1

UNIVERSAL
DESIGN
17 Ways of Thinking and Teaching
Edited by Jon Christophersen
2

© Husbanken 2002

Det må ikke kopieres fra denne bok i strid med åndsverkloven

og fotografiloven eller i strid med avtaler om kopiering inngått
med KOPINOR, interesseorganisasjon for rettighetshavere til
åndsverk.

1. utgave 2002

Opplag: 3000
Trykk: Haslum Grafiske
Bokbinderi: Bokbinderiet Johnsen as
Grafisk produksjon: PrePress as
Omslag layout: Geoffrey Kempton

ISBN: 82-90122-05-5

HB: 7.F.34 E
Contents 3

Contents
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Introduction by the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Author Biographies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Part 1. Europe
1.1 Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created.
Tone Rønnevig, Norway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
1.2 Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal
Design Compendium. Sigmund Asmervik, Norway . . 43
1.3 Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge.
Solveig Dale and Rigmor Leknes, Norway . . . . . . . . 59
1.4 If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word
in a World Called Science. Marten Wijk, Holland . . 81
1.5 Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching
Universal Design. Jim Sandhu, England . . . . . . . . . . 105
1.6 Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching.
Andrew Walker, England . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
1.7 Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future –
Teaching Accessibility at the School of Architecture
in Aarhus. Poul Østergaard, Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Part 2. North America

2.1 Universal Designing. Edward Steinfeld and Beth
Tauke, Buffalo, New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
2.2 Universal Design: An Opportunity for Critical
Discourse in Design Education. Polly Welch and
Stanton Jones, Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
2.3 Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum.
Wolfgang Preiser, Cincinnati, Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

2.4 Distance Education in Universal Design. Molly

Follette Story, North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
2.5 A Universally Designed Universal Design Course.
Laurie Ringaert, Manitoba, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269
4 UNIVERSAL design

Part 3. Asia and Australia

3.1 Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context.
Annette Pedersen and Christopher Crouch, Perth
Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
3.2 Universal Design Education and Development.
Singanapalli Balaram, Ahmedabad, India . . . . . . . . . 315
3.3 Universal Design: Tertiary Education and Promotion
in Asia. James Harrison and Kenneth Parker,
Singapore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
3.4 Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design
in Chiba University. Kaname Yanagisawa,
Chiba, Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
3.5 Universal Design Competition for Students 2000
Nagoya/Japan. Makato Yanagisawa, Nagoya,
and Tadao Shimizu, Chiba, Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
Foreword 5

Foreword
During the last four years, The Norwegian State Housing Bank
has co-ordinated a systematic effort targeting Norwegian
schools and universities in the form of the "Universal design of
housing, buildings and the external environment" project.

Universal Design became a relevant theme in social develop-

ment during the course of the 1990s. Pioneers in the USA,
Europe and Japan accumulated information and developed vari-
ous methods of teaching. This collection of articles was
assembled as part of the Norwegian initiative to put Universal
Design onto the agenda.

In line with the Norwegian objective that everyone should be

given the opportunity to live in a good residential environment,
the Norwegian State Housing Bank believes it is important to
stimulate the development and dissemination of useful social
information, particularly among the future players in the hou-
sing and building sector. Architect Jon Christophersen,
Byggforsk (the Norwegian Building Research Institute) was
commissioned by the Norwegian State Housing Bank to gather
articles that would provide an insight into the principles of
Universal Design and how it is taught in various countries.

The articles will be of interest to everyone who works with phy-

sical design of the constructed environment, either within the
sector or in a related educational context.

We hope this collection of articles will provide inspiration to

those who are working to develop an inclusive society.

Oslo, April 2002

Geir Barvik
Managing director
6 UNIVERSAL design
Introduction
by the Editor Introduction 7

Introduction
by the Editor
This volume has come about as an appendix to the main univer-
sal design education project run by the Norwegian State
Housing Bank. The project, which is presented in chapter 1.1,
provides schools and universities with incentives and ideas to
set up universal design courses. The aim is that by the end of
the project period, universal design will be an integral part of
the curriculum in most Norwegian schools and universities that
educate architects, planners, designers, engineers, occupational
therapists and craftsmen. The objective is to familiarize
anybody involved with shaping the built environment with the
concept of universal design.

The starting point for this book is that universal design has
become a worldwide movement, and, as universal design cour-
ses can be found in universities all over the world, educators
will be interested to see how universal design is being taught in
various places. The intention is not to provide a comprehensive
survey - that would require a substantial volume indeed - but to
show and possibly document that the subject is being taught all
over the world, and that there is both diversity and strong simi-
larities in approaches to teaching, the content of the courses and
the teaching methods. In order to limit the scope, the articles
only deal with education at the university level. To some extent,
the book complements Ostroff/Preiser's "Universal Design
Handbook" and the "Strategies for Teaching Universal Design"
by Polly Welch.

Apart from South America and Africa, universities in most parts

of the world are represented. It might be noted, however, that for
various reasons it has not been possible to include articles from
China, Korea or countries in the south or east of Europe. Again,
the argument is that the intention is to provide examples of pre-
sent teaching in the field rather than being comprehensive. On
the other hand, the contributors include several of the domina-
ting and best-known personalities in the field at present.

Some attempts at covering a variety of academic fields have

been made, but this has been less successful than the aim for
8 UNIVERSAL design

geographical dispersion. Thus, design and architecture domi-

nate the book. Ideally, engineering subjects and planning should
have played a larger part, but it proved impossible to find a suf-
ficient number of available contributors who could present arti-
cles on these subjects to achieve a balance with architecture and
design. There is some logic to this: Having coined the universal
design concept, designers have managed to achieve a certain
amount of tradition, while architects, working from the basic
notions of functionality, easily see how the concept is appli-
cable and relevant to them.

Respecting and allowing for the diversity involved we have

given the authors free rein in the choice of scope, topics and
presentations of their articles. Nevertheless, some features are
so common as to seem central to the teaching of universal
design. These are commented on in the following paragraphs.

The Structure of this Book

Structuring the present collection of articles is done in the sim-
plest possible way: geographically, in three parts - Europe,
North America and Asia/Australia. A more thematic structure
would have become rather artificial, as so many of the articles
cover a range of topics. However, there is some thematic struc-
turing within each main section. Articles that focus on theoreti-
cal subjects are placed first, followed by articles dealing with
infusion into the curriculum, course structure and course con-
tent, while descriptions of specific courses and projects conc-
lude each section.

Definitions
Several of the contributors to this book were also present in the
group that formulated the definition and the seven principles of
universal design (appended to this introduction). Others have
collaborated with or work together with these authors. Of the
rest, it is safe to say that most have found that the principles of
universal design provide a useful basis for their thinking about
usability and functionality - although the actual terms used may
vary somewhat, particularly outside the US (thus, both inclusive
design - chapter 1.4 - and even accessibility is sometimes used
with much the same connotations as Universal Design).
Therefore, the definition, principles and guidelines listed in the
appendix to this introduction serve as a basis for the design tea-
ching that is the subject of this book.
Introduction
by the Editor Introductionated 9

Promotion and motivation

As a subject in schools of architecture and design, accessibility
and, by extension, Universal Design, are often (as stated by
James Harrison and Ken Parker in chapter 3.3 and other authors
in this book) taught by default. Far less glamorous than
Architectural Design, designing for a wide variety of users has
to compete with the least interesting of the technical subjects -
often alongside issues of legislation, or even as something
which deserves little direct attention. (A good example of the
latter point is cited by Andrew Walker in chapter 1.4). Thus,
many teachers of universal design have had to put more effort
into promoting the subject than those teaching the more traditi-
onal aspects of architecture and design. Another example of
achieving recognition is through an official competition as done
in Japan (chapter 3.5) and through contact with industry (see
chapter 2.4).

Promotion and motivation of universal design thus become

almost a subject in itself, which most of the authors in this book
cover in some detail. In this context some issues have equal
importance everywhere: those connected to demographics and
individual rights. The rise in the proportion of elderly and dis-
abled in the population is recognised as a problem everywhere,
making the need for designs that accommodate a wide range of
users imperative to avoid undue pressure on institutions and to
reduce the need for personal assistance. At the same time the
individual rights movement has made it politically impossible to
disregard the needs of the disabled when designing the built
environment. Extending the scope of universal design some-
what, design for all would also include ethnic minorities - whe-
ther indigenous peoples, immigrants or indeed women, as dealt
with by Pedersen/Crouch (chapter 3.1), Harrison/Parker (chap-
ter 3.3) and Steinfeld/Tauke (chapter 2.1). To some extent
Balaram (chapter 3.2) also deals with this issue, seen from the
point of view of a developing country.

Achieving popularity with the students - once the basic problem

of not being glamorous is overcome (on which Balaram, chap-
ter 3.2, has some interesting views) - does not seem to be much
of a problem. Indeed, a number of authors mention the popula-
rity of the Universal Design course (see Preiser, chapter 2.4,
Ringaert, chapter 2.6, Walker, chapter 1.4, Pedersen/Crouch,
chapter 3.1 and the Japanese projects, chapters 3.4 and 3.5).
Much of the popularity seems to be due to some fairly simple
10 UNIVERSAL design

factors such as the obvious relevance to the fundamental issues

of functionality - i.e. the fitness for use by the human body - the
political and demographic issues mentioned above, and the way
the teaching connects with and is orientated towards the users.
The latter factor of course has the effect of creating a valuable
identification with the users.

Infusing universal design into the

curriculum
This issue is closely connected to the former. Although
Universal Design may be taught as a specialist subject, this has
obvious shortcomings, unless the specialist teaching (as M.A.
or Ph.D. dissertations) comes on top of more basic teaching
throughout the course. The need for inclusion of universal
design on all levels of the programme may well be obvious to
the practitioners, but the ways and means of achieving it are by
no means equally apparent. Andrew Walker, who perhaps has
more years of practice than most other teachers in the field,
relates his experiences and problems in chapter 1.4. Other
approaches may be found in the articles by Preiser (chapter
2.4), Welch/Jones (chapter 2.3) and Poul Østergaard (chapter
1.5).

With regard both to the problems of infusion and gaining accep-

tance, the efforts by the Norwegian State Housing Bank stand
apart from all others. The Housing Bank is of course not an
educational establishment, nor does it have any formal connec-
tion to the educational field. However, the Bank has for a num-
ber of years been one of the most prominent promoters of
accessibility in dwellings and dwelling areas in Scandinavia,
and has therefore experienced both the frustration of disabled
users and the insufficient level of expertise among architects
and designers. The Bank therefore started a large-scale project
aimed at all schools and universities that educate planners,
designers and builders in Norway, with the aim that Universal
Design should be taught in all places where those engaged in
shaping the built environment are educated. As already men-
tioned, the current book is a product of his project.

Teaching methods
Broadly speaking, the teaching methods can be subdivided into
three main issues, theory, user involvement and evaluation.
Introduction
by the Editor Introductionate 11

Theory
Much of the basis for modern design might be criticised for
basing its requirements on the ergonomics of the average able-
bodied Caucasian male, or maybe even an idealised, "Greek
god" version of him. As few people conform to this ideal, it is
too narrow to fulfil the aims of good, functional design, and a
different approach is needed. Thus, critical discourse becomes a
worthwhile starting point for a theoretical and pedagogical
approach to Universal Design. Both Steinfeld/Tauke (chapter
2.1) and Welch/Jones (chapter 2.3) deal with these aspects in
their articles. Balaram (chapter 3.2), on the other hand, con-
trasts differences of ideals in Western culture with those found
in some developing countries, while Wijk (chapter 1.2) attempts
to find a broader scientific basis for design.

User involvement – users as expert consultants

User orientation is central to the teaching of Universal Design,
and almost every article in this book describes ways and means
of achieving it. There are at least five different approaches: One
is to bring handicapped people in as lecturers, giving talks
about their problems and ways to overcome them. Another is to
involve users to evaluate or test existing and new designs pro-
duced by the students (see for instance Balaram, chapter 3.2). A
third way is to study user requirements through interviews, for
instance as described by Molly Follete Story in chapter 2.5. A
somewhat different approach, which seems particularly useful
when designing for groups with varying types and degrees of
handicaps, such as elderly people, is to study the users' way of
life using a combination of interviews and observation. This
was done by some teams in the Nagoya design competition
(chapter 3.5) and is a vital part of the methods used by
Pedersen/Crouch (chapter 3.1). The fifth and a commonly used
method is usually referred to as simulation exercises. Although
simulation may be carried out in a variety of ways, the object is
always the same: to create awareness through experiencing han-
dicaps for a limited period of time, and usually over a predeter-
mined test course through buildings and outdoor areas. The
method involves putting students in wheelchairs, using specta-
cles that reduce normal eyesight etc (see Ringaert, chapter 2.6,
Harrison/Parker, chapter 3.3 and Østergaard, chapter 1.5). It
must be mentioned, however, that not all authors agree with the
benefits of simulation. The argument against is chiefly that the
awareness which is created is unreal; handicapped people have
learnt to live and cope with their handicaps in ways which the
12 UNIVERSAL design

simulation exercise cannot hope to illustrate, and, for a handi-

capped person, technical aids are necessities without which cer-
tain functions cannot be performed, while a non-handicapped
person may experience technical aids as an impediment.

Evaluation
Audits and evaluation are almost as important as user involve-
ment. Thus, evaluation methodology becomes another central
issue in the teaching of Universal Design. Both the articles by
Jim Sandhu (chapter 1.3) and Wolfgang Preiser (chapter 2.4)
deal extensively with evaluation methods, systems and tools. In
addition, Molly Follete Story's article (chapter 2.5) links evalua-
tion and assessment to the seven principles of Universal Design.

Acknowledgements
The editor wishes to thank all the contributors for their idealism
and their ability to produce articles within a very short time
frame. The editor is also particularly grateful to Elaine Ostroff
and Dr. Satoshi Kose. Both gave invaluable help with sugges-
ting and locating contributors to the book. A final note of
thanks goes to the Norwegian State Housing Bank for putting
up the funding and the means of publishing that have made this
book possible.

Jon Christophersen
Norwegian Building Research Institute
 Appendix
by the Editor Appendix. Definition, Principles and Guidelines Cre 13

Appendix
Universal Design – Definition,
Principles and Guidelines

Adapted from Molly Follette Story, "The Principles of Universal

Design", in Preiser/Ostroff (ed) Universal Design Handbook.

Definition
Universal Design is defined as the design of products and envi-
ronments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent pos-
sible, without adaptation or specialized design.

As developed by a group of American architects, product desig-

ners, engineers and environmental design researchers, the defi-
nition of Universal Design is accompanied by and linked to a
set of seven principles. The intention is that the seven principles
may be applied to evaluate existing designs, guide the design
process and educate both designers and consumers about the
characteristics of more usable products and environments. The
group, which consisted of Bettye Rose Connell, Mike Jones,
Ron Mace, Jim Mueller, Abir Mullick, Elaine Ostroff, Jon
Sanford, Ed Steinfeld, Molly Story & Gregg Vanderheiden,
have presented the principles in the following format:
– name of the principle, intended to be a concise and easily
remembered statement of the key concept embodied in the
principle;
– definition of the principle, a brief description of the princi-
ple's primary directive for design;
– guidelines, a list of the key elements that should be present
in a design which adheres to the principle.

It must be noted that all guidelines may not be relevant to all

designs and that the Principles of Universal Design address only
universally usable design; the practice of design involves more
than consideration for usability. Designers must also incorporate
other considerations such as economic, engineering, cultural,
gender, and environmental concerns in their design processes.
These Principles offer designers guidance to better integrate fea-
tures that meet the needs of as many users as possible.
14 UNIVERSAL design

The seven principles

Name Definition Guidelines
1. Equitable Use The design is useful and 1a. Provide the same means of use for all
marketable to people with users: identical whenever possible, equiva-
diverse abilities. lent when not.
1b. Avoid segregating or stigmatizing any users.
1c. Make provisions for privacy, security, and
safety equally available to all users.
1d. Make the design appealing to all users.
2. Flexibility in Use

2. Flexibility in Use The design accommodates a 2a. Provide choice in methods of use.
wide range of individual 2b. Accommodate right- or left-handed access
preferences and abilities. and use.
2c. Facilitate the user's accuracy and
precision.
2d. Provide adaptability to the user's pace.

3. Simple and Use of the design is easy to 3a. Eliminate unnecessary complexity.
Intuitive Use understand, regardless of the 3b. Be consistent with user expectations and
user's experience, know- intuition.
ledge, language skills, or 3c. Accommodate a wide range of literacy
current concentration level. and language skills.
3d. Arrange information consistent with its
importance.
3e. Provide effective prompting and feedback
during and after task completion.

4. Perceptible The design communicates 4b. Maximize "legibility" of essential infor-

Information necessary information effec- mation.
tively to the user, regardless 4c. Differentiate elements in ways that can be
of ambient conditions or the described (i.e., make it easy to give instructi-
user's sensory abilities. ons or directions).
4a. Use different modes 4d. Provide compatibility with a variety of
(pictorial, verbal, tactile) for techniques or devices used by people with
redundant presentation of sensory limitations.
essential information.

5. Tolerance for The design minimizes 5a. Arrange elements to minimize hazards
Error hazards and adverse conse- and errors: most used elements, most
quences of accidental or accessible; hazardous elements eliminated,
unintended actions. isolated, or shielded.
5b. Provide warnings of hazards and errors.
5c. Provide fail safe features.
5d. Discourage unconscious action in tasks
that require vigilance.
 Appendix
by the Editor Appendix. Definition, Principles and Guidelines 15

Name Definition Guidelines

6. Low Physical The design can be used effi- 6a. Allow user to maintain a neutral body
Effort ciently and comfortably and position.
with a minimum of fatigue. 6b. Use reasonable operating forces.
6c. Minimize repetitive actions.
6d. Minimize sustained physical effort.

7. Size and Space Appropriate size and space is 7b. Make reach to all components comfor-
for Approach and provided for approach, reach, table for any seated or standing user.
Use manipulation and use regard- 7c. Accommodate variations in hand and grip
less of user's body size, post- size.
ure, or mobility. 7d. Provide adequate space for the use of
7a. Provide a clear line of assistive devices or personal assistance.
sight to important elements
for any seated or standing
user.
16 UNIVERSAL design
Author Biographies 17

Author Biographies
Dr. Sigmund Asmervik is professor of landscape architecture at the
Department of Land Use and Landscape Planning at the Agricultural
University of Norway. He has recently completed a compendium on
Universal Design and currently leads the Agricultural University of
Norway's universal design development group. He holds a degree in
architecture and a Ph.D. in engineering from the Norwegian
University of Science and Technology, and was formerly the head of
the department of architecture and building technology at the
research institute SINTEF in Trondheim. Asmervik has published
widely on a number of subjects and is a highly respected lecturer.

Singanapalli Balaram has worked as creative writer, designer and

senior professor at the National Institute of Design, India, for over
three decades. He is presently the head of the Design Studies
Faculty as well as vice president of the Society of Industrial
Designers of India. He holds four patents for his innovations. His
design projects have received national and international awards and
he was conferred with honorary fellowship of the Society of
Industrial Designers of India. His latest publications include a book
"Thinking Design" and major chapters in Encyclopedia Britannica -
Asia. He serves on the advisory board of "Design Issues" Journal
(MIT Press, USA), on the board of governors of the Centre for
Environmental Planning and Technology as well as the National
Institute of Design. Design for special needs is his passion and he is
presently planning to start a Ph.D. level programme in this area.

Jon Christophersen is an architect at the Norwegian Building

Research Institute. He is the author of numerous publications on
housing quality, accessible housing and special needs housing. He
has also composed the Norwegian State Housing Bank's require-
ments for life span dwellings. Recent work includes recommenda-
tions for accessibility in the European Union's railways and
methods for assessing accessibility in existing built up settings,
including public transport. Christophersen is a contributor to the
Universal Design Handbook.

Dr. Christopher Crouch has published widely on the relationship of

modernity and post colonialism to visual culture. His book
Modernism in Art, Design and Architecture is a set text in university
courses in Britain and Australia. He is currently writing on a book
about modernity and the city. Dr Crouch coordinates theory at the
Western Australian School of Visual Arts, Edith Cowan University.
18 UNIVERSAL design

Solveig Dale is trained as an occupational therapist. Her background

includes two years work with technical aids for disabled people and
ten years work with housing for the municipality of Trondheim,
where she is currently engaged with universal design of municipal
buildings. For the past five years Solveig Dale has also had the
responsibility for subjects concerning dwelling adaptations at the
Department of Occupational Therapy at Sør-Trøndelag University
College. Dale has written a thesis on provisions for the inclusion of
disabled in the community. She holds an official recognition from
the Norwegian society of occupational therapists as a specialist on
community health, based on her Universal Design Work.

Rigmor Leknes is an occupational therapist. Her background

includes seven years of working with physically disabled adults at
Munkvoll Rehabiliteringssenter and, since 1992 teaching on,
amongst others rehabilitation, retrofitting of dwellings and univer-
sal design at the Department of Occupational Therapy at Sør-
Trøndelag University College. Here she also has been organising
the one day, multi-disciplinary seminar described in this article.
She holds a bachelor degree and is currently working on a thesis
on accessibility, elderly people and activities outside the home.

Stanton Jones is professor of landscape architecture at the

University of Oregon. His work has focused on open space planning
and design from both a site and a systemic perspective, concentrat-
ing on public space in low-income communities and communities of
colour as well as the interrelated issues of inclusivity, cultural di-
versity, social justice, and environmental equity as they pertain to
populations underserved by the public realm. He teaches design and
planning studios, graduate seminars on public space, and courses in
landscape technologies and construction. Recent professional pro-
jects include a community revitalization and a community visioning
process for cities in Oregon, and several design/build projects
involving students, practitioners, and users.

Dr. Annette Pedersen is a socio-legal scholar interested in social

justice and pedagogic practices related to inclusive curricula. She
has published in areas related to social justice, pedagogic practice,
post-colonialism, art history and Australian/Irish socio-legal his-
tory. She and Dr. Crouch have collaborated on a number of inclu-
sive curriculum projects in Western Australian universities. Dr.
Pedersen is currently working on a book focused on ethics and
contemporary Australian culture.

Laurie Ringaert, BSc., BMR-OT, [Link]., has been involved with dis-
ability and access issues for over 20 years. She is an occupational
therapist and holds a Master of Science degree in Community
Author Biographies 19

Health Sciences. She has worked as director of the Universal Design

Institute at the Faculty of Architecture, University of Manitoba,
Canada. She previously taught occupational therapy students. She
has served as principal investigator on several research projects and
has developed courses on universal design. Laurie provides consul-
tation to several building code, standards and guidelines committees
and publications. Laurie has served as a test site coordinator for the
World Health Organization's (WHO) testing of the International
Classification of Impairment Disability and Handicap and is a
member of the WHO Environmental Task Force. She has been
involved on disability community boards and is currently a founding
member and Chair of the Canadian Centre on Disability Studies
(CCDS). Laurie has provided universal design seminars in Canada
to Ukrainian and Russian delegates and has travelled to Russia and
Estonia to provide seminars and project development. Laurie is cur-
rently developing a universal design consulting business.

Tone Rønnevig is an advisor at the Norwegian State Housing Bank,

and leads the Bank's Universal Design education project. She is
trained as an occupational therapist. Having concentrated on access-
ibility in housing, her work includes project co-ordination and devel-
opment, studies and research, both for the public and the private
sectors. The former includes local authority as well as state bodies.

Jim Singh Sandhu has worked in the field for over thirty years in
twenty-five countries and has published 200 papers, reviews, book
chapters and books. His consultancy, teaching, and research work
has covered products, transport, telematics and environments. A
founder member of the European Institute for Design and
Disability and past president he has also been policy adviser to the
British Government and the European Commission. He is the
director of Inclusive Design Research Associates (INDRA).

Tadao Shimizu is a MFA from Cranbrock Academy of Art (USA)

and Dr. of Engineering from Tokyo University. He has worked as a
designer in both Japan and USA, and has also taught as an assistant
professor at University of Washington (USA) and Chiba University
(Japan). Mr. Shimizu is the recipient of more than 40 design awards.

Edward Steinfeld, [Link]., is professor of architecture and adjunct

professor of Occupational Therapy at SUNY/Buffalo. He is the
director of the IDEA Center and the RERC on Universal Design at
Buffalo. He received two Progressive Architecture Awards for
Applied Research and a Research Recognition Award from the
National Endowment for the Arts. From 1974-1984 he was the
20 UNIVERSAL design

secretary of ANSI A117, the committee that develops the consensus

standard used for accessible design throughout the U.S. and a mem-
ber of the CABO/ANSI A117 Committee from 1995-1998. Dr.
Steinfeld was one of the developers of the Principles of Universal
Design. Recent activities include research on accessibility and uni-
versal design in housing, usability of automobiles for older people,
methods for measuring the usability of products and environments
and the development of a prototype "Universal Bathroom." He is
also currently an expert consultant to the New York City Housing
Authority. He has experience as a practicing architect in housing,
health care, retail stores and religious buildings.

Molly Follette Story is a researcher and designer specializing in

products for diverse populations, including individuals with disabil-
ities and older adults. She has been on the staff of the Center for
Universal Design since 1994. She coordinated the development of
and helped author the Principles of Universal Design and has fre-
quently written about and presented them to international audi-
ences. Ms. Story has taught industrial design since 1984 at Georgia
Institute of Technology and North Carolina State University.

Beth Tauke, M.A., M.F.A. Ms. Tauke is an associate professor at

the Department of Architecture at the SUNY/Buffalo. She directs
the Educational Models Project for the RERC on Universal
Design at Buffalo. This project is developing resources for univer-
sal design educators and developing multidisciplinary programs
on universal design education at SUNY/Buffalo. Her scholarly
research combines the areas of visual communication, colour
theory, visual/spatial perception/analysis, and design education.
She has presented her work on design education and curriculum
development at over thirty conferences since 1988, including eight
National Conferences on the Beginning Student, three College Art
Association Conferences, three Association of Collegiate Schools
of Architecture Annual Meetings, four National Foundation for
Art, Theory, and Education Conferences, three International
Design Communication Conferences, and three Industrial Design
Society of America Education Conferences.

Andrew Walker is an architect by training. He was formerly the

Head of Technical Studies and Director of the Environmental
Access Programme at the Architectural Association School of
Architecture (AA). He is a founder member and former Chair of
the United Kingdom Institute for Inclusive Design (UKiiD).

