Strengthening Tier 1 Instruction with UDL: Rethinking Whole-Group Instruction

(gentle music) Welcome to the Balance. I'm Dr. Katlin Tucker. And today I wanna talk about universal design for learning or UDL, and specifically what it looks like to universally design whole group instruction. So one of the things I appreciate most about UDL is that it's grounded in values that many of us educators already hold. Most teachers believe every learner deserves access to meaningful learning experiences. They want classrooms that are inclusive and equitable and responsive to learner variability. Because as one of my favorite people in education says, Dr. Katie Novak, learner variability is the norm, not the exception, right? Kids are just different from each other. And as a result, they learn differently. So the challenge isn't whether educators believe in those values that are at the heart of UDL, the challenge is always about implementation. How do we implement UDL in a way that feels manageable, sustainable, that right there is the challenge. And when I work with schools and districts, I often hear some version of that same concern, right? We believe in UDL. We've spent a long time training our staff on what it means and what it looks like, but we're not exactly sure how to put it into practice in a way that feels manageable. Too often, UDL implementation gets reduced to adding a choice board at the end of the lesson or offering students a few options for how they practice or demonstrate their learning. And while those strategies can absolutely support our learner agency, they represent only a small part of the learning experience. The reality is that a significant portion of instructional time is spent on direct instruction, whether we are introducing a new concept, we are building background knowledge, modeling a skill, facilitating a discussion around complex content, teachers spend a lot of time guiding learning in a whole group setting. So the question becomes how do we take the values at the heart of UDL and apply them to whole group instruction? How do we design lessons that acknowledge learner variability from the start instead of waiting for students to struggle before we make adjustments, we differentiate, or we respond? So to answer those questions, I want to begin with the goal of UDL. According to CAS updated UDL guidelines, the goal is learner agency. In other words, we want students to become purposeful, reflective, resourceful, authentic, strategic, and action oriented. We want learners who understand themselves, know how and start to discover how they learn best and take an active role in the learning process. So if learner agency is the destination, then we have to ask the question, what kind of learning experiences are going to help us get there? And that's where the three UDL brain networks provide a useful lens for thinking about instructional design. At a high level, these networks help us think about three essential questions. One, why would students engage with this learning? Two, how will they make sense of what they're learning? Three, how will they use, apply, and demonstrate what they've learned? The UDL framework organizes those questions into three networks-- the effective network, the recognition network, and the strategic network. And before we go any further, I want to take a closer look at each one and why it matters when we're designing whole group instruction. First, we have the effective network, which is connected to what UDL refers to as multiple means of engagement. This network influences motivation, relevance, belonging, persistence, and emotional investment in learning. It's where students answer the question, why should I care about this? If students don't see the value in what they're learning, they don't feel connected to a learning community, or don't feel confident that they can be successful, engagement suffers. This is why UDL encourages teachers to provide multiple pathways for engagement. Learners are motivated by different things-- some are driven by curiosity, others by collaboration, challenge, personal relevance, or even opportunities to have some voice and choice in the learning experience. When we design instruction that helps students connect to the learning and to one another, we are supporting the effective network. The next is the recognition network, which aligns closely with what we call multiple means of representation. This network is responsible for how learners perceive, process, and make sense of information. It's where students answer the question, what am I learning? And learners vary widely in their background knowledge, lived experience, language proficiency, reading abilities, processing speeds, prior experiences, et cetera. And as a result, a single explanation or a single representation of information is unlikely to work equally for every learner. And this is why UDL emphasizes that multiple means representation. We want to provide flexible pathways for accessing information and building understanding. And that might include visuals, models, examples, demonstrations, strategic use of media, guided note supports, concept maps, or opportunities to hear concepts explained in different ways. Finally, we have the strategic network, which is connected to multiple means of action and expression. This network helps learners plan, organize, communicate, monitor their progress, and take action, be those action-oriented students. It's where students answer the question, how will I make sense of apply or demonstrate my learning? And this network is closely aligned to learner agency because it supports the development of metacognitive skills, self-regulation, and strategic decision-making. Students need opportunities to explain their thinking, communicate their understanding, reflect on their learning, and make choices about how they engage in the learning process. These experiences are what help them to become more independent, self-directed learners over time. And while we've discussed these networks separately, they don't operate in isolation, right? Effective learning experiences activate all three. And students need a reason to engage opportunities to build understanding and ways to use and communicate what they know. That's where UDL or a UDL approach to whole-group instruction becomes so powerful. So what does all of this mean for lesson design? If we know that learning depends on activating the effective recognition and strategic networks, then we have