The Universal Design for Learning guidelines were extensively studied to understand inclusive learning and teaching in higher education. However, to date, there have been few studies that approached UDL-based asynchronous university courses from the needs satisfaction perspective in self-determination theory. To address this gap, researchers designed and implemented two 15-week asynchronous online courses based on UDL. They then tested their effectiveness with college freshmen by adopting a sequential explanatory mixed method. The study aimed to examine whether asynchronous instruction based on (...) UDL catered to inclusion and diversity across gender and academic background and whether the instructional design supported learner engagement and needs satisfaction. The findings showed that both male and female students as well as Arts and Sciences students equally engaged in the courses and perceived the needs support from the course design. However, the study also found that although universal design supported autonomy and competence, it nonetheless failed to fully satisfy learners’ relatedness needs. The researchers concluded by discussing empirical and theoretical implications. (shrink)

Separate issues of possible relations between generations in the context of the concept of social justice are investigated. Special attention is paid to the need to preserve the environment, natural resources, the preservation of life on earth, biological diversity, the need to search for alternative energy sources, to ensure favorable living conditions for future generations. The author draws attention to the theoretical difficulties in unambiguously defining the rights of future generations, to the difficulties of their legal formulations. The author explores (...) the problem of justice in relations between generations from the point of view of the materialistic understanding of history, the dialectic of social existence and social consciousness, the relationship of needs, interests and values, the principle of development and the principle of historicism. The study of possible relations between generations in the context of the realities prevailing in the modern world contributes to the reassessment of the established values of modern society and the formation of a new worldview that takes into account the need to preserve peace, the cultural heritage of mankind, natural resources, human habitat, biological diversity, the transfer of resources to future generations. In this regard, there is a reassessment of the known norms of justice, morality and law. Modern interpretations of global problems, including issues of intertemporal justice, were a reflection of new historical realities. The creation of favorable conditions for future generations should not harm the necessary and reasonable needs of modern society. (shrink)

The problem of social equality and social inequality is investigated in the light of the concept of justice, the concept of just inequality and unfair equality. The author substantiates the interrelation of justice and equality as concepts and phenomena that are presented in an indissoluble unity and are actually a two-pronged problem. Justice is interpreted by the author as a measure of social equality and social inequality. The author explores the problem of social inequality from the point of view of (...) a materialistic understanding of history, the principle of development and an axiological approach. The concept of natural justice is investigated as the basis of justice established by people, that is, social justice. The legitimacy of the conditional use of the concept of natural justice as a natural right of an individual to use his natural gifts, which under certain conditions of social life activity can be decisive in human life, can give him fair advantages over other members of the society. The natural personal potential of an individual can cause significant differences in the intellectual and spiritual abilities of people, which, in the presence of diligence, determination and appropriate social norms, necessarily generate social inequality in society. Fair inequality does not contradict natural justice. Natural justice is contradicted by unfair inequality. A person by nature has the right to life, freedom and property in compliance with the mandatory norms established in this society. Justice established by people should not contradict natural justice. The validity of the use of the concept of legitimate elite as the most outstanding personalities in various respects, having high achievements and services to society in various spheres of human activity, is substantiated. (shrink)