Universal Design Stems Expert Answer

The concept of universal design stems from the idea of creating, developing and establishing spaces that are usable by all individuals regardless of their disability status, age or size. These spaces are not limited to physical areas but can also environments where individual perform their work or engage in learning. However, the notion of universal design not only aims to assist those who have a disability but has an inclusionary view which means that its inclusion is beneficial for everyone. The purpose of this discussion is to conduct a critical analysis of three individual images that showcase a personal and professional space that adheres to exclusionary design. The assessment will focus on highlighting who the spaces exclude and how they do so while exploring the underlying ethical dilemmas and describing who holds the power or authority in each case to modify the space for it to become inclusionary. An inclusive alternative to the space will also be provided while reflecting on the theory of professional power to highlight its importance.

[hbupro_banner id=”6299″]

Universal design is governed by seven principles which enable the creation of inclusive spaces that do not discriminate on the basis of various factors. The first principle that is associated with that of universal design relates to ‘equitable use’. The essence of this principle is rooted in providing the same level of design and accessibility to all individuals regardless of their physical abilities. Therefore, these spaces should be identical when the possibility arises however, when doing so is that not possible then they should still ensure a certain level of equity. Accordingly, by adhering to this principle, spaces are created with the view of not stigmatizing individuals or making them feel that they are segregated from society as a whole. Other design elements which are accounted for while aligning with the principle include compliance with aesthetics, ensuring safety and security while making sure that the space does not violate the users’ privacy.

The second principle relates to the ‘flexibility of use’, according to this aspect, the design should be created as such that it fits in with the unique preferences and abilities of individuals. Henceforth, a design is deemed universal once it allows users to pick from different methods of use while ensuring that it is adaptable and allows users to make accurate choices that are also marked with precision. The third principle of the universal design is linked with the development of spaces that facilitate usage which is not complex and also intuitive in nature. Thus, by aligning with this principle, spaces are created with the vision of eliminating needless complexities. This principle also ensures that individuals are not discriminated upon based on their learning capacities.

The fourth principle is that of ‘perceptible information’ which essentially means that the design should serve as a source of communication for the user while not taking their sensory abilities into account. For example, in a noisy bus station a television which is playing news in the background will also include screen captions of what the newscaster is announcing thereby allowing users to read the information without any hassle or issue. The next principle calls for ensuring that the design has a zero tolerance policy for any errors. This is imperative for ensuring that users are not subjected to any hazards or accidents while using the space. This can be achieved by eliminating the presence of elements that can be deemed hazardous or dangerous for users and also placing warning signs for elements that are hazardous but necessary in order to make sure that all safety precautions are taken by the user. Labelling of safety signs and precautionary measures is also important for such spaces. This ensures that users are aware of the consequences that may take place if a wrong action is taken.

The sixth principle of universal design seeks to ensure that users of the design can easily benefit from it without having to put themselves under physical strain, engage in strenuous activity or experience fatigue as a result of using the design. Spaces that adhere to this principle are designed while upholding the view that a user should not have to engage in recurring movements and only exert force which can be deemed as reasonable and not too extreme.

The last principle which must be fulfilled in order to make sure that the space is universally inclusive follows an approach of dedicating an appropriate space and size in spite of the user’s mobility, body posture or their size. Such a space makes sure that individuals who have support or assistance devices with them are able to bring them inside or within the confines of the space without any issues. Accordingly, it also takes into account the critical need to assist users who are seated in the space and those are standing by minimizing any discomfort and ensuring that they are able to have a comprehensible line of sight which is not compromised by their position.

Universal design principles hold importance in both practice and theory because they ensure that individuals are not subjected to oppressive practice in their day to day life or while using personal or professional spaces. These instances reflect situations where those who are effectively able to use the space are put in a position of power and privilege over an individual who cannot use the space as effectively because of a disability, their body size or their age. Moreover, adhering to universal design also follows the guiding principles in critical practice which state that everyone has a right to be treated as equal which is the devolution of power and privilege is necessary. Secondly, it also focuses on making sure that relationships that are based on the power play and privilege of another party are not promoted. Therefore, the importance of these principles is significantly rooted in eradicating the wrongful influence of professional power regardless of how it influences design. It also relates to allocating resources by taking the unique needs of the population into account and making sure that a greater share of resources is not allocated to one party because of their position of power and privilege in society (Black, Weinberg and Brodwin, 2015).

[hbupro_banner id=”6296″]

The first photo in consideration is that of staircase located at the university. The structure is relatively large and is made of wood flooring while being equipped with metal and wooden railings on the side. The staircase has two intervals where the user can stand after taking the first flight of stairs which includes ten steps. This space does not comply with the principles of universal design because it excludes wheelchair users and those who are of a larger size. The reason behind this is that the stairs do not have an accessibility ramp or a wheelchair lift which is specifically designed for stairs. Moreover, the steps and the railing of the structure are too narrow to accommodate those who are of a larger size or are taller.