to ask ourselves the question, how can we intentionally design whole-group instruction in a way that strives to support all three? Unfortunately, many whole-group lessons that I observe primarily focus on the recognition network. Teachers present information. They explain concepts, model skills, share examples. They're providing verbal explanations that are paired often with visual supports in the form of slides with media. And while those things are important, they represent only one piece of this learning puzzle. Students also need a reason to engage with the learning. They need opportunities to process information, make meaning, communicate their understanding, and learn with and from their peers. So in other words, they need experiences that activate all three networks. And that's why I want to share a simple approach to designing or maybe redesigning whole-group instruction that aligns more with the principles of UDL. So when I work with teachers, I encourage them to start whole-group instructional sessions with a hook, then take their traditional mini lessons or lectures and chunk them. So breaking them into smaller segments. And typically, I encourage teachers to keep each segment or chunk of instruction no more than five minutes at a time. And there's no like magic research that says five minutes is the sweet spot for this. However, I think it provides a really nice guide rail to limit teacher talk so we are not presenting more information in one kind of moment than students can actually take in. So after each chunk, we're going to pause, allowing students to think about what they just heard and maybe capture what they're learning in their notes. And then support processing with cooperative learning. So it's a hook plus a cycle of chunk pause process. Chunk. pause process. And depending on the length of instruction, the amount teachers have to cover, the age of the students, we might move through that chunk pause process to three, maybe even four times. What I like about this approach is that it isn't something totally foreign or extra that teachers need to add to their lessons. Instead, it's a way of designing those whole group instructional sessions that acknowledges learner variability and activates these different networks. The hook is designed to activate the effective network by sparking curiosity, hopefully establishing some relevance, and creating a reason for students to want to engage with the instructional session. The chunk supports the recognition network by introducing information in manageable pieces that reduce cognitive overload or avoid, hopefully cognitive overload, making the learning more accessible. The pause creates space for individual meaning making. It allows students to process what they're learning. Reflect, ask questions, capture their thinking, and maybe capturing their thinking with some scaffold or support as needed. Then the process phase invites students to actively engage with the content and one another through cooperative learning. As they discuss, explain things, ask questions, compare ideas, defend their thinking, hopefully they're activating all three networks. They're deepening their understanding. They're being exposed to different perspectives and points of view. The interactions strengthen that sense of belonging in classroom community, and they develop their communication skills, their meta-cognitive skills that are all going to serve them as they develop into the profile of learner agency or they become those kind of learner agents. So when we design a whole group instruction this way, we're no longer planning around what the teacher will say, what the teacher has to cover. We're planning around what students need to do to learn. So I want to take a closer look at each part of this process starting with the hook strategy. Let's start with the hook. The hook is designed to activate that effective network or what UDL refers to as multiple means of engagement. Before students can learn, they need a reason to engage. Unfortunately, many lessons begin with the teacher sharing the learning objective and then immediately launching into the content. And while it's important for students to know what they're learning, that approach doesn't necessarily answer the critical question, why should I care? A strong hook creates curiosity, establishes relevance, sparks interest, or invites the student to connect learning to something they already know or already care about. The goal isn't entertainment, it's engagement, right? Researchers who study curiosity describe something called the information gap. And that's when learners realize that there's something that they don't know, but they want to know their curiosity is activated and they want to resolve whatever that uncertainty is. Or they want to figure out the thing that they don't understand or they're not sure about. And that's why effective of an effective hook often presents students with a question, a problem, prediction, scenario, or even a misconception before any instruction takes place. So a hook might be a really unusual, surprising image, a short video clip, a provocative kind of question, an opinion poll, a real world problem, maybe a scenario for students to kind of talk about or solve, a prediction task, a common misconception, it might even be kind of like a concept sort of like, can you connect things, you know, make connections. These strategies help students lean into the learning because they create a reason to learn. I think we take for granted and education that students spend their days going in and out of classrooms, listening into instruction that gives them answers to questions they have never asked and solutions to problems they have never encountered. Right? And so that's where a hook can be incredibly compelling. And they also support belonging, which is another important aspect of the effective network. Right? When students have opportunities to share their ideas, discuss predictions, share a point of view, consider, you know, other perspectives. They're beginning to really experience connection with their classmates, right? The learning experience becomes really active instead of passive. Once students are engaged, we move into that first chunk of instruction. And the chunking primarily is designed to support the recognition network, which aligns with multiple means of representation. This is the part of the lesson where we introduce a bit of new information or model part of a process, analyze