Defining Curriculum: Finding Clarity Through UDL
In Episode 141 of UDL in 15 Minutes, Gordon Eldridge, Director of Curriculum and Professional Development at the International School of Brussels shared how he applied UDL thinking to his school's assessment policy, but along the way, we uncovered something equally important. He discovered that UDL could be used to interpret standards and benchmarks, creating greater flexibility in learning for all students.
The Curriculum Conundrum
Ask ten educators to define curriculum, and you might get ten different answers. Some view curriculum as a comprehensive document that prescribes what teachers should teach and how they should teach it. Others see it as standards and benchmarks alone. Still others think of curriculum as encompassing everything from yearly scope and sequence down to daily lesson plans. This lack of consistency creates confusion for teachers trying to understand where their professional autonomy begins and prescribed requirements end.
Gordon shared how his school approaches this challenge: “At ISB, we sort of think of curriculum as the top-level stuff, the set of standards and benchmarks that every student is expected to achieve.” The unit plans and lessons that follow become teacher responsibilities, created to anticipate the needs of learners. This distinction matters because it clarifies (a) that their thinking about planning aligns with UDL and (b) they understand that flexibility must live in the system.
The UDL Definition
Universal Design for Learning offers a helpful framework by defining curriculum as four interconnected components: goals, assessments, methods, and materials. This definition acknowledges that curriculum isn't just about content standards—it's the entire ecosystem of what we teach, how we measure learning, the instructional approaches we use, and the resources we provide.
What makes this definition powerful is how it illuminates where barriers to learning often hide. When goals are too prescriptive about specific knowledge rather than deeper understanding, flexibility disappears. When assessments only allow one way to demonstrate learning, some students are blocked from showing what they know. When methods and materials sneak into standards documents as if they are requirements, teachers lose the agency to respond to their students' needs.
Also, the premise of UDL is that we look at and apply the UDL Guidelines before instruction occurs. We use it to anticipate the barriers our learners will face and we use the information within the UDL Guidelines to choose options that will lower those barriers.
Designing for Flexibility
Gordon's insight resonates here: “Once we've identified the bigger pieces of understanding as the major targets, it's possible to get there with all different kinds of knowledge that might be relevant in different contexts with different classes at different times.” This is UDL in action—keeping our eyes on the essential learning outcomes while remaining flexible about the paths students take to get there.
When we apply UDL's principles to curriculum design, we build in options from the start. We separate the non-negotiables (the understanding we want all students to develop) from the variables (the specific knowledge, methods, and materials that might change based on context). This isn't about lowering expectations—it's about creating multiple pathways to rigorous learning.
The goal, as always, is learner agency. When curriculum provides clear targets but flexible routes, students can make meaningful choices about their learning. Teachers can exercise professional judgment. And schools can ensure all learners have access to challenging, grade-level content while receiving the support they need to succeed.
Understanding how we define curriculum matters because it shapes everything that follows. With UDL as our framework, we can design curriculum that's both rigorous and flexible, supporting every learner's journey toward greater agency.