Theme/topic:
This paper addresses the critical theme of implementing universal design in digital learning resources within higher education in Norway. It explores how lecturers perceive and enact accessibility in their teaching materials and the extent to which their methods are inclusive for all students, particularly those with disabilities.

Research Questions:

1. How do lecturers in higher education implement accessibility in their learning resources?
2. Are their teaching methods inclusive, and if not, what measures need to be implemented to achieve inclusivity?

Theoretical Framework: 
Previous studies (Sanderson, Kessel & Chen, 2018; Svendby, 2020) have shown that lecturers in higher education have a positive attitude towards universal design of ICT, but that they lack the necessary competence and workings conditions.
The study is anchored in Lipsky's concept of street-level bureaucracy (1980, 2010), which serves as a foundational framework. This theory is central in examining the challenges that lecturers in higher education face when they function as front-line implementers of policies related to universal design. It provides insight into how educators, as street-level bureaucrats, navigate and interpret educational policy, and how this policy is translated into practical application in the context of universal design
A hermeneutic phenomenological approach, deeply rooted in Gadamer's philosophy, is employed to gain a comprehensive understanding of the lecturers' experiences and perspectives, focusing on the theme of accessibility.
Method: (see next field)

Intended Purpose: The paper aims to:

• Highlight the discrepancies between the positive attitudes towards universal design and its practical implementation in higher education.
• Emphasize the need for comprehensive training and development programs for lecturers in universal design principles.
• Advocate for institutional policy and practice reassessment to support the effective implementation of universal design.
• Provide actionable recommendations for enhancing the accessibility of digital learning materials in higher education.

Methodological Approach: The study utilized a qualitative research method, conducting in-depth interviews with eighteen lecturers from twelve different universities in Norway. These lecturers were selected through employee lists on university websites and were interviewed to explore their practices and attitudes towards universal design in tools such as Canvas, PowerPoint, Word, and videos. The hermeneutic phenomenological approach guided the thematic analysis of the interview data, emphasizing the iterative process of understanding, reflecting the Gadamerian hermeneutic circle. This method allowed for a nuanced exploration of the lecturers' narratives, recognizing the researchers' biases and preconceptions and achieving a 'fusion of horizons' in the analysis.

Findings: The analysis revealed several key themes: * A lack of time and institutional support for discussing and implementing pedagogical work. * Challenges in creating accessible content, particularly with automated captioning in Norwegian dialects. * A gap between regulatory expectations and the practical feasibility of implementing universal design. * A general unpreparedness for inclusive teaching, particularly in digital environments like Canvas. * A recognition that intuitive ICT skills are insufficient for ensuring true accessibility. * The crucial role of leadership in prioritizing and supporting accessibility initiatives. Conclusion: The paper concludes with specific recommendations for making learning resources accessible: * Anchoring the importance of accessibility at the leadership level. * Providing lecturers with access to professional and updated training materials, including online asynchronous resources with practical examples and interactive tasks. * Facilitating discussions on universal design within professional communities. * Enhancing the understanding among lecturers of why accessibility is crucial for an inclusive learning environment. This paper contributes to a deeper understanding of the challenges and potential strategies for implementing universal design in higher education, underscoring the important role of lecturers in bridging the gap between policy and practice.

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-level bureaucracy : dilemmas of the individual in public services (30th anniversary expanded ed., pp. XXIII, 275). Russell Sage Foundation. Sanderson, N. C., Kessel, S., & Chen, W. (2022). What do faculty members know about universal design and digital accessibility? A qualitative study in computer science and engineering disciplines. Universal Access in the Information Society, 21(2), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00875-x Svendby. (2020). Lecturers’ Teaching Experiences with Invisibly Disabled Students in Higher Education: Connecting and Aiming at Inclusion. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.16993/sjdr.712