a chunk of text, demonstrate a skill. Right? The challenge is that often learners are processing information at different rates. Some students might have strong background knowledge. Others may be encountering content for the first time, some process very quickly, some process more slowly. Others need a moment to kind of make sense of new ideas. And learner variability is one reason why cognitive overload can be such a barrier in whole group instruction. When we present too much new information at one time, working memory becomes overloaded. Students may hear the words, but that doesn't mean they're building understanding. Right? Working memory in the brain is so limited that I often kind of compare it to imagine working memories like a glass. And the information we're giving students is the water. And if we pour too much water into that glass, the water is just going to start to spill over the edges and be lost, right? And the same goes with information. Students only have so much space to hold that new information and working memory before it needs to be processed and head toward long-term memory. If we just keep piling on new information, then they're really going to struggle to acquire that information. So chunking helps to reduce that barrier. And especially for working with multilingual learners, they are juggling an additional linguistic load. And so being really thoughtful about chunking and segmenting, the presentation of new information into bite-sized pieces, breaking up those 15, 20-minute mini-lectures or mini-lessons and lectures can help students to be more successful acquiring the information, the content that we need them to acquire for our class. So instead of delivering 10, 15, 20, 25 minutes of uninterrupted instruction, we present information in the shorter, more manageable segments. And each chunk should focus on kind of a single idea, concept, question. And I often encourage teachers to think about each chunk as helping students to answer a question or solve part of a larger problem introduced potentially in the hook or that is going to be in this instructional session. So we want a sequence of thoughtful chunks of instruction designed to help students understand something that they need to understand for our class. And this creates a more hopefully coherent learning experience and helps students build understanding incrementally, right? And so what's happening between each chunk? That's where the pause is really critical. So this step is often overlooked. But I would argue it's one of the most important parts of the process. The pause gives students time to independently begin to think about what they just heard before they move into a discussion or before they are asked to apply that learning. So learning isn't happening simply because the information is presented. Our students need time to think about that information, connect it to what they already know, identify questions or wondering and begin to make meaning. And this pause is also an ideal time for note taking. And this is where UDL reminds us to acknowledge that learner variability and the fact or the reality that not all students need the same level of support when capturing information. We can make multiple levels available to students so they can decide what level of support do I need. But too often in classrooms, I think all students are kind of given the same amount of scaffolding, kind of whether they want it or need it or not. So some students might be successful taking independent notes. They might even prefer to do something like drawing sketch notes as opposed to taking traditional notes. Others may benefit from guided notes that help them identify key ideas, vocabulary, concepts might provide some visual representations of the information presented that students can label and make notes on. Other students because of IEPs, 504, of fours might require more significant support taking notes in the kind of form of close notes, which I've talked about in a previous episode, which are really more like fill in the blank notes or even completed notes, really to help students for whom that cognitive load of note taking might be very, very challenging. So again, rather than viewing note taking as a one-size-fits-all activity, we can think about it as a continuum of support. The goal isn't for every student to use the same note taking strategy. The goal is for every student to have the acts or have access to the support that they need to process and make sense of the information being presented. And the pause also supports students who just need a bit more time. More time to kind of think about what they just heard before new information is presented. So by intentionally building this time into our lessons, we are honoring learner variability and we are creating more equitable access to the learning experience. One students have had time, a beat to kind of process independently, we invite them to process collaboratively. And this is where cooperative learning becomes such a powerful strategy. Too often, cooperative learning is viewed primarily as an engagement strategy, and it certainly can increase engagement. That's a wonderful byproduct. But the benefits extend far beyond the effective network. When students discuss ideas with peers, they gain access to multiple explanations, different examples, perspectives, ways of thinking about a concept. A class may hear one explanation from the teacher, but during cooperative learning, students gain access to many more explanations. And quite frankly, a peer may explain a concept using language that feels more accessible and understandable. They might provide an example that kind of makes the learning click or make a connection between the idea and some personal experience that kind of clarifies it for another student. I cannot tell you how many times I had a student in my class who I had kind of presented information a couple of times. They were still struggling. I grabbed another student in the class who was very strong in that area and said, hey, can you help so and so with this? I'm really struggling as the teacher in this scenario to make this clear. And I would listen to the conversation. And I felt like so often the way the student who was really strong explained it was similar to how I had presented the information. But for whatever reason, hearing it from a peer, the slight changes in language that was used made all the difference. And so in this way, cooperative learning can support