Polly Welch, an architect and professor at the University of Oregon,

has been engaged in promoting inclusive design for twenty years
Author Biographies 21

as a practicing architect and as a consultant to public and private

organizations on user accommodation. She has been instrumental
in developing accessibility regulations, served on the adjudication
board of a state access board, and has authored award-winning
guidelines on accessibility. As former deputy assistant secretary for
Public Housing in Massachusetts, she was responsible for the
siting and construction of housing for low-income families, people
with mental and physical disabilities, and older people. She is the
editor of Strategies for Teaching Universal Design, co-author with
Stanton Jones of Advances in Universal Design Education in the
United States, and speaks frequently on universal design and social
equity. Her teaching includes design studios and classes on the
social, political, and economic context of design.

Maarten Wijk is professor at the Department of Architecture at the

Delft University of Technology. His interests include ergonomics of the
built environment. He is senior manager at Deloitte & Touche ICS
consultants in the field of strategic facility and real estate management.

Kaname Yanagisawa is associate professor at the Faculty of

Engineering, Department of Design and Architecture, Chiba
University. He has a Ph.D. and a Master’s degree in Architecture
from the University of Tokyo. His thesis "Studies of the spatial
analysis from the viewpoint of children's behaviour setting"
received an award from the Architectural Institute of Japan, and he
has written several books and articles on the design and use of
school buildings, school furniture and the uses of classrooms.

Makoto Yanagisawa is Dr. of Engineering from Tokyo University. He

has worked as a professor at Nagoya University and Nagoya City
University since 1975. Much of his work has been committed to im-
proving and developing Hospital Planning. A thesis prize was awarded
by the Architectural Institute of Japan; some projects he has worked
on were awarded by Japan Institute of Healthcare Architecture.

Poul Østergaard was employed at the office of the architects Jørgen

Bo and Vilhelm Wohlert from 1958, working amongst other projects
on the design for the Louisiana Art Museum outside Copenhagen.
Since 1968, he has been a member of the teaching staff at the Aarhus
School of Architecture. He founded the school's department of indus-
trial design in 1983 and was the head of the department until 1993.
Since then, he has been engaged in a variety of research projects,
concerning people with special needs as well as giving numerous
lectures on accessibility both in Denmark and abroad. Poul
Østergaard has also been engaged in external projects on accessibil-
ity guidelines for government ministries and user organisations.
 22

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 23

Part 1
Europe
2424 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 25
Housing Bank

1.1 Without Dreams,

a New Reality Cannot
Be Created
Tone Rønnevig, advisor, The Norwegian State Housing Bank

This chapter describes a Norwegian pro-

ject organised by the Norwegian State
Housing Bank. The aim of the project is
to reinforce the integration of the
Universal Design concept in schools,
colleges and universities that educate
professionals who shape the man-made
environment. This includes architects,
planners, designers and engineers as well
Tone Rønnevig.
as members of the building trades. The
Coordinater of the
project started in 1997 and will close in
project.
2002. This chapter describes the organi-
sation of the project, the aims and objec-
tives, methods and results as well as some of the ups and downs
experienced in the process. Thanks to highly skilled and hard-
working collaborators in the organisations for the disabled, in
research institutes and government ministries, we have been
able to provide the schools and universities with a framework
which could be developed further. We have been quite success-
ful, and we hope that our experiences may provide some inspi-
ration for others outside Norway. To document the project, two
booklets are currently being produced. One deals with motiva-
tion; the intention is to inspire schools and universities to get
involved in the subject. The other booklet presents school pro-
jects and results reached during the project period. Another
booklet, "Inspiration", which has already been produced, pre-
sents good Norwegian and European examples with comments
on possible improvements.
26 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Reasons for starting the project

Substituting institutional care for care in the home has been one of
the main priorities for the reforms that have taken place in
Norway during the 1980s and 1990s. The ideological basis is that
everyone shall be able to live and participate equally in society,
thus securing basic human values and equal opportunities for eve-
rybody. However, decisions made on this basis have and will cont-
inue to have a number of consequences. One consequence is that
new demands will be put on the design of products, dwellings,
buildings and outdoor areas; the former values and priorities that
made up the basis for the design of the existing man-made envi-
ronment are somewhat different. Thus, attitudes have to change
both among designers and in the building trades. In addition, the
knowledge base among the professionals has to expand.

The responsibility for the training of professionals and the deve-

lopment of planning and practice has been and is still divided.
Statutory requirements for accessibility are worded in such gene-
ral terms that disregarding them has been easy for most of the
actors in the field. Well-functioning, high-quality design solutions
are not created as a matter of course.

The organisations for the disabled have been playing very deman-
ding roles in the process of changing requirements and attitudes.
By tradition the organisation for the blind acted as spokesman for
persons with visual impairments, whilst the Norwegian
Association of the Disabled represented those with reduced mobi-
lity. The result was often that solutions that worked well for one
group were less than ideal for the other, and that information to
designers and planners was inconsistent and conflicting. There
was little co-operation towards a common goal.

That was the starting point when the Norwegian State Housing
Bank invited the organisations for the disabled to a meeting in the
spring of 1997. The objective of the meeting was to discuss the
possibilities for collaborating and forming a new strategy - the
Housing Bank being the provider of grants for work related to
housing for elderly and disabled people. Statutes, requirements,
building trades and education were all seen as issues needing to be
approached and influenced.

Following a long process and a series of discussions, an agree-

ment was reached that new modes of collaboration should be
tested. It was also agreed that the effort should be directed towards
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 27
Housing Bank

education, aiming at integrating an understanding of different user

needs into the courses on offer. (Efforts towards the building
trades and statutory requirements are still continuing on a day-
to-day basis.)

Having agreed both to co-operate and to work towards the field of

education, the Norwegian Building Research Institute was asked
to produce an introductory project, describing the target areas in
the educational establishments, the existing knowledge base and
possible education methods for Norwegian schools and universi-
ties.

At the same time, visits were made to schools and government

departments to discuss possibilities and to create interest in such a
project. The reactions to these promotional efforts were generally
favourable, but also somewhat sceptical. The scepticism gave us
the courage to continue marketing the project and confirmed the
importance of what we were doing. The visits also provided us
with important information about the structure and composition
of the schools - their widely different decision processes, highly
individual working models and the varieties of pedagogical theo-
ries. We, with our basis in design and social sciences had to be
humble towards the world of teaching and adopt an attitude of
listening and learning.

Organisation
The group involved in the discussions included representatives
from several organisations for the disabled in Norway: The
Norwegian Society for the Blind, Norwegian Association of the
Disabled, Norwegian Federation of Organisations of Disabled
People, Norwegian Association for Persons with Developmental
Disabilities and the Norwegian Heart and Lung Association.
Additional participants were one person from the Norwegian
State Council on Disability and two researchers who had
worked for a number of years with questions regarding housing
for disabled people.

Our logo, showing a range of human diversity.

28 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

A major problem at this stage was how to organise and finance

the task. Our visits to the schools and our acquaintance with the
educational system had uncovered a sector with severely limited
financial resources. Any new activity would mean additional
costs. We decided (1997) that the representatives involved up to
then should establish themselves as a project group. The
Housing Bank's role was clarified and defined as project co-
ordinator. The various members of the project group were - in
addition to serving as representatives for their organisations -
given the task of leading a school working group. Six school
working groups (one for each type of school), each consisting
of three members, were established; we felt that three members
were necessary in order to strengthen the groups and provide
opportunities for discussion. The intention was that the school
working groups should provide means of contact with the
schools as well as initiate and follow-up activity, experiments
and development. Given the mandate for the school working
groups, their responsibilities were to develop plans for action
and budget, and to follow up reporting and time scheduling.

This way of organising the project proved to be successful. It

has indeed been one of the strongest forces driving the project
forward, and an advantage we did not realise that we had when
the project started. The process involved was, however, both
time-consuming and complicated. Few participants in the group
were used to looking beyond the needs of one particular group
and see the totality of many groups of users. Working on this
project, having Universal Design as a unifying concept, has
given the organisations involved a new approach which has
been useful in other contexts (such as other parallel projects -
particularly one run by the Ministry of the Environment).

An advisory reference group was established in 1998, mainly to

achieve a better link to the central government and to create
better organisational ties (in addition to improving the chances
of funding). This group had representatives from the Ministry
of Education, Research and Church Affairs, the Ministry of
Health and Social Affairs, the Ministry of Local Government
and Regional Development, the Ministry of the Environment,
the Forum for Co-operation between Organisations for the
Disabled (SAFO), Norwegian Federation of Organisations of
Disabled People and the Norwegian State Council on Disability
(the government's agency). This group has contributed to put
Universal Design on the agenda and has been supportive in the
discussions on strategies and funding.
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 29
Housing Bank

Our ambitions
After the introductory phases, the project group agreed on the
following objectives:

1. The project shall promote changes which as far as possible

will ensure that products and the built environment will be
designed for all, as well as altering attitudes so that the idea
of integration becomes the basis for product development,
planning and building in the next century.
2. The intended results of the project are that
– planning for disabilities and knowledge about Universal
Design will be integrated into the courses offered by scho-
ols and universities, including relevant health education,
technological and design education in Norway (architects,
planning, industrial design, interior design, occupational
therapists, and builders).
– the schools and universities will be able to develop suffici-
ent know-how to carry out courses in Universal Design.
– subjects relevant to Universal Design will be included in
the curriculum of the schools and universities by the end of
2001, or that there is a plan for the inclusion of the subject.

In addition, we were resolved that experiments in teaching

Universal Design should be carried out in all the different types
of schools during 1999.

When the aims and objectives were defined (the dates were
revised while the project was running) and some of the funding
was in place, we invited the schools to a starting-up conference.
The project covered the participants' travelling costs.

Inspiration and starting-up conference

During the first phase of the project, two members of the pro-
ject group were present at a conference on Universal Design
education organised by the European Institute for Design and
Disability, EIDD, in Mainz, Germany. It attracted enthusiastic
and inspiring designers, and gave us the possibility of meeting
Elaine Ostroff, who informed us of the work that was going on
in the US. When we told her of our plans to invite Norwegian
schools to a conference, she offered to supply all the partici-
pants with a copy of the book "Teaching Universal Design"
(Welch 1995). She also invited us to the international confe-
rence Design for the 21th Century in New York in 1998.
30 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Our starting-up conference took place in November 1997. It

had some 60 participants, representing the levels of education
we had aimed for. The main theme of the conference was to
present and discuss the Universal Design concept. To open the
conference, we brought in Linda Sheridan from the School of
Architecture at Liverpool University, who is an experienced lec-
turer within the subject. She also presented ideas for the after-
noon workshops. During the workshops, the school working
group leaders discussed ideas for education projects, experi-
ments and the will and possibilities for carrying them out.

The conference found that all the schools and school types that
were present had a positive interest in carrying the Universal
Design concept further into their educational fields. The partici-
pants agreed on a need for educating both the teachers and the
students, as well as developing teaching materials and school
projects. All received a copy of "Teaching Universal Design" - a
summary of which we, at a later date, have published in
Norwegian.

Invitations to schools and universities

The project group decided that, for the work to be effective, all
types of schools that educate professionals within the fields of
design, construction and production should be represented in
the project. At the outset, all types of health education were also
targeted. This was, however, narrowed down to occupational
therapists, as these often play the part of user representatives in
local authority building projects. In addition, these professio-
nals were seen as an important resource regarding information
about user needs - an aspect that is often remote and unfocused
in the education of the other types of professionals.

Norway is a small country in terms of inhabitants, only 4.5 mil-

lion. The universities are located in the four main cities; poly-
technics are situated in smaller and larger cities, and most
municipalities have secondary schools.

The schools and universities that were invited to take part in the
project included:
– The schools of architecture in Oslo, Bergen and Trondheim
– Schools of planning in Ås, Oslo, Trondheim, Volda,
Stavanger, Kjeller, Grimstad, Volda
– Schools of engineering in Stavanger, Bergen, Narvik,
Trondheim, Agder, Oslo
– Industrial design schools in Oslo and Trondheim
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 31
Housing Bank

– Building trades programmes in Bergen, Trondheim,

Skedsmo, Kristiansand
– Schools of occupational therapy in Bergen, Tromsø,
Trondheim, Oslo

As there are a large number of schools of engineering and

secondary schools, only a limited number were invited.

The Vigeland sculpture park in Oslo: "Community?" - an example of

Universal Design as students at SHKS, Norway have understood the term.
32 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Structure and time schedule

The project was evaluated in the spring of 2000. The findings
were largely positive with regard to the results and the way the
project had been carried out. In addition, the evaluation gave us
an opportunity to see some side effects of the work. At the time
of writing this chapter, we have accomplished a lot of hard
work, but we hope that our conclusions will be useful in the
time to come. The list below sums up the main stages.

1. Preparatory phase (1997-98)

Analysis of educational needs
Project organisation
Marketing and legitimising the project

2. Practical work (1998-2000)

Initiating introductory projects and development of educatio-
nal experiments
School projects and experiments
Reports from school and experiments
Development of teaching material
Conclusions

3. Conclusions (2000-2001)
Summing up and production of documentation about the
project Evaluation1

Being too ambitious

During 1998, the project group members spent a lot of time
making contacts and learning about school structures and teaching
methods. In our first plans - without pedagogic expertise in the
project - we had designated 1999 as the year for teaching experi-
ments and the year 2000 as the final year. At this time, the schools
were supposed to have Universal Design worked into the curricu-
lum. We realised, as the year 1998 was reached, that plans for an
educational year are made one year ahead (a fairly obvious fact),
and that it takes time to bring in new objectives. It also became
clear that we, rather than the teachers, were the ones that knew
about user needs. The process of creating a knowledge base and
have it integrated into the school system would have to run in
parallel if we were to meet the objectives we had laid down. We
accepted that this was not possible in practice and decided to let
the schools do their own timing regarding projects and experi-
ments. Infusing Universal Design concepts demands not only

1 The project was evaluated by Asplan Analyse in 2000.

 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 33
Housing Bank

theoretical knowledge, but also changing attitudes and ways of

thinking. We also learnt that with regard to role models a number
of barriers had to be broken down. User models developed by
Neuffert (Bauentwicklungslehre) and le Corbusier (the Modulor)
had to be altered (and preferably discarded). Young people who
are developing are not only under pressure to think universally, but
also have to combat their own selfishness in addition to outmoded
ideas conveyed by some teachers. However, we kept in close con-
tact with the schools and tried to inspire them into action.

In 1998, funding was also high on the agenda. To succeed means

that experiments at the different schools had to be provided with
financial support. We had to convey the honourable aims and objec-
tives of the project wherever means could be made available. Thus
we were both proud and relieved when the project was listed as a
separate area of commitment in the central government's budget.

The Experiments
to develop and carry out education projects. We also gave
them the opportunity to start work on teaching materials.
During the introductory phase the working groups had stres-
sed that the Universal Design and user needs requirements had
to be compulsory subjects. If not our surroundings would
change very slowly indeed. The teachers we had contacted
worked accordingly and introduced both compulsory projects
and subjects for choice. In 2001 the development of projects
and teaching methods is still going on, and some research pro-
jects have been formulated. A list of projects is provided in
appendix 12. Other projects will be presented in the booklet
"Presentation", which the Housing Bank is publishing.

Follow-up Conference
In connection with a conference on aesthetics and functionality,
all the participants in the project were present at a one-day con-
ference in May 2000. The object of the conference was mutual
inspiration and exchange of ideas. During the plenary session
which started the day teachers and students presented school
projects, experiences and sketched the aims of the exercises. In
addition the leaders of the school working groups presented
their experiences. In the afternoon discussions of further deve-
lopments and ambitions were held in working groups, one
group for each type of school. The conference was successful in
several respects: The teachers found rewarding opportunities for

2 The summaries of the projects are based on Halvor Kr. Halvorsen 2000.
34 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

exchanging views and experiences with other teachers, and tea-

chers from different types of schools had a rare chance to get
acquainted.

What has been achieved?

In relation to the aims of the project, we have:

– partly achieved that planning for disabled people and know-

ledge about Universal Design has been integrated into the
curriculum at schools where architects, industrial designers,
interior designers, occupational therapists and builders in
Norway are educated.
– achieved that the schools and universities are in a position to
develop a knowledge base which will enable them to teach
Universal Design as a subject. However, some schools prefer
to use experts from the outside because they see a need for
specialists on the subject and because this gives the course a
higher status.
– achieved that a course will be repeated several years in a row
and that subjects relevant to Universal Design have either
been worked into the curriculum or that there are plans to
include them.

We have seen presentations of student projects. These clearly

show that the students have grasped the main points: They are
open to a society which allows for human diversity, and under-
stand that a product which can be used by a wide range of peo-
ple has a potential for commercial success and may receive
awards. In the words of one student: "The solution is intended
to integrate use for all; if adaptations are needed, we have done
a bad job."

The project has also contributed to making the term Universal

Design widely known in Norway. We see that attitudes are
beginning to change; the political pressures to build and design
for all are increasing.

The Road Ahead

The development projects at the schools and universities will be
continued, and teaching material will be distributed and impro-
ved. Research programs will be worked out and promoted. Our
motivation and documentation booklets will be published
during 2002, and we will present the projects and the partici-
pants who have been involved in Norway.
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 35
Housing Bank

As the project is running to a close in Norway, the EU Council

has agreed on a resolution (Res AP (2001) 1), which calls for
Universal Design teaching in all schools that educate professio-
nals who shape the built environment in the member states.
Hopefully others will now pick up on our dream, grab the baton
and continue the work.

References
Welch, P. (ed.) Teaching Universal Design. Adaptive
Environments Center, Boston MA 1995.
Halvorsen, H. K. Evaluering av Husbankens utdanningspro-
sjekt universell utforming av bolig, bygning og utemiljø.
Asplan Analyse/Aplan VIAK. Sandvika. 2000.
36 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Participating Schools and School Projects

Schools of Architecture
The working group consisted of Edel
Heggem, architect, Norwegian
Association of the Disabled; Karin
Høyland, architect, SINTEF; and Solveig
Kornstad, architect, Norwegian State
Housing Bank, Trondheim.
Edel Heggem. Leader
Elective course – student competition
working group Schools
A competition titled Dwellings for All
of Architechture.
was organised in 1999, and the competition
evaluation including a discussion of the term Universal Design.

Teacher conference
The working group has organised a seminar for teachers at the
thee schools of architecture in Norway. Professor Marten Wijk
from the Delft Instutute of Technology was invited as inspirator.
He also took part in the seminar discussions. A framework for
further development in the schools of architecture was drawn
up as a conclusion of the seminar.

Oslo School of Architecture

Co-ordinator Margrethe Dobloug.
1. Basic, first-year course module
The module is a two-day course consisting of lectures and
practical exercises in which the students make proposals
based on user characteristics. The school wishes to include
the course in the general curriculum.

2. One-term design subject

Universal Design of a primary school, to illustrate how archi-
tectural solutions influence use and participation and to
develop design methods which both recognise the impor-
tance of time-/user aspects and take a dynamic approach to
use and users. The overall object was to put architecture into
a social perspective. Twenty-seven students took part.

Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim,

School of Architecture
Co-ordinators Harald Høyem and Kjell-Håvard Bråten.
1. Development and implementation of a course module in the
basic architecture course
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 37
Housing Bank

The module was developed and put into practice in 1999.

The object was to make the students acquainted with scale
and dimensional requirements in relation to the environment
by testing full-scale models of rooms in dwellings (bed-
rooms, kitchen, entry, bathrooms etc). Seventy students took
part. The course has been made compulsory for second year
students from the year 2000.

2. Seminars (see also Schools for Occupational Therapy, Sør-

Trøndelag University College below)
The aim of the seminar was to inform the students about
Universal Design and to increase understanding regarding
requirements and solutions in different educational fields.
Seminars were held in 1999 and 2000, as collaborations be-
tween the school of architecture, the school of occupational
therapy, the school of engineering and the school of building
at Brundalen. (All schools in the county of Sør-Trøndelag.)
Some 150 participants were present. The seminar is compul-
sory for the students, and will be held every year.

3. Teaching material
Primary school teaching plan developed by Siv Bleikli and
Anne Torill Bleikli, on the premise that the Norwegian State
Housing Bank sees a need to increase the awareness of dwel-
ling quality at an early age. The existing structure in the pri-
mary schools makes it possible to include projects of this
type. As a result, a booklet presenting ideas was produced in
2001.

4. Solutions for accessibility in historical buildings

Prof. Eir Grytli and architecture student Cathrine Schøll
Heneide have produced a booklet showing how accessibility
has been achieved in a range of historical buildings. The boo-
klet will be used in the advanced
course at NTNU. It has since been
reworked and published a new edition
titled "Ingen hindring" (No Barriers).
The booklet is distributed by SINTEF,
Trondheim and Riksantikvaren in Oslo.

Schools of Planning
The working group consisted of Olav
Rand Bringa, civil engineer; Steen L. Olav Bringa. Leader
Petterson, architect, Norwegian Heart working group Schools
and Lung Association; Tone Manum, of Planning.
38 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Norwegian Association of the Disabled, Oslo County; and

Gunnar Ridderstrøm, head of planning, Larvik Municipality.

Kjeller University College

Co-ordinators: Pål Jordanger and Kari Bjerke Karlsen.
Kjeller developed a plan for the inclusion and integration of
Universal Design into the various courses at the school, inclu-
ding overall planning, health and social studies, and local envi-
ronment for children and juveniles.

Agricultural University of Norway

1. Seminar and plan for action
Prof. Sigmund Asmervik organised a seminar to inform the tea-
chers at the school about Universal Design, and to start the
work on a plan of action to integrate the subject into the courses
at the school. The plan has been made, and Universal Design
has been infused into the teaching. Each year about 110–120
students are brought into contact with Universal Design.

2. Teaching material
A booklet showing examples and providing a background for
group assignments, student projects and further studies into
the subject has been produced by Prof. Sigmund Asmervik.
(Asmervik 2000)

Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim,

School of Planning
Teaching materials
Sverre Nistov is developing reference materials for the students
(experiments in the third year at the School of Architecture;
Universal Design is by now integrated and compulsory for town
and city planning students) and lectures, as well as an evalua-
tion of the course. Further plans include teaching Universal
Design for advanced studies in building technology.

Master degree in planning

This includes the development of a Universal Design module
for a Master’s degree in social studies.

Teaching materials and documentation for the education of

planners
Pål Jordanger is developing a compendium for health, social
and environmental studies.
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 39
Housing Bank

Engineering Schools
The working group consisted of Jon
Christophersen and Karine Denizou,
architects, Norwegian Building Research
Institute; Stein Hustvedt, Bergen Muni-
cipality; and Morten Skjennem, architect,
Norwegian State Housing Bank, Oslo.
Jon Christophersen.
Sør-Trøndelag University College Leader working group
Teachers and students at the school of Engineering schools.
engineering participate in seminars orga-
nised by others.

Stavanger University College

Architect Jonas Espedal, who teaches at the college and has a
private practice in Stavanger, is developing a compendium and
sets of examples to be used for teaching engineering students.
Some experiments have been carried out at the school.

Secondary Schools
The working group consisted of Dagfrid
Hestenes, Norwegian Federation of
Organisations of Disabled People; Ole
Vefferstad, the Education Council for
Mining and Building; and Dagfinn Roy
Andersen, Kvadraturen school in
Kristiansand.
Dagfrid Hestenes.
The working group has contacted publis- Leader secondary
hers and authors of educational books to Schools working
enquire about the possibilities of inclu- group.
ding Universal Design in books that are
already in use. The group has also initiated work on a collection
of exercises for use in social studies and in the education of
builders.

Dagfinn Roy Andersen has written a booklet titled "Making

Way for All". The booklet introduces and discusses the
Universal Design concept, and describes training exercises
designed for secondary school pupils It has been distributed to
all the schools that train professionals for the building trades in
the country.
40 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Interior Design Schools and

Industrial Design Schools
The working group consisted of Ellen
Jyhne, Norwegian Society for the Blind;
Karen Karen Christie Bjønness, interior
designer; and Sidsel Bjørneby, Human
Factors Solutions Ltd.
Ellen Jyhne. Leader Interior Design
Oslo School of Architecture,
Schools / Industrial Design Schools
Institute for Industrial Design
working group.
Co-ordinators Tom Vavik and Hilde Angelfoss.
1. Teaching Experiments
The co-ordinators worked towards developing a knowledge
base at the school through educational experiments. A fur-
ther goal was to have Universal Design fitted into the curri-
culum. Some 15 students took part, and Universal Design is
now being included at several levels in the programme.
2. Revised Version of the textbook Human Aspects of Design - an
introduction to ergonomics. The authors, Tom Vavik and Trond
Are Ørritsland, have completed a revised version of the book.

Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim,

Faculty of Product Design
Developments in the teaching of Universal Design which have
taken place as a consequence of the Housing Bank education
project include a contribution to Tom Vavik's textbook (above), a
survey of and an article about the level of competence as regards
Universal Design among Norwegian industrial designers (sum-
mer 2000), the introduction of Universal Design in the teaching
of ergonomics, industrial design and product design at the
Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Universal
Design was first introduced as a specialist subject (1999) but has
later become an integrated part of the teaching (2000).

The National College of Art and Design (NCAD)

The professors Anne Alnæs and Terje Hope have developed,
carried out and evaluated a course in Universal Design. The
experiment was divided into three parts: "a candidate examina-
tion" in the spring of 1999, a second and third year course in
the autumn of 1999 and another course as an introduction to a
study trip for third-year students. A total of eight teachers and
36 students took part. In 2000 and 2001, the college has also
organised projects in which Universal Design has been integra-
ted into large-scale designs of schools and school playgrounds.
One-day multi disciplinary seminar for students.
 Tone Rønnevig
The Norwegian State Without Dreams, a New Reality Cannot Be Created 41
Housing Bank

Schools of Occupational Therapy

The working group consisted of Guri
Henriksen, Norwegian Association of the
Disabled; Bente Osnes, Norwegian State
Housing Bank, Oslo; Inger Hafsten, the
City of Oslo, and Randi Røed-Andersen,
DELTA-centre. The working group has
organised a seminar about the effects of
light. Participants were students of inte-
Guri Henriksen. Leader
rior design, occupational therapists and
Schools of Occupational
electrical engineering.
Theraphy working group.

