Design learning that works for everyone
InclusiveLearn helps educators, training providers, and learning designers review courses, identify barriers, and create inclusive redesign plans grounded in Universal Design for Learning. Free to start. Built by accessibility specialists.
Three areas. One inclusive workflow.
From question to plan, in five steps
- Upload or describe a lesson, course, assessment, or training activity.
- Receive a UDL review across Engagement, Representation, and Action & Expression.
- See barriers identified in plain language with priority levels.
- Generate redesign suggestions with practical, inclusive alternatives.
- Export a report for your team, your organisation, or your funder.
Built by accessibility specialists, for inclusive teams
Who it is for
- Teachers, lecturers, and curriculum developers
- Instructional designers and learning teams
- Schools, universities, and training providers
- NGOs, workplace L&D, and CSI departments
- Accessibility consultants and inclusion teams
What makes it useful
- Plain language — no jargon, no theory dump
- Practical recommendations, not abstract principles
- Privacy-first: no learner data uploads required
- Human review for formal reports
- WCAG AAA accessible by design
Welcome back, Fadila
Here is a snapshot of your inclusive design work.
You are on the Free plan
You can review unlimited lessons. Course, assessment, and learning material reviews are available on paid plans.
My recent reviews
| Material | Status | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Grade 10 Life Sciences — Photosynthesis | Report ready | 72% |
| Workplace Induction Module 2 | In progress | — |
| Financial Literacy Assessment | Barriers found | 54% |
| NQF 5 Customer Service Course | Report ready | 81% |
My UDL area progress
Average alignment scores across your last 10 reviews.
My top recommendations
- Add audio narration to written content in 8 of your lessons. High
- Offer assessment alternatives beyond written response in 5 modules. High
- Add captions and transcripts to embedded videos in 4 courses. Medium
- Provide glossary support for technical vocabulary in 6 lessons. Medium
- Add learner choice in topic examples in 3 modules. Low
Stellenbosch University Faculty of Education
Full access to all review types, team workspace, approvals, custom rubrics, and human review.
Team Admin view
You are viewing institution-wide metrics for Stellenbosch University Faculty of Education. Drill down by team or individual reviewer using the filters below.
Reviews by team
| Team | Reviews | Avg score | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Faculty of Education | 78 | 74% | On target |
| Faculty of Engineering | 54 | 69% | Improving |
| Faculty of Health Sciences | 92 | 78% | On target |
| Centre for Learning Tech | 41 | 58% | Needs support |
| Continuing Education | 53 | 72% | On target |
Institution UDL alignment
Average across all reviews completed in the last 90 days.
Reports awaiting your approval
| Report | Reviewer | Submitted |
|---|---|---|
| Photosynthesis Lesson | Fadila L. | 2 days ago |
| Customer Service Course | Pieter v.d.B. | 3 days ago |
| Statistics Tutorial | Thandi M. | 4 days ago |
| Disability Awareness Workshop | Dr Naidoo | 5 days ago |
Privacy & AI safety
- 4 uploads flagged this week for sensitive data review
- 0 reports issued without human review (target: 0)
- 3 bias-check flags raised and resolved
- Last accessibility scan: 28 April 2026 — passed AAA
Start a new UDL review
Walk through five short steps to get a structured, plain-language review of your learning material.
Review type
Upload or describe
Privacy check
UDL analysis
Report
Privacy comes first
Do not upload identifiable learner information, assessment scripts with student names, or sensitive personal data. If you need to review such material, use the secure team workspace with consent in place.
My reviews
| Material | Type | UDL score | Status | Last updated | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 10 Life Sciences — Photosynthesis | Lesson | 72% | Report ready | 27 Apr 2026 | |
| Workplace Induction Module 2 | Course | — | In progress | 28 Apr 2026 | |
| Financial Literacy Assessment | Assessment | 54% | Barriers found | 25 Apr 2026 | |
| NQF 5 Customer Service Course | Course | 81% | Report ready | 22 Apr 2026 | |
| First-Year Statistics Tutorial | Lesson | 65% | Report ready | 20 Apr 2026 | |
| Disability Awareness Workshop | Lesson | 89% | Report ready | 18 Apr 2026 |
Barriers identified
Plain-language summary of barriers found in Financial Literacy Assessment. Each barrier includes a priority level, the UDL area it affects, and a suggested next step.