the recognition network. By expanding the way students access and make sense of the information, every student explanation becomes maybe another representation of the learning that could be helpful at demystifying it for another classmate. So cooperative learning supports the representation or the making the information more accessible from that perspective. It also does support the effective network by fostering that need for belonging, that need for connection in a classroom. Students learn with and from each other. They see that their ideas are valued. They have opportunities to contribute, which is so incredibly important. Especially in this moment where I feel like so many kids are a little uncomfortable engaging with each other verbally, just like making eye contact, having conversations. I think they spend so much time staring at little screens and communicating via those devices that they need more of that human to human conversation baked into the learning environment. And cooperative learning can support the strategic network as well. Students are communicating ideas. They're explaining their thinking, their reasoning, justifying perspectives. They're asking questions, evaluating evidence, and refining their thinking. They're actively doing that cognitive work of learning. And this is why I encourage teachers to move beyond simple recall questions during these moments, those depth of knowledge level one questions. And instead, ask questions that require students to compare ideas, explain that reasoning, analyze relationships, defend conclusions, apply concepts to new scenarios or situations, and even consider alternative perspectives. Those are the types of questions that lead to meaningful discussion. They drive deeper learning. And once the processing is complete, we move into the next chunk of instruction and we repeat the cycle. Chunk pause process. And over time, students build understanding one piece at a time while remaining actively engaged in the instructional session. So I'm hoping this process is making sense from a design perspective. But I do want to look at what shape it might take in actual lessons. So I'll provide two examples, one from an elementary ELA classroom and one from a secondary science example. And as I walk through these examples, I want you to notice how the lesson intentionally tries to activate these three networks. And notice how the teacher is reducing barriers, acknowledging and honoring learner variability, and creating opportunities for students to actively make meaning throughout the lesson. So let's start with that elementary English language arts example. Let's imagine a fourth grade teacher is introducing the concept of theme. The lesson begins with a hook and the teacher projects three statements on the board. One, always be yourself. Two, teamwork makes us stronger. Three, mistakes help us grow. Then the teacher asks students to consider the question, which lesson do you think is most important for kids your age? Why? So students think independently for a moment and then share with a partner. Right away, students are engaged in the conversation. They have opinions, they have experiences, perspectives that they can contribute. The teacher explains that the authors often communicate important messages and lessons through stories. And these messages are called themes. And then they move into the first chunk of instruction. So that first chunk of instruction is going to focus on the difference between a topic and a theme. And a teacher is going to use a familiar story for this so that students aren't struggling to understand the story while also trying to understand the difference between topic and theme. So they could even use a very common children's picture book or a very short story that the students have already read. And the topic might be friendship. The theme might be that true friendship requires trust and honesty. So that's the focus of the first chunk. Then there's a pause. Students spend a minute capturing their thinking. So some students might be taking notes independently. Others might be using guided notes that prompt them to define theme versus topic in their own words and record an example from the texts that they just heard the teacher working with. They might also another thing a prompt a teacher can give them is like comparing contrast. What's the difference? What's similar about theme versus topic? Or like I said, just have them define those two things in their own words. Then we move into process and students engage in a think-pair share quad. If you're not familiar with the structure, students think independently and quietly first about a prompt. Then they discuss their ideas with a partner. And next, two pairs join to form a group of four to continue the conversation kind of building on one another's thinking perspectives. It just exposes them to more ideas. So the prompt that the teacher projects for this think-pair share quad is the question, why do readers often confuse topic and theme? What is the most important difference between them? So notice this is not a recall question. Students must analyze the relationship between the two ideas and explain their reasoning. As they discuss, they're going to hear different explanations, different examples from classmates, creating additional pathways to understanding. Then the teacher moves into the next chunk. And in this second chunk of instruction, the teacher reads a short section of a text aloud and models how readers use evidence to support a claim about theme. So during the pause, students record one piece of evidence. They think supports the theme and briefly explains their thinking or their reasoning in their notes. Then we transition to the processing collaboratively with that think-pair share quad structure again. And this time, the prompt is which piece of evidence best supports the theme and why. And you can have students pulling from their own evidence. You can have multiple pieces of evidence displayed on the board for them to rank sort discuss. So students are comparing evidence. They're justifying their choices. They're listening to alternative interpretations provided by their classmates. And the conversation really requires that students evaluate that evidence, defend their thinking. Then the teacher moves and moves. into the final chunk of instruction. And that is where the class is going to, that the teacher is going to guide kind of a conversation about how characters decisions