Jane Bringolf, Author at Centre for Universal Design Australia

Making online spaces accessible

Citizen action has never been more important and much of this is done online and through social media. This is due to the ease of technology, a pandemic and plain economics. Consequently, it’s important to make online spaces accessible for everyone.

On The Commons Social Change website, Manisha Amin provides some advice form making online spaces accessible. Here are some facts about the Australian population:

- - 18% living with disability
  - 70% of disabilities are invisible
  - 20% have a long term health condition
  - 28% live in regional and remote areas
  - 48% born overseas or have parent born overseas
  - 8% men are colour blind

These figures don’t include people who have a temporary loss of capability, such as a broken leg.

An inclusive social environment, online or face to face, is created through respect and listening. Being accountable for your own emotions and accepting all experiences are valid are important too.

Online meetings have benefits and drawbacks and not everyone needs the same features. For example, having video on helps people to lip read and see facial expressions. But some people with neurodiverse conditions find video distracting.

Live captioning is better than auto-generated captioning and provides a transcript later. Captioning is also good for people with limited English language skills or find different accents difficult to understand.

The article is titled, Digital Accessibility: Making Online Spaces Accessible. There’s more information about preparing for meetings and good advice about learning to be inclusive. Don’t worry about not getting it right first time – it’s a learning journey for everyone.

In addition, meeting facilitators need to be aware of the power dynamics in the room. Who holds the pen? Who has the loudest voice or the most influence?

Sheri Byrne Haber has also written about Zoom for people with vision loss.

Economics of universal design in ICT

It is often thought that economic arguments will win the day if social justice arguments are ignored. This may be partially true if these arguments are allowed to be heard. “On Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Universal Design of ICT”, is another attempt to show that universal design has cost benefits, particularly if you take the longer view. This research paper on the economics of universal design in ICT is from Norway.

Abstract: In the ICT and IT domains, universal design is typically viewed as a burden and an expense, and its application is often justified only by ethics and/or legislation. Advocates for universal design are arguing that it is cost-effective, but so far there are few studies that document this in a detailed way. In this work, we discuss related research and studies dealing with the costs and benefits of accessible and usable ICT solutions.

In particular, we discuss the findings regarding what is a universally designed solution, what is needed to make such a solution, how much does it cost, what impact can be anticipated by the extra effort, and how it can be measured.

Finally, we suggest an approach for carrying out cost-benefit analyses of developing universally designed solutions. There is a weak indication that the economical benefits of UD solutions are much higher than the initial and running costs.

I think it is problematic to talk “cost-benefit” because politically it seems it has to benefit those who are not excluded. “Cost effectiveness” is a somewhat different measure with a focus on outcomes rather than outputs. Schraner et al have developed a different model using assistive technology as a case study. Jane Bringolf, Editor.

Creating a walkway with universal design

Lookout towers are usually built with steps, so how can you make them accessible? The answer is of course a ramp, but not just any ramp. The Stovner Tower in Oslo shows how you can create a beautiful walkway with universal design. It curves and loops for 260 metres until it reaches 15 metres above ground. This provides excellent views of the city and landscape beyond. Located on the forest edge it is a destination for everyone to enjoy.

The project is described in detail with several images on the DOGA website. The key part of the design was the co-design process and community consultations. This was essential for gaining community support at the beginning of the project.

The path is wide enough for two prams or wheelchairs to pass each other. The slightly inward sloping railing gives an additional sense of safety. Lighting at night makes it attractive as well as safe and accessible both day and night.

The tower has become a popular destination for both locals and visitors. It’s used for weddings, meditation, exercise, celebrations and encourages people to experience nature.

This project is an example of collaboration between local government, landscape architects and contractors. Universal design drove both the design process and design outcomes. It won a landscape architecture award for universal design in 2020. There’s a video showing it with snow and lighting on the visitor website.

Norway has universal design written into their planning and zoning codes. Other articles on Norway are:

Downsizing? But where to?

Downsizing is not happening even if policy makers think it’s a good idea for older generations. This is the bottom line of a brief from AHURI. So, what is downsizing?

First, this concept is mostly about home owners not renters. There is financial downsizing to release equity by buying a cheaper home. But only 20 per cent of owner-occupiers aged 55 to 64 years in 2001 moved to another home of lesser value by 2016 (this age cohort was the most likely to have ‘financially downsized’ during this 15 year period).