12 barriers found
3 high priority. 5 medium priority. 4 low priority. Estimated time to address all: 4–6 hours of redesign work.
High priority
Single response format only
What we found: The assessment requires all learners to submit a 1,500-word written response. This excludes learners who communicate better through speech, visual, or practical demonstration.
Why this matters: Single-format assessments measure communication skill as much as actual understanding, especially for second-language learners and learners with specific learning differences.
No alternative to dense text
What we found: Key concepts (compound interest, inflation, opportunity cost) are explained only in long paragraphs of text. There are no diagrams, no audio, no worked visual examples, and no glossary.
Why this matters: Learners who process information better visually or auditorily, or who have low reading confidence, are filtered out before they can demonstrate financial understanding.
No relevance to learners' real lives
What we found: All examples use mortgage and stock market scenarios, which do not match the lived financial realities of most learners (informal income, stokvels, mobile money, family financial pressure).
Why this matters: When examples do not connect to learners' lives, motivation and persistence drop, and learning does not transfer outside the classroom.
Medium priority
No reflection or self-monitoring prompts
Learners are not asked to reflect on what they understand, what they are unsure of, or how they will apply the learning.
Vocabulary not explained
Specialised financial terms appear without definition or simpler synonyms.
Inclusive redesign suggestions
Practical, learner-centred alternatives for Financial Literacy Assessment.
Suggestion 1 — Offer four ways to demonstrate understanding
Action & ExpressionReplace the single 1,500-word written response with a choice of four equally valid response formats:
- Written response (1,000–1,500 words) — for learners who prefer extended writing.
- Recorded oral explanation (5–8 minutes) — for learners who explain better through speech.
- Visual response (annotated infographic, mind map, or storyboard) — for learners who think visually.
- Practical demonstration (worked household budget with reflection) — for learners who learn by doing.
Use the same rubric across all four formats so the assessment measures understanding, not communication channel.
Suggestion 2 — Multi-format core content
RepresentationFor each financial concept, provide:
- A short written explanation (200 words max, plain language).
- A 2–3 minute audio version (or read-aloud option).
- One simple diagram or worked visual example.
- A glossary card with definitions and a real-life example.
This adds about 30–40% production time once, but reaches significantly more learners and reduces the need for repeated explanation.
Suggestion 3 — Anchor in learners' real financial lives
EngagementReplace mortgage and stock-market scenarios with examples that match learners' actual financial reality:
- Stokvel and savings group dynamics.
- Mobile money transfers and fees.
- Family financial obligations and "black tax".
- Informal income smoothing.
- Microloan trade-offs.
Offer learners a choice of which scenario to work with, so they can connect to what is most relevant.
UDL Explorer
Plain-language guide to designing for Engagement, Representation, and Action & Expression.
Engagement — designing for the "why" of learning
Engagement is about helping learners want to learn, sustain effort, and self-regulate. Without engagement, even the best content fails.
Review prompts
- Choice and autonomy — Where can learners choose topic, pace, format, or partner?
- Relevance and authenticity — Do examples connect to learners' lives, cultures, and goals?
- Belonging and community — Does the design make every learner feel they are seen and welcomed?
- Collaboration — Are there opportunities to work together, not just side by side?
- Feedback — Is feedback frequent, kind, specific, and growth-focused?
- Reflection — Are learners prompted to think about how they learn?
- Motivation and persistence — Is the workload paced and supported, with visible progress?
- Emotional capacity — Is the environment psychologically safe?
- Biases, threats, and distractions — What might make learners disengage, withdraw, or feel unsafe?
Representation — designing for the "what" of learning
Representation is about giving learners multiple ways to access information and build understanding.
Review prompts
- Multiple ways to perceive — Is content available in text, audio, and visual form?
