Universal Design

Universal Design

Universal design is a relatively new idea that came about midway through the 20th century. The National Disability Authority defines universal design as, "The design and composition of an environment so that it can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability"(n.d). Basically, universal design is designing something to meet the needs of all people. This blog post will investigate the history of universal design, evaluate cases of universal design principles in biology, and provide a brief overview of usability testing as a test of universal design.

History of Universal Design

Up until the 1970s when the disability rights movement happened, individuals who were elderly or had a disability were largely forgotten about. When I say forgotten about,  there really weren't any laws requiring manufacturers to design products to be accessible for all. They were simply worried about making things accessible to the majority. However, the efforts of disabled military veterans as well as a number of other committees led to the first accessibility standard, "117.1-  Making Buildings Accessible to and Usable by the Physically Handicapped" (Center for Universal Design). This standard, passed in 1961, was monumental to the progression of disability rights and the progression of universal design. By 1973, 49 states had passed some kind of accessibility legislation.

In addition to legislation making buildings and products accessible to all people, there was also legislation preventing the discrimination against disabled people. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 protected disabled people from discrimination in employment, services, programs, public transportation, etc. These efforts over roughly three decades were instrumental in establishing a culture of tolerance, equity, and acceptance. Then with the development of the internet, it was apparent this newly established culture carried over rather easily. There was a learning curve to this brand new revolutionary medium, but over time, the internet has become one of the best hubs for accessibility resources. There are countless examples of internet resources, websites, and assistive technologies that have universal design. Screen readers are an excellent example of this. People who are blind are unable to read a screen, but with the use of a screen reader, they are able to hear what is on the screen as well as navigate the page. A website with good universal design would keep in mind that an individual may be using their site with a screen reader, so the site should be made accessible to them.

As time goes on, I feel people are starting to get a stronger sense of individuality and self worth. They want this to be reflected by being able to access whatever they want whenever they want. I think the future of universal design is strong, and as long as we keep putting an emphasis on accessibility, universal design will only continue to grow as a discipline.

Universal Design Principles in Biology

According to the Center for Universal Design, there are 7 guiding principles for universal design. The 7 principles include:

1. Equitable Use
2. Flexible Use
3. Simple and Intuitive Use
4. Perceptual Information
5. Tolerance for Error
6. Low Physical Effort
7. Size and Space for Approach and Use

Given that I am a biology major and teaching candidate, I spend a lot of time in science laboratories. I have observed numerous instances of universal design in those labs. The following list applies each of the principles to an example from a biology lab:

1. Equitable Use: Provide gloves of all sizes & safety goggles for people with and without glasses

2. Flexible Use: Large lab tables to work & left/right handed dissection tools

3. Simple and Intuitive Use: Lab procedures written in chronological order

4. Perceptual Information: Allow devices for those with sensory limitations & explain information in a variety of modes (linguistic, visual, gestural)

5. Tolerance for Error: Lab safety procedures posted on the wall & labeling of hazardous substances

6. Low Physical Effort: Centrifuge can mix solutions at high RPM automatically

7. Size and Space for Approach and Use: Large lab tables & chairs that can be sat and worked on, or easily rolled out of the way to stand

While these are all viable strategies that can be implemented to make a science lab more accessible, I feel it is impossible to make everything accessible in the lab. Safety is the number 1 priority in the lab and there are instances when the ability of an individual can compromise the safety of themselves or others. For example, it may be difficult for an individual with muscle tremors to dissect a specimen or light a Bunsen burner. I think in there lies the challenge of making things accessible. How does one create a tool that can help, but also not impede the safety or logistics of accomplishing a task. While there are various accommodations that can be made for different individuals, there should certainly be limitations on what can be accommodated. The experience of the science lab should be as equitable as possible, but safety should never be disregarded in doing that.

Usability Testing

One way companies and website creators evaluate the accessibility of their product is through usability testing. In these tests, volunteer participants interact with a website or product under direction of representatives from either the company itself, or an outsourced firm doing the testing. Essentially, participants provide an example user experience that gauges the universal design. Feedback can then be taken from this to see how they can improve their accessibility.

Recently, a group of peers and I conducted a usability test for thetrollhole.com, a website for a troll museum in Alliance, Ohio. Conducting this test led to a few surprises about usability tests themselves as well as universal design. One thing that really stuck out to me is that if there is a major issue, almost every user is going to be affected by it. There were multiple instances from our usability test where each test participant made the same mistake when prompted with a task. As somebody conducted the test, that should be a major red flag.

Another thing that surprised me was the thoroughness required for the usability test report. When scouring the internet for example usability reports, each example was over 30 pages in length and went into great detail about their methods and findings. I figured there would be some depth to a report like that, but I did not envision it to that degree. It makes sense though because the point of the test is to identify what goes well and what goes wrong. Collecting as much data as possible and writing with extreme detail is imperative in obtaining useful findings.

Lastly, the shortness of the tests surprised me. We replicated our usability tests 3 times and each went between 10-12 minutes. Internet sources all predict usability tests to be 30-45 minutes in length. The length of our tests could be attributed to limited content of the website, but being 20 minutes shorter than expected was certainly surprising.

Overall, usability tests are an excellent tool for assessing usability and accessibility. The thoroughness of the report is the key metric for whether the test is useful. It is up to the designer of the test to scope it so that the information retrieved is relevant and helpful.

References 

Center for Universal Design. A Brief History of Universal Design. Retrieved from https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/pubs_p/docs/udffile/chap_1.pdf

Center for Universal Design. The principles of Universal Design and Their Application. Retrieved from https://projects.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/pubs_p/docs/udffile/chap_3.pdf

National Disability Authority. Center for Excellence in Universal Design: What is Universal Design. Retrieved from http://universaldesign.ie/What-is-Universal-Design/