Physical downsizing is often seen as reducing the number of bedrooms, but this is a crude measure. This is because the number of bedrooms isn’t the issue. The size of all the rooms could be smaller, but it’s the size of the yard and maintenance that really matters to older people.

Fewer than 15 per cent of older home-owners moved to another home with fewer bedrooms between 2001 and 2016. This research serves to confirm the key study by Bruce Judd and team where they found all bedrooms were in use. Also, older people spend more time at home, so it’s their space for recreation and activities

The title of the brief is, Understanding downsizing: What are the different types of downsizing and how common is it? There are references to other related AHURI research in this brief.

Downsizing: But where to?

The idea of downsizing is appealing to empty-nesters. But where can they go? The biggest barrier to downsizing is finding a suitable home in the right location. Many empty nesters just want a smaller home and yard. Governments have a vested interest in older Australians having a home in which it is safe in later life. It’s cost effective for everyone.

Sometimes it isn’t the home they want to downsize – it’s the garden maintenance. ‘Empty’ bedrooms do not necessarily mean that a home is under-utilised. This is a crude measure because spare bedrooms are needed as guest and hobby rooms. Spending more time at home means the home has to do more. A small home can limit options for different activities.

The Conversation discusses these issues and has links to well-researched reports. The title of the article is, Half of over-55s are open to downsizing – if only they find homes that suit them.

A similar article was published earlier in The Conversation titled, Lack of housing choice frustrates would-be downsizers.

When it comes to house size, Bruce Judd and colleagues from UNSW found that retirees generally want three bedrooms for flexibility of lifestyle. Some for visiting family and looking after grandchildren. Others need room for hobbies or a study. Some couples sleep separately for health reasons. Typically, retirees spend more time at home now that they are not working, so space becomes even more important.

Baby Boomers defy predictions.

Housing experts predicted “the great senior sell-off”. But baby boomers aren’t downsizing – they are staying put.

Mimi Kirk in a CityLab article looked at new research from Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies that discusses issues related to housing type, affordability and the different expectations of millennials and boomers. Millennials are generally uninterested in the style of their parents’ homes. So there goes the myth that boomers are (selfishly) holding onto homes that millennials could buy.

Policy makers think that downsizing is largely about finances and homes being too large to suit ageing in place. But the evidence is something else. Research findings put to bed some of the myths younger policy makers have about older people and their ideas on housing.

“…high cost of new multi-storey apartments means that householders don’t necessarily have enough money from the sale of their larger family house to buy an apartment, particularly after stamp duty, bank and real estate agent fees, and moving costs are included.” AHURI report, 2018.

Suitable housing in the future?

The Livable Housing Design Standard is now part of the National Construction Code. All jurisdictions other than NSW and WA have adopted all or part of it. This means more universally designed homes in Australia, and the ability to age in place.

Getting a mind-shift with design students

four photos of students experiences barriers in the built environment. — Figure 2 from the study

Societal stereotypes and assumptions about people with different levels of capability are difficult to shift. It takes more than a disability awareness exercise which is easily forgotten when students graduate. Students need to be immersed in the issues. So how can you get a mind-shift with design students?

A paper from Europe presents a case study of a practical teaching method where students identified real barriers to access by observing people with disability encountering barriers. From this, the students also created design solutions. The learning took place over three weeks which allowed students to be fully immersed in the issues.

The learning activities were conducted as an outdoor simulation in collaboration with a higher-education institution, a clinical centre, and people with disability.

This was much more than a disability awareness exercise that is easily forgotten when students enter the real world of architecture and design. The process was about getting a mind-shift to understand and to create with an inclusive approach.

The title of the paper is, Experiential learning approach to barrier-free design in architectural education. It proposes a method involving different stakeholders, simulation, mapping and creative design. It has some nice images to illustrate points and student designs. The paper comes from Bosnia and Herzegovina which has recently commenced their accessibility journey.

Architecture students attitudes

The attitudes of architecture students to universal design is the focus of a Deakin University study. It builds on previous work (Design 4 Diversity) in 2010 on inter-professional learning for architecture and occupational therapy students. The findings of this latest study show that while architecture students viewed access to public environments favourably, there was a mixed response in relation to private homes.