Sør-Trøndelag University College

1. One-day, multi-disciplinary seminar for students (see also
Schools of architecture above). The seminar was organised in
collaboration with the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, the school of engineering at Sør-Trøndelag
University College and Brundalen school for builders. The
aim of the seminar was to inform the students about
Universal Design and to increase understanding regarding
requirements and solutions in different educational fields.
Seminars were held in 1999 and 2000. Some 150 participants
were present. The seminar is compulsory for the students,
and will be held every year. Universal Design courses have
also been organised in 2001 and 2002.
2. Collaborative Universal Design Project
Rigmor Leknes from the Occupational Therapy School and
Embret Sandbakken from the School of Engineering organi-
sed a project where students from the two schools worked
together on concrete proposals, using Universal Design prin-
ciples for the refurbishment of a building in Trondheim.

Schools of occupational therapy in Trondheim, Bergen, Oslo

and Tromsø
Ideas for teaching Universal Design. The four schools are collabo-
rating with the Norwegian Association of the Disabled to create a
reference work intended to increase the knowledge base, give con-
tent to the education structure and to provide a tool for the teachers.

Teaching material
The working group has produced a set of three loose-leaf fol-
ders. The first folder in the set goes through the principles of
Universal Design. The second concerns user adaptations, whilst
the third, which targets the teachers, contains various teaching
materials such as sheets for overhead projectors etc.
 Sigmund Asmervik
4242 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe
42 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 43
University of Norway (NLH)

1.2 Cities, Buildings

and Parks for Everyone,
a Universal Design
Compendium
Professor Sigmund Asmervik, Department of Land Use and
Landscape Planning, Agricultural University of Norway (NLH).

Introduction
When I first heard the term Universal Design in the summer of
1998, in connection with an invitation to join a conference in
the USA, I thought, as many others surely would, that this soun-
ded very much like old content in a new package. However,
after gaining more insight into the concept I realized that much
more was involved than I had originally thought, as it was more
about making all of society available and accessible to every-
one, regardless of functional ability.

Financing from the Norwegian State Housing Bank (as part of

the Norwegian State Housing Bank project described in chapter
1.1) has made it possible to write a compendium to be used in
the teaching of students of architecture, landscape architecture
and planning. The various school projects under the Housing
Bank project at many institutions of learning in Norway have
provided inspiration for this work, and study trips to other lo-
cations in the Nordic countries, the USA and Barcelona in
Spain have provided me with good examples upon which much
of this publication is based.

How to use the book

The main aim of this book is to give the concept of universal
design meaning to students in the fields of planning, architecture
and landscape architecture so that as professionals they will find
it an exciting and challenging part of their fields of work.

Two aspects of the concept of universal design deserve special

attention. One is the principle that we should plan and design for
everyone without making special solutions for particular groups
 Sigmund Asmervik
44 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

of the population due to age or functionality considerations.

Universal design should help to remove or at least move away
from the «we and you», «us and them» approach. The second
aspect is that by working with universal design, the students are
forced to devote attention to the needs and requirements of vari-
ous groups. Industrial designers are already quite familiar with
this way of thinking, as they are dependent on a market that is
willing to buy a product at a certain price. Architects and land-
scape architects have a strong tradition based on the idea that
the individual’s «signed work» is the real objective of their
activity, and this attitude often relegates awareness of the needs
of various users to the sidelines in the learning processes.

When we pay greater attention to these two aspects, we will need

to cooperate with other professions, such as occupational thera-
pists, social workers, educators, janitors and cleaning staff. To
arouse the necessary curiosity in our students, the book presents
some examples that are of special interest to universal design:

– Barcelona has been chosen as an example of a city where

truly systematic efforts are being applied to facilitate use of
the city for everyone. Barcelona has been and will continue
to be a magnet for students of planning and design, and will,
for this and a number of other reasons be an appropriate goal
for study trips.
– The small city of Røros in Norway has been chosen because
of its historic importance. Here, the need to protect historical
monuments is a major concern, and the need to facilitate uni-
versal design is particularly challenging. At Røros a com-
prehensive registration of physical access to buildings with
high visitor frequencies has been undertaken, yielding a good
basis for student assignments. Moreover, we show a number
of good solutions from other locations.
– The University Centre at Dragvoll in Trondheim, Norway,
was planned in the 1970s. The concept on which this facility
is built in many ways lends itself well to universal design. At
the Norwegian University of Science and Technology
(NTNU) in Trondheim, planners have been very aware of the
need to improve access for everyone.
– Sommerfrydhagen, (the Summer Park) at Tøyen in Oslo,
Norway, is a good example of a park that has been planned
and designed for various groups of the population. Using
simple techniques, landscape architects have created a model
facility, paying special attention to the needs of functionally
challenged children.
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 45
University of Norway (NLH)

– Sinnenas Trädgård (literally: garden of the mind) in the

Sabbatsberg area of Stockholm, Sweden, is an exciting faci-
lity that has been designed especially for the elderly who are
suffering from dementia, but which has become a highly
popular area for everyone, residents, employees and next of
kin
– Buildings designed by some of the most famous architects of
the 20th century, such as Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies van der
Rohe, Le Corbusier and Alvar Aalto, are also included, with
comments in terms of universal design. These examples
prove that for quite some time architects have looked upon
the ramp as an architectural element, literally creating a
sliding transition from outside to inside. They have also
designed such details as door handles suitable for persons of
various heights.

Examples from Dragvoll in Trondheim and Sabbatsberg in

Stockholm are presented below.

Background for the concept universal

design
The universal design concept is American, and this country led
the way in the 1990s with its intense efforts to facilitate society
for everyone. The concept simply means an attitude or way of
considering things, where surroundings, buildings and products
are planned and designed so they can be used by everyone to
the greatest extent possible. In the US there has been a fairly
heated debate about this concept and its consequences. The fact
that the concept can be understood in a number of ways is
something that in itself fuels the debate. One interpretation is
that; «It could also happen to me», i.e. that I could become
functionally challenged, and that this is not only something that
happens to others. Another stance is that this means nothing
more than what good design and planning has always been
about. Needless to say, the debate also focuses on how the
concept was first arrived at and who was responsible for this.

In 1977 the architect Michael Bednar pointed out that many

people were surprised when they saw how the functionality of
physically challenged persons increased dramatically when
physical barriers were removed. This gave him the idea of
launching a more comprehensive and general concept that
included the needs of everyone. In the US, the concept «acces-
 Sigmund Asmervik
46 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

sible design» was used a great deal early in the 1980s. However,
as the concept appears to have taken on the meaning of acces-
sible and accessibility particularly for persons with miscellane-
ous handicaps, it has lost its meaning of accessibility for
everyone.

An accessible building was generally perceived as a building

that could be entered by a person in a wheelchair, but exactly
where the entrance was placed in relation to available public
transport was not deemed to be part of the accessibility issue.
Accessibility and participation are included in the universal
design concept in a very wide sense. Another important point of
universal design was that this would be a general condition
incorporated in planning and design, and hence also cost-
effective.

The concept of universal design stemmed from two separate but

related movements, one focusing on removing the they and us
attitude, an approach that marginalized persons with functional
disabilities, and the other focusing on a «democratisation» of
the definition of good design with users in mind.

In the 1960s, the focus on giving the functionally challenged,

primarily mobility-challenged persons, better accessibility
resulted in «solutions for the handicapped» with ramps, special
lifts, bigger toilets and the international symbol featuring a
wheelchair user. These measures have brought about substantial
improvements for many mobility-challenged persons, but have
also contributed to the stigmatization of this group of the popu-
lation in a frequently negative way. The concept of universal
design was also introduced to change attitudes that the physical
accessibility concept could not satisfy.

Planners, architects and designers comprise a group of profes-

sionals that basically has users as the basis for their work.
Architects have been especially reputed to have great interest in
their personal work of art to the point of trivializing the needs
of users. We find innumerable examples of buildings that gene-
rally look very good in trendy periodicals but do not function
well in everyday use. There is little comfort in professing belief
in functionalistic architecture if the building does not function
for various user groups. Designers have in many ways enjoyed a
different relationship to users, as they have had to pay attention
to the demands of mass production market dependency.
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 47
University of Norway (NLH)

A group of designers and architects in the 1960s drew attention

to ergonomics and studied general human body functions, quite
often based on average male bodies. This harks back to Le
Corbusier’s Modulor from the end of the 1940s, a slightly dif-
ferent kind of universal design. User-interested architects and
designers have also had a tendency to consider special popu-
lation groups, such as children and the elderly. Special design
has often led to separation instead of integration.

The idea of standardization has also generally led to solutions

that are poorly adapted to various types of functional disabili-
ties. The trend has been a general minimum standard, which in
turn has led to solutions that are not viable for everyone.

In 1990, the rights of Americans with functional disabilities were

guaranteed in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This
has greatly impacted the implementation of the philosophy of the
concept of universal design. The discussion has now reached far
beyond city ordinances and zoning bylaws on building design;
attention has now been focused on the basic civil right to partici-
pate in community life in general. By connecting the intention of
this act to the American constitution’s pledge of equal rights, the
focus has shifted from pragmatic discussions on where to place
the wheelchair lift, to consideration of who are the users of the
physical environment, buildings, parks and facilities, and what
needs they have to orient themselves, move around and do what
they want to do. One of the reasons why this epochal act from
1990 has had such an effect is that it authorizes penalties for non-
compliance in the form of fines and other injunctions.

It may also be worth noting that the act was not written and
promoted by radical associations and groups of people with
functional disabilities, but rather proposed by the Reagan
administration and adopted by Congress in the incumbency
period of George Bush, conservative Republicans both. This
demonstrates the relationship of the Act to one of the most
typical of all American tenets, i.e. guaranteeing the civil rights
of each and every citizen of the United States of America.

Universal design is also very much about designing for the

entire course of life. We all need accessible areas, buildings and
various facilities not only when we are children, but also as
adults and when we grow old. The very topical issue of the
general greying of the population will probably be a good ally
of proponents of universal design.
 Sigmund Asmervik
48 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

If the concept of accessibility has largely been abandoned in the

US today, it continues to be frequently used in Norway. A case
in point is the circular T-5/99 B issued by three Ministries in
1999 called Tilgjenglighet for alle (Accessibility for Everyone).

Examples of general universal design

assignments
How big and how small is the human body?
Does everybody have the same proportions? Measure each
other’s full length; arms, legs, height to the hips and knees.
What about the proportions of children and young persons?
Compare the measurements with those of Le Corbusier as they
are expressed in his Modulor.

How many people are actually functionally

challenged?
Discuss in groups of four to six persons and determine whether
you have neighbours, family or friends who are functionally chal-
lenged, have visual or hearing impairments or who have allergies.
Try to determine the proportion of the population that in the course
of life will have one form of functional disability or another.

Why is access to towns and buildings so difficult?

Try to determine why so many buildings and types of transport
are so poorly accessible. Contact the local building authorities,
janitors and maintenance managers of various organizations.
Local associations for the physically challenged may be good
informants. Propose ways of enhancing accessibility.

The universality of functionalism

We quite automatically connect the concept of functionality to
the approach within architecture and urban planning called
functionalism. This philosophy generally emerged as an aesthe-
tic project dominated by a relatively small group of architects
and artists during the two or three first decades of the twentieth
century.

The establishment of the Bauhaus headed by German architect

Walter Gropius, initially in Weimar in 1919 and later in Dessau
in 1924, occupies a central place in the development of what I
would call the aesthetics of functionalism. Such a dominant
figure as the architect Mies van der Rohe also had links to
Bauhaus. Artists that spring to mind include Wassili Kadinskij
and Paul Klee.
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 49
University of Norway (NLH)

One of the most catchy slogans of the functionalists was Form

Follows Function. However, this was a very mechanical and
biological understanding of function. The car, the aeroplane and
not least the Ocean Liner were models of the living machines of
the 1920s and 1930s. The liberated individual was considered a
biological phenomenon. Light, air and green areas were more
than linguistic metaphors.

Le Corbusier’s philosophy and proposal for «Universal Design»

was Le Modulor, which he patented in 1947. This «modulor»
was based on universal design in the sense that there are univer-
sal measurements that are adapted to the human body in a
general sense, and specifically a male body of 183 cm.

Functionalism as we know it from the 1930s completely lacked

social aspects, even if some of the neo-positivists in Vienna
dreamed of replacing ethics with science. Generally the
functionality of aestheticism developed from an aesthetically
dominated point of departure into a virtual «scientification»
from the middle 1930s and up towards 1960, where mass
production and the forces of capital became the characteristics
of later functionalism.

Illustrations from Norwegian research on housing and buildings

from the 1950s clearly demonstrate how human philosophy and
gender roles are based on the objectification of humans as a
physical and biological phenomena.

If we consider in more detail some of the important works of

the most famous architects from the 20th century we can easily
demonstrate that accessibility in the sense we are now using the
term was virtually unknown. Nonetheless, we can see that in a
number of famous buildings the ramp has been used as a central
architectonic element.

Le Corbusier
If we start with le Corbusier, we see that ramps have been used
with great care in one of his most famous villas, Villa Savoye in
Poissy, from 1928–31. Le Corbusier has also allowed ramps to
be a central architectonic element in a number of other buil-
dings, often large and complex ones.

Frank Lloyd Wright

The famous Guggenheim Museum from 1959 in New York by
Frank Lloyd Wright is completely designed around the spiral-
 Sigmund Asmervik
50 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

ling inner ramp. The ramp inclination is so slight that the walls
along it are used to exhibit pictures.

Mies van der Rohe

Mies van der Rohe’s Barcelona pavilion from 1929 is an inter-
esting example in this context. The generally flat floor without
differences in levels expresses some of the main points of the
pavilion and the new architecture, i.e. the fluent transition be-
tween inside and outside, where persons may move easily and
effortlessly. This floor level could quite simply have been made
easily accessible with a slightly inclined ramp, as the differen-
ces in levels are quite modest.

Alvar Aalto
Alvar Aalto is famous for his exquisite use of materials and the
level of detailing in his buildings. Even though he did not work
with the universal design concept, we see a number of examples
in his work of his great concern for the users of buildings,
whether this concerns illumination or cleaning. A special design
element is his door handles at various heights for persons of
various ages and heights.

Assignments concerning famous

architecture
Are famous houses from the history of architecture
easily accessible?
Find famous buildings and facilities in modern architectural
history from around 1920 and later. Study their accessibility by
examining blueprints and photos. The best way of becoming
familiar with a building is to build a model of it.

Do architectural competitions consider accessibility?

Architectural competitions determine trends. Review a number of
such competitions, and study whether the idea that buildings and
facilities should be accessible to everybody has been considered.

What do famous architects and landscape architects

believe?
Contact famous architects and landscape architects and inter-
view them for their response to the idea that buildings should
be accessible to everybody. Try to determine what they feel is
the most important reason to explain why this principle has not
been carried out more than it has. Is it due to attitudes, finances
or aesthetic considerations?
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 51
University of Norway (NLH)

The house for everyone

The university centre at Dragvoll
The university centre at Dragvoll in Trondheim is a separate
part of the Norwegian University of Technology and Science,
NTNU. As a special building facility it has received great atten-
tion and has received a number of awards for its architecture.

The architecture competition in 1971 which started the project

was won by Henning Larsen’s Architect Office in Copenhagen.
The winning design was based on Oxford, England, because
this has approximately the same area as the competition pro-
spectus indicated, as much as 500,000 m_ for around 25,000
students. Today’s facility is around one tenth of this.

Larsen wanted to build a dense city in a farming landscape 3–4

km from downtown Trondheim. The project was based on a
block structure of approximately 100 x 100 m. The most special
aspect of the proposal was that it was based on glass-covered
streets, a generally untried concept at this time in the 1970s (see
fig. 1). Later glass-covered streets and urban spaces have grown
quite commonplace in Norway and other parts of the world. The
first section was taken into use in the autumn of 1978, the
second section in the autumn of 1993, and a small section 3 in
the autumn of 2000. Today there are more than 2,000 students
at Dragvoll and the gross area is close to 60,000 m2.

Fig 1. Glazed “street” at Dragvoll University Centre.

 Sigmund Asmervik
52 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

The covered glass streets have especially attracted a great

deal of attention, and been the object of discussions, studies
and research. The original main argument for this solution was
its financial benefits compared to traditional streets, bearing in
mind the clearing of snow and regular maintenance. It has later
been decided that this type of design reduces energy consump-
tion for heating and has the added advantage of creating natural
meeting-places.

It has later been demonstrated that the main concept for this
facility is favourable for implementing the idea that the building
and facilities should be accessible for everyone. A number of
lifts have been centrally placed in the streets and the facility
provides a very sound basis for implementing the seven prin-
ciples for universal design.

In relation to the principle of equal opportunities for use and

flexibility, we may state that this university centre is well desig-
ned. We notice this already when we reach the entrance doors,
where a light push on an automatic door opener gives easy
entrance. With no need for long detours to reach the destination
and with clear signs, the principle of simple and intuitive use
and easily comprehensible information has been well handled.
An example of the principle of tolerance of errors and design to
alleviate the risk of accidents and injuries is the railing found by
some stairs to prevent people with vision impairment and others
from bumping their heads. The principle of good sizes and
space for access and use is enhanced by the wide streets. A
curiosity is the handicap marking on a computer terminal at a
height adapted to wheelchair users. This sign should really be
unnecessary here!

However, even this facility features a number of details that are

unsatisfactory when we consider the intention of ensuring
accessibility for everyone. Measures that have been carried out
to render the university centre even more accessible are listed
below:

Measures for enhanced accessibility

To offer wheelchair users the opportunity to enter the building
on their own and to be integrated instead of being sitting exhi-
bits at a show, automatic entrance doors were installed in
entrances adjacent to the parking area for the physically chall-
enged. Moreover, new door opening buttons and new display
panels were installed by the lifts inside the buildings to enable
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 53
University of Norway (NLH)

wheelchair users to use the facilities on their own. Not all the
lifts are accessible, but wheelchair users have access to all
areas, even though in some locations they must choose one of
the two lifts. Study desks have been reserved close to these lifts.

All regular exit doors have been replaced with sliding doors
with infrared sensors. This eases accessibility for all users. The
information desk has been furnished with hatches at a height
suitable for wheelchair users and with bells for summoning
assistance.

All auditoriums are being adapted for wheelchair users. Some

auditoriums had a high brick wall which wheelchairs users were
unable to see over, and this has now been replaced by tables so
that wheelchairs users are able to sit with the others. All the
auditoriums feature adjustable tables intended for wheelchair
users.

All stairs in the walkways were marked so they would be visible

for those with vision impairment. Moreover, induction loops
have been installed in all the auditoriums. Maps on the outside
of auditoriums indicate the parts of the rooms that have good
coverage.

All staircases in communal areas were marked with white tiles

on vertical and horizontal planes. It was too expensive to
replace full tiles with split tiles on all the stair edges. Eventually
all the areas will be marked in contrasting colours.

Outside markings and opening buttons have been placed on an

attractive standard column that can be used by anyone.

Assignments on the building for

everyone
How can we study whether a building is accessible
for everyone?
Undertake a specific and detailed study of accessibility for
persons with mobility, vision and hearing impairments and/or
allergies in a building used by a large number of people.
Interview the maintenance department and the staff working
with health, environment and safety issues. Propose improve-
ments and draw up a detailed plan for improvement works.
 Sigmund Asmervik
54 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

How can we plan to improve accessibility?

In an exercise assume that a building, park or facility must be
accessible for everyone. Consider how you can exploit ramps
and lifts, colour and lighting as architectural techniques/mea-
sures.

What do architects think about buildings they

themselves have planned?
Visit and interview architects and landscape architects and find
out what they think about their own work. It is useful to under-
take some research at the locations in question so that you can
ask the really penetrating questions.

The park for everyone

The Sabbatsberg area in Stockholm
In 1998 a park in Stockholm called Sinnenas Trädgård was
opened close by Vasa Park in a central location in Stockholm.
The purpose of this park was to create a garden that would
function as therapy for elderly persons suffering from dementia.
When elderly people are forced to leave their home to live in
special housing, they lose contact with their familiar neighbour-
hood. One’s previous habits and roles are taken away and
opportunities for enjoying the outdoors will often be greatly
reduced. If there is dementia in addition to this, the ability to
orient oneself in time and space is debilitated.

Green surroundings are valuable for a person’s day-to-day will

to live. Being in nature, whether passively or actively, and the
sensory impressions of green surroundings are important for
our well-being. A therapeutic garden in which to roam, or
merely sit and enjoy oneself may prevent restlessness, alleviate
stress, calm persons with dementia and sharpen their concen-
tration.

Sinnenas Trädgård
Taking a closer look at Sinnenas Trädgård in Stockholm, we see
that it is designed around familiar elements from private
gardens and some features of classical monastery gardens.
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 55
University of Norway (NLH)

Fig. 2. Staff, relatives and inhabitants love this garden.

1. Paths meet around a centrally located pond where the water

is shallow. This area is framed by old trees and a pergola
with climbing ivy.
2. Under the wide branches of the old trees we find a beautiful
conservatory.
3. The garden has three entrances. By each entrance there is a
pergola and a gate with sweet-scented climbing roses,
honeysuckle and clematis.
4. The framework consists of a) a wooden fence and b) a
hedge. This provides a sense of space, safety, shelter against
wind and a boundary against the outside traffic.
5. In the north section of the garden we find an old wrought
iron fence facing the Vasa Park where children play and
people walk their dogs. Children laughing and dogs at play
allow visitors to Sinnenas Trädgård to participate in what is
 Sigmund Asmervik
56 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

happening without having to worry about being run into by

children and dogs. Only the sounds of the passing traffic
bring to mind the fact that the garden is located in a city,
but this may be an important recollection for those users
who grew up in a city. Plants in the garden have been se-
lected with great care to create great variation in a small
area and to generate the desire to undertake something on
one’s own. There are flowerbeds and fields, durable lawns, a
rock-filled flowerbed and a pond with water lilies. The
garden has retained its century-old chestnuts, its elm grove
and its hawthorn trees.
6. The main walkway faces south and ends in a venerable old
staircase.
7. Left and right of the walkway we find a raised flowerbed in
granite with old-fashioned plants to stimulate recollection
and recognition. Flower pergolas frame the flowerbeds with
hops, roses, Virginia creepers and clematis.
8. a) Along the west walkway we find raised flowerbeds with
wild strawberries, strawberries, raspberries, red currants,
blackcurrants and gooseberries.
b) Along the east walkways we find flowerbeds with cut-
ting flowers, spices and vegetables.
9. In the north end we find two groves, one of lilacs and one
of clematis, scenting the air around comfortable benches
where visitors can rest and smell the flowers.
10. The flowerbeds abound with flowers and fruit, such as
apples and plums. A lawn frames the main walkway.
11. There are many small tables along the raised flowerbed in
granite inviting people to rest and drink their coffee.
13. The summerhouse from 1784 is surrounded by a number of
small groves with lilies, bracken and forest paths covered
by bark to create an illusion of being in a forest.
14. An exercise railing with larch handrails and wrought iron
latticework is used to exercise the sense of balance and for
support when walking.

Assignments on the park for everyone

Who are the park’s users?
Make your own observations using the park. Do you find
anyone who has obvious accessibility problems? Select various
groups and interview them regarding their use of the park, and
whether they find it difficult to find it and orient themselves.
Sigmund Asmervik. Agricultural Cities, Buildings and Parks for Everyone, a Universal Design Compendium 57
University of Norway (NLH)

How does the park function for you?

Carry out your own tests, preferably together with a co-student
who has a functional disability. Which barriers are there? How
can they be overcome?

What kind of vegetation benefits various types of users?

Catalogue the vegetation in a park. Try to establish whether
parts of this park are particularly favourable for people with
various types of functional disabilities. In addition to sight, also
consider hearing, smells and allergies. Propose improvements.

References
Asmervik. S. Byer, hus og parker for alle. Institutt for land-
skapsplanlegging, NLF. Ås. 2001.
Cold, B., Fathi, H and Asmervik. S. Evaluering av den over-
dekte gaten på Dragvoll. SINTEF-rapport. Trondheim.1995.
Gonzalez, A and Lacuesta, R. Barcelona Architecture Guide
1929–2000. Editorial Gustavo Gili SA, Barcelona.
Grefsød, E. Terapeutiske hager for personer med demens. Det
Norske Hageselskap/Nasjonalt kompetansesenter for alders-
demens. 2001.
Statsbygg. Universitetssenteret på Dragvoll, Ferdigmelding nr
434/1993.
58 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 59
Norway

1.3 Universal Design –

an Interdisciplinary
Challenge
Solveig Dale, occupational therapist, public health specialist,
Trondheim.
Rigmor Leknes, post graduate student and lecturer at the
Department of Occupational Therapy, Sør-Trøndelag university
College, Trondheim.

“Oh! It’s so difficult being blind!” groaned architecture student

Wibeke Johansen from NTNU. She was suddenly completely
reliant on the help of occupational therapy student Gunn Berg.

Patches had been placed over Wibeke Johansen’s eyes. The

lights had gone out on her world, so to speak, and the only per-
son who could help her was her companion, Gunn Berg. The
architecture student could no longer orient herself in the
shopping centre and had to be led around by the occupational
therapy student.

This is how the Høgskoleavisa (The University College

Newspaper) introduces a report about the second joint seminar
on universal design in Trondheim (Svanemyr, K., 2000).

History of the seminar

The seminar that is the subject of this chapter was first organi-
sed in the winter of 1999. In November 1997, Husbanken (The
Norwegian State Housing Bank) arranged a working conference
on the educational organisation of universal design and the need
to improve the design of built-up environments (see chapter
1.1). The conference fired the starting gun for the planning of
this seminar. Several of the conference’s participants agreed
that co-operation between the health and technical professions
was not good enough and that co-operation between the rele-
vant parties while they were completing their studies would
probably make these future specialists more willing and able to
work together. Per and Kirsten Lauvås claim: “The different
parties’ attitude of mind, and the way they understand
60 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

information, are primarily acquired through vocational sociali-

sation” (Lauvås, K. and Lauvås, P., pg. 150, 1994). The effects
of vocational socialisation are strongest during the educational
phase and the first active years of work in the field (ibid).

