INFORMATIKA DARSLARIDA UDL (UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING) VA INKLYUZIYA

UDL (UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING) AND INCLUSION IN COMPUTER SCIENCE LESSONS

Main Article Content

Abduraxmanova Ro'zixon Xasanboy qizi

Abstract

The article proposes a practical design model for inclusive teaching in computer science lessons by applying the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL). The three areas of UDL — multiple means of representation, multiple means of action and expression, and multiple means of engagement — are adapted to the content of computer science: algorithmization, coding, logic diagrams, visualization and project work. In the study, lesson scenarios are developed on the basis of a literature review, interviews with teachers and students, lesson observations and a UDL checklist. Examples of adaptation include web resources compatible with screen readers (NVDA/JAWS), keyboard navigation, colour-contrast standards, multimodal manuals (text–audio–video–code blocks), differentiated assignments and adaptive assessment rubrics. As a result, a UDL-based design checklist for computer science lessons, assessment criteria and sample scenarios are provided for teachers; they serve to widen access, participation and support for learning outcomes for students with various needs (visual and hearing limitations, reading difficulties, Uzbek as a second language). The article concludes with step-by-step recommendations on implementation, together with monitoring and reflection mechanisms.

Article Details

Section

13.00.00 – Pedagogical sciences

How to Cite

UDL (UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING) AND INCLUSION IN COMPUTER SCIENCE LESSONS. (2025). Research Focus International Scientific Journal, 4(8), 25-31. https://doi.org/10.66073/researchfocus.v4i8.1743

References

Mamarajabov, M. E., Toshtemirov, D. E., & Yuldashev, O‘. A. (2023). Informatika o‘qitish metodikasi. Toshkent: Bookmany print. ISBN 978-9943-9727-5-9.

Madatov, I. Y. (2024). Inklyuziv ta’lim: darslik. Samarqand davlat universiteti Kattaqo‘rg‘on filiali, 240 b.

Mavlonova, R. A. (tahr.). Umumiy pedagogika: darslik. Jizzax davlat pedagogika universiteti nashri (elektron).

Uzluksiz ta’lim pedagogikasi va inklyuziv ta’lim: darslik. (2024). Namangan davlat universiteti ARM (elektron nashr).

Qodirova, F. (2022). Inklyuziv ta’lim: nazariyasi va amaliyoti. (Elektron resurs).

JDPU (2022). Inklyuziv ta’lim (o‘quv qo‘llanma, to‘plam).

Oltiboyev, A. E., & Zaripova, S. E. (2024). Inklyuziv ta’lim. Gospital pedagogika: o‘quv qo‘llanma. Termiz: “ILM-21”.

Kamaltdinova, D. T. va boshq. (2020). Informatika va axborot texnologiyalari: 5-sinf darslik. Toshkent: RTM. (Elektron nashr).

Fayziyeva, F. M., Sayfurov, D. M., Atamuratov, R. K., Tursunova, F. R., Dottoyev, S. X., & Tilovova, M. M. (2021). Informatika va axborot texnologiyalari: 10-sinf darslik. Toshkent: Respublika ta’lim markazi. (Elektron nashr).

JDPU (2023). 5110700 – Informatika o‘qitish metodikasi: o‘quv-uslubiy majmua. (Elektron fayl).

Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Publishing. (Erkin onlayn nashr).

CAST. (2024). UDL Guidelines 3.0 (yangilangan yo‘riqnoma).

W3C. (2024). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 — Rekomendatsiya.

WAI, W3C. (2023). What’s new in WCAG 2.2 (qo‘shimcha 9 ta mezon sharhi).

WAI, W3C. (n.d.). WCAG 2.2 Overview (13 ta yo‘riqnoma, A/AA/AAA darajalari).

Al-Azawei, A., Serenelli, F., & Lundqvist, K. (2016). Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A content analysis of peer-reviewed papers (2012–2015). Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(3), 39–56.

Almeqdad, Q. I. (2023). The effectiveness of Universal Design for Learning. Cogent Education.

La, H., Dyjur, P., & Bair, H. (2018). Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education: A Practical Guide. University of Calgary Taylor Institute (ochiq PDF).

Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In Usability Evaluation in Industry. (SUS shakli/ballash usuli — rasmiy nashrlar).

Brooke, J. (2013). SUS: A retrospective. Journal of Usability Studies, 8(2), 29–40.