals (with questions designed to encourage student reflection for guided discussions, interviews, and exit slips). Following is an example of a possible next phase of implementing this checkpoint:

_______________________________________________________________________________

Sample goal and action plan - phase 2
 
Goal: Continue to increase student awareness of curriculum outcomes by heightening the salience of goals and objectives throughout instruction (CAST UDL Guidelines – checkpoint 8.1)
 
Action plan:

•  Display learning goals in student-friendly language and have students refer to it often 
• Display learning goals in student-friendly language on activities and assessments
• Offer opportunities for students to reflect on progress toward meeting goals through the use of guiding questions/prompts (i.e. pair and share, exit slips, interviews) 

Resources needed:

•  Area in classroom to display learning goals in student-friendly language 
• Time to edit documents (activities, assessments) to include learning goals
• Time to collaborate with colleagues to create a bank of questions/prompts that guide student reflection toward meeting goals in a variety of contexts

Evidence of achievement:

• Learning goals in student-friendly language are visible in the classroom. Students can locate and read the goal at the beginning of a lesson 
• Learning goals are visible on activities and assessments
• Students discuss progress toward meeting goals with teacher and peers, and record written reflections on exit slips 
• Guiding questions/ prompts are in use

 _______________________________________________________________________________

One could continue to dive deeper into this checkpoint. Other practices that can heighten the salience of goals and objectives throughout instruction may include but are not limited to, teaching students to formulate goals, how to break down larger goals into smaller goals, involving students in co-constructing criteria for assignments, presenting rubrics to students before completing work so they are made aware of the expectations in advance, or involving students in the creation of rubrics. One could opt to tackle this checkpoint in its entirety or move onto another area of interest and return to this one when ready to develop it more fully. It really depends on the interests of each educator and their desired approach to implementing UDL. 

By Jana Nicol

"All students are 'our' students" is a recurring theme in Dr. Elizabeth Stein's Elevating Co-teaching with Universal Design for Learning - Revised and Expanded Edition (CAST, 2023). What is powerful about this idea is the shift in mindset that is needed to help co-teaching relationships meet their fullest potential and create truly inclusive educational environments guided by the UDL framework. But before we can describe why this is significant and what that could look like, it might be helpful to begin with a working definition of co-teaching. 

What is co-teaching?
Co-teaching has traditionally been defined as having one general educator and one special educator teaming up to plan and deliver instruction (Cook & Friend, 1995). Although this has changed in recent years, and co-teaching now includes any two teachers working together to plan, organize, deliver, and assess students within a shared space (Bacharach, Heck, & Dahlberg, 2007).

I'd like to take this a step further and suggest that co-teaching can include more than two teachers. I have experienced success co-teaching with small groups and professional learning communities. Here are just a few possibilities for co-teaching partnerships:

• Subject area teams 
• Grade level teams
• Team up with a teacher in the grade just above or just below the grade you teach - this works well in smaller schools where there may only be a single class for each grade
• All of the above (or any other team) can be supported by co-teachers from resource or special education, administrators, and any other educator who participates in the planning and delivery of instruction to students.

General and special educator co-teaching relationships are a reflection of beliefs about inclusion
Dr. Stein focuses mainly on co-teaching pairings between general and special educators throughout this text. The co-teaching relationship can be challenging for any two educators (e.g. two general education teachers, like a grade level team), but there are some unique challenges that present themselves when the pairing includes a teacher from general education with a teacher from resource or special education, which are well explored throughout Elevating Co-teaching. 

One particular challenge faced by co-teaching pairings of general and special education teachers is an incomplete understanding of the role of each partner plays in the co-teaching relationship (and arguably with facilitating inclusion within the education system itself, but that's a whole other entry). Everyone's prior experiences helps form their expectations and it can be frustrating when educators aren't on the same page about inclusion and/or how to execute a co-teaching relationship. I have been in co-teaching relationships with teachers as a general educator and as a resource teacher, and I have observed such frustration from time to time. It usually results in a difference of opinion about what inclusion looks like, and what the purpose of co-teaching is: is it to increase student engagement and achievement for all students in an inclusive setting, or is it an opportunity for the same few students to get some extra help?

Dr. Stein shares a scenario in which a group of general educators, each specializing in a different subject area, struggled to form effective co-teaching partnerships with a special educator who was new to their school. The group expected the special educator to take on a 'helper' role in 'their' classroom, to focus on 'her' students (those they perceived as 'special education students'), and not to use up any of 'their' instructional time. In contrast, the special educator expected to be included in the planning and delivery of instruction to all students, as her expertise could enhance the team's ability to address learner variability, which is not limited to those who may be seen as 'special education students'. It's little wonder this group was experiencing frustration with their co-teaching partnerships. School leadership committed to helping create a shared vision for co-teaching among staff. 

Leadership is key! Co-teaching to build a shared vision of inclusive learning environments
Leadership in systems, districts, and schools are instrumental in building capacity in teachers to form effective co-teaching relationships that are centred on increasing inclusion and student achievement. It is vital to communicate the roles and expectations for all co-teachers, not only to help avoid frustration but also to learn how to use co-teaching more effectively in order to improve achievement for all students in an inclusive educational setting. Having a better understanding of roles of educators will also help everyone develop a better appreciation for the expertise their partner brings to the co-teaching partnership, which will hopefully result in building trust and mutual respect, which in turn will result in more productive co-teaching relationships! 

I think this begins with the idea that "all students are 'our' students". To me, it's foundational to real inclusion. There are only our students. Not 'regular students', 'special education students', 'resource students', 'IEP students' or any variation of segregating and othering students. If we embrace variability and acknowledge that it exists among all learners, then what is the purpose of choosing a group of students to consistently leave out or treat differently? If we include students in the classroom but deny them access to curriculum, that's not inclusion, that's geography. Leadership can initiate and continue this discussion among staff, and can also provide professional learning for teachers in co-teaching and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) to support teachers in efforts to elevate their co-teaching relationships.

​Teachers also need proper supports to effectively implement co-teaching, for example, they need to be given time to work with the co-teacher that doesn't interfere with existing preparation time. Building time into the workday for co-teachers to review student data and plan next steps would not only reduce frustrations, it would communicate that this practice is important. It is valued. It is necessary - thus increasing teacher buy-in and engagement. And if it is important, valued, and necessary, then it shouldn't be dependent on unpaid overtime. 

The value in a co-teaching relationship guided by the UDL framework is that more teachers can add their expertise into the planning and delivery of curriculum to reach all students where they are. Elevating Co-teaching with Universal Design for Learning includes a lot of practical examples of how to implement the CAST UDL Guidelines in the classroom and would be an excellent subject for a book study for schools or teams of teachers who wish to adopt a co-teaching model, or to elevate co-teaching within their school.