Transforming Education: Designing and Integrating Multimodal Content through Universal Design for Learning (UDL) for Neurodivergent Learners

Introduction

In contemporary classrooms, traditional one-size-fits-all instructional approaches often fail to support the diversity of learners, particularly those who are neurodivergent. Neurodivergent learners—students with neurological and cognitive differences such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, and other learning variations—frequently encounter barriers in educational contexts designed primarily for neurotypical students (Armstrong, 2017; Singer, 2017). These barriers may manifest as challenges in attention, information processing, communication, or engagement, which can lead to inequitable access to learning opportunities.

The purpose of this article, Transforming Education: Designing and Integrating Multimodal Content through Universal Design for Learning (UDL) for Neurodivergent Learners, is to examine how Universal Design for Learning (UDL) serves as a robust framework for creating inclusive learning environments when paired with multimodal content delivery. This integration aims to not only remove barriers but also foster active engagement by aligning instructional design with learner strengths. The article highlights practical, research-informed strategies for educators to reimagine instructional practices that cultivate meaningful participation for neurodivergent learners.

Why Multimodal Content and UDL Matter Now More Than Ever

The urgency of educational inclusion has grown in response to increasing awareness of learner variability and the need to design systems that equitably address it. UDL, as articulated by CAST (2018), emphasizes providing multiple means of engagement, representation, and action/expression to support the broadest possible range of learners. When implemented with intentional multimodal content—such as visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and digital modalities—UDL enables educators to deliver instruction that is responsive to diverse cognitive and sensory processing styles (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014; Rao, Ok, & Bryant, 2014).

The relevance of this work is underscored by persistent challenges faced by neurodivergent learners within conventional education systems, where curricula often remain inflexible and assessment practices narrowly defined (Taylor et al., 2022). Multimodal instructional design, grounded in Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles, offers a means to dismantle these systemic barriers by shifting practice from reactive, individual accommodations toward proactive and inclusive instructional planning (Al-Azawei, Serenelli, & Lundqvist, 2016). The literature informing this work was intentionally selected through a focused review of peer-reviewed scholarship on UDL, multimodal instruction, and neurodivergent learning, prioritizing seminal theoretical frameworks and applied studies that demonstrate practical implications for classroom design. Sources were organized thematically to highlight connections between theory, instructional practice, and learner access. As educational contexts continue to diversify, the imperative to transform instruction through frameworks such as UDL is not merely pedagogical but ethical, ensuring equitable opportunities for all learners to engage, learn, and thrive.

Understanding the Foundations

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) emerged from the field of architecture’s concept of universal design—the idea that environments should be designed to accommodate the widest possible range of users without the need for retrofitting or adaptation (Mace, 1998). Applying this principle to education, researchers at the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST) in the 1990s began to explore how flexible curricula and digital technologies could reduce barriers to learning (Rose & Meyer, 2002). Their work recognized that traditional “one-size-fits-all” instruction often excluded students with disabilities or learning differences, and they proposed a proactive framework for designing instruction that meets the needs of diverse learners from the outset.

Today, UDL is widely regarded as a scientifically grounded framework for inclusive pedagogy, endorsed in policy (e.g., the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 in the United States) and increasingly applied in K–12 and higher education contexts (CAST, 2018; Rao, Ok, & Bryant, 2014). UDL is based on the understanding that learners differ in how they engage with content, process information, and demonstrate understanding. To address this variability, CAST (2018) articulated three guiding principles, each informed by cognitive neuroscience:

1. Multiple Means of Engagement (the “Why” of learning):
   Focuses on stimulating learners’ motivation, interest, and persistence. Engagement may vary across students depending on their prior experiences, emotional regulation, and preferences. Strategies include offering choice, fostering collaboration, and supporting self-regulation.

2. Multiple Means of Representation (the “What” of learning):
   Ensures that information is presented in diverse formats to make content accessible. This principle addresses differences in perception and comprehension by providing alternatives such as visual aids, auditory supports, language scaffolds, and interactive media.

3. Multiple Means of Action and Expression (the “How” of learning):
   Provides learners with options for demonstrating what they know. Recognizing that students vary in motor skills, executive functioning, and communication styles, this principle supports flexibility through varied assessments, technology use, and scaffolds for planning and goal-setting.