influence the message readers take away from the story. So really making the connection between character actions and theme and theme development, right? So during the pause, students are going to jot down an initial response to the question that they're going to be using in their kind of think parachute quad before they discuss it. So the question the teacher is going to project is, how might the theme change if the main character made a different decision at the climax of the story? So this question pushes students to deepen their analysis, transfer what they learned. They have to consider cause and effect, evaluate the characters' choices, and how those choices shape meaning, and they have to support their thinking with textual evidence. So throughout the lesson, the students are not simply listening to an explanation of theme. They are repeatedly making meaning, talking about their ideas, benefiting from multiple perspectives and really starting to refine their understanding. All right, let's look at one more example. It's high school science class, it's a biology class, and imagine a biology teacher is introducing photosynthesis. The lesson begins with a hook and the teacher projects the question on the board, or yeah, the question on the board, and says, if a tree weighs 500 pounds more today than it did five years ago, where did that mass come from? And students can make their predictions, discuss their thinking with a partner, many students might confidently say, it comes from the soil, others might say water or sunlight, and the teacher is not going to reveal the answer yet. Instead, the teacher invites students to investigate or keep that question in their mind as the instruction is provided. So in the first chunk of instruction, that won't last more than five minutes at a time, the teacher introduces a process of photosynthesis, explaining how plants use sunlight, water, and carbon dioxide to make glucose. During the pause, students add labels to a diagram that might be provided for them. They could write a brief explanation, a photosynthesis in their own words, or create like a little sketch flow chart or image kind of showing the process. And some students could do this totally independently, and others would really benefit from guided notes with that, with sentence frames, visual supports, the diagram unlabeled that they can add to. Then during the collaborative where they're going to process together, the teacher uses numbered heads together. This is a Kagan strategy I love because of the baked in accountability. So in this cooperative learning structure, students work in teams. I usually have the teams about four, and each member is assigned a number one through four. After discussing the question, the prompt, whatever together, the teacher randomly calls a team number, and a student number. And I usually have everybody in the room in the various teams who have the number, like the numbered heads together number, I have them all stand. And then the person with that number at the team table that I call, they're the first to share. And if we have time, I can invite anybody else who's standing to chime in, did their group have a different perspective, did they want to share another point of view? And because any student could be called on, every learner is accountable for participating in the discussion that happens. So the question the teacher is posing in this first round of numbered heads together is, why can plants be considered producers in an ecosystem? So students get a moment, usually it's somewhere around 60 seconds to just consider the question independently. Give them a chance again to process the question, kind of gather their thoughts. And then we queue numbered heads together and they discuss their ideas with their team. And as they talk, again, they're hearing multiple explanations, examples that can help to clarify the concept. Then in chunk two, so the second segment of instruction, the teacher explains that plants do not get food from the soil. Instead, they create glucose through photosynthesis. So students add a note to their diagram, explaining where the plants food come from, and why glucose is important. Then we shift into numbered heads together. And the question is, how is a plant getting energy different than an animal? So students compare processes, identify key distinctions, build on one another's explanations. And then we transition into the third chunk of instruction where the teacher explains how carbon dioxide from the atmosphere becomes part of the glucose produced during photosynthesis. And eventually becomes part of the plant's physical structure. Now we're linking back to that opening question, kind of coming full circle. And during the pause, students can revisit that original prediction, revise their thinking, using evidence from what they just heard in the instruction. Now when we shift into the final round of numbered heads together, a teacher might ask something like, use what you learned about photosynthesis to explain where most of the tree's mass comes from. And students must synthesize the information from the entire instructional session, each of the various chunks, connect multiple concepts, construct an evidence-based explanation. So by the end of the lesson, students haven't simply listened to information about photosynthesis. They've engaged with a phenomenon, built an understanding in these kind of manageable segments, processed information and ideas independently, benefited from learning from their peers, and used discussion to deepen and refine their thinking. And that's what's really powerful about this approach. We're designing whole group instruction around how students learn, not simply what teachers have to teach. As you listen to those examples, I hope something stands out for you, right? The teachers in those scenarios aren't doing less teaching. They're still providing explicit instruction, right? They're still modeling, explaining, guiding the learning. What's changing is the design of the experience? So at this point, I think some of the teachers listening or even the instructional coaches are like, this sounds great, but also it's going to take a lot longer. And in some cases, it might. And on one hand, I'm just like, if the goal of instruction is for students to understand concepts, retain them, be able to apply them, then shouldn't we be doing whatever it takes to make sure that happens? Like for me, it's like if kids don't understand, retain, if