- Customising display — Can learners change font, contrast, speed, or layout?
- Vocabulary and symbols — Are technical terms explained, with examples?
- Language and dialects — Is plain language used? Are translations or summaries available?
- Multiple media — Is content delivered through more than one channel?
- Prior knowledge — Is what learners already know surfaced and built on?
- Big ideas and relationships — Are concepts connected, not just listed?
- Comprehension — Are there built-in checks for understanding?
- Transfer and generalisation — Can learners apply learning beyond this lesson?
Action & Expression — designing for the "how" of learning
Action and Expression is about giving learners multiple ways to interact, communicate, and demonstrate understanding.
Review prompts
- Multiple response methods — Can learners respond in writing, speech, visual, or practical formats?
- Accessible technologies and materials — Are tools usable with assistive technology, on mobile, and offline?
- Multiple media for communication — Are audio, video, written, and visual options offered?
- Tools for construction and creativity — Can learners build, design, record, draw, or perform?
- Graduated support — Are there scaffolds for learners who need more structure?
- Goal-setting — Are learners involved in setting their own goals?
- Planning — Is there support for learners who need help breaking work into steps?
- Organisation — Are templates, checklists, or examples provided?
- Monitoring progress — Can learners see their own growth?
- Challenging exclusionary practices — Have you checked for assumptions about what "competent" looks like?
UDL Review Report
Grade 10 Life Sciences — Photosynthesis Lesson | 27 April 2026 | Reviewer: Fadila Lagadien
Review summary
This lesson plan demonstrates a strong commitment to engagement and authentic context, but underuses Representation strategies and offers limited Action & Expression options. Targeted improvements in three areas could raise the overall UDL score from 72% to an estimated 88%.
Strengths
- Real-world hook (local plant biodiversity) anchors the lesson in learners' environment.
- Group discussion is well-scaffolded with role cards.
- Lesson includes a clear learning intention shared with learners.
- Reflection prompt at the end invites self-monitoring.
Potential barriers
| Barrier | UDL area | Priority |
|---|---|---|
| Content delivered only through teacher talk and text | Representation | High |
| No glossary or vocabulary support for technical terms | Representation | Medium |
| Single end-of-lesson exit ticket format | Action & Expression | Medium |
| No caption/transcript for the video clip used | Representation | High |
| No mobile-friendly version of the worksheet | Action & Expression | Low |
UDL-aligned recommendations
Quick wins (under 1 hour)
- Add captions and a downloadable transcript to the photosynthesis video.
- Provide a one-page glossary of key terms with simple definitions and examples.
- Convert the exit ticket into three response options: written, drawn, or verbal.
Longer-term improvements (over multiple lessons)
- Build a multi-format content pack: short audio explanation, infographic, and video.
- Co-design the next iteration with two learner representatives.
- Add a self-monitoring rubric so learners can track their own understanding.
Human review note
This report was generated with AI assistance and reviewed by an inclusive learning specialist. AI is used to surface patterns and possibilities — final professional judgement and contextual decisions remain with the educator and the institution. This report does not constitute formal compliance certification.
Learning Materials Accessibility Checker
Reviews documents, slides, videos, images, and digital activities for accessibility concerns aligned to WCAG 2.2.
Last scan — Workplace Induction Module 2
Top issues
| Issue | Where | Severity | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Images missing alt text | Slides 4, 7, 12, 18 | Critical | Add descriptive alt text |
| Insufficient colour contrast (3.2:1) | Slide 9 body text | Critical | Use darker text on light bg |
| Video without captions | Module 2 introduction | Critical | Add captions and transcript |
| Heading levels skip from H1 to H4 | Worksheet PDF | Medium | Use logical heading order |
| Link text reads "click here" | Module overview | Medium | Use descriptive link text |
Assessment Redesign Tool
Help learners show what they know in multiple, equally valid ways.
Current assessment
Title: Financial Literacy — End of Module Assessment
Format: Single 1,500-word written response
UDL alignment: Action & Expression score of 38%
Redesigned: four equally valid response formats
Same learning outcomes. Same rubric. Four ways to demonstrate understanding.