These principles underscore that learner variability is not the exception but the norm, and that instructional design should anticipate and embrace this diversity rather than attempt to remediate it retroactively (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014). By drawing from neuroscience and educational research, UDL reframes inclusion as proactive design rather than reactive accommodation. It equips educators with a framework to build flexible learning environments that promote equity and foster meaningful participation for all learners, particularly those who are neurodivergent.

What is Multimodal Content?

Bouchey, Castek, and Thygeson (2021) define multimodal content as the proliferation of information in several modes, where learners engage with text, visuals, gestures, haptics, audio, multimedia, and interactivity to construct meaning through multiple channels of representation. As applied in instructional design, multimodal design involves the intentional integration of these modalities to support diverse cognitive processes and information-processing needs. This approach is rooted in the theoretical framework of multimodality, which considers meaning-making as a process that extends beyond language alone, occurring through the interaction of different modes (e.g., combining images with text, using gesture, using gestures alongside speech and visuals) (Jewitt, 2008; Kress, 2010; McVee, Schucker, Silvestri, & Tripp, 2023).

However, not all learners make meaning, process information, or demonstrate understanding in the same way. For neurodivergent learners in particular, certain modes of input may be essential for accessing and understanding information effectively. For example, some autistic learners may benefit from clearly structured visuals that support comprehension, rather than relying only on verbal instructions. Some may learn more effectively with tactile experiences such as hands-on activities, manipulatives, or movement-based tasks, engaging multiple senses by connecting abstract ideas to concrete physical experiences. Similarly, learners with ADHD may benefit from the content presented through combined text and visuals to help sustain attention, as research by Antonietti et al. (2021) suggests that multimedia learning, especially with integrating salient visual cues, can support selective attention and working memory in learners with ADHD.

Learners with dyslexia may experience challenges with text-heavy content, and research shows that the learners demonstrated the highest retention when content was delivered through audio accompanied by visuals, compared to text-based or mixed-format conditions (Kim, Wiseheart, & Walden, 2018). By designing instructional content that allows for flexible pathways to understanding, educators create opportunities for neurodivergent learners to engage with learning in ways that leverage their cognitive processing strengths. The multimodal design approach supports this flexibility by offering multiple modes of interaction and enabling learners to choose how they access information, making learning not only accessible but also personalized (Gibson & Hanson-Baldauf, 2019). As Pigato (2024) discusses, multimodal content also benefits neurodivergent learners to participate fully without being forced to conform to a “one-size-fits-all" approach.

Why UDL + Multimodality = Inclusive Excellence

These flexible pathways are made possible through the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework, whose core principles, multiple means of representation, engagement, and expression, closely align with the multimodal design approach. When applied together, they not only reduce access barriers for neurodivergent learners, but also promote inclusive excellence for all students by allowing them to access, engage, and express their understanding in ways that proactively respond to their individual learning needs.

Applying the UDL Framework to Design Multimodal Content

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is a research-based educational framework grounded in the learning sciences, particularly neuroscience and cognitive psychology. Developed by CAST. UDL proposes that learners vary widely in how they engage with, perceive, and express understanding of information. UDL offers three guiding principles: provide multiple means of engagement (the “why” of learning), representation (the “what” of learning), and action and expression (the “how” of learning) (CAST, 2024). These principles are illustrated in Figure 1. UDL shifts the focus from retrofitting accommodations to proactively designing inclusive curricula from the start.

Figure 1

The Core Principles of UDL – Engagement, Representation, and Action & Expression (presented without “considerations” to maximize readability)

Note. Downloaded from Choose your UDL Guidelines v. 3.0 representation! by CAST (2024).

To apply the UDL framework within multimodal content design, educators can incorporate actionable strategies that particularly support neurodivergent learners while ultimately benefiting all students.

Multiple Means of Engagement (The “Why” of Learning) through Multimodal Design

Multimodal design supports this principle by offering relevant, interactive, choice-based, and sensory-aware learning experiences that align with learners’ interests to sustain motivation, support emotional regulation and reduce overstimulation. The following table outlines how multimodal design strategies can be applied in UDL’s engagement checkpoints—welcoming interests, sustaining effort and persistence, and supporting emotional regulation—with actionable examples that support neurodivergent learners while benefiting all.

Table 1

UDL Guideline: Engagement, Multimodal Design Strategies, and Actionable Examples

Multiple Means of Representation (The “What” of Learning) through Multimodal Design

Multimodal design supports this principle by offering flexible, multiple inputs and scaffolded content that help neurodivergent learners engage with content in ways that align with their cognitive processing strengths. The following table outlines how multimodal design strategies can be applied in UDL’s representation checkpoints—perception, language and symbols, and comprehension—with actionable examples that support neurodivergent learners while benefiting all.