For a number of years, the Department of Occupational Therapy

in Trondheim had been wishing to co-operate more closely on a
regular basis with the Department of Achitectural Design
because the results of poor building plans can directly affect
professional duties of occupational therapists. Practising occu-
pational therapists quite often come across examples of buil-
dings that have not been designed with everyone in mind:
whether it involves doors that are too heavy, door sills that are
difficult to negotiate, poor signing, difficulty in orienting one-
self in a building, colours with insufficient contrast for the
visually impaired, inappropriate placing of kitchen and toilet
fittings, and the height of entrances (with the consequence that
ramps have to be adjusted afterwards, etc.) Occupational
therapists often learn of users’ who have problems coping with
everyday life due to such planning. Expensive technical
modifications are often needed to enable these people to
function well in their surroundings. Such solutions are rarely
aesthetically attractive or fully functional and are often
extremely expensive.

The need for better interdisciplinary co-operation between the

relevant parties has also been pointed out by architects several
years ago. Architects Grete Bull and Tore Lange believe that
interdisciplinary co-operation and user input throughout the
whole process of designing housing for the functionally dis-
abled is essential. In their opinion, such co-operation can ensure
that the user’s needs and input are better represented (Bull, G.,
et al, 1993).

To promote interdisciplinary co-operation, it is important that

the various professional groups participating in the planning
work are familiar with each other’s areas of expertise, otherwise
it will be less likely that they will seek out contact with each
other. Facilitating the interaction of future professionals from
the relevant areas of study while they are still students is likely
to increase the possibility of interdisciplinary co-operation in
their work.

In the spring of 1998, the Department of Occupational Therapy

called for a meeting between themselves and the departments of
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 61
Norway

architecture, building engineering and High school of carpen-

try. A representative from the Norwegian State Housing Bank
was present and told the participants of the possibility of recei-
ving financial support for this educational experiment. This
meeting helped to bring about the joint seminar on universal
design. We had to ensure that the date set did not clash with
exams, project periods and practise periods. We agreed that the
date would be co-ordinated by the High school of Carpentry of
Occupational Therapy and early in the autumn of 1998 it was
set for 4 February 1999.

We formed a small working group consisting of five people:

one from the architecture department, one from the High school
of carpentry department of Occupational Therapy, an architect
from the Norwegian State Housing Bank, an architect from
SINTEF and a council occupational therapist from Trondheim
Council. This group was assigned the task of planning the inter-
disciplinary seminar. The working group included some persons
that had their main occupation outside the educating institutions
involved in order to benefit from the expertise these people had
within their respective fields. Three of the participants had pre-
viously conducted several housing seminars for the students of
occupational therapy. The two smaller departments were not
represented in the group because it could have made the group
too large and perhaps made it more difficult to find common
points of reference. However, they were provided with the
minutes of the meetings and participated in the last few meet-
ings. The working climate was open and stimulating, which
encouraged creativity. Several of the participants already knew
each other, and this undoubtedly helped the work go smoothly.
Simultaneously, we had so much confidence in each other that
we dared to object to ideas that were viewed less practicable.
Everyone wanted the seminar to take place, and many of us put
in a lot of work to ensure that the practical arrangements went
smoothly.

Educational aims
The aim of the seminar was for each student to gain:
• Professional knowledge about universal design
• Knowledge about the functionally disabled peoples’ design
needs
• Familiarity with the various professions that participated in
the seminar
62 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Contents and methodology

The working group felt that, in order to achieve these goals, the
students should first be given a common professional point of
reference. Most of the students were unfamiliar with the term
universal design. Architect Poul Østergaard had prepared a CD-
ROM that presented examples of functionally disabled people’s
need for functional solutions (Østergaard, P., 1996. Also see
chapter 1.7). These are good examples of universal design. He
was invited to present universal design from his perspective.

We also wanted an occupational therapist to communicate the role

occupational therapists can play with respect to universal design,
so that the students on the technical courses would become more
familiar with the expertise of an occupational therapist.

We also wanted to engage someone from an organisation for the

disabled to explain what it was like to encounter obstacles in
their everyday life. It had been the experience of the department
of Occupational Therapy that such testimonies from disabled
people made a strong impression. The examples that were pre-
sented included the difficulty of getting into shops or not being
able to sit next to one’s spouse at the theatre because there was
no place to sit for an attendant in the wheelchair users’ area.

The working group wanted to employ several different pedago-

gic methods, since we knew that variation stimulates the lear-
ning process. We settled on a combination of lectures, video
and group work. We felt it was important for students to experi-
ence a disability first hand so that they would better understand
disabled peoples needs and life situation. According to Gunn
Imsen, Piaget’s theory says that one probably learns best when
one actively participates in the learning acquisition process
(Imsen, G., 1998). One can be active in many ways, such as
listening, seeing, doing something practical, discussing and cre-
ating a written work, etc. It is not necessarily so that everyone
learns best by use of the same teaching methods (ibid).
However, the effects of teaching and the insights thus gained
can be enhanced by combining personal experiences with other
methods of communication.

The working group also wanted the students to meet each other
and share experiences and perspectives from the various cour-
ses. We decided to give them tasks in which they would have to
use their specialist knowledge and arrive at universal design
solutions by way of discussion.
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 63
Norway

Motivating the students

We brought in people with international reputation in the area
of universal design in order to increase the appeal and encou-
rage student participation in the seminar.

In order to make the interdisciplinary groups work well, it was

necessary that the participation from the students was as good
as possible. So we did our utmost to inform students well in
advance. The programmes that were printed and distributed had
a nice design, which the architects’ expertise contributed lar-
gely to. The attendance at the seminar was furthermore made
obligatory.

Front page of programme and invitation.

64 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

The final programme looked like this:

08.30-09.00 Registration, coffee, tea

09.00-09.15 Welcome speech by university college lecturer
Rigmor Leknes
Introduction: Why an interdisciplinary
approach?
Researcher Karin Høyland, SINTEF
09.15-09.45 Users’ perspectives
Odd Walter Syltevik, The Norwegian Association
of the Disabled
09.45-10.15 Universal design from the point of view of the
occupational therapist
Occupational therapist Sidsel Bjørnebye, Human
Factor Solution
10.15-10.25 Break
10.25-11.10 Handicap, architecture and design
Professor Poul Østergaard, Århus
11.10-11.20 The Delta Centre’s film “Universal design –
seven points about planning”
Professor Tore Brantenberg
11.20-11.30 Introduction to group work
Occupational therapist Solveig Dale
11.30-13.45 Lunch and group work
13.45-14.15 Plenary presentations
14.15-15.45 Accessibility and flexibility in your own work
Architect Angelo Mangiarotti, Italy

Group work
The group work, including the group tasks, has in our opinion
been a crucial element of the seminar. In our view it was within
this setting that the greatest professional and pedagogic deve-
lopments took place. As we believe it could be both useful and
inspiring for others to “take part” in these experiences, we have
chosen to provide a detailed presentation of the group works
and the different tasks. Each year the group tasks are altered
and developed on the basis of an evaluation and exchange of
ideas. We have therefore chosen to present here the group tasks
from the third seminar we arranged. The group tasks set in the
first seminar are described in detail in an evaluation report
(Dale, et al, 1999).
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 65
Norway

The aim of the group work was:

• To promote experience/observation of what it is like to be
functionally disabled and to experience the types of obstacles
that a person with a disability may encounter.

• For the members of the groups to gain an insight into the

expertise possessed by the various professions and how this
breadth of expertise can be exploited with respect to
planning for all.

In all, the following students took part in the seminar:

60 occupational therapy students
60 architecture students
20 building engineering students
10 pupils from the carpentry course at an upper secondary
school

The students were divided into 20 groups of about 7 people

each. This was done in advance, so that the groups would repre-
sent a range of disciplines. One member from each group was
to sit in a wheelchair, one’s sight would be impaired with the
help of special glasses, and one would be blindfolded using eye
patches and sunglasses. These three physically impaired parti-
cipants would each have a partner. The other members of the
group acted as observers.

As part of their course, the occupational therapy students had

had experiences with being physically impaired and were there-
fore assigned the role of companion or observer.

During the introduction to the group work, emphasis was put on

the importance of the students seriously attempting to tackle
difficult situations while playing the role of the disabled person.

The situations were played out both indoors in the university

college building and in the local community in the vicinity of
the college.

Group tasks were allocated as follows:

Four groups experimented with being functionally disabled in a
bathroom. They were each told to find their way to their allo-
cated bathroom/toilet in the building. The participants playing
the role of the functionally disabled persons had to wash their
hands in the sink, brush their teeth, and apply moisturising
cream. They also had to make their way to the toilet.
66 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Four groups experienced being functionally disabled in the

bedroom. They were each told to find their way to their
bedroom in a small hospital ward at the college. Once in the
bedroom, the people playing the parts of the functionally dis-
abled had to try to get in and out of bed. They also had to wash
their hands in the sink, brush their teeth, apply moisturising
cream, and open the window to air out the room.

Two groups made their way to their respective training kitchens.

Here the people playing the roles of the functionally disabled
were to make tea and coffee for the whole group with as little
help as possible.

Two groups were given the task of finding their way to two
offices. The people playing the functionally disabled had to
open a window and try to reach shelves and cupboards as well
as try out the workstation in front of the computer screen. Part
of their task included drawing the office. These two groups
were asked to come up with design changes to the office on the
basis of different needs.

Some groups were also assigned tasks outside the college.

While planning the group work, we tried to benefit from the
opportunities presented by the college’s local surroundings.
These included a bus stop, busy roads, a shopping centre, petrol
station, café, post office and bank.

Two groups made their way to the shopping centre near the col-
lege, where they were to shop in the foodstuffs department.

This meant the groups had very specific tasks and had to find
their way to the correct products. After shopping, they had to
find their way to the café on the first floor, where two tables
had been reserved. Those playing the part of physically disabled
persons had to order coffee or tea at the counter. While drinking
their coffee, they had to discuss the joint tasks all the groups
had been assigned after the experiments.

Two groups were instructed to find their way to the post office
and bank in the nearby shopping centre. Here they were told to
post a letter and deposit NOK 50 into Save the Children’s bank
account (the groups were each given NOK 50 in an envelope in
advance).
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 67
Norway

Simulation excercises.
Top: reaching for food
in a shopping centre.
Bottom: Catching a
bus.
68 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

A couple of groups were instructed to catch a bus. They had to

find out when the bus was to leave, get to the local shopping
centre, get off at the bus stop and return to the school along a
busy road.

Two groups had to make their way to the petrol station. Here
they were told to put themselves in the following situation:
what would it be like for a car driver who was in a wheelchair
to fill up with petrol and wash the car’s windscreen? Those
playing the role of functionally disabled people also had to
purchase a newspaper and visit the toilet before returning to the
college.

Problems in the environment as experienced and reported by a student.

 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 69
Norway

One group was instructed to find its way to the shopping centre
via a subway. They had to traverse a car park and a zebra cros-
sing. They also had to find a specific shop and pick up some
brochures from there before returning to the college.

At the end of the experiments all the groups were given the
following tasks:

• What impressions were those playing the role of a functio-

nally disabled person left with? Share your experiences.
• What observations had the observers made?
• Based on the experience you now have, discuss the adapta-
tions you will have to take into account when designing with
universal design in mind so that the surroundings you have
just encountered will meet the requirements of universal
design. Give reasons for your answers.
• How can you take advantage of each other’s expertise to
achieve universal design?
• The group tasks should be answered in writing. Prepare
proposals to present in plenary.

Appendix 1, p. 73, illustrates an example of a group task.

Group advisors
Seven teachers were appointed as group advisors in advance.
The advisors gathered immediately after the start of the group
work. They were provided with information about the role and
function of an advisor. The advisors’ task was to visit the
groups after the experiments had been completed. The advisors
were expected to ensure that the process had begun and that it
was moving along and be available should the group need clari-
fication or have questions. The groups had to go through the
process without too much intervention from the advisors. The
advisors were provided with enough money to cover any
expenses the groups might have incurred while carrying out
their group tasks.

Visiting the groups also helped the advisors see which groups
were working well together and might be candidates for making
presentations in plenary. The advisors met again just prior to the
gathering in plenary, discussed their experiences from the
various groups and agreed on which two or three groups would
be asked to present their results.
70 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

The practical planning of the seminar

Carrying out the seminar was a relatively comprehensive practi-
cal business. One person was given the responsibility for co-
ordination and the practical tasks were assigned to the seminar’s
working group.

We strived for the smoothest possible execution of the seminar.

All the equipment necessary to carry out the group tasks was
obtained in advance. This included special glasses for those who
were going to play the role of visually impaired people (which
can be bought from Blindes Produkter AS, Oslo (see referen-
ces)), eye patches (obtainable from pharmacies) for those who
were going to play the role of blind people, and sunglasses to
wear over the eye patches. The students were given materials and
pens to be used in overhead projector presentations. This equip-
ment was put in separate packets for the group leaders.
Wheelchairs were obtained on loan from a specialist company.

We obtained class lists in advance of those students that would

be attending. On the basis of these lists, we decided on the
make-up of the groups to ensure that each group contained as
many disciplines as possible. The students were told which
groups they had been assigned to when they registered. Group
leaders were picked out in advance. They received written infor-
mation of the group’s tasks together with all the equipment they
would need to carry out their assigned tasks. Folders containing
information about universal design (see Aslaksen, et al, 1997)
were handed out to each student during registration.

Tables were reserved in the canteen so the students could sit

with their groups during lunch, thus allowing them to spend
more time together. They were given the opportunity to use the
mealtime for both group work and for social contact, so as to
get to know each other better.

Evaluation
The financial support from the Norwegian State Housing Bank
was made subject to their receiving an evaluation of the seminar.
Thorough evaluations from both students and teachers would
also benefit further developing this educational experiment .
Questionnaires were prepared, see appendix 2. The results of the
evaluation are described in detail in a separate evaluation report
(Dale, S., et al, 1999). Subsequently, the seminar has been evalu-
ated annually on the basis of these questionnaires.
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 71
Norway

The students were particularly pleased with what they got out of
the lecture by the Norwegian Association of the Disabled and
Østergaard’s CD-ROM (Østergaard, P., 1996). Nevertheless, the
evaluation showed that the group work had had the greatest
impression. Many students said that the experience of being
functionally disabled had had a great emotional impact on
them. They also felt that meeting students from other disci-
plines had been important and useful. Among other things, it
gave them the chance to discuss issues from a number of dif-
ferent perspectives.

Students on the technical courses gave the group work a

somewhat higher evaluation then those on the occupational
therapy course did. This may have something to do with their
experience of trying to cope as a functionally disabled person.
Even though the occupational therapist students had played
these roles previously, they nevertheless felt that the group tasks
had been useful. They said that the discussions following the
experiments had been particularly interesting and educational.

The students thought that the seminar had been very important
in terms of future co-operation. The average mark given for this
question, on a scale from 1-7, was 6.0. However, most students
thought that too little time had been assigned for group work.

Future development of the seminar

All of the departments said the first seminar had been a great
success. It has therefore been held on an annual basis since
1999, albeit with improvements and adjustments to the pro-
gramme. The last lecture was dropped to allow more time for
group work. We have expanded the user representation to
include both the visually and physically disabled. The introduc-
tions are brief. A small group of students from the Institutt for
Samferdsel (Institute of Transport and Communication) also
participate in the seminar. Some group tasks have been adjusted
to accommodate to their needs. The accessibility of both train
and bus terminals will be tested. Next time the seminar is held,
the theoretical part will also include a brief lecture about the
universal design of transport and communication.

Conclusion
In our experience, the seminar’s teaching methods and content
stimulate interdisciplinary co-operation. There is no doubt that
organizing such a seminar is a very demanding challenge. The
72 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

effort is worthwhile, however, because the results from the eva-

luations of the seminars are so good. The seminars have already
given rise to projects where students from different fields work
together. For instance, occupational therapy students have taken
part in several major projects together with building enginee-
ring students. Occupational therapy students have also parti-
cipated in projects initiated by SINTEF, Institutt for Samferdsel.

We hope that this event will also be a source of inspiration for

collaboration after graduation as well. We wholeheartedly
recommend that other educational institutes initiate similar
interdisciplinary educational collaboration based on local
options.

References
Aslaksen, F., Bergh, S., Bringa, O. R., Heggem, E. K. (1997):
Universell utforming. Planlegging og design for alle.
(Universal Design: Planning and Design for All) Rådet for
funksjonshemmede I-0909 B
Blindes Produkter A/S, Postboks 5915, Majorstua, 0308 OSLO,
Norway. (Tel.: 23 21 55 50)
Bull, G., Lange, T. and Grut, L. (1993): Råd for uråd.
Prosjektrapport 117. (A Way Out of the Difficulty: Project
report 117) Norwegian Building Research Institute/SINTEF
Dale, S., Høyland, K., Kornstad, S. and Leknes, R. (1999):
Sammendrag evaluering av seminar den 4. februar 1999.
(Summary of Evaluation of Seminar Held 4 February 1999)
Imsen, G. (1998): Elevens verden. (The Pupil’s World) Tano
Aschehoug
Lauvås, K., and Lauvås, P. (1994): Tverrfaglig samarbeid.
Perspektiv og strategi. (Interdisciplinary Co-operation:
Perspectives and Strategies) TANO
Svanemyr, K. (2000): Blind for en dag. (Blind for a Day)
Høgskoleavisa no. 3, 10.02
Østergaard, P. (1996): Handikap, arkitektur & design.
(Handicap, Architecture & Design) Christian Ejler’s Forlag.
Denmark
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 73
Norway

Appendix 1:
Group tasks “Universal Design” Groups
11-12
AIM:
We want the members of the groups to experience/observe what
it is like to be functionally disabled and experience the types of
obstacles a functionally disabled person may encounter.

We also want the members of the groups to gain an insight into

the type of expertise that the various professions possess and
how this can be used with respect to designing and planning for
all groups of users.

FUNCTIONAL DISABILITIES:
One person in the group will sit in a wheelchair. The person can
use both of their arms but neither of their legs. One person in
the group will be visually impaired and the other blindfolded.
The blindfolded person will have a companion. Occupational
students will act as observers or companions of the blind. The
other group members will act as observers of the experiments.

TASK:
Make your way to the KBS shopping centre. Shop in the KBS
food department. Those playing the role of a functionally dis-
abled person must buy the following:

The person in the wheelchair The person who is visually

must buy: impaired must buy:
1 tub of yoghurt 1 tin of mackerel in tomato
sauce
1 tin of peaches 1 packet of macaroni

The person who is blind must buy:

1 apple
1 packet of dry yeast

Make your way to the café in KBS, where a table has been
reserved for the group. Each of you must buy your own cup of
coffee or tea. Those of you who are functionally disabled must
pay for the observers.

While you are drinking your coffee/tea, discuss the following:

• What impressions have those playing the role of a functio-
74 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

nally disabled person been left with? Share your experiences.

• What observations have the observers made?
• Based on the experience you now have, discuss what adjust-
ments you will have to take into account when designing with
universal design in mind so that the surroundings you have
just encountered will satisfy universal design requirements.
Give reasons for your answers.
• How can you take advantage of each other’s expertise to
achieve universal design?

If you start to run out of time, you can return to the college in a
non-disabled state. Bring the receipts for the food and
coffee/tea with you. Your expenses will be refunded today.

The group task must be answered in writing. Prepare

proposals to present in plenary.

Appendix 2:
Evaluation form for seminar on
universal design
We want your feedback on your outcome of today, along with
any suggestions you may have for improvements in the event
the exercise is repeated.

We need to know what course you are currently taking:

Tick relevant course:

Civil architecture, 2nd year

Civil architecture, 3rd year

Occupational studies

Building engineering studies

High schoolCarpentry studies

High school Bricklaying studies

 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 75
Norway

1) To what degree have you benefited educationally from the various lectures and group work?

Give your evaluation by ticking off on a scale of 1–7

None Average A great deal
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

User perspective
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Universal design from the

occupational therapist’s
point of view
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Handicap, architecture
and design
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

The Delta Centre’s film

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Group work
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Accessibility and flexibility

in your own work
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2) What was the most interesting and educational part?

3a) Were you familiar with the perspective of universal design previously?

Tick off on a scale of 1-7

Not Somewhat Very

at all

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
76 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

b) To what extent do you feel that universal design is relevant to your own subject?

Not relevant Average relevance Very relevant

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

GROUP WORK
a) How well did the interdisciplinary co-operation succeed during the group task?

Tick off on a scale of 1-7

Very poorly Average Very well

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

b) To what extent do you feel your specialist knowledge contributed to the group
co-operation?

Tick off on a scale of 1-7

Not very Average A great deal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

c) Was the group task relevant to someone with your professional background?

Tick off on a scale of 1-7

Not very Average Very

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

d) What was the most useful experience you gained from the group work?

e) For those of you who experienced being functionally disabled; what did you
learn from being “visually impaired”, “blind” or “wheelchair bound”?
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 77
Norway

f) What group task were you given?

Group task no.: __________

5) What effect may such a joint seminar have on future interdisciplinary co-operation?

Tick off on a scale of 1-7

No effect Average Great effect

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6a) Do you think that other professions should be represented at such a seminar?

Tick off one of the boxes

Yes No

b) If you answered yes to the previous question, which professions?

7) To what extent were your expectations for the seminar fulfilled?

Not fulfilled Average To a great extent

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8) Was there anything about the seminar’s content, organisation and arrangement that you felt
was particularly noteworthy?
78 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

9) If such a seminar were to be held again, do you have any suggestions for how it might be
improved?

Write down your suggested changes:

Evaluation form for seminar on universal design

We want your feedback on how relevant and useful you judge this seminar to be for your stu-
dents/pupils.

Which course do you teach?

Civil Architecture, 2nd year Civil Architecture, 3rd year

Occupational therapy Building Engineering

Carpentry

1) To what extent have the lectures and group work been relevant for your students/pupils?

Tick off on a scale of 1-7 to give your evaluation

Not at all Average Very high

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User perspective
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Universal design from the

occupational therapist’s
point of view
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Handicap, architecture
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

The Delta Centre’s film

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Group work
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Accessibility and flexibility

in your own work
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
 Rigmor Leknes/Solveig Dale
Sør-Trøndelag University College, Universal Design – an Interdisciplinary Challenge 79
Norway

2) Have your students/pupils been taught anything about the term universal design before?

3) Will students receive more instruction on this subject during the course of their studies?

4) Do you feel that such a seminar might improve interdisciplinary co-operation in future careers?

5) To what extent have your own expectations for the seminar been fulfilled?

6) Was there anything about the seminar’s content, organisation and arrangement that you felt
was particularly noteworthy?

7) If such a seminar were to be held again, do you have any suggestions for how it might be
improved?

8) Do you think it would be relevant for your course to participate in a similar seminar next year?
80 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 81
the Netherlands

1.4 If Anything, Call It

Ergonomics – in Search
for a Word in a World
Called Science
Prof. Maarten Wijk MSc. Department of Architecture, Delft
University of Technology

Introduction
In October 1996 an academic chair called “Accessibility” was
installed at the Department of Architecture of the Delft
University of Technology. The mission of this chair was – and
still is – to improve accessibility awareness in architectural
training. The precise motivation and ambitions of the chair were
addressed during the inaugural speech of its managing pro-
fessor – the author of this article – held in 1997 and published
in English under the name of “Differences we share” (Wijk,
1997). In this chapter the author describes his general attitude
towards the issue of improving accessibility awareness since the
installation of the chair, and what it – in his professional
opinion – all seems to come down to: the search for a word in a
culture heading for science.

Golden opportunity
Admitted: it is a considerable advantage to be able to introduce
a traditionally neglected issue in the curriculum of a design
institute, when its necessity to do so is recognised by means of
an academic chair. A chair is the carrier of the institute’s values.
Nonetheless, within the common culture of the institute, there is
still a huge challenge to find the most adequate vehicle to
spread the message and to fulfil the ultimate objective, which is
– to put it simply – good design.

If one brings down teaching to its essence, it is all about finding

words which hit the state of mind of the receiver, of the archi-
tectural student, of fellow teachers and of the common culture
as a whole. By tradition students just have one ambition, and
that is to be one of the top designers of their generation.
82 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Anything seemingly leading away from that ambition is

considered to be off the road. However, what is to be considered
“top design”, depends on the contemporary culture at the insti-
tute in question.

Well, due to globalisation and competition amongst different

schools of architectural training, at the beginning of the new
millennium the institute’s output is seriously heading towards
an evaluation of its scientific merits. After all, graduated
architectural designers are internationally to be called Masters
of Science. Therefore teaching architectural design must have a
scientific approach and its output must be scientifically
explicit.

Being one of the major architecture institutes in the world and

wishing to stay that way, or even be the best, the Department of
Architecture is eager to improve its scientific image. Research
by Design becomes a mainstream issue. For raising accessibi-
lity awareness, it would be a waste not to embrace an opportu-
nity like this. However, making use of the opportunity demands
a clever use of words which must be recognised inside the
mainstream of design, where there is only a distinction between
good and bad design. “Inclusive Design”, “Design for All”,
“Universal Design” are not the proper phrases and, for that
matter, the word Accessibility is not either, stigmatised as it
unfortunately has become.

A Stigma
Initially it seemed like such a good word: Accessibility. How
could designers possibly misinterpret it? My daughter was three
years old when I asked her what the word accessibility meant.
After a few moments’ reflection, she answered, “Accessibility is
when you have a door.” Delighted by its simplicity, I often
quoted my daughter’s definition. When I asked her the same
question many years later, she gave the same reply half of those
asked give: “Accessibility has something to do with handi-
capped people.” The remaining fifty percent has no idea what it
means.

As accessibility adviser to the Dutch Government Buildings

Agency (Rijksgebouwendienst), I visit a lot of governmental
buildings. I always call in advance to make an appointment with
the facility manager of the building. “What a coincidence, we
just installed an invalid lift in our reception hall.” “That’s won-
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 83
the Netherlands

derful”, I reply, “but actually, I’d like to see the entire building
and also to inspect such things as the accessibility of the work
locations.” “But,” he says, sounding a bit doubtful about the
purpose of my visit, “we don’t employ any handicapped people
here.” Nevertheless, I manage to make an appointment. On the
way there, I painstakingly try to come up with a synonym for
accessibility so that the conversation will proceed more fluently.
I fail to find it.

At the time of my inauguration, the newspapers regarded me as

“the professor whose job will be to remove thresholds”. A large
national daily newspaper published an article entitled “The
Threshold Professor” calling me a Professor in Barrierology.
When introduced to architect and fellow professor Carel
Weeber in the doorway of his room, he asked if he should now
remove the sill of the doorway into his room. “That depends,” I
replied, “on whether you are expecting visitors”, and thought:
“never mind….”.

