Learning about universal design

Innovation, inclusion and leadership

“Inclusive design can help all human beings experience the world around them in a fair and equal way”. This is the definition on the Global Disability Innovation Hub website. Their blog page is titled, “Why inclusive design matters and how we are leading change”. The blog leads up to their new Masters course Disability, Design and Innovation. The course design process included people with disability.

This multidisciplinary course is run in conjunction with the University College London, Loughborough University, University of the Arts and London College of Fashion. International students can also apply. There are bursaries available for UK and EU residents (submission dates closed for this year). Here is a video with a brief overview.

The Global Disability Innovation Hub has more information on their website on research, education and practice.

The Disability Innovation Summit will be run alongside the Tokyo Paralympic Games. Call for papers will run between October 2019 and March 2020. Priority will be given to submissions with: a passion to collaborate globally; products and ideas that are ready to go to market, or have the ability to be scaled; and tangible solutions that can impact lives around the world.

Principles for Accessibility Studies

Objects should not just be useful; they should be intrinsically meaningful both philosophically and emotionally. In his paper, Gian Maria Greco discusses the move from separate approaches based on disability to universal approaches. His Principles for Accessibility Studies are a useful take-away for designers and lead to co-design thinking.

Greco follows on from the philosophical work of Rob Imrie and his discussions on the quest for universality. The title of the paper is, Accessibility Studies: Abuses, Misuses and the Method of Poietic Design. Greco concludes the article with a list of principles for design:

1. The Principal of Universality: accessibility concerns all, not exclusively specific groups or individuals.
2. The Principle of Personalisation: one size does not fit all. The design should be able to respond to the specificities of individual users.
3. The Principle of User-centrality: design should focus on users and their specificities.
4. The Principle of Epistemic Inclusivity: users and other stakeholders, including experts, are bearers of valuable knowledge for the design of artefacts.
5. The Principle of Participation: design should be carried out through the active participation of the stakeholders involved.
6. The Principle of Pro-activism: accessibility should be addressed ex-ante, not ex-post.

From the abstract

Accessibility has become increasingly discussed in a range of fields, producing a large number of new ideas, theories, and innovations that have proven to be quite fruitful. A closer look shows that different fields have experienced fundamental changes. There has been a shift from specific accounts to a universalist account of access, a shift from maker-centred to user-centred approaches, and a shift from reactive to proactive approaches.

Through these processes, accessibility has birthed new areas within those fields, that have been gradually converging to constitute the wider field of accessibility studies. The nature and position of accessibility studies has now become a central topic. This ongoing progression of conceptual clarification may bear some misunderstanding and misinterpretations along the way.

In the paper, I first briefly review the principal traits of the process of formation of accessibility studies. Then I address some possible misconceptions; and finally, introduce a first, very general sketch of poietic design, a method proper to accessibility studies.

UD and the interior design curriculum

Inclusion will remain a futuristic concept if we continue to train design professionals without including UD in the curriculum. This was highlighted in a recent survey of interior design students. It showed the majority had no idea about universal design and of those who did, most only vaguely understood it. Students who had exposure to UD were in favour of having the topic in the curriculum, while others said it would interfere with the technical nature of the course and dilute rigour. They also claimed UD would be an unnecessary addition to an already full course. The results were similar to previous studies showing UD awareness is missing in design studies.

The first part of the paper covers the background to UD in detail and will be known to many. The second half covers the method, the results and important discussion. This paper comes from the U.A.E. where most of the universities in the region are run by either American, Canadian or British institutions. The title of the paper on ResearchGate is, Concept Awareness of Universal Design in Interior Design Program in the U.A.E.

To disclose or not to disclose

How likely are university students to disclose their disability? The answer is related to whether the disability is visible. The concern of being stigmatised is real and is a form of exclusion. Of course, if the disability is visible then stigma is already part of the student’s life. A recent study found students with invisible disability will be less likely to make use of the institution’s accommodations for disability. However, if the teaching staff were helpful and accommodating anyway, the need for seeking institutional support was reduced. An interesting and relatively easy read for a thesis.

The title of the thesis is “Effects of Institutional Factors on College Students’ Self- Disclosure of Disability Status and Their Utilization of Disability Services“. Here are two excerpts from the discussion section.

“Students with invisible disabilities in the current study were less likely to use accommodations and self-disclose their disability status to the institution, and students with visible disabilities had used accommodations more often than their peers with invisible disabilities. Research has indicated that students with invisible disabilities perceive revealing one’s disability status as an important decision because it moves the person from a non-stigmatized identity to a stigmatized one.

“This study also found that when professor knowledge and understanding were well-received, students were less likely to self-disclose. This is consistent with research that has indicated students who did not disclose said they felt they didn’t need accommodations because their professors were helpful and accepting of their disability without needing institutional documentation (Cole & Cawthon, 2015). When students do not feel supported by professors, they are more likely to advocate for their rights and self-disclose to the institution, which occurs more regularly for students with invisible disabilities (Marshak et al., 2010).