Table 2

UDL Guideline: Representation, Multimodal Design Strategies, and Actionable Examples

Multiple Means of Action and Expression (The “How” of Learning) through Multimodal Design

Multimodal design supports this principle by offering flexible ways that allow neurodivergent learners to express what they learn in ways that align with their cognitive and communication strengths. The following table outlines how multimodal design strategies can be applied in UDL’s action and expression checkpoints—interaction, expression and communication, and strategy development—with actionable examples that support neurodivergent learners while benefiting all.

Table 3

UDL Guideline: Action & Expression, Multimodal Design Strategies, and Actionable Examples

Designing for Neurodivergence: Practical Tips and Considerations

Neurodivergent learners often encounter systemic barriers within traditional classrooms that can limit their ability to fully engage and succeed. These barriers may include difficulties with executive functioning, heightened sensory sensitivities, or differences in processing speed (Brown, Attwood, & Garnett, 2021; Denhart, 2008). By intentionally designing learning environments through the lens of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), educators can mitigate these barriers and cultivate inclusive contexts where neurodivergent learners thrive. Below, we outline practical considerations for classroom setup, instructional planning, and assessment. Table 4 summarizes common barriers faced by neurodivergent learners and corresponding UDL-informed strategies.

1. Classroom Setup: Environmental Supports

Common Barriers: Many neurodivergent learners are sensitive to sensory stimuli such as noise, lighting, or visual clutter. Overstimulating environments can increase anxiety, reduce focus, and interfere with participation (Ashburner, Ziviani, & Rodger, 2008).

Design Suggestions:

• Flexible seating and workspaces: Offer quiet zones, standing desks, or movement-friendly areas to accommodate different regulation needs.

• Sensory accommodations: Provide tools such as noise-cancelling headphones, fidget devices, or dimmable lighting to reduce sensory overload.

• Structured organization: Use clear labeling, visual schedules, and decluttered spaces to support predictability and ease of navigation.

• Calm corners: Design spaces where learners can self-regulate without stigma, promoting autonomy and emotional safety.

2. Instructional Planning: Pacing and Scaffolds

Common Barriers: Executive functioning differences—such as challenges with attention, working memory, or organization—can hinder a learner’s ability to follow multi-step instructions, manage time, or sustain focus (Barkley, 2015). Processing speed variability may also lead to frustration when instruction moves too quickly or without adequate scaffolding (Kuhn & Holling, 2014).

Design Suggestions:

• Chunking and pacing: Break lessons into smaller segments with built-in processing time and opportunities for review.

• Multimodal instruction: Present content through visual, auditory, and kinesthetic modalities to reinforce comprehension and accommodate varied processing styles.

• Scaffolding supports: Use graphic organizers, guided notes, and task lists to make complex tasks manageable.

• Predictable routines: Establish consistent classroom structures to reduce cognitive load and support executive functioning.

• Explicit teaching of strategies: Model time management, note-taking, and self-monitoring techniques to build learner independence.

3. Assessment: Formative Feedback Loops

Common Barriers: Traditional assessments often privilege speed, memorization, and standardized formats, which may disadvantage neurodivergent learners (Elliott, 2020). Difficulties with written expression, test anxiety, or rigid assessment conditions can prevent learners from demonstrating their true understanding.

Design Suggestions:

• Flexible assessment formats: Allow learners to demonstrate mastery through varied modalities—oral presentations, visual projects, portfolios, or digital media—in alignment with UDL principles (Meyer, Rose, & Gordon, 2014).

• Frequent low-stakes assessments: Incorporate check-ins, exit tickets, or short reflective tasks to provide ongoing data without high pressure.

• Feedback as dialogue: Provide timely, specific, and actionable feedback that emphasizes growth over deficit (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).

• Extended time and flexible deadlines: Offer pacing accommodations without penalty to account for differences in processing speed or executive functioning.

• Collaborative goal-setting: Involve learners in setting personalized goals and monitoring their progress, fostering agency and self-advocacy.