Option A — Written
Structured written response of 1,000–1,500 words, addressing four prompts.
Option B — Oral
5–8 minute recorded oral explanation, with optional visual aid.
Option C — Visual
Annotated infographic, mind map, or storyboard with short written narrative.
Option D — Practical
Worked household budget with reflection on choices made.
Resource & Template Hub
Templates, examples, checklists, and short learning resources.
UDL Lesson Planning Template
Editable Word template structured around the three UDL areas.
Inclusive Assessment Rubric
One rubric, multiple response formats. Spreadsheet format.
Accessibility Quick Checklist
One-page WCAG 2.2 quick check for learning materials.
Plain Language Style Guide
Short guide for writing learning content at Grade 8 reading level.
Multi-Format Content Workflow
How to produce written + audio + visual versions efficiently.
Learner Co-Design Toolkit
Templates for involving learners in designing their own learning.
Team Workspace
Inclusive Education Team — Stellenbosch University Faculty of Education
Assigned tasks
| Task | Assignee | Due | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Add captions to Module 2 video | Thandi M. | 2 May | In progress |
| Build glossary for Stats 101 | Pieter v.d.B. | 5 May | Open |
| Review redesign for Customer Service | Fadila L. | 30 Apr | In progress |
| Approve Photosynthesis report | Dr Naidoo | 29 Apr | Awaiting approval |
Admin Dashboard
Platform-wide visibility for institutional administrators.
AI review log
All AI-assisted analyses are logged for transparency.
- 318 AI reviews completed this month
- 94 reports escalated to human reviewer
- 0 reports issued without human review
- 12 bias-check flags raised and resolved
Accessibility testing log
Platform self-tests against WCAG 2.2 AAA.
- Last automated scan: 28 April 2026
- Manual screen-reader test: 20 April 2026
- Keyboard-only test: 20 April 2026
- User testing with disabled learners: 12 April 2026
Flagged uploads
Uploads automatically flagged for sensitive data review before processing.
| File | User | Flag reason | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| student_results_2026.xlsx | j.smith@uni.ac.za | Contains learner names | |
| iep_review_draft.docx | m.dlamini@uni.ac.za | Possible IEP content |
Plans for every team
Start free. Talk to us when you are ready for more.
Free
For individual educators starting their inclusive design journey.
No credit card required. No time limit.
- Unlimited lesson reviews
- Full UDL Explorer (Engagement, Representation, Action & Expression)
- Plain-language barrier identification
- AI-assisted redesign suggestions
- Word and PDF report export
- Accessibility checker for lessons
- Resource & template hub
- WCAG AAA accessible by design
- POPIA & GDPR-aligned privacy
- Course, assessment, and material reviews
- Team workspace and task assignment
- Custom institutional rubrics
- Human review workflow
Teams & Institutions
For schools, universities, training providers, and workplace L&D teams.
We tailor plans to your team size, review volume, and compliance needs.
- Everything in Free, plus:
- Course, assessment, and material reviews
- Team workspace with task assignment and approvals
- Custom institutional rubrics
- Department-level reporting
- Human expert review on formal reports
- Single sign-on (SSO) and role-based access
- API access and LMS integrations
- Multilingual support
- Dedicated success manager
- Custom contract and SLA
- Onboarding and team training
Discounts and partnerships
We offer significant discounts for registered NPOs, public schools, and disability-led organisations. We also partner on research projects and accessibility programmes. Email hello@beaccessible.co.za to start a conversation.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Free plan really free forever?
Yes. The Free plan has no time limit and no credit card requirement. You can review as many lessons as you need.
What does \"talk to us\" actually look like?
A short discovery call (30–45 minutes) where we learn about your team and your goals, followed by a tailored plan and quote. No pressure, no scripts.
Can I try paid features before committing?
Yes. Most teams start with a structured pilot — typically 30 days with a defined scope — so you can see the value before signing a contract.
Do you offer pilots or research partnerships?
Yes. We work with universities, NGOs, and government departments on inclusive education research and pilots. Reach out to discuss.