Right at the beginning of my appointment I started to have

doubts about the choice of this word. How would I explain to
family and friends that I have been appointed merely to lecture
about thresholds? Added to that, I know nothing about thres-
holds. Every time I am lost in thought and trip over the sill of
the door into my own room, I wonder: what purpose do those
little sills serve anyway?

There wouldn’t be much against this limited association of

thresholds with the so-called Disabled, if it would actually lead,
as a matter of course, to built environments completely acces-
sible to this user category. But what happens is the opposite. For
some reason or other, the building industry is not particularly
interested in solving the problems of this small group, which it
fears to think about. Efforts in the field of accessibility remain,
thus, incidental acts of charity. It is a welfare issue.

The stigma is historically understandable, but academically

speaking odd. The Dutch definition for accessibility – as used
since 1990 – is of a very basic nature. According to its defi-
nition, accessibility is the feature of built facilities which enable
people to reach and use those facilities (CCPT, 1990). It sounds
like the very nature of architecture, instead of being some sort
of additional quality. It shows how tricky the use of words can
be.
84 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Architectural design as a science

Despite its stigma, the need for raising accessibility awareness
is obvious. As suggested earlier, a scientific design attitude
might just be the right vehicle to spread the message. Question
is: what is science?

The first criterion for science is the capacity of a discipline to

constantly improve its output. The scientific approach is based
on consequently deepening the insights of its paradigms, and
even renews the paradigms once in a while. Does architectural
design fit this picture?

At the beginning of the twentieth century architecture was

strongly associated with science. New building technologies
were – for example – compared with the high-tech automobile
industry. Architecture and city planning were subject to a
scientific approach. It seemed science really got hold of our
environment since the proclamation of the CIAM principles. Or
are we looking at self fulfilling prophecies here?

In either way, the concepts of Le Corbusier and his colleagues

had an enormous impact on the image of our planet. The
Romans were in this respect a lot more modest. A Roman city
– for example (fig. 1) – must have been a beautiful environment
two thousand years ago, embracing its romantic society. In
modern times we build differently. Fig. 2 shows a picture of the
latest output of architectural design, the Dutch Pavilion at the
Expo 2000. The building fools around with gravity, and by
doing so, provides its visitors with an experience, which they
never had before.
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 85
the Netherlands

Fig. 1. A Roman city must have been a beautiful environment two thou-
sand years ago.
86 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 2. The Dutch Pavilion at the Expo 2000

The capacity of enforcing new experiences may lead to the

conclusion that architecture is a product of science. But then
again, architecture is not only about spectacular experiences. In
most cases it is just a facilitation of ordinary activities: a
building to work and a house to live in.

Certainly less spectacular is the way we build houses in The

Netherlands. Since 1800 we have been building houses as
shown in fig. 3. Now we do it as shown in fig. 4. I must admit I
hardly see any changes. Maybe the bricks have a different size
now, or a different shade. New houses may be environmentally
correct and may be built more efficiently. However, in the
theory which I want to address in this chapter, it does not really
matter whether the looks of buildings changed or not. I am not
particularly curious about the form and technical aspects of
built products. I am curious about the performance. Do new
buildings actually perform better than old buildings?
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 87
the Netherlands

Fig. 3. Dutch homes in the 1800.

Fig. 4. Modern Dutch homes.

Let us take a look at the automobile industry. Around 1900

automobiles looked like carriages without horses. Within only
one century we all drive around in highly sophisticated machi-
nery with cruise control, remote control, route navigation, ABS,
air conditioning, and air bags (fig. 5). A different form: yes, dif-
ferent technologies: yes, but certainly a better performance:
new cars are faster, relatively cheaper, safer, have more comfort
and we can choose any model we want. These are all function
driven innovations. It makes automobiles products of science.
88 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 5. Modern, sophisticated designs.

To be able to say whether architectural design is scientific is to

measure it with the universal principles of a scientific design
approach. We all know them. First we have a box. It stands for
the brains of the designer. There is going information into The
Box – the input – and out of The Box comes the output, which
is a design of some sort. Science demands that the output is
evaluated. If the design does not comply with the input, some-
thing must have gone wrong in The Box.

However, even if the output complies with the input, we will not
be quite sure whether the output is the best solution for the
problem. We must find out whether the input was valid by com-
paring it with the latest insights. By consequently validating the
input, every time a process is going through The Box, the out-
put will perform better than before. This is a scientific appro-
ach. This simple scientific design model should also apply to
architectural design.

Fig. 6. The Box.

 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 89
the Netherlands

We have The Box (fig. 6), which is a student, a teacher, or an

architect who was a student once. He is either a genius or an
average designer, but in both cases a Master of Science. The
input of an architectural design process consists basically of:

– functional values (which refer to what we need),

– situational values and restrictions (which refer to what we
will influence),
– the budget (which is what we are willing to pay), and finally
– technical values (which deal about how we can comply).

The output is obviously a design for a building, which is

basically:

– facilitating people so that they can work or live there,

– in harmony with its surroundings,
– within the budget, and
– properly constructed.

In this model the input will – of course – be validated and the

output evaluated. And logically the functional values form the
basis of this model: they are the very reason why we design in
the first place. Let us take a look at those functional values.
These aspects might be:

– Image (to be able to associate with the building),

– Use (to function as you wish and can),
– Safety (to feel secure and be secure),
– Health (to stay breathing), and
– Flexibility (to be able to change).

One could look at these aspects at all kinds of levels. To men-

tion three, these levels might be:

– Our Society (which are our common cultures),

– An Organisation (which may be a company or a household),
and
– The Individual (who is you and I, he and she).

By crossing the functional aspects with these three levels, one

gets a matrix which has to be filled with input validated know-
ledge (fig. 7). This is a rather complex matter, because – though
people share the same needs – people differ in what they expect
at each level with regard to the values.
90 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 7. Matrix

In society people are – for example – rich or poor, white or

black, catholic or protestant. Organisations differ in several
ways, in size, in image, in kind of activities, in lifecycle, and
within organisations people have all kinds of different functions
from the management to the work floor. Households are big or
small, we are a single or a partially couple. As individuals
people are – of course – all unique. The chapter deals with this
later.

So, people are all different, and this makes architectural design
rather complex. It comes with the status of the discipline. And
if indeed a designer succeeds in creating a building which
meets the matrix filled with validated values, one can say: yes,
architectural design is Science, and the output can be labelled
Architecture.

A Mismatch
But how about the following empirical data; are these master-
pieces of science?
– Glass towers being used as a library, despite the fact that
science learned ages ago that books should be stored in dark,
cold places (fig. 8, Library of France, Paris, architect
Perrault)
– An unprotected hole in the floor, in which my and anyone’s
daughter might easily fall down (fig. 9, KunstHal,
Rotterdam, Architect: Koolhaas).
– A quite slippery-when-wet surface at a pedestrian route (fig.
10, Bridge, Bilbao, Architect: Calatrava).
– An unpredictable slippery-when-wet square, which is also
hard to climb on with anything on wheels (fig. 11,
Schouwburgplein, Rotterdam, Architect: Geuze).
– A slippery-when-wet-part-three glass floor, leading to a slope
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 91
the Netherlands

which starts with a step, a slope which is too steep and has no
safety measures at the most hazardous spots, a slope which
leads to the main entrance, which could have been at street
level in the first place. Not a product of a scientist I might
add, but the signature of a perverted form fetishist with
slippery-when-wet client (fig. 12, AZL Head Office,
Heerlen, Architect: Arets).

Fig. 8. Library of France, Paris.

92 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 9. KunstHal, Rotterdam.

 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 93
the Netherlands

Fig. 10. Bridge, Bilbao.

94 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 11. Schouwburgplein, Rotterdam.

Fig. 12. AZL Head Office, Heerlen.

Well, these are all examples of exceptional architecture, which

operates above the laws of science. It is Art. Okay, I can appre-
ciate this thought. However, it is not only highly respected
architecture which creates a mismatch between environment
and its use. The following examples are considered to be middle
of the road architectural output, and what do we see?
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 95
the Netherlands

– Something silly like a doorbell out of reach (fig. 13),

– A stairway quite hazardous to walk on (fig.14), and
– A typical Dutch ladder (fig.15). Hardly scientific, since
Adam and Eve already knew how best to climb stairs, and we
are obviously not able to make them walk safely.

Fig. 13. A doorbell out of reach.

96 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 14 A hazardous stairway.

 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 97
the Netherlands

Fig. 15. A typical Dutch ladder.

It is as if we design buildings which seem to function properly –

and which do function to a certain extent – but which also con-
sist of mismatches between the image, use, safety, health and
flexibility asked for, and what has been provided. This mis-
match between man and environment can be visualised by a
square and a circle (fig. 16). The circle represents the needs of
people, the square represents the performance of the building.
You can see the mismatch. Where does it come from?
98 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Fig. 16. Mismatch between man and environment.

In search of a match
It may be obvious that both exceptional design and middle of the
road architecture have hardly anything to do with a scientific
design approach. A scientific design approach would have recog-
nised the mismatch and would have dealt with it sufficiently over
the ages. We all would have been living in universal space, hap-
pily ever after. But the truth is that the functional performance of
buildings did not significantly improve compared with other
kinds of products. The question is how to overcome the mismatch
and help design institutes to gain their scientific status.

Designing for The Disabled

What should be taken care of is to update the design input used.
This can be done by investigating the experiences of people
when they actually make use or try to make use of a building.
When doing so, one might find that people meet all kinds of
problems functioning in and around built facilities. Obviously
the so-called Disabled do. This is indeed so obvious, that it
might lead to the conclusion, that the needs of “The Disabled”
are the proper input for good (scientifically correct) design.
However, Designing for The Disabled means (and implies)
implicit design with special facilities attached for special user
categories, whether one calls it – for example – Universal
Design, or not. In the diagram you can see little squares around
the square of implicit design, representing the specific needs of
categories. These little squares do not fill the circle and they are
isolated (fig. 17).
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 99
the Netherlands

Fig. 17. Implicit design. Mismatch for some user categories.

Therefore designing for the Disabled still results in buildings

where people catch their sleeve on the door handle (and spill
coffee on the floor), where people get annoyed by a child ratt-
ling the flap of the letterbox because it cannot reach the door-
bell, where luggage is crushed in a turnstile, where a high heel
is lost in a floor grating, heads bump against awnings because
spectacles are steamed up, and where people may break their
neck on the stairs. People tend to think that these are just every-
day inconveniences, caused by their own clumsiness. But in
fact, designers have not been using the right input for their
design processes. Designing for the disabled is no design
science.

Integral Approach
Standardised men and women do not exist, nor do The
Disabled. People are all diverse. We are thin or fat, short or tall,
strong or weak. Sometimes we cannot see or hear well, and our
minds can change gradually or suddenly from being clear-
minded to confused. Unacquainted with a city, we can get lost –
whether this happens occasionally or all the time, it happens to
everybody at one time or another.
100 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

This phenomenon was recognised at the beginning of the

1990s. Consumer organisations started to develop a new appro-
ach, which was called the Integral Approach. The strategy is to
combine the special needs of categories into one package of
requirements, and emphasising that not only people with disabi-
lities benefit from the measurements, but also other categories
like children, the elderly and people with luggage and prams.

Fig. 18. Integral approach – still a mismatch.

This integral approach can be put in a diagram as well (fig. 18).

As you can see the square has grown, covering parts of the
special needs, but not covering the whole circle. There is still a
mismatch. The design input will still not pass the test, but who
cares, the university does not even know about this input, it
knows nothing at all about the topic, that is, before the installa-
tion of the chair. The so-called Integral Approach – which could
have been called Universal Design – is no design science. It
goes much deeper than that, and is more obvious still.

Ergonomic Diversity
There are two major concerns. First of all we have the designer.
Architectural designers have been trained over the ages to be-
lieve that they are to interpret the functional values of the buil-
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 101
the Netherlands

dings they designed according to their own merits. But it may

even be more concerning than that. When a student is explicitly
asked what functionality he is expecting from the environment,
he has no clue. He is simply not trained to look for the user
aspect at all. His major concern is appearance, i.e. what the
design looks like. Above that all, he has learned that this omis-
sion is in fact considered to be a quality in the educational cul-
ture: His examples are rewarded with glossy – people free –
pictures in respected architecture magazines. Designers Only.

Secondly, there are the traditional accessibility promoters with

their categorical interest in addressing the specific needs of
groups, maintaining the assumption that man can be seen as a
set of categories. People all differ, but they are still being repre-
sented as categories. However, the sum of categorical needs is
not the same as covering the needs of all people. When thinking
in categories one overlooks the needs people share. There are
only individuals, each changing their behaviour and capacities
every second of the day. The strategy is not to think in terms of
people, but to look at every single aspect of human functioning.
What should be done, is dividing human needs into separate
aspects of functioning, and then search for the proper values to
cover the extremes in each of these aspects (fig. 19).

Fig. 19. Proper values to cover the extremes. No mismatch.

102 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Aspects of functioning are just the ordinary things which

people do to function in the environment, like seeing, hearing,
feeling, touching, smelling, recognising, understanding, appre-
ciating, moving around, operating, breathing, staying warm, and
cooling down. Once these aspects are seen in the light of human
diversity, it is possible to validate the functional values concer-
ning all kinds of environmental parameters like lightning,
acoustics, temperature, space and texture.

Epilogue
From 1997 up to 2001 the academic chair of accessibility –
myself and Ita Luten – has been working on a book for teaching
purposes, deepening this ergonomic approach into pragmatic
design methods and criteria, to be used in several stages of
interior design, architectural design and city planning. It will be
published (in Dutch) by the Delft University Press in October
2001 (working title: Mens & Omgeving – People in their
environment, M. Wijk I. Luten, 2001).

To address our work at the Delft University, we use the phrase

“Ergonomics of the build environment”, covering all environ-
mental parameters which enables people to function effectively
and comfortably, safely and healthy in the environment, recog-
nising the common needs of people in general and the needs of
the individual to reach for all its rich diversity. If students are
trained to take this scientific approach to their discipline seri-
ously, there is no way past an ergonomic approach based on
people the way they are: diverse but with common needs. No
word is needed to express the obvious, but if one calls it any-
thing: call it ergonomics. As mentioned to my dean, November
2000.
 Maarten Wijk
Delft University of Technology, If Anything, Call It Ergonomics – in Search for a Word in a World Called Science 103
the Netherlands

References
CCPT, European manual for an accessible built environment,
CCPT, Rijswijk, 1990.

Wijk, M., Differences we share (original title: Niets menselijks

is ons vreemd), Publikatiebureau Bouwkunde Faculteit TU
Delft, Delft, 1997.
104 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 105
UK

1.5 Multi-Dimensional
Evaluation as a Tool in
Teaching Universal
Design
Prof. Jim Sandhu, Inclusive Design Research Associates,
Jesmond, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Introduction
Universal design has come a long way since its inception. Some
of its principles and objectives have been outlined and to a
lesser extent some of its applications have been verified. But
there is an urgent need to expand these to ensure its continuing
evolution. For example, how can the limits/parameters of
universal design be established under wide-ranging situations
and contexts? What metrics do we use to evaluate success?
How do we incorporate the fast pace of globalisation in order to
ensure that resources are used frugally: that design can work
alongside nature, not against it; that the scale of solutions mat-
ches the scale of the problems? How can universal design
ensure the continuous flow of value, seamlessness, sustainabi-
lity and the quality of life of a significant number of human
beings? What is the most effective approach to teach universal
design for future generations?

This chapter endeavours to address some of the issues described

above with a particular focus on the built environment.

In order to understand the impact of universal design on the

built environment such as housing and city-scapes it is crucial
to understand the background of universal design and its devel-
opment. It is interesting to observe that in Japan design power
has for decades been widely accepted as being central not only
to the quality of spiritual life but also of product wholeness and
market power. In the typical Bushido code good design is seen
as the creation of a product or environment that is totally right,
made in the right way to meet user needs, of the right material,
at the right price, to the right specification, to deliver the right
106 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

performance. Whilst this proto-universal design approach has

clearly been successful in Japan it is difficult to objectify and
translate it to other cultures – more so, in the context of
teaching.

Universal Design
The title covers a range of over-lapping phrases whose adhe-
rents usually claim exclusive rights and insights to their own
particular version. Some of the more popular ones are: inclu-
sive design, design-for-all, barrier-free design, transgeneratio-
nal design, design-for-the-broader-average and design-for-the
non-average as coined by the author for a new course for post-
graduate architectural students at the Polytechnic of Central
London in 1973. Despite their varying focus the essence of all
these definitions can be synthesised into ‘universal design’.

Universal design is the concept which focuses on achieving

accessibility to structures, products and services by planning
for the fullest range of human functions at the blueprint stage.
The two main goals of universal design are (1) to enable acces-
sibility to the widest range of individuals and (2) to eliminate
the need for retrofitting and reconstruction. Universal design is
one aspect of a larger trend in the design fields described by
Weisman as the “politics of inclusion and wholeness” in place
of the patronising “politics of tolerance and competing inter-
ests”. Fundamentally, it is an approach that values and cele-
brates human diversity. Above all, it highlights a major
paradigm shift – from treating people as part of the medical
model, as dependent, passive recipients of care, to a model
where people are treated as equal citizens and disability is seen
to be either irrelevant or merely as a social construct.

With the above broad characteristics of universal design in

mind it can best be illustrated using the following simple
diagram:
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 107
UK

The shaded area at the top of the bell curve depicts mainstream
design which largely ignores universal design principles thereby
excluding a greater range and number of people, especially
those who are disabled, elderly, left-handed, colour blind, poor,
etc. Ironically, this lack of consideration also results in a
smaller market-base. The bottom dotted line highlights that it is
possible to enlarge the range and number of users, and the
potential market base by using universal design precepts culled
from validation, verification and. evaluation exercises.

Brief History
The main thesis of this article is that evaluation as a process is a
crucial platform for teaching universal design principles. This
statement is supported by the author’s thirty years of experience
carrying out wide-ranging evaluations and then applying the
results to teaching design, supervising postgraduate research
and generally bringing about greater awareness of design
issues. In 1973 when starting a new post-graduate course for
architects this exercise consisted of practical design projects
focusing on multiple disabilities, lectures by eminent leaders in
fields such as design methods, politics, policy, ergonomics,
housing, etc., and visits to mental hospitals, special care units,
doss houses, homes for the elderly, run down city-scapes etc.

From 1979, based at the Special Needs Research Unit (SNRU),

University of Northumbria, most of the evaluation work resul-
ted from consultancy contracts and covered a range of building
types, wheelchairs, public transport and transport information,
domestic and specialised products, playgrounds kitchens, com-
puter systems and accessories, assistive technology, telematics,
packaging, etc. Some of the clients who funded the evaluation
of just under 400 separate items included British Gas,
Consumers Association, Research Institute for Consumer
Affairs, European Commission, Safeways Plc, the Passenger
Transport Authority, New World Cookers Plc, and Newcastle
City Council.

The multi-dimensionality (which is elaborated later) of the title

emerged from cost, economic and social impact considerations
on some contracts and from the fact that the projects were
entirely targeted at disabled or older people. This brought into
play serious ergonomic and human factor considerations related
to extreme physical, sensory, cognitive and learning limitations
of potential users.
108 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Evaluation3
So what is evaluation? It is concerned with gathering informa-
tion through the involvement of users about the usability or
potential usability of a product, environment or system in order
either to improve or assess its functionality and to provide gene-
ric feedback for related range of products. Without evaluation a
design reaching end-users would be untried and would merely
reflect the intentions of the designer but with little potential
understanding of user needs. More importantly, it is now
imperative to incorporate several cycles of iterative or usability
evaluation during the design development phases in order to
enhance quality. There are other more significant reasons why
evaluation is necessary both during and after the design process:
- Statutory health, safety and building standards have to be met.
- A detailed understanding of product/environment use is
required for design refinement.
- General levels of performance need to be achieved due to
commercial market forces from rival products.

Every evaluation takes place within a definite context which

includes:
– The experience level of users
– The types of tasks that have to be undertaken
– The environment in which the product has to be used
– The type of system or product that is being evaluated

The User/Task/Environment/Product/System
Approach
Every single contextual component of evaluation also provides
specific guidelines for developing similar range of products and
pointers to avoiding mistakes that add up to poor design. These
components are also the minutiae of teaching universal design
thinking and to solving design problems for the greatest range and
number of people. The generic checklists that emerge from consi-
dering user requirements during the design stage and then at the
evaluation stage are best exemplified by the following flexible and
expandable checklist based on the above approach. Although syn-
thesised from literally hundreds of practical evaluation protocols
or checklists it is crucial that designers and teachers treat it as a
guide rather than as something set in concrete. In other words –
merely a tool for thinking rather than as a rigid formula.

3 Editor’s note: Evaluation methods are also described in chapters 1.5,

2.4, and 2.5.
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 109
UK

A. The User What are the characteristics of the user?

Age
Sex
Diagnosis
Mental state/Learning abilities
Functional limitations:
e.g. strength in limbs
coordination of movement in limbs
hand and spinal function
absence of limbs
endurance/energy
trunk stability when standing/sitting
sight
hearing
speech
psychological problems:
confusion
poor memory
Other people involved in use of product:
to install
maintain
clean
repair

Some further questions:

Children: Can the product be used by them? Should it?
Handedness: Has suitable compromise been made between
requirements of the 90% right-handed users and the
10% who are left- handed.
Anthropometrics: Is product/environment usable by:
a) women in advanced stages of pregnancy?
b) fat persons
c) extremely tall persons
d) extremely short persons

B. TheTask: What tasks should be achieved with the product/building/system?

What actions are required to carry them out?
What skills are required to carry out the tasks?
What is the dynamic interaction between the user and the task; between
environment and the task?
What is the precise sequence of operation?
110 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

C. The Environment: In what conditions will the building/product be used?

Under what physical conditions?
acoustics
moisture
lighting
heat
vibrations, etc
Would it have to be installed?
in what conditions?
to what materials?
to what available spaces?
Would it be used in conjunction with other equipment, furniture
or structures?
What would be their characteristics?
What kind of social environment would the product/building be
used in?
D. The Product/Building What is the product/building for?
/System What features should it possess?
For what activity is it intended?
What are the principles for operating it?
Where would it be used?
Would it be used in combination with other products?
Would it be used in combination with other systems?
Would it need someone’s assistance? Whose?
How frequently would it be used?
How can the user obtain or access it?
How can it be installed?
How can it be maintained?
How can it be cleaned?
How can it be moved, assembled, or adjusted for use?

In the context of evaluation all the above are components of usability which is an integral
feature of universal design. The focus on usability puts the user at the hub of any design
exercise. The ISO Draft International Standard (DIS) 9241-11 “Guidance on usability specifi-
cation and measures” defines usability in the following way:
• usability: the effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with which specific users achieve
specified goals in particular environments;
• effectiveness: the accuracy and completeness with which specified users can achieve
specified goals in particular environments;
• efficiency: the resources expended in relation to the accuracy and completeness of goals
achieved;
• satisfaction: the comfort and acceptability of the work system to its users and other people
affected by its use.
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 111
UK

In the light of the author’s experience of carrying out validation exercises in the human
computer interfaces (HCI) domain and in view of the overlapping nature of design particu-
larly in the context of universal design it is possible to extend the components of evaluation
even further as exemplified by the following chart:

System Acceptability

Utility Easy to learn

Social
Acceptability Usability Efficient to use
Usefulness
Easy to remember
Cost
System Few errors
Acceptability Compatibility
Subjectively
Practical Reliability pleasing
Acceptability
Support Configurable

Availability Provides
feedback
Flexibility

Mobility

Standards
This far one of the most important components missing from the above overview is that of
standards and standardisation. The designer’s conformity to standards that uphold universal
design principles can enhance product/building quality and promote good practice.
Standards can also form a metric for evaluation as they are a process for establishing
common rules and characteristics of products, buildings and services to be used when
manufacturing, designing, building and selling products and services. Standards can also
provide a prescription or guidelines when initiating a new project and cover such topics as:
– buildings – traffic safety
– ergonomics – quality of internet services
– surface temperatures of electric appliances – smart cards
– safety of household appliances – smart houses
– heating, cooking and ventilation
– garden equipment Standards also cover services such as:
– safety of machinery – measurement of quality of postal services
– lifts – terminology for tourism operators anf hotels
– child safety issues – quality of public transport
112 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

User Panels
An integral and unique feature of SNRU’s evaluative work was
the voluntary panel of disabled, older and ordinary testers first
established by the author in 1981 for evaluation the Tyne &
Wear Metro System which had just been opened. Over the past
twenty years the panel varied from a core of 250 to just under
1000 members. Starting exclusively with volunteers with a self-
admitted disability or problems using components of their envi-
ronment, considerable attention was paid to keeping the range
of disabilities proportional to the national average as first estab-
lished by the Unit for the Commission’s RACE Programme. It
should be pointed out that this was not always possible. In the
recent past more and more ordinary users have been added lar-
gely due to the increasing knowledge and spread of universal
design principles. Despite the problems of proportionality the
size of the panel made sampling of various disabilities empiri-
cally viable. However, it is interesting to note that when stu-
dents were introduced to groups of volunteers one of their first
observations had a common theme – that despite their social
and economic differences which have tended to keep disabled
and older people apart, many similarities in functional characte-
ristics were evident in panel grouping. This was clearly the
beginning of their hands-on universal design awareness. They
learned more from this process of interaction than from lectures
or studio work. (On average just over half the panel was over 60
years old – a reflection of the burgeoning demographic shift,
amongst others.)

Sometimes the number and range of categories selected for a

specific evaluation largely depended on the following:
– conditions imposed by the contracting organisation, such as a
request to concentrate on the visually impaired market sector
– the nature of the product, e.g. specialised easy-to-wire plugs
compared with gas or electric cookers which require more
extensive and exhaustive data collection
– the overall budget which dictated what could be achieved in a
given timescale; the honoraria that could be afforded to pay
the volunteers; the geographic and disability spread of the
volunteers.

Usability Issues
Some of the theoretical issues were discussed earlier. In the
practical context of the various evaluations the prime ‘teaching
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 113
UK

goal’ aside from satisfying contractor requirements, was to

learn from the panellists about their experiences with products
and environments. What design feature made the product work
for them? What features render a product/environment inacces-
sible? In the early 1980s the reason for this emphasis was that
traditionally, disabled and especially older consumers had not
been the subjects of market research. There were very few
studies describing usability from their perspective. It was also a
reflection of the fact that a large proportion of users with spe-
cial needs made do with ‘ordinary’ products to the best of their
abilities. To some extent this is true of mainstream society today
as it goes about making the most of poor design.