These common barriers, including related challenges and their impact on learners, are addressed through practical UDL-informed design strategies, which are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4

Common Barriers Faced by Neurodivergent Learners and UDL-Informed Strategies

Designing for neurodivergence requires educators to anticipate common barriers and embed flexibility into every dimension of teaching—from the physical environment to lesson pacing and assessment practices. Through intentional use of UDL-informed strategies, educators can move beyond compliance-driven accommodations toward transformative inclusion that validates neurodivergent learners’ strengths and fosters equitable opportunities for success.

Case Examples or Scenarios for Digital Learning

While the previous sections discussed UDL principles applied through multimodal design, this section shares two examples that may inspire educators to apply selected strategies in digital learning environments to support neurodivergent learners.

Gamification

As mentioned earlier, gamification can be one of the multimodal strategies to support the UDL principle of Multiple Means of Engagement by fostering motivation and goal persistence, particularly for neurodivergent learners who may benefit from clear structure, immediate feedback and a sense of progression. In an LMS such as Canvas, teachers can implement learning mastery paths to design tiered achievement levels align with specific learning objectives. Each level can offer gradually increasing challenge, support goal-setting, and provide immediate feedback. Figure 2 illustrates how gamification can be implemented within a digital learning environment to support learner motivation and sustained engagement.

Figure 2

Gamified knowledge check in a digital learning environment.

Note. This instructor-view screenshot from Canvas depicts an activity with three tiers of knowledge checks, each aligned with specific learning objectives and increasing in difficulty. Immediate feedback is provided at each stage to support motivation and persistence. As discussed earlier, offering flexible ways for learners to demonstrate understanding is an effective multimodal strategy aligned with the UDL principle of Multiple Means of Action & Expression.

Alternative Assessment Formats

In addition to gamified learning, alternative assessment formats reflect the UDL principle of multiple means of action and expression, allowing learners to demonstrate understanding in ways that align with their strengths. Figure 3 illustrates how teachers can provide alternative assessment formats within a digital learning environment to allow students to choose how they express their learning, whether through writing, presentational, or creative interpretations.

Figure 3

Alternative assessment formats in a digital learning environment

Note. This instructor-view screenshot illustrates an example of a “choose-your-adventure” assessment design in an LMS, where students select from three branching paths —writing, presentation, or creative interpretation —to complete the assignment.

Implications for Educations and Conclusion

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and multimodal content together hold transformative potential for reimagining education as inclusive by design rather than by exception. When educators intentionally integrate these frameworks, they do more than differentiate instruction—they reframe access, engagement, and expression as rights that belong to every learner. For neurodivergent students in particular, such intentional design affirms equity, access, and belonging, allowing them to participate meaningfully and thrive in spaces built with their strengths in mind.

The call to action is clear: it is time to move from a culture of accommodation to one of proactive design. Instead of adding supports after barriers appear, educators can anticipate variability from the start and design learning environments that meet it with flexibility and creativity. Beginning this shift does not require sweeping reform overnight—small, deliberate steps can have profound impact. Teachers might start by redesigning one lesson using multiple means of representation, or by offering students varied options for showing what they know (CAST, 2018). Over time, these small acts of intentional design build a culture of inclusion that benefits all learners.

Collaboration remains central to this work. Families, specialists, and the students themselves are essential partners in shaping responsive educational experiences. By listening to their perspectives and co-designing solutions, educators gain invaluable insight into how learning environments can be both supportive and empowering.

Finally, to sustain this transformation, system-wide alignment is vital. Professional development must equip educators with the knowledge and confidence to apply UDL principles. Curriculum planning should embed multimodal strategies from the outset, and policies should reinforce inclusive design as a standard of excellence—not an optional add-on. Through these collective efforts, schools can move closer to a future where learning is flexible, equitable, and deeply human—where neurodivergent learners not only belong, but flourish.

