1. I agree with the view that often curriculum is disabled, inflexible, and often poses barriers rather than support optimal learning. From the view of a person with very little experience teaching, I find curriculum daunting and overwhelming, wondering how on earth I’ll cover all of the material with my students. In my opinion, teachers (especially new ones) become so bogged down in all the other responsibilities of being a teacher that they may be simply focusing on the content and not the quality or way in which the information is being taught.
2. I think that analyzing the curriculum for strengths and weaknesses is highly beneficial, and a great alternative to analyzing student strengths and weaknesses. I believe that a strong, optimal curriculum, created with UDL in mind, can allow for all students’ strengths to become evident and create well-rounded learners. The challenges for this approach will include the progress of students who don’t do well, regardless of how they are being taught. I think it is just important to remember that there are always exceptions and students who may need extra assistance.
ISTC 301 
I agree with you completely. I do think, even with analyzing the curriculum, there will still be a lot of challenges. Every student is different and will need different attention. i like how you talk about teachers having a lot of responsibilities and worried about covering all of the information needed. When worried about making AYP and their students passing, teachers really don’t have time to find the best ways to teach sometimes because they are so much information to get to the students.
I like that you talked about the UDL bringing students to be well rounded learners. And I agree that teachers may be focused on the curriculum and getting the content taught that they neglect the process and experience of learning. I think that as a future teacher, referring to the UDL would be a great benefit to check my teaching and insure the students are recieving this well-rounded education.