Typologies, Taxonomies and Design

Morphology
Contractually, the main goal of the evaluations was to establish
some sort of a usability metric for the product/environment and
to provide feedback to the client for further refinement. This
feedback was based on the analysis of an evaluation protocol –
a set of questions very much focused on the actual use of the
product/environment. These protocols ranged from thirty-five
A4 pages for cookers; fifty pages to evaluate access to a univer-
sity to just three pages to evaluate screwless plugs. Severally
and jointly with the research Institute for Consumer Affairs
(RICA) and others over 500 pages of questions (or checklists)
have been developed covering a range of generic products and
environments.

The fact that the protocols emerged from establishing the typo-
logies, taxonomies and relationships centred on the specific
product/environment being evaluated holds great promise to the
evolution of universal design. The methodology is a solid con-
tribution both to establishing a design morphology and as a tea-
ching/analysing/awareness raising tool. It is also a major help to
establishing generic guidelines and to evolving meta-rules for
clarifying functional specifications.

Example 1
Perhaps the simplest example of the above approach which
highlights the factors affecting the successful use of a product
or environment is given below in Figure 1. Due to weighting of
the three main elements shown and the ever changing circum-
stances at any time, it has to be assumed that the three rings are
114 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

in a constant state of flux and subject to centripetal and centri-

fugal forces. The greater the parallax in the centre the more
successful the product in use.

Steps/Actions
Needed fo Use

Level of
Extent of Success Extent of
Universal Design in Use Physical/Mental
Principles Impairments of Users
Incorporated

Example 2
The following is a simple example of the generic process of
establishing user tasks when testing a new product/environ-
ment. It is a prerequisite to the more detailed processes that
follow, which in turn lead to the final protocol or checklist. This
table is focused on the evaluation of the whole range of micro-
wave cookers. But it could equally apply to any other product,
system or environment:

Establishing User Tasks

Task sequence involves three main areas of operation
Loading; Programming; Unloading
Task sequence can involve the following action
Grasping; Lifting; Pulling; Pushing; Turning
The standard sequence of operation is
Opening door; Placing an object in the cavity; Closing the
door; Setting programme; Starting programme; Switching
off; Opening door; Removing object/utensil; Closing door;
Cleaning any spillages
Factors considered in arriving at overall evaluation
Overall ease of use within each separate task; Comfort of the
user whilst using appliance; Ease of understanding instruc-
tions; Effort required to carry out each individual task;
Absence of any sharp edges or dangerous components eg
safety; Ease of cleaning; Audibility of signals, timer, etc.
Colours, contrasts, lettering, light, etc.
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 115
UK

Example 3
As the next step in the process, the following figure highlights
the microwave cooker taxonomy in terms of the different key
components and their logical relationship. The figure also intro-
duces the concept of clustering components that belong to-
gether and the concepts of main and sub-categories.

Documentation

Door Release Within the Cavity Facilities

– Dual Action – Turntable – Grilling
– Push Button – Turntable Housing – Browning
– Pull – Fan – Auto Defrost
Doors – Glass Tray – Memory
– Side Opening – Rotating Antenna – Combination Cooking
– Drop Down – Shelving – Halogen
– Other – Self-Cleaning Walls
– Other Equipment

Control Panel Displays and Labelling

– Size – Visual Feedback
– Shape – Audible Feedback
– Position – Tactile Feedback
Type of Controls
– Rotary
Auto Facilities
– Touch Pad
– Digital
– Touch Sensitive
– Analogue
– Colour Contrast
– Simple Mechanical
– Visual Feedback
– Audible Feedback
– Tactile Feedback

Example 4
The evaluation procedures described this far can also be used to
assess the suitability of all the components in a house for diffe-
rent types of impairments as shown over the next two pages:
Restrictions dependant on helpers, restricted movement of restricted directed none or very sight problems or none or very basic Restricted movement severe hearing & spe-
restricted mobility head, rising, bending, handling & finger restricted mobility of blindness co-ordination, abrupt in upper limbs ech defects 116
Problem grasping, turning, control the upper body movements,
area or object kneeling balancing problems
Dishwasher No particular problem Problems opening & No special problems Generally incapable of Plugging in & opening Generally regarded as Difficulties opening & Cannot establish when
except minor difficult- closing the door, for only some small non- using a dishwasher switch, difficult to a problem, without closing the door; diffi- machine is running &
ies [Link] of opening some this is impossible specified difficulties read, impossible to considering individual culties reaching the when corresponding
the machine because of their r know if on or not; elements back of the machine; cycle is ended
estrictions cannot see inside the difficulties putting in
machine special salt
Windows Difficulties cleaning Impossible to clean No problems General difficulties Cannot see whether it Restrictions prevents Cannot reach window No special problems
windows particularly windows; difficulties preventing opening; is clean & without stre- cleaning by oneself; in order to clean it; im-
because of height opening, closing & loo- closing & cleaning; aks; fear of leaning out extreme problems possible to clean out-
king out; difficulties difficulties getting at window when cleaning opening & closing side; opening & closing
opening/closing curtains & closing window too difficult; difficulties
curtains; fear that they windows getting near window
may fall out low with wheelchair; limi-
windows ted view
Floor covering Difficulties cleaning No problems Carpets make wheel- Cannot recognise Problems cleaning par- Carpets cause friction; No problems; small
floors; mobility im-pai- Problems turning; clea- chair movement more whether cleaning is ticularly with dust pan loose edges are diffi- bother with cleaning
red by deep pile car- ning; things breaking difficult; because of necessary & when & especially with loose cult to negotiate;
pets; loose rugs are a on hard floors when disability they cannot clean, whether it is lying carpets vacuum cleaner diffi-
greater danger they fall clean clean or not cult to handle;flat slip-
pery surfaces are
particularly dangerous
for old or threadbare
wheels
Bath Problem getting in or Small difficulties; Bath too low & slippery Balancing problems Difficulties getting in or Often restrictions pre- Cannot hear when
out; difficulties Need basic help; sides some demand help when using & cleaning; out; cannot reach in to vents person from water is running or
reaching for cleaning too low - danger of does not know when clean it using bath; difficulties overflowing
purposes slipping, too hard; clean; cleaning sub- getting from chair into
danger of falling stance changes feeling; bath; difficulties
slippery; sides too low reaching fixtures
Rubbish container Problems transporting Problem of transport- No problems Some cannot, others Some demand shorter Transport problem, Access with wheelchair No problems
rubbish outside; diffi- ing rubbish; rubbish have no problem routes to rubbish emptying as well as not possible; cannot
culties emptying rub- container difficult to container reaching the rubbish take rubbish out; rub-
bish into container access. container bish container too high
Bed Making beds is Problem making bed as No problems No room to move No problems Changing bed-linen is Cannot make bed; no No problems
UNIVERSAL design

problematic well as getting in or around bed, cannot a problem way around it; bed too
out make bed high for wheelchair
WC (toilet) Problem sitting down Restrictions prevents No problems WC too near side wall No general problems; WC too small; space Seat too low; move- Cannot hear toilet; fear
& standing up independent usage; space for wheelchair very often WC too for manoveuring ment difficult; problem of overflowing when
seat too low; cannot too small small closing door from they are blocked
reach handle inside, cannot get near
enough
Part 1 Europe

Built-in (walk-in) cup- Insufficient space; Shelves & hangers too No problems Shelves too high, insuf- Doors difficult to Stretching, too little Opening too narrow, No problems
boards shelf too difficult to high; space too small; ficient space handle space, jamming of sli- cannot get at things
reach no light; no view; no ding doors high up or low down,
storage space for bro- clothes rack too high,
oms, luggage cannot get near enough
with wheelchair
Shower Problems standing, Cannot get in or out, No problems Too small for standing Fixtures too low, diffi- Problems moving, stan- Cannot use fixed sho- No problems
nothing to hold on, fixtures difficult to & probably for helper cult to grasp dial, soap- ding up, standing and wer, needs help
fear of falling & slip- reach, space too nar- as well, jamming sli- holder & other things shower controls moving, difficulties
ping row for 2 people if hel- ding doors difficult to too difficult to find reaching fixtures
per required, slippery manage
Problem area or object dependant on helpers, restricted movement of restricted directed none or very restricted sight problems or none or very basic co- Restricted movement severe hearing &
restricted mobility head, rising, bending, handling & finger mobility of the upper blindness ordination, abrupt in upper limbs speech defects
grasping, turning, control body movements, balancing
kneeling problems
Light Problem changing Wrongly & badly loca- Cannot change bulbs Switch too high, too High lights dazzle - Cannot change bulbs, Switch difficult to No problems
ceiling light-bulbs, ted switches & sockets, difficult to reach, too unpleasant, placing of problems using light reach, switch too high,
generally too few & cannot change bulbs few switches switches in different switch too difficult to use.
badly placed switches places causes one not Cannot change bulb
UK
Inclusive Design Research
Jim Sandhu

to know whether light

is on/off, need non-
dazzle light or high
concentration of light
Wall sockets & Difficult to reach/ no Too low, too little, Problems with some. Socket behind furniture Too few sockets, too Range & accessibility Position of sockets out Problem with all audio
electrical appliances problem problems with plug- or in inaccessible cor- deep or badly placed, of reach, cannot reach signals, door bells etc.
ging in & taking out ners, problem with so that they are behind wall behind work area
plugging in taking out or between furniture
Wash basins Must be able to sit, Cannot get close No problems Basin too high, too No general problems No general problems, Problems reaching fix- No problems
cannot get beneath enough to or underne- deep. Cannot get close have to be able to sit tures and turning taps.
basin with wheelchair ath fittings, gets wet to basin due to wheel- down
underneath basin chair.
Bedroom Too small, bad shelving Too small cannot get at No problems Too small, wants also No problems. Too small , no shelf Problems with switches Better light, signal
& too small dressing light, curtain, window, to carry out work from space and TV controls. light, alarm
space T.V., radio etc. from bed bed, open/close curtain
from bed
Maintenance Only needs help for Needs help with shop- Needs help for difficult Needs help. Requires help with Small problems, hot Only some help Needs no help if equip-
some manual jobs & ping, problems with jobs & with cleaning shopping, difficulties meals not always pos- required with strenu- ment has light/sound
shopping mealtimes jobs with reading recipes sible ous shopping & jobs signal systems
Housekeeping Periodic help for clea- Daily help essential for Periodic help for diffi- Help once a week with Now & again needs Problems with infre- Needs help with clea- No help required
ning & washing cleaning, making beds, cult cleaning jobs cleaning & washing help for cleaning & quent big cleaning ning, bed making &
washing etc. washing, as well as for jobs, chang-ing bed- washing but not daily
paying bills linen, doing washing
Personal Hygiene No help Help with bathing, Now & again for mani- Help with dressing, un- No help No help Some are dependent No help
dressing, undressing, cures or getting hair dressing, bathing, on help, particularly for
going to the toilet, to done etc. going to the toilet etc. bathing & dressing
bed etc.
Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design

Fridge/Freezer Problems reaching Needs help. Needs help. Needs help Needs some help. Needs help. Needs help. No help
higher shelves.
Microwaves No problems if within Needs help Needs help. Needs help. Needs occasional help. Needs help Needs help. No help.
reach.
Cookers Restrictions due to Needs help. Needs help. Needs help. Needs help. Major problem. Needs help. No help.
wheelchair.
117
118 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Example 5
The following example highlights a procedure for carrying out
an access audit or evaluation extensively used by the author and
his team over many years. The brief was to assess all the univer-
sity buildings for full accessibility. The numbers in the final
column rank (RK) the order of priority from 1 to 3, with 1 stan-
ding for immediate action to tackle problem areas. However,
these are seriously embedded in reality – in full knowledge of
the budgets available. So the ranking takes into consideration
the fact that installing a vertical lift would not be feasible in the
immediate future.

Site: City Campus, Main Facility: Ellison Building

SUB AREAS OBSERVATIONS REMARKS/SUGGESTIONS RK

Block ‘A’ basement Access via staircase Install stairlift or vertical lift 3
Block ‘A’ doors 2 sets of heavy double doors Adjust opening force & speed 1
in corridor
Block ‘B’ approach to main 3 steps to main double doors tl Dropped kerb need to be installed.
entrance o the right of large flat leve Initiate parking restriction around kerb 1

Upper floors in Block ‘B’ 2nd floor access restricted to A ramp needs to be installed 1
the right from the lift due to a
single step
South entrance toBlock ‘C’ Single step to double doors Dropped kerb required for step.
No footpath leading to entrance Double doors repositioned for
safe entry 3
Upper floors in Block ‘C’ No access to wheelchairs Subject to budget install lift 3
no lift
Main entrance Block ‘D’ Level access to main Door opening force & speeds 1
corridor via double doors
to be checked
Main entrance Block ‘E’ Small step to double doors Dropped kerb or minor ramp needed 2
6 steps rising to main corridor
Level. Mat well in foyer.
Level Access to lifts.
Refectory goods Entrance Ramped walkway along the Alternative access to building but
side of Ellison Building leading not recommended as access route.
to a ramp into the goods
delivery depot.
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 119
UK

Example 6
An important step in the act of designing, and therefore central
to universal design, is the formulation of a prescription or
model for a finished work in advance of its embodiment. This
process applies to every activity which involves designing – in
this example, the design of a complex interactive computer sys-
tem targeted at providing up-to-date and ‘real time’ information
to travellers. (Further information can be obtained from the
websites [Link]/turtle and [Link]/turtle ).
The example focuses on the mechanism for clarifying the com-
plex inter-relationship of the various elements that combine at
different levels to result in a viable electronic information sys-
tem. As can be seen there are many generic elements common
to many of the previous examples in terms of tackling universal
design problems.

Elements of a Taxonomy of Transport Information Tools

MEDIA HARDWARE INTERFACE

Text Interface Devices
Data Input Devices
Image Output Devices
Audio Networks
Video

FUNCTIONALITY
SOFTWARE INTERFACE Conversational
Dialogue Type/Style TRANSPORT Messaging
Display Format INFORMATION TOOL Retrieval
Directivity BUNDLES Integration
Control of Errors Document Production
Coding/Abbreviation Storage
Help Manipulation
OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS
Flexibility/Adaptability
Clarity
Capacity
Facilities
MODALITY Speed
Vision Response Time
Hearing Reliability
Touch Networking
Cognition Inter-relationship
Harmonisation
Transferability
Complementary
120 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Example 7
An important component of the above project was to provide
complementary and seamless information to all users of the Tyne
and Wear Metro – including pictures and problems areas for each
station (which can be seen on the above websites). The methods
of gathering data or information, and of carrying out surveys or
audits contribute directly to the morphology of universal design.
The following audit protocol is one of seven used since 1981.

Tyne & Wear Metro Evaluation & Access Audit

General Information
Name of station Other information • No. of entrances
Location • Suitable station to visit City Centre/Coast etc.
Date of survey • Is it suitable for disabled people to use?
Number of platforms • platform number
• direction

Access Information
Ramps • handrails • floor surface texture
• gradient • length
Access between platforms • between all available platforms • lifts
• the route • handrails
• footbridges • resting points
• steps • signage
• ramps • reflective markings for guidance
• subways • textured surfaces
• kerbs • surface quality
• dropped kerbs • distance to travel
• escalators • barriers
• overhanging shrubbery • suitable pavement for wheelchair user
Access onto Platforms Consider: as above
Access onto the Metrocar Consider: as above, plus
• platform edge • gap between metrocar & platform (fixed)
Access Routes to Station Consider: as above, plus
Automatic Station Doors • location • floor surface texture
• suitability for visually impaired users • signage
Disabled Parking • no. of spaces • signage
• location
Escalators Consider: as for steps, plus • suitability for disabled people
Help point • manned • suitability for disabled people
• location
Lifts • operation • signage
• suitability for visually impaired users • suitability for wheelchair users
Parking • no. of spaces • signage
• location
Personal Assistance Available • number of people • how to get attention
• hours of availability
Steps • number • handrails
• height ➩ colour
• depth ➩ grip
• reflective markings
Tactile Edge Markers • location • nature
• colour ➩ raised bumps, spongy rubber
Ticket Barrier • location • colour
• nature • signage
➩ automatic, swing etc. • operation
• manned
Other Information • Anything not previously mentioned
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 121
UK

Facilities At The Station

Automatic Train announcements • nature of announcement
➩ visual
◊ location
◊ colour
➩ audible
◊ male or female voice
◊ suitability for hearing impaired
Closed circuit television • availability
Emergency stop button • location • suitability for disabled people
• colour • operation
Information Panel • availability • suitability for visually impaired users
• suitability for reading disabilities
Lifts • operation • signage
• suitability for visually impaired users • suitability for wheelchair users
Luggage Storage Area • signage • location
Public Address System • availability
➩ visual
◊ location
◊ colour
➩ audible
◊ male or female voice
◊ suitability for hearing impaired
Resting points • seating • location
• non-obstructive place to stop wheelchair • signage
Seating available on platform • colour • number
• height • nature e.g. flip-seat
• location
Shelter available on platforms • distance from entrances or other shelters • full cover
• partial
Signage Details • signs within station • signs for disabled access
• signs to platforms ➩ colour
➩ icons
➩ location
➩ conspicuosness
Ticket machines • location • suitability of operation for disabled
people
Timetable Information • availability • suitability for visually impaired
• suitability for reading disabilities
Toilets • location • signage
• number • opening hours
• accessible toilets
Transfare Information • availability • suitability for visually impaired
• suitability for reading disabilities
Travel Centre • availability • signage
• opening hours • location
• accessibility
TURTLE Terminal • availability
Other Information • anything not previously mentioned
122 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Other Facilities At The Station Or Nearby

Airport • location

Bus Station • location

Bus Stop • location

Cafeteria • accessibility
• location
• opening hours

Civic Centre • location

Cigarette Machine • location

• accessibility

Confectionery Machine • location

• accessibility

Hospital • location

Hospital with A & E • location

Newsagent • accessibility
• location
• opening hours

Park & Ride Facility • location

Photo Booth • location

Post Box • location

Post Office • accessibility

• location
• opening hours

Public House • accessibility

• location
• opening hours

Taxi Rank • location

• signage

Telephone • cash
• card
• induction loop
• accessibility

Train Station • location

• signage

Other Information • anything not previously mentioned

 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 123
UK

Example 8
This final example highlights that the most important element
in teaching universal design is that of relatedness – how various
relationships and dependencies impact on the problem to be
solved. On the whole designers tend to have a narrow focus
dictated by their profession and training. The reality is that
many of the problems faced by the world are multi-dimensio-
nal: pollution, the environment, poverty, poor housing, sanita-
tion, unemployment, etc. However, the institutions that are
meant to solve these problems – government, science, edu-
cation, the professions – are not multi-dimensional. Each has a
particular focus and remit. Design and especially universal
design can play an important role in turning policies into tan-
gible ideas and concepts to change the way people think and
act. A prerequisite of this process is not only that designers
understand the role of other disciplines but also the complex
matrix of service providers and policy makers. This under-
standing lies at the hub of universal design evolution.
124 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

In a sense the above paragraph really focuses on the concept of

convergence which provides an opportunity to deal in a cohe-
rent and comprehensive way with the whole series of previously
disparate accessibility issues. Convergence is particularly being
driven by the fast developing new technologies.

The diagram below highlights the various bureaucracies and

their relationships and how they can impact on an individual
and very often enmesh them.

Conclusions
• It is clear that teaching Universal Design is not an easy task.
It requires the broad vision that only comes with experience.
It definitely requires a great deal of knowledge tempered by
wisdom.
• Designers can bring about far greater change in society
through the judicious application of their Universal Design
know-how than any other means such as politics or legis-
lation.
• Awareness of systematic methods for analysing problems
and for carrying out evaluations at every stage of the design
process is critical to universal design practice.
• Evaluation dictates that user issues rather than technical con-
siderations are central; to the design process.
• It is important to focus on user task analysis so that users’
needs are well understood.
• Task analysis needs to be done in addition to general require-
ments analysis, which tends to focus on what functionality is
required and not on how to provide that functionality.
• It is crucial to design iteratively with many cycles of proto-
typing/testing/redesign. The designer should aim to add
value with each stage.
• Multi-dimensional thinking, convergence and seamlessness
should figure writ-large in any course teaching universal
design.
 Jim Sandhu
Inclusive Design Research Multi-Dimensional Evaluation as a Tool in Teaching Universal Design 125
UK

References
Sandhu, J.S. An integrated approach to universal design:
Towards the inclusion of all ages, cultures and diversity. In
Universal Design Handbook. Eds. W. Preiser and E. Ostroff,
McGraw-Hill, USA. 2001.

Sandhu, J.S. Ageing, Citizenship and Universal Design.

Keynote Speech, International Federation on Ageing,
Montreal. 1999.

Sandhu, J.S. What is Design-for-All? In European Telematics:

Advancing the Information Society. TAP Conference,
Barcelona. 1998.

Sandhu, J.S. A Holistic Approach to the Design-for-All

Concept., European Institute for Design and Disability,
Newsletter No. 2. 1995.

Weisman, L.K. Towards an Architecture of Inclusion. Outreach

ACSA Women’s Issues Newsletter, Oct.1994.

Sandhu, J.S. Demography and Market Sector Analysis of People

with Special Needs in Thirteen European Countries: A report
on telecommunication usability issues. European
Commission’s RACE TUDOR Project. 1991.
126 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 127
for Inclusive Design, UK

1.6 Developments
Towards Inclusive
Design Teaching
Andrew Walker, AADipl, Grad Dipl (Cons)AA, United Kingdom
Institute for Inclusive Design

This chapter will examine the history, evolution and implemen-

tation of Inclusive Design Teaching at an institution known for
radical intervention, the Architectural Association (AA) in
London, UK.

Personal Route to setting up the course

It is important I believe, however briefly, to preface my own
reasons for entering this sphere of education as there are as
many routes to it as practitioners and this must colour the
manner in which the subject is developed.

I came into it truly by accident having fallen through a roof, as I

had not been taking care whilst measuring a building. In a
moment I became a wheelchair user. It was fortunate that I had
trained as an architect and was at the time a part time tutor at
the Architectural Association School in London. After half a
year in a spinal unit it was possible to return to continue wor-
king there and to become a full time staff member with the
agreement of the then lively and controversial Chair of the
School, Alvin Boyasky. There was to be no problem with access
around the building, it was explained, as the staff from the
maintenance department could lift me anywhere I wished to go.
The buildings form part of London’s finest Georgian square and
were built to suit sedan chairs with servants to move people
about and open doors. There was of course no lift and the idea
of one was not on the agenda in 1982. My office moved from
the top attic floor overlooking the Square to a room in the back.
After a year there I was made Head of Technical Studies and
held this position for thirteen years. Conditions remained primi-
tive but I was able to ask for a sink to cope with my sanitary
needs. I learnt that disabled people are very reliable – they can-
not go anywhere – students always knew I would be in my
128 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

office and I would not be at the bar or out to lunch. But we are
the lucky ones with jobs and meeting students every day keeps
the brain awake and I was aware that many disabled people,
even those now rich with “compensation” had a less happy fate.

I was also fortunate in being asked to design a sports and reha-

bilitation centre for the experimental London Spinal Unit.
Again, briefly, I must explain that this also meant helping raise
the money to fund it. Whilst I was honoured with the experi-
ence it did mean a lot of work as part of a team and a lot of
meeting and hand shaking of people on the charity circuit of
those that come under the euphemism “the great and the good”.
It was a fascinating experience which did produce a Centre of
Excellence which was opened by the most popular of “Royals”
but also still makes me shudder. It was obvious that these are
the “special” people with their need for limousines, vestments,
choirs, palaces, armies and of course – disabled people.
Disabled people want to do the ordinary things like go out to
the pub, go to the cinema, get an education, have work, sex and
holidays and find somewhere an accessible lavatory. But what
will the media do when we are no longer “special”. An army of
professionals could completely disappear.

With the sad death of Alvin Boyasky, a new head was elected
by the School Community, Alan Balfour, a Scot who had been
working in the United States. Excitingly the AA is one of the
few institutions that elects its own head but beyond this, being
there is a rather feudal experience. Our new Chair had experien-
ced the Americans with Disabilities Act. He was rather surpri-
sed to find that I had no access to a lavatory and that I still had
to be helped in and out of the building.

For a short period I had been doing part time work for what is cal-
led, with British militaristic obsession, an Access “Officer” for a
local authority. This proved fascinating to me, as it was a new world
where people did not go on holiday but went “on leave” as though
they were in the armed forces. (Much of our language is still milita-
ristic; we still have «captains of industry». In design our prima
donna architects still talk not of a strategy but of a «Master plan»
and our master plans have to be “in line”.) Also I learnt that diffe-
rent departments lived in their own Masonic worlds and did not like
to speak with those in different departments, frightened that their
own empires would fall and they might become redundant. As a
curiosity in a wheelchair, I was able to get into any department
because no one really knew what all this “access” stuff meant.
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 129
for Inclusive Design, UK

The establishment of the Graduate

Diploma in Environmental Access
Suddenly with the new head of the AA, an opportunity came
about to get these non-speaking professions together with non-
disabled and disabled people together in a new graduate
diploma course taught on a day release basis for people at work.
(Building Conservation had had a similar course for years.)

The AA is a registered charity and School of Architecture foun-

ded over 150 years ago. Its foundation was not by some act of
Parliament or some beneficence by an aristocrat or industrialist
but astonishingly by a 25-year-old student. He felt dissatisfied
with the teaching he could get and wanted to prove that there
must be more to Architecture than just pattern books of Gothic
or Classic design. So he combined with others of like minds
and they met together and taught themselves. The School has
always encouraged students’ initiatives, ways of thinking and
problem solving which often become mainstream. So why not
invite disabled people to participate with professions who did
not really want to speak to one another to a graduate course in
an inaccessible, listed building and ask them to pay for the
privilege? It did seem a rather dubious proposition, but when I
hesitated the Access Officer for the City Corporation, Julie
Fleck – who also felt strongly about the idea – encouraged me
to “Just do it”. Since then I have advised dissatisfied users very
widely to do the same thing and see what happens.

It also meant that if we were inviting students into the building,

some of whom might be disabled, then there would have to be
proper parking, an accessible entrance, an accessible lavatory
and a lecture room with an induction loop: all the physical
things that any building should normally have anyway.