Quotable quotes on universal design

There are many definitions and explanations of universal design. But sometimes the way people talk about it expresses it better. Here are some quotable quotes on universal design.

This banner was hanging at the Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Access (IDEA) located at the University at Buffalo in 2004. The text reads,

“The essence of universal design lies in its ability to create beauty and mediate extremes without destroying differences in places, experiences, and things”. Bill Stumpf and Don Chadwick, Designers.

Wall banner saying The essence of universal design lies in its ability to create beauty and mediate extremes without destroying differences in places, experiences and things

Accessibility vs universal design

Ed Steinfeld explains the difference between accessibility and universal design is, “The space of accessibility and universal design”, in the book, Rethinking Disability and Human Rights:

“Accessibility is a compensatory strategy conceived to prevent discrimination while universal design seeks to change the consciousness of those who create the built environment to address a broader conception of the human body.”

The website of Design and Architecture Norway (DOGA) explains:

“In simple terms, design thinking is about recognizing the designer’s methods for connecting the user’s needs with what is technologically possible and which provides a real market value.

Apple is well-known for making their products really easy to use. Here is a quote from Steve Jobs, former CEO, Apple.

“Some people think design means how it looks. But of course, if you dig deeper, it’s really how it works.”

The universal design conference held in Dublin 2018 began with the words, “Good Design Enables. Bad Design Disables“. The Centre for Excellence in Universal Design has a good, but wordy description of universal design.

Slide at a conference with the words, good design enable. Bad design disables.

Diversity

The text in the sign by Arthur Chan says:

Diversity is a fact.
Equity is a choice.
Inclusion is an action.
Belonging is an outcome.

They are all are part of a universal design approach.

The signboard says, Diversity is a fact, Equity is a choice, Inclusion is an action Belonging is an outcome.

The late Judith Heumann has quoted this many times. She also said it is easier to change the design of the environment that to change attitudes. Her TEDx talk is worth a look.

“There are only two kinds of people in the world: people with disability and people yet to have a disability.”

Quote from Christina Mallon, Microsoft’s head of inclusive design: The end goal? “It’s that inclusive design becomes the only way to design, so that my job as an inclusive designer is just a designer. I want my job to go away.” From FastCompany article.

Overheard at a workshop: “So if you design for the extremes you include the middle”

Classroom design from a student perspective

What is the optimal classroom environment for students? Why not ask them? Designing Classrooms for Learning reports on a project that included student opinions about classroom design for learning about science. The project included a survey where students compared their “ideal” design with current design.

The study concludes that lighting, desk layout, places to put belongings and the layout of materials in the classroom all have an effect on student learning. “Student morale and learning can be affected greatly by the physical structure of the classroom, and that the involvement of students in the environment creating process can increase their motivation as well as empower them and develop a sense of community”.

According to the findings, something as simple as desk layout can make a big difference. Most teachers of adults have known this for some time. They take the time to rearrange rows of previously aligned tables and chairs into circular layout or into small group layout.

Given that every student learns differently, instructors need to provide multiple avenues for learning. This links with the theory of humans having different intelligences. You can read more on education, learning and universal design for learning, on this website.

Design Council Inclusive Environments CPD

Inclusion is everybody’s business. By definition it isn’t a fringe activity. Inclusion requires everyone to be involved. In the built environment that means people involved in commissioning places and spaces as well as the trades and certifiers. So it goes beyond access codes and leaving it to access consultants. To help, the Design Council has a free interactive online Inclusive Environments CPD training course. It is about raising awareness of population diversity and why we should be designing more fairly and sustainably. There is also a searchable resource hub that has relevant information and discussion on this subject.

Captioning helps knowledge retention

A new study found that students are happy to use captions when learning new information, because captioning helps knowledge retention. By testing two groups the researchers found a significant improvement in learning outcomes by those who had videos with captions vs. videos without captions. With more teaching and learning happening online, this is one technique that can benefit all. Captions are not just for people who are hard of hearing.

The title of the article is, Captioning Online Course Videos: An Investigation into Knowledge Retention and Student Perception. Access the article via ResearchGate and request a copy of the paper. It is also available from ACM Digital Library.

Captioning and transcripts

A similar study on the benefits of closed captions for learning was carried out by Oregon State University. They surveyed more than 2000 students in 15 institutions and found more than half said captions help by improving comprehension. The most common reasons for using captions were: to help them focus, retain information and overcome poor audio quality of the videos. Transcripts are often used as study guides and to find and retain information. Interestingly, in this study, 13% of respondents indicated having a disability, but only 6% were registered as such.

Various reasons were given for the benefits of closed captioning – noise in their listening environment, unclear speech in the video, spelling of new or unfamiliar words, and being able to take notes just by stopping the video and not needing to rewind to listen again. Students with English as a second language also benefitted.

Researchers found there was a 7% increase in student results compared to the previous year’s students who did not have captioning. The article also discusses the cost of captioning and other options, such as speech recognition. The title of the article is, Closed Captioning Matters: Examining the Value of Closed Captions for All Students, and is published in the Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 2016.

