Inclusion or standardization? An analysis of the paradoxes of UDL (Universal Design for Learning)

Abstract

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) has been widely promoted as an innovative and inclusive model for pedagogical planning, based on principles of accessibility, curricular flexibility, and respect for student diversity. However, its implementation in specific educational contexts, especially in Brazil, reveals important limitations. This article proposes a critical analysis of UDL, based on a theoretical and documentary review, highlighting the tensions between its normative proposal of universality and the material, formative, and epistemological conditions that shape teaching practice in public schools. It is argued that, by adopting a conception of inclusion centered on universal guidelines, UDL runs the risk of standardizing practices and silencing local and cultural specificities. Furthermore, its frequent association with technological solutions can contribute to the devaluation of the relational, ethical, and creative role of the educator. The criticism presented also points to the strategic use of UDL in discourses of educational innovation, without due investment in infrastructure, continuing education, and collective participation. It is concluded that, although UDL has transformative potential, its uncritical appropriation can reduce inclusion to a technical protocol, disconnected from the political and pedagogical commitments that support a truly emancipatory education. It is therefore necessary to challenge its epistemological bases and demand a situated, dialogic approach that is committed to the multiple voices that make up the school routine.