for Learning ( UDL ) guidelines developed by
the Center for Applied Special Technology
( CAST , 2020 ). As with any area of inclusivity ,
providing diverse and flexible means of engaging
with knowledge so that as many learners can participate in the teaching and learning activities is a core principle with ARCs as well . In Table 2 , the main UDL guidelines are grouped in three categories , which in turn are mapped onto ARC-related activities as follows : 1 ) knowledge representation , which will be reflected in the selection of appropriate , accessible and relevant ARC reading texts ; 2 ) knowledge expression , which will be reflected in a range of flexible , accessible and scaffolded to ARC activities ; and 3 ) knowledge , which will be reflected in the availability of contextualised and accessible instructional support and scaffolding .
In terms of means of representation and expression , it might be useful to consider a range of formats of the reading text ( e . g ., mp3 files ) and flexibility in the output of roles such as the “ Visualiser ” ( e . g ., using Lego builds , diagrams , or scrolls ). The former will allow learners with SpLDs , users of screen readers , or those with caring commitments to engage with a reading text without the print medium / page or screen being an obstacle ; whereas the latter will enable students with different learning styles or those struggling with different levels of motor control to take on the “ Visualiser ” role .
Other than the medium , the length , complexity and cultural situatedness of a reading text might be a barrier for some learners . To accommodate a range of needs , it might be useful to consider “ slow ” timing and embedding extensive reading ( Rhead , 2019 ; Soliman , 2012 ), or negotiating the length of required reading ( Shelton-Strong , 2012 ), so that learners can engage critically and holistically with reading texts without feeling the pressure to process it cognitively within a tight timeframe . Alternatively , given timetable constraints , it might be a better option to break down the reading text into shorter sections with guiding questions provided in advance ( Seburn , 2015 ), use jigsaw reading activities or text maps / scrolls ( Abegglen et al ., 2020 ) to support learners into reconstructing the whole reading text together .
A major factor affecting engagement is learners ’ perception of the ARC relevance to their studies . Thus , giving learners the freedom to choose a reading text , self-nominate for a role , or personalise reading roles to their own needs can improve learner motivation and promote ownership and monitoring of own learning . Daniels ( 2002 ) and Shelton-Strong ( 2012 ) have suggested that adherence to reading roles guidance might sometimes lead to unnatural peer-led discussions , lacking flow and spontaneous interaction , hence they ’ ve recommended the use of reading logs instead . To signal the link between academic reading texts and real-world tasks / problems beyond the instrumentality of academia ( Allen , 2011 ), use of perspective-taking activities such as Eduard de Bono ’ s “ thinking hats ” ( 1971 ) to scaffold the “ Discussion leader ” questions might be useful . In terms of roles , it is also important to recognise that some might be underutilised , misunderstood or less relevant in different disciplines ; for instance , the “ Highlighter ” in STEM or the “ Visualiser ” in Medicine and Healthcare might require additional guidance ; alternatively , merging roles such as the “ Connector ” and the “ Contextualiser ” in certain contexts ( e . g ., when students have limited prior knowledge of the subject ) might be appropriate ( Williams , 2007 ). Conclusion This paper has demonstrated the use and adaptability of Academic Reading Circles as an innovative and inclusive reading practice in developing students ’ criticality . By offering flexibility of form and means and removing metacognitive and socialisation barriers to learning , teachers can adapt the reading text and their delivery of this in order to support students in creative ways of analysing and interpreting content . As a result , students are given agency in taking ownership of their learning and building an understanding of how knowledge is co-constructed . 20