Julie Fleck and I had met some years earlier whilst I was invol-
ved as Hon Sec of the Access Officers’ Association in its inau-
gural year. We conferred with Jane Campbell then at Camden’s
Disability Research Centre who is now at the forefront of the
Independent Living movement in this country. It was agreed
that the proposals needed credibility with both disabled people
and design professions. The course would reject the medical
model and support the social model of disability. As a conse-
quence, Access was viewed as an environmental and not a
medical issue. We would advocate the end to people being
called “special” and consequently becoming the recipients of
130 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

much bad design. We would support organisations “of ” dis-

abled people rather than those “for” disabled people. The course
would be a yearlong day-release course which would lead to a
Graduate Diploma in Environmental Access.

Whilst running Technical Studies at the AA, it was possible to

have access to state of the art Consultants expert in such things
as structure, environmental science and acoustics. The intention
was now to introduce into the school experts in sound, sight,
mobility and cognition – that is deaf, blind, ambulant disabled
and learning-disabled people.

This would be a disability lead initiative but there was always

the belief that the issue was not just one for people with disa-
bilities. The issue would be seen as one not of disability but of
access. It was considered vital that it took its ethos from the
noises being made by the disability movement and not from the
professional establishments which were seen as being not pro-
gressive. High standards of design, good management and clear
information for people with disabilities would not leave out the
majority of the population who are also all disabled by similar
practices. It would be set within the context of civil rights and
universal standards rather than philanthropy and special needs.
Thus the debates and assignments on urban planning, public
building, housing, transport, education and product, graphic
and communication design would be encouraged to be seen
from the perspective of inclusion with common standards rela-
ted to emerging government programmes of social inclusion
which were seen as both cost effective and a key element in the
propagation of sustainability.

An attempt was made to get the Access Committee for England

to endorse the course but while being enthusiastic it said it
could not endorse it. I went before the Royal Institute of British
Architects’ Education and Professional Development
Committee. Some of the members did not know what the dis-
cussion was about. They too could not endorse the course but
they did agree with the Royal Town Planning Institute, the
Institute of Building Control, the College of Occupational
Therapists and the Access Committee for England to “endorse
this long over-due course initiative”.

Opposition came from a leading architect, AA trained, who

wrote to the Chair complaining he had been doing this stuff for
years for disabled people and was well qualified, and if he had
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 131
for Inclusive Design, UK

been doing it, it would be done properly and he should have

been consulted. The architect had missed the point, and it was
precisely for these reasons that I have avoided that advice.

“By Us” and not “For Us” should be their motto”, William Morris
had written in the Daily Chronicle of 1895 on the proposed eman-
cipation of the working classes. Whatever was done must come
from the bottom up; from the ignored experts who had to live with
the consequences of a disabling environment. These must be
encouraged to come into our highly prestigious institution with its
worldwide reputation and STUDY and TEACH!

It was necessary to create a leaflet to advertise the course. I

chose what I took to be a very beautiful photograph, but was
told that the photograph showed a pitiful image. It was of a
wheelchair-using friend of mine, taken whilst he was photogra-
phing a desolate scene in Bangladesh, where he was about to set
up a factory to teach disabled people to produce their own
wheelchairs from waste steel and rickshaw wheels. In this way they
would get a fine design to suit their own terrain and also become
independent of foreign charity. Hardly a pitiful image this.

Funding of the course was merely made under a small contin-

gency which the School gave me. One disabled student who
was helped by a bursary from a charity connected to a long-
standing member of staff. All attempts to get funding from the
charities of well known architectural firms failed.

The First Year of the Course

The School did get the changes to the building accomplished
ready for the first intake of students. The Chair greeted the stu-
dents with great hospitality and we began with hot coffee and
croissants served by a white coated AA Chef from the upstairs
bar. This is important, because as the bar was not accessible and
we did not wish to be discriminatory, it was policy to have
volunteers to bring refreshments down every so often so we
could be together in a group. The group was small. Eight people
to start with. Two planners, two architects, two access consul-
tants, an editor and a researcher. Three were disabled people. It
was very useful as one of the architects was deaf and required
an induction loop. We held the course around some tables and
had one person at a time speaking into the loop. This method
has been used ever since to discipline discussions. It also meant
our lecturers had to learn that discipline. Also we learnt to
132 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

speak clearly and not to turn our faces away when speaking.
Students were introduced to the library and the slide library.
The AA has very fine collections in both. But it was decided
that as neither were readily accessible, being on the first floor
and basement. Our books and videos would be kept in the
Access Office on the ground floor. This meant of course that
the books in the main library and used by AA students were
generally those which were very out of date – and still are.

It was a prerequisite that all students had a common grounding

in a disability awareness exercise which would cover the first
two weeks of the course. This not only covered issues of lang-
uage but also set the whole issue in the context of race, gender,
class and women’s rights. After seeing a video of “Black people
in the countryside” a student remarked that the long dresses do
make people look odd in the country. She was asked whether
this would apply also to Jane Austen? The awareness exercise
was fundamental to all the work that followed and it is a vital
ingredient in any such course. The pity was that it could not be
done by all the staff of the School.

In the 32 weeks of the day release course, students were expec-

ted to complete three essays, several assignments and a thesis.
Their coursework books notes would be examined together with
any assignments with the thesis in an interview on the final day
of the course. Two assessors were appointed: Geoffrey Darke,
an architect now in private practice, a member of the Access
Committee for England and Elspeth Morrison, former editor of
Disability Arts in London (DAIL) who was then a producer for
the Disability Programmes Unit at the BBC.

In this first year coursework covered the polemic, disability

awareness training, architecture, planning, product design,
transport and the law. It looked at education buildings, housing,
theatres, cinemas, stations, historic buildings etc. It brought into
the school the major organisations dealing with the issue of
Environmental Access. Visits were made to test transport and
facilities in different parts of the country. Seminars were held
with organisations such as People First, the national organisa-
tion of people with learning difficulties.

This last was to a degree to become the high point of the

presentations as we were asked to write down key words and
phrases used in our profession and then explain them in simple
English to people with learning difficulties. It rapidly became
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 133
for Inclusive Design, UK

Graduate course 1996 – disabling dog grids being tested by a blind person.

clear that it is this group of people who are the real experts in
communication skills. We learnt for example that someone may
be able to read but not understand symbols or even pictograms,
and so a wheelchair symbol on a door to indicate a lavatory
may just mean to them a room where there may be people in
wheelchairs; the label “toilet” needed to be added.

Students were instructed in access assessment. They had to do a

group assessment and one on their own of a building of their
choice. Generally these were illustrated documents with photo-
graphs and diagrams. The first exercise was important as it sho-
wed that, say, a blind person or wheelchair user can do as good
an assessment of a building, management practices and infor-
mation as anyone, provided appropriate assistance is in place.

The course did not generally indulge in simulation exercises.

The view was taken that pretending to be blind, deaf or unable
to walk can be as unrewarding as pretending to be a different
colour or gender. It can never be known but has to be believed.
One of the problems is that users’ views are not always credible
to professional people. We are expected to prove everything and
end up being measured and tested. For someone to suddenly
have to use a wheelchair can give a completely wrong impres-
sion of this non-walking way of life. Wheelchair skills have to
be learnt over time – a well-designed wheelchair enables. It
maintains independence and pride.
134 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

One student was blind, and for his first essay he attached a
camera to his head and filmed his journey in black and white
around Waterloo Station from his – and his dog’s – view. A
friend took a video of him doing this in colour. It proved a very
effective way of illustrating the access, information and
management shortcomings at this rail terminus. A copy was for-
warded to the Minister of Transport for information.

Some of the students had asked to be able to learn how to

design, but an architect or designer has to take a long time to
learn this skill, and the mixed background of the students
worked against producing anything but simple designs.
However, it was possible to teach all the students to be very
good critics of design and of the management practices that are
needed to create accessible environments.

Exhibition and Evening Lectures

In celebration of the establishment of the course, an exhibition
of the work of the group “Motivation” and in particular the
photographs and designs of David Constantine of
“Wheelchairs in the Developing World” was held for three
weeks. It was an opportunity not only to exhibit some excellent
designs and processes but also to invite leading figures from the
right, left and centre of politics. The earliest prototype which
the designer had produced whilst a student and had been on a
dump rusting away was rescued and repaired and put on its own
pedestal. An induction loop was added to the main lecture hall.
And a light weight ramp added to the main Georgian entrance
in the Square which shocked the owners of the Square and
delighted taxi drivers as they could identify as “that’s the
School of Architecture with the ramp at the front and about
time too...”

The whole of the design process and the difficulties encounte-

red in setting up self-sufficient production lines in Bangladesh,
Poland and Cambodia was explained in the first of a series of
lectures held with sign language interpreters in the lecture hall.

On the same evening the Chairman launched an appeal for

funds for a general passenger lift to link most of the levels of
the school buildings and enable facilities to be used by all.

So over a few weeks the following evening lectures, free to the

public, were held:
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 135
for Inclusive Design, UK

David Constantine: Motivation: the design of low cost

wheelchairs, using local materials
and local people in Bangladesh,
Poland and Cambodia.
Doug Alker: Sound Designs? – Architecture and
deaf people.
Professor Michael Oliver: What’s so wonderful about
walking?
Jill Allen-King: Access needs of blind and partially
sighted people.
Rachel Hurst: The Taj Mahal or the Native Kraal
– an international perspective on
Access
Cedric Price: A concluding presentation

The exhibition and lectures were a success and gave the work
some credibility in the School and further afield. It enabled the
usefulness of the teaching to be recognised and it was now pos-
sible for Alan Balfour to start incorporating the work in the
mainstream teaching of the School. It became possible to take
the course into the First, Intermediate and Diploma levels.

The course was commented on by Mary Banham: “The densest

and most exciting course I have audited – and that amounts to
quite a few on two continents.” (AA Files Autumn 1993)

Infusing the Subject into the

Mainstream Curriculum
A pattern was developing that for a brief period enabled the
course to be infused into the mainstream teaching of the School
and also allowed the Graduate students and undergraduates to
be present together in this process. An Appendix giving the
Projects Review text of one year – 1997 – is added for informa-
tion.

Perceptions of Space – First Year

Early in their first year all students took part in a day’s presenta-
tion in a building – usually a theatre – which was undergoing
design and management changes to make it usable by all. These
building projects were all being funded by the Arts Council of
England National Lottery money which comes from any mem-
ber of the public buying a ticket. Therefore the projects had to
allow access in its fullest sense as part of the condition of fun-
ding for all people – including anyone with any disability. It
136 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

seemed the greatest civil right given to disabled people had

come inadvertently not by grand legislation but through gamb-
ling! The funding related to the RIBA’s work stages so is an
extremely practical system.

Students were lectured by disabled people on different aspects

of design relating to sight, sound, mobility and cognition. Issues
of race and gender were included and the presentations took
place at such venues as the Theatre of Black People and Grææ,
the European Theatre of Disabled People, the Royal Festival
Hall, the Battersea Arts Centre and Lux Cinema, Hoxton.
Several firms of well-known and new firms of architects were
happy to bring their projects to be scrutinised by young stu-
dents. Students then had to present a submission relating to
their own access needs, for example, their own auditorium.
Students’ recognition of the social and technical issues raised
thus informed a submission assessed in conjunction with
requirements for Technical Studies. This served as an
Introduction to the access issue for them and a basis for the
teaching in the remaining five years.

1st year perceptions of space, how do I communicate?

 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 137
for Inclusive Design, UK

They were being taught from the start that the issue included
them. This was quite difficult for some undergraduates to sto-
mach. Some came from countries where disabled people are
kept out of sight. One student said how horrified she had been
to be lectured by disabled people but when she had to write her
diary about her access needs she found that she was quite small
and always had great difficulties coping with London buses and
seeing above other people. Graduate students also participated.

Second Year
In the Second Year access became a technical requirement in
terms of Technical Studies. Five half-day presentations by both
non-disabled and disabled professional people relating to Sight,
Sound, Spatial Perspectives, Cognition and Mobility were
given. They took place in the AA or in buildings relevant to the
presentation on Thursday afternoons.

2nd year playground – ts Roachford – wall & floor surfaces.

138 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Students were expected to fulfil attendant coursework and

demonstrate how technical access issues modified a unit-based
proposal in order to pass this component of their Second Year
Technical Study. Work was assessed by Interim and final juries
in the spring and summer terms of each student within a unit
setting. For the first time all Intermediate School students now
had a scheme design in their unit work that had had to be
altered in some way to be inclusive.

2nd years and graduate students 1996 project assessments.

Third Year
In this year Environmental Access now embraced the concerns
of both Technical and General Studies. A series of seminars by
leading practitioners discussed technical matters and the social
polemic of access. With the co-operation of the General Studies
and Technical Studies departments, a number of students had
the opportunity at the beginning of the Spring term to enter a
proposal relating to their unit design work, which could be con-
sidered as a Technical or General Studies submission. Technical
and General Studies Seminars took place on two afternoons per
week. Following discussions between student and course tutors,
students could be paired with a consultant to guide them in their
work, perhaps advising further discussion with other specialists
in the field. It was intended that selected work would then be
presented to a jury comprising Technical and General Studies
staff and members of the graduate Environmental Access
course.
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 139
for Inclusive Design, UK

3rd year – king chong – communal housing – bed pods.

It was further intended that selected work be further presented for

selection for the Access Prize. This was to replace an Access Prize
which had previously been given by the Chair to the second year.

2nd year workshop 1995 – Yanko

Apostolov & Shibboleth Schecter
– illuminated handrail to aid
navigation and provide support.
140 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Diploma School Evening Lectures

Evening lectures which were free and open to the public were
held annually. Sign language interpreters were available on all
occasions. They started off being under the title “Access,
Architecture and Architects” and later “Inclusive Design”. They
were held in the Spring Term and related to the social and tech-
nical changes being brought about by the gradual emancipation
of all sections of society. The lecture series hoped to show how
broad the issue was and that it concerned all people. The inten-
tion was that they could easily form the basis for study for
Diploma School students.

Outside Interest
The evening lectures were always well attended but generally
by people from outside the School. A designer from the USA
broke his flight to come to one of them before going on to
Poland. None of the presentations were ever published. This is
sadly the pattern in most design schools were such work is pre-
sented. A few students embrace the ideas with great interest and
there is always interest from outside the institutions and glo-
bally. Several educators visited the School to get advice on how
to set up similar courses elsewhere and they have done so.
So it is important to see this in a broader perspective. The
Environmental Access Course had links with other access and
design organisations promoting inclusive design including the
European Institute for Design and Disability and organisations
in North America.

The Centre for Accessible Environments (formerly the Centre

on Design for the Handicapped) has for many years been pro-
ducing pamphlets and developing courses in user orientated
design. Socially orientated courses were also held earlier than
the AA – Greenwich University and later Leeds.

Later courses sprang up in Belfast, Bristol, Dublin, Newcastle,

Reading, Salford and Singapore. All these courses look at the
issue from slightly different angles. They had been better fun-
ded than the AA had been able to do and I do not think any
attempted to integrate the subject within a five-year architectu-
ral education system.

The course had intended to get different professions on board

and sometimes succeeded in this; however, some professions
such as architecture were not as forthcoming as for instance
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 141
for Inclusive Design, UK

occupational therapy. Possibly, although it is not possible to be

sure, the feeling was that architects did not need to be taught by
and alongside disabled people, whilst Occupational Therapy
liked the idea of being in a School of Architecture once a week.
But it was agreed that the course was not meeting its multi-cul-
tural idea whilst most of the students came from one discipline.
So it ceased to operate. Also it had always been very difficult to
get funding for students on the course at an independent school
of Architecture. This sadly meant that the only interventions
that could be made would have to be in the mainstream course
itself. The problem here was one of the buildings themselves,
which still did not have a lift and no proper access from the
front to the back of the building without being lifted. The buil-
dings are all historic and listed Grade I and are in London’s
finest Georgian Square, so changes to them are not easy to
contrive.

Inclusive Design
The British Institute for Design and Disability was founded at
the AA in 1995 and is one of a European network under the
umbrella of the European Institute for Design and Disability.
But the AA Prospectus was talking about inclusive design by
then, and mirrors the change of the British Institute to the
United Kingdom Institute for Inclusive Design (UKIID) in
1998 once the membership (half of which are disabled people)
was allowed to vote. The organisation was therefore taking
notice that it is not disability that is a problem but the disabling
nature of much design. (“Bad Environmental Design Disables
far more than any Medical Condition” – Elspeth Morrison AA
News Spring 1993.)

This philosophy was seen as the way forward and encouraged

membership from all sections of society (UKIID’s membership
doubled) interested in the notion that an inclusive society can-
not exist unless the design of the environment is also inclusive.
This principle was to seen apply to the design of buildings,
infrastructure, building and consumer products.

On June 2000 in London’s Docklands UKIID held the first con-

ference on Inclusive Design, which was attended by twelve
countries outside the UK. This was an opportunity to show the
positive efforts in this sphere in the United Kingdom and cove-
red regulations, domestic products, housing, transport and, fun-
damental to all, education. The 1995 Disability Discrimination
142 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Act and the extension to Part M or our Building Regulations to

give a general accessible standard to all new housing is giving
architectural practices a spur of an interest in a more rounded
approach to design. Similar user orientated notions are influen-
cing thinking at design schools.

Last year Reading changed the name of its MSc from “Non-han-
dicapping Environments” to “Inclusive Environments” and now,
encouraged by former AA student Amanda Gibberd, the Pretoria
School of Architecture is likely to introduce Inclusive Design.

Proposed MA
Now the School, under Mohsen Mostafavi, has asked that the
subject is approached again and once again I have asked that an
MA is introduced dealing with Inclusive Design. I have been
pushing for this since 1996 and at last it may be possible to do
it. Also the President of the Association, Nicholas Grimshaw,
has pledged the Association to install a lift and make conside-
rable alterations to make the buildings accessible. It will then be
possible to teach on an equal footing and participate in the
juries and activities of the school.

Whilst a course can be established which fits into the mechanisms

for the MAs currently provided in the School it means that it
must, at a School of Architecture, include more than just debate
and architectural propositions. It does mean that other professions
will need to be there on such a course to instruct and be taught.

This is very difficult for the profession to understand. It must

practically relate to the users and be tested and it must be broad
in scope and be constantly developing. Part of that development
I hope will be with other institutions and also with the under-
graduate school as there is a need to develop curricula which
can be modified to the particular requirements of different
schools of architecture and design. The issue is too important
to be seen as just a specialist exercise but a fundamental change
in the way design is taught at all levels.

Society still remains largely ignorant of the needs of users. It

must be acknowledged that certain non-disabled people have
put much energy into reform of the system. But there are others
eager to jump on the bandwagon in their professional capacity.
They are well funded and well placed to get their organisation’s
views across at gatherings across the globe. Only a few token
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 143
for Inclusive Design, UK

disabled people manage to get funding to participate in such

decision-making exercises which are fundamental to change.
Civil Rights legislation would provide a move towards some
recognition of this problem but very little of this is in place.
And much of this is inadequate.

The paucity in numbers of disabled participants and graduates

in design education is only a reflection of the lack of integration
in society generally. Diversity is still considered a threat.
Curricula need to ensure that students will not have to pursue
their design education without coming into contact with those
for whom they are supposed to be designing.

Appendix 1
1997 Extract From AA School’s Annual
Projects Review
Complementary Studies
ENVIRONMENTAL ACCESS
This department co-ordinates the Environmental Access
Programme throughout the Graduate and Undergraduate
School. Awareness of societal and technical changes has encou-
raged the School to take an active part on this issue. The desire
is that the social and technical issues raised can be fed back into
the unit work. This is increasingly seen to be the case.

UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE PROGRAMME

The AA set the Environmental Access Course, the first qualifi-
cation in this subject from any institution in January 1993. This
is its fourth year and again there was welcome participation
from architects from overseas. This work is now being develo-
ped in mainstream architectural teaching of the School and into
current social changes relating to disability, race, gender and
sustainability which must have an impact on design.

This year too there were offerings in the First, Second and Third
Years and an evening lecture series free and open to the public
and accessible to bring inclusive design to the widest possible
audience.

The principle aim is to bring together those involved in the

planning, design and implementation necessary to create an
environment accessible to all and so promote, in terms of
144 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

architecture and design, a less hostile, more inclusive environ-

ment. The course is designed to be multi-disciplinary as like
architecture itself the Access Issue does not fit within the tight
confines of a single profession. Integrated with this basic prin-
ciple, people who are directly affected by a disabling environ-
ment in terms of gender, race and disability are naturally
included as students, educators and innovators.

Course Requirements
An essay is required by students in the first terms, followed by
several audits in the second. These consisted of the pairing of
the students to look at aspects of access within the AA – such as
approach, horizontal and vertical access and measurements of
sound and light, followed by a complete audit of a building of
their choice. This work was assessed by the Programme
Director. A thesis was completed in the third term and assessed
together with notebooks and reports by the External Examiners.

The Students
This year most of the students were non-disabled people and
mostly women. There were participants from Jersey and Japan.

The Course
AUTUMN TERM
Week 1–2: Introduction and Induction Course
Week 3: All Day Event at IBM. Profit by Design
Conference – First public meeting of the British
Institute for Design and Disability.
Week 4: Do Deaf People Need Architects? and Participating
Practices 1
Week 5–6: Access needs of visually impaired people 1 and 2,
Access to Information, Education Conference in
Mainz, Site Visit (S. John’s Wood Adventure
Playground), Participating Practices 2
Week 7: Perceptions of Space – all day event. Race, gender,
sight, sound, mobility and cognition. Participating
Practices 3, Access Proposals for Oval House
Week 8: Oval House – feedback. Hand in Essay 1.
Discussion on thesis titles. Participating Practices 4
– Access Proposals for the Royal Festival Hall and
proposals for S. John’s Wood Adventure
Week 9: What Every Architect Should Know About
Wheelchairs. Participating Practices 5 –
Accommodating Diversity. Improving Access
Through Consultation
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 145
for Inclusive Design, UK

Week 10: Assignment 1 – Hand In. Rôle of the Access

Committee for England and the Access Officer. The
Taxi You Told Us You Wanted – London Taxis
International on the design of the world’s most
advanced and user friendly taxi. Review of First
Year Access Assignments and presentations by
invited students

SPRING TERM
Week 1: Access Needs of Ambulant Disabled. Australian
Perspective. Design Questionnaire Feedback
Week 2: The Art of Lying Down. The Big Issue; Accessible
Housing. General Studies Third Year Option &
Graduate Students Seminar. Disability & the Media
Week 3: Assignment 2: Access Audit. Access Auditing,
Building Regulations, Consultation. Technical
Studies Seminar/Option: The Art of Lying Down &
Do Deaf People Need Architects?
Week 4: Barcelona Conference, Design for All. Civil Rights.
Technical Studies Seminar
Week 5: Products You Can & Cannot Use. Participating
Practices 6. Students Seminar; Access to Historic
Buildings 1. Technical Studies Seminar. Disability
& the City
Week 6: Public Transport to Your Front Door. Nothing to
Fear? Trust & Respect in Urban Communities.
Technical Studies Seminar. People and their
Environments – Simon Richardson
Week 7: What People See – Project Rainbow Colour &
Contrast. Insurance Claims and Housing
Assessments – Andrew Walker
Week 8: All Day Visit – Greenwich via Canary Wharf & the
Greenwich Tunnel, National Maritime Museum site
visit to Nepture Hall Project with Keith Page of
Bovis.
Week 9: The Americans with Disabilities Act – Eight Years
On. Access to Historic Buildings 2 Participating
Practices 7 – Access to Historic Buildings 3 –
Winchester Project and Portland College
Competition
Week 10: The Accessible Office. Design & Materials for
Permanent & Temporary Ramps
Week 11: All Day Visit to Coventry – The Accessible Factory
Floor – London Taxis International with MD Jevon
Thorpe & lunch
146 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

SUMMER TERM
Week 1: Accessible Housing. Regent Square WC1 – access
improvements? Accessible house on four levels.
Week 3: Going it Alone, Housing without a grant. Housing
Adaptations. Visit – Building Centre
Week 4: Assignment 2 – Student presentations. The
Redevelopment of Sadlers Wells – design, informa-
tion & management practices – Judy Monahan with
committee members
Week 6: Transport – the implementation of radical change in
the run up to the formation of the Greater London
Authority. How Discrimination is Inherent in Design
Week 7: Assignment 2 – Assessments. Access to Housing &
Arts Venues, Measurement & Monitoring. Access to
the Countryside 1
Week 8: Access to the Countryside 2. National Trust and
Access Policy. What is Tripscope – easy access to
travel arrangements for anyone who has difficulty in
getting about.
Week 9: Thesis Submission. Railtack Strategy – Stations to
suit passengers as well as management. Career
Changes after the EA Course
Week 10: All Day Visit: Richard Attenborough Centre,
Leicester University
Week 11: Interviews and Assessment of students’ work with
examiners. Appraisal of EA course by students, and
examiners

In addition in the Summer Term, five evening lectures were

held under the title Inclusive Design. They were free and open
to the public, to publicise the notion of inclusive design. Sign
language interpreters and an induction loop were available at all
public lectures.

Ian Taylor Are you feeling comfortable? Issues in

Inclusive Design
Ken Worpole Does Inclusive mean Universal? –
Public Spaces and Public Goods
Deirdre Candlin
and Diane Haigh Incremental Access at the Royal
Festival Hall
Rob Imrie Beyond the Barriers to Inclusion in the
Built Environment
Jevon Thorpe The Creation of an Accessible Taxi –
The TXI and its Future Evolution
 Andrew Walker
United Kingdom Institute Developments Towards Inclusive Design Teaching 147
for Inclusive Design, UK

Appendix
2 Definition of Inclusive Design
Inclusive design is design which can be used regardless of age,
gender or disability.

United Kingdom Institute for Inclusive Design (UkiiD)

“Promoting and developing a culture of inclusion through
design and its application”

UKIID’s purpose
UKiiD is an organisation of and for anyone with an interest in
design. The keystone of our work is to promote design which is
inclusive – which can be used regardless of age, gender or
disability.