they can't do anything with information that's presented, what was the point of that time? But I do think it is helpful to think about it, less is just adding more time and more as a redistribution of time, right? In many traditional lessons, a teacher presents all of the information first, and then follows that instruction with practice, application, discussion, activities, et cetera. Students do most of the meaning making after the instruction is over. Whereas with a chunk pause process approach, we're redistributing some of that practice, some of that application into the actual instructional session. So instead of waiting until the end of the lesson to ask students to think, discuss, apply, analyze, comparing contrast, explain, we're inviting them to do that work during the instructional session in those pauses and processing moments, right? The pause gives students opportunities to process information, capture their thinking. That collaborative processing phase allows them to discuss, compare, explain, make meaning with their peers. And as a result, students are actively engaging with the content throughout that instructional session, instead of kind of passively receiving or consuming the information and then trying to make sense of it later, referencing their notes to try to create some clarity around things that might be confusing. And in many cases, that investment of time during instruction can reduce the need to re-teach concepts later, because we're actually checking for understanding and supporting meaning making in the instructional session. And we're acknowledging learner variability, right? Some students need more support with note-taking, some need more processing time, some benefit from hearing an explanation more than once or hearing it explained by a peer in a different way. And instead of viewing those differences as problems to solve later, the lesson is designed with those differences in mind from the start. And that's what UDL is really asking us to do, not to create a different lesson for every student, not to individualize every aspect of the learning experience, but to anticipate learner variability and design flexible pathways that help more learners access and engage with the learning. And I think that's particularly important when we think about whole group instruction. It often gets criticized because it can create a lot of barriers for learners. But I don't necessarily think the problem is with whole group instruction itself. The problem is how it's often designed and delivered. right, when whole group instruction is designed for learner variability, when we intentionally activate the effective recognition and strategic networks, and when we build opportunities for active processing, collaborative meaning making into the experience, whole group instruction can become a much more inclusive and effective tier one pathway. So as we wrap up, I want to return to that connection between UDL and MTSS, because too often universal design for learning and multi-tiered systems of support are discussed almost like as two separate things or they're kind of siloed. And when people ask me what strong tier one instruction looks like, this is increasingly where my mind goes. Strong tier one instruction is universally designed instruction, right? It's instruction that acknowledges, acknowledges learner variability from the start. It's proactive. It wants to remove barriers rather than waiting for students to struggle. And when we activate the effective network, we're helping students connect to learning and see its value. When we support the recognition network, we're providing flexible pathways for students to access information and build understanding. And when we activate the strategic network, we're giving students opportunities to think, communicate, reflect, develop the skills that contribute to learner agency. And when we weave those elements into whole group instruction, we're creating learning experiences that work for more students. And that for me is the overlap that's so important between UDL and MTSS. It's not about working harder. It's about designing more intentionally. And I'm recording this episode right as the summer is starting. And many teachers might be thinking about the new school year and the kinds of learning experiences they want to create for their students. So if you find yourself feeling inspired, maybe revisit a whole group instructional session using this kind of approach or framework as a lens. Where might you incorporate hooks to spark curiosity? Where might you break instruction into smaller segments or chunks? Where might students benefit from time to pause and process independently? Where could cooperative learning create opportunities for more collaborative meaning-making? And you don't need to redesign everything. You know, I would start with one lesson. And then when you implement it in the classroom, just pay attention. Notice whether students are more engaged. Notice are they contributing more ideas? Are they asking more questions? Where are they demonstrating deeper understanding of content as the lesson of unfolds? And maybe most importantly, notice whether more students are able to access and participate in the learning experience. Because at the end of the day, that's really what UDL and multi-tiered systems of support are all about and striving to accomplish. Not creating more work for teachers, creating learning experiences that just work better for kids. So as always, I want to thank you guys for joining me for this episode. I always appreciate you being here. I hope you are enjoying your summer and finding ways to fill your bucket, relax, connect with the people you care about. And if you enjoyed this episode, please feel free. Reach out. Let me know. Ask questions. I love your comments. You can find me online anywhere you hang out, whether it is Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn. You can always submit a question directly via my website, KatlynTucker.com. And if this is work happening on your school or campus, like share it with your colleagues, school leadership, I will also include in the show notes a blog I wrote about this process of kind of chunking and engaging. I will also share my think-pair, share quad, and my numbered heads-to-gather guide for anybody who's interested in exploring those cooperative learning structures as well. So have a wonderful rest of the week and I will see you back here next Tuesday. [Music]