Editor’s note: Captioning has evolved significantly in the last two years and there are many ways to include captioning. Zoom, YouTube and other platforms now offer captioning as standard. AI captioning has improved significantly.

Gaining client acceptance of UD thinking

Although architects might propose universal design principles in designs, it seems that Australia is not the only country where clients are ambivalent at best and resistant at worst in terms of inclusive thinking. In Clients’ Approach to Universal Design – A Slow Change? Sidse Grangaard of the Danish Building Research Institute reports on the research into why clients are not interested in going beyond basic building regulations. It would seem the design and construction industries share much in common across the globe. A useful research project. The full paper is available from the link.

Abstract: When new buildings do not comply with the accessibility requirements of the Danish Building Regulations, the main reason is often attributed to a lack of knowledge and prioritization. It is the experience of architectural firms that clients decide their own focus on accessibility during the design process, and also whether the level of accessibility should be higher than that stipulated in the Danish Building Regulations. Post-occupancy evaluations point out that when the client is particularly conscious of, or ambitious about, accessibility/Universal Design (UD), the result is a building with an extensive level of accessibility. Thus, the client is a key figure for the project and the level of ambition. Based on interviews with 15 Danish clients, this paper presents a characterisation of their conception of Universal Design. It is significant that, as a concept, UD has not gained currency among the clients that let their ambition level be defined by the Danish Building Regulations. In order to capture differences between clients, a description of the client’s conception of users and designs is based on an analytical framework about the concepts of particular, universal, market and equality. The analysis shows that three conceptions about accessibility/UD can be characterized among the clients: 1) accessibility by design, 2) broad accessibility 3) added value. Above all, the findings show that a development is going on towards UD, although slowly.

The article is from the proceedings of the UDHEIT 2018 conference held in Dublin, Ireland, an open access publication.

Valuing disability in higher education

The philosophical perspective of this paper could be applied in other areas of life, not just higher education. Benjamin Ostiguy applies the concept of “Deep Ecology” to argue that everyone and everything has an intrinsic value, but that many societies only measure value by how it contributes to the economy. Students with disability are still considered as “outliers” and as persons who must “transcend” their perceived impairments if they are to belong.

Ostiguy argues that valuing disability can lead to the “identification of novel veins of inquiry, bolster critical analyses, and help facilitate meaningful change in uncertain times”. The title of the paper is, The Inherent Value of Disability in Higher Education. 10 points to consider based on Deep Ecology thinking are:
1. Employ accessible and inclusive pedagogies, methods, technologies, and research instruments;
2. Avoid adherence to rigid standards and traditional practices absent of “intrinsic value” or unrelated to “fundamental goals”;
3. Before adopting a new or trendy technology, method, or instrument, first consider if SWDs will find it accessible and inclusive;
4. Recognize and value the diverse identities, perspectives, strengths, and challenges represented among college SWDs; cultivate an awareness of intersectional oppressions (e.g., ableism and homophobia);
5. Understand that SWDs are a heterogeneous demographic with identities, priorities, expectations, opinions, and access requirements differing within
and among specific disability “types”. Note that perspectives on disability vary and evolve, so what is deemed appropriate or supportive may/will
vary by generation, culture/ethnicity (e.g., international students), and social/historical context;
6. Employ the concept of universal design in all aspects of your work, including teaching, assessment, research, and service;
7. Develop research questions that account for SWDs and accurately represent/address their perspectives, needs, and sense of dignity;
8. When faced with apparent pedagogic/epistemological dilemmas, err on the side of accessibility and inclusion;
9. Speak out against campus policies, procedures, and traditions that are not universally inclusive, or otherwise stigmatize SWDs;
10. Reject the idea that a student’s value to a campus or academic discipline is proportional with their apparent potential to contribute toward the economy and the upward distribution of wealth.

Abstract: Evidence suggests that college students with disabilities (SWDs) continue to encounter attitudinal and physical barriers while institutions endeavor to offer reasonable supports—mainly in the form of accommodations and modifications. In practice, disability is largely treated as something external and ancillary, with most colleges administering measured allowances, but otherwise managing to avoid change. However, as we proceed into the 21st century, very little seems assured, least of all the status quo. Under the dominant neoliberal regime, virtually everything and everyone is valued in proportion with their perceived economic utility. No longer is higher education widely embraced as a public good. Instead, there is increased scrutiny of the academe with an eye for “value added”, and the returns students can expect with regard to careers and earning potential. Viewed through this narrow hegemonic lens, SWDs must assimilate or transcend their perceived impairments if they are to belong. In this commentary, I introduce key concepts from the environmental philosophy/theory of Deep Ecology to the scholarship of disability in higher education and assert that disability in academe has an “intrinsic value”, irrespective of expected economic utility. I conclude by discussing ways that the deep valuing of disability can lead to the identification of novel veins of inquiry, bolster critical analyses, and help facilitate meaningful change in uncertain times.

Category: Learning about universal design

Innovation, inclusion and leadership

Like this: