A singularity theory: unifying pedagogical differences between "abled" and learning "disabled" writers
MetadataShow full item record
Type of Workapplication/pdf
iv, 44 pages
ProgramTowson University. Professional Writing Program
RightsCopyright protected, all rights reserved.
There are no restrictions on access to this document. An internet release form signed by the author to display this document online is on file with Towson University Special Collections and Archives.
Universal Design in Learning (UDL) was designed to provide support for students with learning disabilities (LD). It gives flexibility to both teaching and learning: how to present information (teaching), how to receive and respond to information (learning), and how to create a classroom space that is both accommodating and challenging to students with LD. UDL is a fairly recent installment, enacted in 2008, addressing the question of how to teach students with LD - a legislative pairing to LD pedagogy theory - while the field of Rhetoric/Composition (Rhet/Comp) has existed for decades, though it is not necessarily wedded to any specific demographic, such as LD. This piece will review works from LD and Rhet/Comp theorists, as well as individuals who have influenced or are influenced by Rhet/Comp. It will look at the theory and practice of teaching LD and non-LD students, what the differences are and, in some cases, shouldn't be, and how to create a singularity theory that merges UDL with already existing theories and practices in the field of Rhet/Comp. In order to do this, two schools of thought will be discussed, compared, and re-thought to the extent that the two can be latticed together. In the end, this thesis will posit the idea of singularity - that pedagogical segregation should not necessarily the result of being different nor should it be the initial reaction in the discussion of how to teach students with LD.