References

1. Al-Azawei, A., Serenelli, F., & Lundqvist, K. (2016). Universal design for learning (UDL): A content analysis of peer-reviewed journal papers from 2012 to 2015. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(3), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v16i3.19295
2. Antonietti, A., Cancer, A., Fabio, R. A., Iannello, P., & Zugno, E. (2021). Multimedia learning in ADHD students. In B. M. Kyser (Ed.), Attention‑deficit hyperactivity disorder: Diagnosis, prevalence and treatment (pp. 71–95). Nova Science Publishers.
3. Armstrong, T. (2017). The power of neurodiversity: Unleashing the advantages of your differently wired brain. Da Capo Press.
4. Ashburner, J., Ziviani, J., & Rodger, S. (2008). Sensory processing and classroom emotional, behavioral, and educational outcomes in children with autism spectrum disorder. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62(5), 564–573.
5. Barkley, R. A. (2015). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and treatment (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
6. Basciano, M., Bisagno, E., & Cadamuro, A. (2025). Multiple ways in which video games make education inclusive: A systematic review of cognitive enhancement for neurodivergent learners. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 9(6), 56. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti9060056
7. Bouchey, B., Castek, J., & Thygeson, J. (2021). Multimodal learning. In J. Ryoo & K. Winkelmann (Eds.), Innovative learning environments in STEM higher education (pp. 35–54). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58948-6_3
8. Brown, T., Attwood, T., & Garnett, M. (2021). Understanding autism: The essential guide for teachers and parents. Routledge.
9. Calvin, K. L., & Gray, S. (2024). Improving expository text comprehension in adolescent Spanish–English bilingual learners with learning disabilities using a graphic organizer. Learning Disability Quarterly, 47(3), 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948723117678
10. CAST (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.2.
11. CAST (2024). Universal design for learning guidelines version 3.0 [Graphic organizer]. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
12. Denhart, H. (2008). Deconstructing barriers: Perceptions of students labeled with learning disabilities in higher education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(6), 483–497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408321151
13. Elliott, V. (2020). Standardized testing and its impact on diverse learners. Educational Review, 72(4), 483–499.
14. Gibson, A. N., & Hanson-Baldauf, D. (2019). Beyond sensory story time: An intersectional analysis of information seeking among parents of autistic individuals. Library Trends, 67(3), 550–575. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2019.0002
15. Gillespie-Lynch, K., Grossman, E., Herrell, J., Riccio, A., Delos Santos, J., Biswas, S., Kofner, B., Dwyer, P., Rosenberg. B., Hwang-Geddes, L., Hurst, A., Martin, WB. & Dave, S. (2023). A participatory approach to iteratively adapting game design workshops to empower autistic youth. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1179548. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1179548
16. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
17. Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and literacy in school classrooms. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 241–267. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07310586
18. Kim, S., Wiseheart, R., & Walden, P. R. (2018). Do multimedia instructional designs enhance comprehension in college students with dyslexia? Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 31(4), 351–365.
19. Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
20. Kuhn, J. T., & Holling, H. (2014). Number sense or working memory? The effect of two cognitive skills on mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 715–729.
21. Mace, R. (1998). Universal design in housing. Assistive Technology, 10(1), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.1998.10131957
22. McVee, M. B., Schucker, K. A., Silvestri, K. N., & Tripp, J. N. (2023). Using multiliteracies and multimodality to explore engineering literacies and problem-scoping for multilingual learners: A perspective on multiliteracies for STEM learning. In R. J. Tierney, F. Rizvi, & K. Ercikan (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (4th ed., pp. 50–63). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.13039-8
23. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. CAST Professional Publishing.
24. Pigato, G. (2024). Contributing to an inclusive education for neurodivergent students: sharing reflections, practices, and experiences. FEMS Microbiology Letters, 371, fnae046. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsle/fnae046
25. Sheejamol P. T., Chacko, A. M., & Madhu Kumar, S. D. (2025). Beyond the one-size-fits-all: A systematic review of personalized and gamified e-learning for neurodivergent learners. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 23(3), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.23.3.4051
26. Rao, K., Ok, M. W., & Bryant, B. R. (2014). A review of research on universal design educational models. Remedial and Special Education, 35(3), 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932513518980
27. Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal Design for Learning. ASCD.
28. Shilliday, A. (2024, October). Mind the neurodivergent mind. Talent Development, 78(10), 32-37.
29. Singer, J. (2017). Neurodiversity: The birth of an idea. Amazon Digital Services.
30. Taylor, M. J., Isaac, C., Smith, E., & Huggett, K. N. (2022). Barriers to inclusion: Challenges faced by neurodiverse learners in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 27(4), 553–567.
31. Ward, V., Parsons, S., Kovshoff, H., & Crump, B. (2022). Co-creation of research and design during a coding club with autistic students using multimodal participatory methods and analysis. Frontiers in Education, 7, 864362. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.864362
32. White, J. P. (2024). Unlocking potential with multimodal learning and assessment. GILE Journal of Skills Development, 4(2), 106–111. https://doi.org/10.52398/gjsd.2024.v4.i2.pp106-111