The ethical dilemma raised by this image is that the space is located at an educational setting where students come from diverse backgrounds and have a host of different abilities. Moreover, as the number of users for this stairs is high, it is not sufficient to suggest that an elevator would be a sufficient alternative to this space. Moreover, before descending the stairs, users stand on flooring which has been designed to avoid accidents of slipping if a person is rushing or going to fast. However, a wheelchair would not be able to move here or the user would have to experience the discomfort of bumping when they are passing through this floor towards another section of the area. The power in this case lies with the administration of the educational institution as they are responsible for approving designs, spaces and structures within the university. Consequently, they also hold the power to change this design and introduce a design which is more inclusive and complies with universal design principles.

The underlying socio-political and contextual concerns in relation to this photograph reflect how society trivializes and ignores the accessibility needs of wheelchair users and those who are of a larger size. Designs such as this are created by keeping in view a particular group of users in mind and do not account for the differences that people have. This is essentially reflective of oppressive behaviour and the abuse of professional power in a bid to minimize costs through the allocation of limited resources (Powell and Pfahl, 2018).

An inclusive alternative to the photo would be the creation of a design space where the staircase has a corresponding wheelchair lift nearby which is allotted for the usage of disabled users. Moreover, the existing design should be reassessed in a way that the steps and hand railings within the staircase are made wider to facilitate the hand grip and flight of those who are of a larger size and are taller compared to the standard user of this design.

The second image depicts an area at an educational institution where students can engage in conversation, creative discussion and brainstorm. It aligns with the concept of shared creative spaces that are structured as more informal spaces within companies and universities to provide employees and students with an opportunity to engage in informal discussions about projects and share ideas (Thoring, Desmet and Badke-Schaub, 2019). The seating in this area has been designed with an aesthetic and futuristic appeal in mind with seating pods placed in close proximity and a light placed above the round table in the middle.

Firstly the photo excludes wheelchair users or those who need special assistance devices to facilitate movement. The entrance of the seating pod is too small for the wheelchair to be placed in a suitable manner because it cannot fit within the structure. Moreover, the seating pod has restricted leg space which would also exclude users who are of a larger size. Accordingly, the direct light that is placed above the round table is not suitable for users with a strained vision because it is too bright.

The power in this photo lies with the building committee of the university that decided to allocate funds for establishing this shared creative space without taking into account how convenient it would be for the users. The committee holds the power to modify this exclusionary design and redesign it to accommodate all students who wish to use this space. The underpinning contextual issue in this case is that the space only accommodates a specific group of students to benefit from the opportunity to work in a shared creative space which undermines the value of experiences that a diverse group of students can bring to an intellectual discussion.

An appropriate inclusive alternative to this shared creative space would be a space that addresses the issues identified above and provides multiple seating options within the area that are not limited to this seating pod. This would encourage all students to come to the space and use it for discussion and brainstorming purposes.

The third image is an example of a designated area for study where students can come over to read or work on their assignments. This space excludes individuals that may have issues with their back and require support against a structure to maintain a neutral posture as highlighted in universal design principles. The types of seating options within the space are high chairs, bean bags, stools and very limited chairs that offer back support. The power here lies with the body within the university which funded the creation of this space as well as the design team which made the decision to select these seating options.

The underpinning contextual concern in this case is that the design team which took the decision to procure the elements for creating the shared space did not take into account the unique needs of students or consider how a specific type of seating arrangement could provide them more comfort and greater mobility. This is also categorized as oppressive practice because it fails to acknowledge the distinct physical needs of users and seek to make their experience more comfortable. A method for making this space inclusionary would be to introduce seating elements that offer adequate back support and are comfortable to use for long periods of time when a person is seated. This would comply with the universal design principle of ensuring flexibility in use and reducing physical effort as inadequate support can be strenuous and cause fatigue.

This discussion highlighted how universal design principles can be used to make spaces more inclusionary for all individuals despite their ability, gender or size. Adhering to these principles is a critical tool for addressing oppressive behaviours in society and making sure that everyone is able to live in a community that is welcoming, provides equal opportunity and believes in equity.

References

Black, R. D., Weinberg, L. A., & Brodwin, M. G. (2015). Universal design for learning and instruction: Perspectives of students with disabilities in higher education. Exceptionality Education International, 25(2), 1-16.

Powell, J. J., & Pfahl, L. (2018). Disability studies in the universal design university. In Diversity and Inclusion in higher education and societal contexts (pp. 157-188). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Thoring, K., Desmet, P., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2019, July). Creative space: A systematic review of the literature. In Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 299-308). Cambridge University Press.