Reasons not to include universal design features in homes included cost, client desires and restrictions on creativity. For example, “Over-designing for the sake of making the residence accessible in the future, just in case, is an unnecessary cost”; and “Private homes should be designed to the individual”; and “Legislation restricts design, resulting in negative impacts the ‘requirements’ did not intend”. These reasons are not referenced in evidence and indicate an attitudinal bias.

The study used a quantitative approach and applied statistical techniques to the data. The first part of the document covers the history of universal design, and there is an extended section on methods and statistics. For followers of UD, the Discussion section is of most interest.

The authors of Students’ Attitudes to Universal Design in Architecture Education, are Helen Larkin, Kelsey Dell, and Danielle Hitch. Journal of Social Inclusion, 2016.

Similar papers

See also Hitch, Dell and Larkin from Deakin University, who also review some of the related literature. The title of the article is, Does Universal Design Education Impact on the Attitudes of Architecture Students Towards People with Disability? Published in the Journal of Accessibility and Design for All.

Researchers from the University at Buffalo presented their research on the incorporation or otherwise of universal design in architectural education at the 3rd International Conference on Design Education Researchers. “Universal Design in Architectural Education: A U.S. Study” was published in The Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Research Vol 2, which has many other articles on the topic of design education.

Using AI to remove accessibility barriers

The latest CanAxess newsletter features a visual podcast on AI for Accessibility. The team from Global AI discuss how using AI to remove accessibility barriers can help people with cognitive impairments understand content better.

There’s a second video on Inclusive Design 24. This one is about using screen readers to evaluate a website. There is also a link to a repository of downloadable screen readers testing resources.

Other articles include automating accessibility testing and a list of useful links about usability. Jonathan Kaufman writes in Forbes magazine about how accessibility is a wake up call for the progress of business evolution. He writes:

“Microsoft’s CEO Satya Nadella said, “… top of mind for me… is how we must make Microsoft products accessible to the more than 1 billion people globally of all abilities… Universal design is central to how we realize our mission and will make all our products better.”

Discover more about accessibility in the ICT and Universal Design section of this website.

Universal design evaluation framework

A diagram that shows the three key areas and how they overlap to create universal design. — Figure 2 from the article

Finding ways to help people understand universal design is not easy. Many have tried by creating frameworks, policies, and guidelines. Many have stayed with the 7 principles of universal design, now thirty years old. Some have used these principles as a checklist for implementation or evaluation. Others have attempted their own definitions and explanations. So it’s good to see a a useful and thoughtful evaluation framework for understanding and implementing universal design in the built environment.

Mosca and Capologo have developed a universal design framework for the built environment that is up to date with current thinking. It encapsulates physical, sensory and social qualities of the environment. The background research for the framework included stakeholder input. This takes it beyond access compliance and evaluates aspects such as user convenience and social inclusion.

Three key elements or universal design categories:

1. Physical-Spatial Quality: the capability of the environment to foster easy, comfortable, functional, and safe use of space and objects. This means being able to physically interact with a system;
2. Sensory-Cognitive Quality: the capability of the environment to foster orientation, comprehension of the service, and comfort of users. This refers to the features that impact peoples’ senses and cognition;
3. Social Quality: the ability of the environment to enhance well-being and inclusion. It considers emotional stimuli and social integration among users.

The framework is about performance and assessing the quality of the built environment beyond access. Mosca and Capologo used 21 indicators and 8 main criteria in their work.

The title of the article is, Universal Design-Based Framework to Assess Usability and Inclusion of Buildings. It is pleasing to see a framework that includes a human centred design and co-design approach.

From the abstract

Universal design offers a set of principles in design practice to meet the needs of the vast majority of a population. However, there is a lack of an accountable approach to measure and analyze the built environment with a universal design lens. This study aims to develop an evaluation framework to assess UD in public buildings to determine, in addition to accessibility requirements, the usability and inclusion of projects for different users.

Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) was adopted as research methodology to systematically and scientifically develop the framework.

We devised a hierarchical framework consisting of three main categories of universal design (physical, sensory, and social), eight criteria (usability, functionality, safety/security, wayfinding, understanding, environmental factors, well-being, and social inclusion), and 21 indicators.

The proposed framework can be considered as an innovative approach in the field of accessible design evaluation since it explores the relation among a multiplicity of aspects, including human performance and social factors, to evaluate the quality of UD buildings

Editor’s note: I’ve seen a lot of attempts at frameworks and this is one of the best so far. Yes, universal design is evolving.

Cities People Love: Letting children play

Line drawing by Natalia Krysiak showing children playing in a street in Cities People Love article.r — Play Street drawing by Natalia Krysiak

Cities People Love website has an article about prioritising children over cars. Designing streets to actively encourage play is a growing trend in Europe. The concept, known as ‘Woonerf’ was originally implemented in the Netherlands and Belgium. It aims to equally balance the needs of drivers with those of pedestrians, cyclists and children at play.

Signage, low speed limits and traffic calming bumps and bends are part of the solution. Temporary street closures are another strategy to encourage play. It’s a collective responsibility to ensure the safety of children playing.

Natalia Krysiak’s article is titled, Cities for Play: Designing streets that prioritise children over cars. In one example, she describes the design of the Hackney Play Street which has rocks, logs and a cubby house. The picture below clearly shows the seating, a log and tree plantings following the route of the footpath.

The street has a wide nature strip alongside the footpath with seating, grassed area and a log. Hackney Play Street design by Muf Architecture. — Image from Cities People Love: Hackney Play Street

Krysiak says we should start questioning why the convenience of drivers is prioritised over the health and wellbeing of children in street design. After all, placing children’s play at the heart of neighbourhood design benefits everyone.

There are links to other publications, one of which is Designing Child-Friendly High Density Neighbourhoods.

The 1000 Play Streets Toolkit is a great Australian resource. The Toolkit is specifically designed with advice for local governments.

Including children in high rise living

Are high rise developments good for children? This is the key question in a study where children are included in the design of social spaces in high density living. The paper discusses the effects of high rise living on families with children. The reseachers include international examples and thoughtful design solutions, both within buildings and in spaces surrounding them.

From the introduction:

“The significance of the skyscraper typology persists as populations grow, land continues to become scarce, and to defy the detrimental social and environmental effects of urban sprawl. What this typology seems to have denied over many years is its relationship with the child. It has led to a rapid decline of children’s physical activity and independent mobility resulting in increased rates of child obesity and other health concerns as described by psychologists and medical professionals across the country.” The author is Suruchi Modi, an architect and urban designer with a specialisation in Tall Building Design from the University of Nottingham UK. There is a useful list of references at the end.

Ageless communities win the day

Apartments in shades of grey are linked by a graded pathway to provide accessibility. Ageless communities. — Image courtesy Guy Luscombe

It’s taken a pandemic to realise that for most people aged care isn’t something they choose or want to remain in. And it won’t be in the future. But what can we do differently? A workshop led by University of Queensland and aged care providers came up with a novel idea – ageless communities. This is what older people have been asking for.

The changes to home design in the building code will help people who buy/rent new homes in the future. So it’s time to re-think aged care design. A workshop run by The University of Queensland found that people wanted a real home with a real front door. So large institutional models are no longer in favour.

Another key theme was staying put and bringing services to the home. Micro communities linked to the wider community are a good alternative. Homes with front doors on public streets are good for any age if the homes are designed appropriately. The University of Queensland project also responds in part to the Royal Commission into Aged Care. Small home models were one of the recommendations. The article is titled Smaller ageless communities predicted for care design.

Homes for life beyond 100

Four older men wearing hats sit at a square table in the park.

Don’t be fooled by the headline. The segregated model of housing lives on in the minds of the housing and construction industry. But when you look at what their new ideas are, their homes for life beyond 100 look remarkably like those in our ordinary neighbourhoods.

The “senior housing industry” in the United States is staying with the notion of segregation as the solution to living in later life. Residents could stay for as long as 40 years and that means their business model has to change. How these places are planned and built need a product recall. That’s what Nate Berg writes in a FastCompany article.

Health and fitness, intergenerational housing, and introducing university students into the mix is part of the new way of thinking. The way the designs are described in the article seem like good designs for all ages. Why can’t people of all ages walk from their apartment to the shops and restaurants? Segregated housing for people in later life perpetuates ageist attitudes and reinforces stereotypes. The notion of walkability and amenity is something everyone can enjoy.

Staying connected

According to the article senior housing models are changing from insular layouts to one that’s more connected and encouraging of social interaction. Interweaving senior housing with preschool activities is part of this “new” idea. The title of the article is How to design homes for life well beyond 100. It also covers issues of affordability and being creative with small spaces.

If we are to combat ageism inclusive designs have much to offer. A new version of the segregation model might not be the way of the future after all. However, the senior housing industry both in the US and Australia is expecting to sell more of their products in the future. Building family homes that will last your lifetime is a challenge to their business model.

Design with people with dementia

It’s not often that people diagnosed with dementia get asked what works for them in terms of home design. People with dementia want to age in place in the same way as others. However, this requires integrated and diverse living solutions. The only way to do this is to design with people with dementia.

In a master’s thesis, Kembhavi explains the background to her research and the research objectives. Using a co-design process she identified three key concepts important to people with dementia: choice, integration, and service support. The process was not linear – many modifications and iterations were required to arrive at the final result.

To begin, the idea of aging in place was investigated. This inquiry created the first design challenge. That is, factors that make aging in place difficult. This resulted in the adoption of a user-centered design philosophy. User-centred design focuses on the requirements and desires of users throughout the concept development process.

This paved the path for the second research topic: ‘how can people with dementia be involved in developing living solutions for themselves?’

Title of the thesis is, Integrated living environment for people with memory decline. Author Shreya Kembhavi, Aalto University. Helsinki city housing company housing was the context for the research.

This masters thesis covers a literature review, design methods, and an implementation strategy. It includes case studies with images and explanatory graphics. The conclusion explains the background to the research, and how the research was done.

From the abstract

Giving people the ability to choose their way of life is an effective way of developing living alternatives for people with dementia. Residential services and spaces, engagement services and spaces, and support services and spaces must be addressed through service and space provision to enable aging in a place of choice. A strong network of these elements in the area could potentially allow a greater population to age in place.

By integrating the serviced housing with the housing for other user groups, the thesis proposes a strategy that incorporates serviced housing as a component of the standard housing stock. The serviced housing is built on the principles of residency, engagement, and support. As part of this approach, new services such as drop-in consultations for persons seeking advice, social spaces such as a cafés, and residential services such as a dementia hotel are proposed.

A branding strategy is advised to de-stigmatize and incorporate people with memory decline. This is an attempt to change an image associated with such spaces, into one that is inclusive and open to the community. The thesis with demonstration of the concept’s scaling and its benefits in the realm of living solutions for people with dementia.

Universal Design for Learning and Teaching

People have different ways of learning and cultural background can influence a person’s approach to learning. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is often associated with school children who have learning difficulties. But it is much more than this. Difficulties with learning can also be attributed to teaching methods. Consequently, we need universal design for learning and teaching.

A good description of UDL is in the Ahead Journal article by Kevin Merry titled, Universal Design for Learning – It’s Just Good Teaching.

“UDL is an approach that incorporates a variety of options to allow it to be accessible and inclusive to diverse groups of students possessing a wide variety of learning needs and preferences”.

Merry discusses both cultural differences and disability and lists the three pillars of UDL. The aim of UDL is to create expert learners who are motivated and goal-orientated. Merry proposes a Cheese Sandwich analogy.

The Cheese Sandwich

Merry created the Cheese Sandwich approach to supporting learning. It is a process “that helps students to become expert learners by supporting their mastery over each of the cognitive skills in Bloom’s Taxonomy (1968).”

Diagram of Blooms Taxonomy, cognitive skills - Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, Evaluation — Figure 1. Bloom’s Taxonomy

The cheese is the contact time with teachers and the slices of bread are the times spent learning independently. Teacher contact time includes peer support and application of higher order skills and collaborative learning.

In the slices of bread time, students consolidate their knowledge and understanding.

Merry explains that UDL was initially focused on classroom-based practice where modifications were made to existing methods. But there is a case for creating universal teaching, not just learning. His article goes on to explain the CUTLAS approach. CUTLAS is Creating Universal Teaching, Learning and Assessment Strategies and the article describes this in some detail.

This website has a section on Universal Design for Learning, and Lizzie’s UDL File has practical ideas. Lizzie provides the basics of the three pillars in the video below.

Author: Jane Bringolf