Core values
– defining how design can meet the needs of as many people as
possible
– designing buildings, transport, products and services to meet
the needs of people with a range of disabilities so that
they are easier to use, by everybody
– celebrating the culture of diversity through inclusion not
exclusion
– ensuring usability and æsthetics are mutually compatible

Core activities
– creating a culture and attitude founded on inclusive design
– providing information on examples of good practice in inclu-
sive design
– providing practical information for design and other diverse
professions on all aspects of disability
– providing information on how to ensure design meet inclu-
sive principles
– publishing a newsletter covering trends, activities and legisla-
tion
– running seminars about relevant issues

Agreed by the Board 14 March 2001

148 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 149
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus

1.7 Architects of
Tomorrow, Accessibility of
the Future – Teaching
Accessibility at the School
of Architecture in Aarhus
Prof. Poul Østergaard, Aarhus School of Architecture

Background
Statutory requirements in Denmark demand unequivocally that
all construction must be accessible and must accommodate
everybody. This has been the Danish parliament’s response to
the United Nations’ Standard Rules on the Equalization of
Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities. The accessibility
requirements are laid down in the building regulations 19954.

Basis for the course

The slogans “Universal Design”, “Design for All” and “Barrier
Free Design” are used in the headlines of publications, national
and international conferences and seminars on disabilities. The
philosophy behind the headlines may be well enough understood,
but the terms are often unworkable in practice. Even “Universal
Design” and “Design for All” must at least to some extent be
based on standards, which in turn rest on notions of normality, i. e.
majorities, which exclude large minorities. Clothing and tools for
personal use must by necessity be designed to fit individual needs.
“Barrier free design” is and will be an empty phrase. The built
environment obviously has barriers, but many buildings are never-
theless in some way accessible for people with reduced mobility.

The term “accessibility” is a better term for the desire to make

products that can be used by the largest possible number of
4 Documents complementing the building regulations have been published
by central authorities and the organisations for the disabled. In addition,
several ministries have produced action plans, aiming to improving the
conditions whereby disabled people can participate in society. There is,
consequently, an endless number of publications, which architects and the
construction industry must know and observe.
150 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

people. The term gives sufficient room for designers to weigh

up how and in which ways disabled people best can gain access
to all that modern society has to offer its members. As a matter
of course, everybody should be able to access and enjoy the
“soft values” in buildings and spaces. In addition to easy entry,
signage and information should be easy to understand.

However, accessibility does not only concern the built environ-

ment. It extends for instance also to modern forms of communi-
cation, which, by means of text, sound, symbols or pictograms
should be easy to understand. Accessibility is comfort for the
many, necessity for the few.

Accessible architecture
The starting point for “accessible architecture” is the basic
human need to manage the activities of daily life without the
help of others. The term arises from the particular conside-
rations that have to be made when planning for people with dis-
abilities: fundamentally that architects and designers can create
architecture and products which enrich and engage the indivi-
dual user. This however, requires that the designer possesses
knowledge about our physical capabilities.

If accessibility is assessed by means of “graded criteria”, the

requirements can be rated on a scale from “decisive” to “essen-
tial” and “suitable”. It is for instance “decisive” that a person in
a manual wheelchair can negotiate differences of level – by
means of ramps or slopes with a maximum gradient of 1:20.
For wheelchair users to open doors, 0,5m unobstructed floor
space at the door handle is “essential”. And it is “suitable” to
have a grab bar at the centre of the door, so that a wheelchair
user can close it easily.

The international accessibility symbol must of course be respected.

When, for instance, the symbol is found on the doors to public toi-
lets, in hotel brochures and in public transport, one would naturally
expect unobstructed access and circulation for people with im-
paired mobility. The symbol does not, however, guarantee optimal
conditions. The author has over the years visited numerous public
facilities marked with the accessibility symbol. These visits have
disclosed that toilets, which meet the needs of wheelchair users, are
an exception rather than the rule. This again means that the symbol
is misleading. Even the tiniest of details may be decisive as regards
the chance of managing without help.
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 151
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus

Allowing for human diversity

Human beings can only become “whole” in an environment that
appeals to personal development and can only achieve self-
respect in an inspiring intercourse with others. There is in other
words a need for a democratic architecture which promotes
individual activity and intercourse, and which assists and
enhances human sensibilities.

Particular/general
Adding accessibility to the other basic aspects of functional
architecture, it is possible to achieve a set of active rules for the
interplay between the participants. These rules can in some
respects turn the users’ limitations into inspiring ways of
thinking and experiencing, and thereby add something to the
architecture which is at once special and general.

Accessibility theme-days
Architectural education in Denmark is the responsibility of the
Department of Culture. The ministry’s “Plan of action for
disabled people’s access to culture” from 1999 states: “The
Ministry of Culture has started negotiations with the schools of
architecture about achieving a better awareness of disabilities
and architecture among the students.”

Effective from September 1st 2000, the negotiations have

changed the course descriptions at the two schools of architec-
ture in Denmark. The change has meant that by the end of the
second part of the course, all students must have received
learning and attained knowledge – through projects – about
accessibility for disabled people and other special needs groups.

The Aarhus School of Architecture has organised obligatory acces-

sibility “theme-days” for students every year since 1995/96. The
object of the theme-days is to familiarise the students with functio-
nal requirements and considerations that must be observed when
planning and designing the built environment, thus influencing the
students’ regard for people towards a realisation that architects can
contribute to alleviate the consequences of disabilities.

About 200 students take part in the theme-days, attending

lectures and field trips confronting them with the problems of
accessibility in the built environment. The theme-days are orga-
nised in periods of 2x2 days, with about 100 students at a time.
152 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

The program may have the following main subjects:

Day one morning session, lectures:
a) “Accessibility for better or for worse”; slides and the CD-
ROM Handicap, Architecture and design
b) “Accessibility crosswise”; a blind person and a wheelchair
user as lecturers
c) “Visions in practical terms”; detached house for a
wheelchair user (architect and owner)

Day one afternoon session, field trips:

The students are divided into groups of four and given a manual
wheelchair or simulation glasses. One group member plays the
part of a disabled person; one performs the role of helper; the
remaining two are observers, taking notes, making sketches or
taking photographs.

Architecture students doing fieldwork as preparation to the thesis subject “A

bathroom for disabled”. The project later formed the basis for the develop-
ment of “Pressalit Multi System. Pressalit A/S Ry. Design Hanne Rasmussen.
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 153
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus

Following a detailed plan, the groups are sent on field trips in

Aarhus and its environs. They may visit dwellings, shopping
centres, shops, restaurants, museums, theatres, town halls etc.
Some groups are required to use public transport to reach their
destinations. Upon arrival, they meet a young, disabled person,
who, acting as a consultant, describes his/her experience of
using the city and its buildings.

Day two, morning session, reports:

Each group puts together a poster giving a synopsis of their experi-
ences from the field trip. The poster is part of a report which is dis-
tributed to all students. The pedagogical reason for this part of the
exercise is to train the students in visual and written presentations.

Day two, afternoon session, lectures and discussions:

a) Group presentations
b) Planning accessible architecture, two lectures by practising
architects
c) Panel discussion run by the organisations for the disabled

Planning the theme days is obviously demanding. Some 40

wheelchairs and a suitable number of simulation glasses have to
be borrowed or rented from the local authority’s centre for tech-
nical aids, and appointments have to be made with suitably
knowledgeable and interesting lecturers and consultants whom
the students can approach for assistance in other projects.

Evaluation of the theme days

In the students’ evaluations of the theme days, the field trips are
seen as particularly useful. Playing the role of a disabled person
gives real insight into how architects can contribute to lessen the
difficulties disabled people encounter at home and in the outside
world. The theme days also contribute to combat prejudice about
disabled people, and the students achieve a realistic attitude to
the subject; their shyness is questioned and worked upon.

The experience gained from the theme days are often integrated
as a vital part of a project. Later on in the course, some choose
to continue working with accessibility issues, whether as a main
subject for a particular term or as thesis. This holds true both
for students of architecture and design. Examples of thesis sub-
jects from 2000/01 are “Communal living for young people
with handicaps”, “Dwelling for the third age”, “The accessible
opera house”, “Communal living for mentally disabled”,
“Easier use of bathrooms for mobility impaired people”.
154 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Thesis project for a collapsible walking frame.

Line Ubbesen, Department of Industrial Design,
1999.
The development of the frame aspired to achieve a
design in which both shape and materials will
break down possible “human barriers” for its use.
The frame has three types of breaks: One slows
down the effect of the frame’s dead weight on slo-
ping ground, another can be used to varying
degrees while walking, and the third is used for
parking, while the user rests on the seat. The roomy
basket underneath the seat is for handbags and for
shopping, and acts to stabiles the entire construc-
tion. The frame was awarded 3rd prize in the plas-
tics industry’s international design competition.
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 155
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus
156 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

Competitions
The two schools of architecture have organised competitions
funded by the Ministry of Culture. The first was held in 1998,
around the theme “Accessibility to culture – the city as the
arena for culture”. The object was amongst others:
– to create spaces and places which offer everybody, including
disabled people, opportunities for activities and participation
in the cultural life of the city.
– to develop innovations, visions and proposals for architecture
and design for everybody
– to influence public debate and direct attention towards archi-
tectural quality and user demands
– to differentiate questions of human values and develop he
notions of normality
– to create a dialogue between disabled people/user organisati-
ons and architects/schools of architecture

33 proposals were submitted, receiving the following comment

from the panel of judges: “The best proposals show that atten-
tion to accessibility requirements cannot on its own lead to bet-
ter design of access and interiors, but can add richness to the
ways architecture is experienced and new architectural types.”

The submissions included subjects like:

– City, area and local meeting points
– Historic edifices in the landscape
– Dwellings in the city
– Design, information technology and Cyberspace as keys to
culture

The first prize of DKK 50000 was awarded a project titled

“Access to Nature – The Museum for World Culture in
Gothenburg”. Projects which kept strictly to the main theme of
the competition received another four awards.

The other competition, titled “Dwelling for the Future”, was

announced in September 2000 in collaboration with the Danish
Building and Research Institute. Invitations for participation
were issued to students at the School of Architecture at the
Academy of Fine Arts, the School of Architecture in Aarhus,
Denmark’s Shcool of Design and the Kolding Shool of Design.
The intention is that the students from different schools shall
work together in teams.
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 157
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus

The main aim of the competition is to develop visionary and

practical solutions for dwellings for the future, stressing sustai-
nability and accessibility, with the actual construction of the
scheme – a 1:1 prototype of a city dwelling for the future,
focussing on the two themes as the end result. To inspire the
participants, a variety of specialists have given lectures at semi-
nars at the four schools. Deadline for submissions was May 31st
2001. DKK 100,000 have been set aside for prizes.

Other initiatives at the School of

Architecture in Aarhus
Aarhus School of Architecture has organised a course in acces-
sibility for architects in practice. The object of the course was to
inspire the participants to take the accessibility requirements
into account while at the drawing board (or the computer). At
the same time, the participants received necessary insight and
tools to handle the statutes requiring that the city as well as its
spaces and buildings should be accessible to everybody.

The course came about as a result of a demand from the

Ministry for Cities and Housing that the local authorities must
observe the accessibility requirements. The Ministry has pre-
scribed that issues relating to impaired mobility, seeing, hearing
and understanding must receive particular attention in all new
construction. The prescription also demands that dimensional
requirements are observed and that exemptions are kept to a
minimum5.

The course corresponded in principle with the theme days, but

greater stress was put on statutory accessibility requirements.
As on the theme days, participants were sent on field trips,
using wheelchairs, which they experienced as useful in their
professional practice. One of the subjects in the concluding
discussion, was how architects can contribute to the assistance
our society offers disabled people, without jeopardising archi-
tectural quality.

5 On the subject of accessibility requirements, the then Minister for

Cities and Housing wrote in the Ministry’s newsletter: «I have a vision
that we will, in the future, be able to market Denmark as the country
where accessibility in the built environment is a matter of course. This
will not be done over night. To reach this goal we have to surf ahead
using easily understandable information and goal oriented political
initiatives, and follow through with sensible statutes.
158 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

The research project ”the Multifunctional Kitchen” consists of four scena-

rios detailing how a kitchen may be designed and adapted in line with
changing user demands over time. The figure shows scenario no 4 in an
old person’s home adapted for a wheelchair user. Design: Lone
Kobberholm Storgaard. 2000.

For the corner of the kitchen table, carrousel cupboards that can be ele-
vated have been developed. The cupboards can be reached by people who
are standing or sitting.
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 159
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus

The sink is specially made from the heat resisting material Corean, to
avoid burns on thighs. Note especially the edge-mounted tap. The dish
washing machine is placed at a height where it is accessible both by whe-
elchair users and people who are standing.

Accessibility as an area of special

concern
The multifunctional kitchen
The school management decided in 1996 that accessibility
should be given emphasis as a field of research at the Aarhus
school of architecture. One result has been a Ph.D. scholarship
on the “Multifunctional kitchen – an investigation into and
experiments with special needs”.
160 UNIVERSAL design Part 1 Europe

The research project starts form the following hypothesis: A pro-

duct in which function and deliberate design forms a higher unity
will have qualities that lie beyond what is immediately visible
and expected. The product will therefore possess a number of
merits making it well functioning and eminently suitable in condi-
tions that go a lot further than its intended common usage and
functional value. The aim of the project is to develop multifuncti-
onal products, which people with small or large disabilities can
use easily and without limitations. Through theory and practice,
the dissertation sought to test the hypothesis in the real world.

The dissertation was approved in December 2000 and gives a

number of concrete proposals for the thoughtful adaptation of a
kitchen to the needs of self-sufficient wheelchair users. A cen-
tral feature of the project is a full-scale prototype, which has
been adapted for a young female wheelchair user. The disserta-
tion also contains a series of recommendations for architects,
designers and manufacturers when developing new products6.

Accessibility handbook
Another initiative at the Aarhus School of Architecture is an
ongoing research project which will result in a handbook on
accessibility. The object of this project is to publish information
about planning and design of the physical environment in rela-
tion to the needs of disabled people. The information is being
prepared and presented in such a way that it can be used
directly, with no need for complex deliberations. It is intended
for use in architects’ offices and for others that are involved in
building and construction as well as for local authority building
and planning departments.

The information will be given in written form as well as draw-

ings and photographs, showing how accessibility may be
achieved for persons with temporary or permanent disabilities.
The requirements in the building code are the basis for the
proposals. The research effort of this project consists of collect-
ing and arranging systematically material that may influence
architectural and planning norms. The project may be seen as a
departure from traditional programming, which rests on the
dimensions and capabilities of the fully functioning adult
person, as depicted by Leonardo da Vinci and le Corbusier.

6 The dissertation, including a synopsis in English is written by Lone

Kobberholm Storgaard, Ph.D., and is available on loan from the library
at the Aarhus School of Architecture.
 Poul Østergaard
Aarhus School of Architects of Tomorrow, Accessibility of the Future – 161
Architecture, Denmark Teaching Accessibility at the school of Architecture in Aarhus

Handicap, Architecture and Design is available both in MC and PC versi-

ons. Author Poul Østergaard, Aarhus School of Architecture. 1996

The handbook is directed towards practising architects. It will

present essential accessibility requirements, including drawings,
photos and written comments showing good and bad examples
of how architects have produced solutions to accessibility pro-
blems. The handbook is planned for release in the autumn of
2001 and is a development of the CD-ROM Handicap,
Architecture and Design (HA&D), which the author of this arti-
cle has produced. The CD-ROM has about 1000 sequences,
which by means of film, animations, drawings and sound show
some of the difficulties handicapped people may meet inside
and outside the home, and which architects can alleviate during
the design stage. HA&D is a planning tool for architects and
others who are involved with the shaping of the physical sur-
roundings of daily life. A revised version of the CD-ROM will
be available as an appendix to the accessibility handbook. The
CD-ROM is available in Danish, English, Japanese and
Portugese.7

7 Handicap, Architecure and Design is published by Christian Ejlers’ for-

lag, P.O. box 2228 Copenhagen K. e-mail: lieber@[Link]
 162

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Edward S
New York 163

Part 2
North America
164 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 165
Buffalo, New York, USA

2.1 Universal Designing

Edward Steinfeld, Arch. D. Professor of Architecture, and Beth
Tauke, M.F.A. Associate Professor of Architecture, School of
Architecture and Planning, State University of New York at
Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, U.S.A.

Introduction
The origins of barrier free or accessible design lie in the field of
rehabilitation. After World War II, the practice of rehabilitation
was successful enough that physicians and therapists were able
to provide many people with severe disabilities enough func-
tion, skills and technology for them to accomplish activities of
daily living independently. But, they discovered that the envi-
ronment outside the rehabilitation center was not conducive to
independent living by their “clients” without modification –
removal of barriers to mobility.

Barrier free design is based on a therapeutic philosophy. The

objective is to intervene in the environment so that people with
disabilities can be more independent. It is primarily a top-down
approach based on a regulatory model.

Universal Design, however, is concerned with more than just

removal of barriers. It seeks to eliminate discrimination by
design and support full social participation for all members of
society. There are two underlying assumptions in this idea. The
first is that all people can benefit from improved function, not
just people with disabilities. The second is that social partici-
pation requires respect and avoidance of stigma. Thus, unlike
barrier free design, which is concerned solely with benefits for
a specific group of people, Universal Design is concerned with
the benefits for the entire population. And, unlike the purely
functional goals of accessible design, Universal Design is
concerned with how the appearance of things affects social
perceptions. Ultimately, Universal Design sets its sights beyond
breaking physical barriers to include the redefinition of disable-
ment as a universal condition, a condition of difference that we
all share (Wijk, 1997).
166 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Breaking barriers
Above: Tearing apart the Berlin Wall, Photo courtesy Fredrick Rahm
([Link]
Below: Photo, Edward Steinfeld

Many would argue that universal design education should

include a focus on therapeutic intervention. But, there is
another equally important tradition in education that has not
been acknowledged sufficiently. This second tradition origi-
nated in the humanities and the social sciences rather than the
professions of environmental design and rehabilitation. While
the practitioners of barrier free design were developing their
technical knowledge base, the proponents of disability rights in
other disciplines were trying to understand how social and
cultural conditions are related to disability and how they
influence attitudes, values and practices in society. Their work,
which has come to be called “Disability Studies”, is a cultural
critique that views disability as socially defined rather than
solely a function of impairment. By extension, the experience
of disability and the social response to it involves far more than
a concern for function.
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 167
Buffalo, New York, USA

Universal Design, in fact, emerged through a cultural critique.

The need to design environments to be accessible to and usable
by people with disabilities was viewed by second generation
proponents including some, like Ron Mace and Ruth Hall
Lusher in the United States, who were both trained as architects
and had disabilities themselves, as a symptom of a broad failure
of society to incorporate disability into its consciousness. Their
argument was that if disability is perceived as a “normal” part
of life – something that could happen to any of us – then the
material world would be designed to accommodate it without
the need for a political movement or professional specialty.
Accessibility and usability, they argued, should be a goal of
design right from the start. Every designer should be able to
design an environment that will benefit everyone, not just
temporarily able-bodied people.

This view of Universal Design as a cultural critique is very

exciting for design education because the form of pedagogy
most emphasized in the design professions is criticism. Nothing
is sacred in a design critique. Students are encouraged through-
out their academic career to develop skills of critical thinking.
Faculty in the design disciplines are experts at criticism. But,
Universal Design is too often presented as a therapeutic inter-
vention or as an ideological campaign, two approaches that are
not received in a positive way in our postmodern academic
culture. The popularity of the Principles of Universal Design
(Connel, et al. 1997) as a pedagogic framework and “attitudinal
change” as a focus of introductions to Universal Design are
examples of this emphasis. The prescriptive nature of the
Principles adopts the stance of therapy and the focus on attitude
change is a form of ideological indoctrination.

To persuade our peers in academia and our students to recog-

nize the value of Universal Design, we must develop a reflec-
tive pedagogy that not only retains the original critical focus of
universal design as a philosophy but also involves self-criticism
to uncover the significant intellectual foundation behind the
ideology and also the limitations in the ideology itself. A reflec-
tive perspective on the concept of Universal Design, in particu-
lar, will help us to understand how others perceive our own
work and help us develop more effective educational pedago-
gies and practices. We hope that such pedagogies will engage
our very best students and convince them not only to practice
Universal Design, but perhaps also to become Universal Design
educators themselves.
168 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

In the rest of this chapter, we present three critiques. The first

will examine the de-institutionalization movement of the
1970’s, the first attempt to use social policy to accomplish
social integration of people with disabilities, using ideas of
symbolic interactionism, a philosophical movement associated
with George Herbert Mead and the Chicago School. The second
will examine the genesis of universal design in the barrier free
design movement through the lens of formal rationalization, a
theory developed by the German sociologist, Max Weber. The
third will turn our attention to universal design itself using a
critique that focuses on the utopian nature of the movement
using the ideas of Sir Thomas More and Ruth Levitas. Each
argument will identify pedagogical approaches to make the
study of universal design intellectually stimulating and rewar-
ding as part of a general design education.

Through the Looking Glass

We mold things in our images: they, in their turn, shape us by
the resistance they offer when we try to impose our own
personal form on them. (David Harvey 1989)

The Symbolic Interactionist school in philosophy developed a

perspective on self and society that led to the contemporary
notion of social construction. George Herbert Mead (1934)
argued that shared meanings evolve through social interaction.
Society can be understood as a symbolic representation of that
interaction. One’s sense of self, or a group’s shared sense of
self, evolves from interaction with others and through an inter-
nal interaction in which we imaginatively take the role of the
“other”. Charles Cooley called this process “The Looking Glass
Self ” (1902).

From this perspective, the relationship of material culture

(architecture, products, vehicles, communication systems,
media, etc.) to social life is characterized by reciprocity.
Material culture is a physical order that, on one hand, reflects
the social order. On the other hand, material culture also pre-
scribes a social order. Physical artifacts not only tell us much
about the way a social system works, but they make it work in
specific ways. One example is the cellular telephone. The popu-
larity of these devices throughout the world symbolically
reflects a global culture that puts great value on instantaneous
communication. At the same time, this culture (including the
technology) enables the increasing interconnectedness of
people throughout the world.
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 169
Buffalo, New York, USA

There are many examples of such reciprocity. A plan of any

building, for example, gives us insight into which group of
people in the inhabiting organization has the most power, and, it
also channels social behavior in ways that can enforce or
counteract the power of specific inhabitants. The allocation of
land in a community demonstrates the value placed on different
activities such as recreation or education. It also affects how
residents will utilize the community for those purposes. The
appearance of automobiles connotes the differences in the
status or lifestyles of their owners but it also contributes to
social interaction patterns, e.g. who is attracted to whom, con-
firming those differences. The relationship of design to be-
havior is not, of course, completely deterministic but there is no
denying that material culture plays an important role.

Given this reciprocal relationship, it is no surprise that social

change is reflected by changes in our material world, and that
changes in the material world contribute to the progress of
social change itself. In cultures where traditions are strong and
change is slow, we find many enduring patterns or material
culture with a particularly clear and homogeneous formal lang-
uage, both in vocabulary and syntax (see, for example, Hillier
and Hanson, 1984). But, many other less consistent examples
are also represented in the historical record. Where change is
particularly rapid and complex, the established and new orders
exist side by side. Thus, today we find people using cell phones
in places where the predominant material culture is pre-
industrial and small illegal radio stations finding niches within
content space neglected by the media giants.

The essence of universal design is to enable, through changes in

material culture, more competence, independence and social
integration through design, especially to previously disadvanta-
ged groups. There is at least one historical precedent for this
endeavor. Hayden (1981) described the emergence of the
material feminist movement in the mid 1800’s. Early feminists
recognized the relationship between the domestic environment
and the status of women. They argued that the nuclear house-
hold was supported by the unpaid domestic work of women.
They further argued that the burden of such work, which, at the
time, was far greater than today, segregated women and kept
them from taking a leadership role in community life. Adopting
an industrial model, they showed how homes could be designed
to be more efficient and housework could be mechanized with
labor saving devices in order to free women from this burden
170 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

and give them the time to pursue other vocations. Further, they
invented new social organizations and building types to house
them that would provide a significant community role. One of
their ideas was removing the activities of food preparation from
the home. Community kitchens would be substituted where
women would work for pay and provide the meals for a whole
neighborhood.

Many ideas promoted by the material feminists eventually

found their way into the mainstream, for example, take-out
food, vacuum cleaners and housecleaning services. However,
the liberation prophesized by the material feminist theorists did
not come to pass in the way they expected. While most women
are now in the workforce and are increasingly taking on lea-
dership roles in the community and the absolute burden of
domestic work for women in industrial societies has been
reduced, that has not necessarily brought them into an equal
partnership with men with respect to who does the housework,
nor have they yet achieved equality in the workplace outside the
home.

The policy to eliminate residential institutions for people with

disabilities and replace them with small scale, community
residences has surprising parallels to the material feminist
movement. De-institutionalization sought to liberate people
with a disability from the status of a disadvantaged minority by
altering the physical environment to reduce dependence and
stigma and increase equal opportunity of access to community
resources. And, as with the material feminist movement, things
did not turn out quite the way that the proponents of these ideas
originally expected. Examining these results can uncover some
interesting implications for universal design education.

The transformation of the institution was guided by «normali-

zation theory» (Wolfensberger, 1972). The perception of social
difference, argued normalization theorists, was the root cause of
the social problems related to disability. Disability was, in fact,
a social construction of the 19th century. They argued that if
people with disabilities are treated as individuals who have
differences, rather than a class of people who are different, their
specific needs could be addressed through a more humane
approach. Thus, in the design of facilities for the new commu-
nity-based organizations, «normal» environments were (and
are) mandated. The definition of “normal” has both program-
matic and aesthetic components because the appearance of
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 171
Buffalo, New York, USA

one’s living environment can be stigmatizing, setting up social

distance between people with disabilities and the rest of the
population.

The historical association of disability and social difference

(defined as “deviance”) with institutions created strong
symbolic content in architectural forms. Perhaps the most
obvious characteristic of institutions is their scale. They are
always much larger than other residential building types. Even a
modular organization (e.g., cottages) fails to mask their actual
size. The highly repetitive and regular appearance of institutions
was generated by beliefs in the ability of order in architecture to
imbue order in human minds and social behavior (Rothman,
1971). It persists as an institutional aesthetic. The institution has
a characteristic spatial syntax that reflects its emphasis on
social control. Visual exposure is high and privacy is low.
Circulation patterns are generally more hierarchical and direc-
ted than in non-institutional settings.

Normalizing an environment, then, includes not only the deve-

lopment of a «non-institutional» aesthetic i.e., informal as
opposed to regular, small scale as opposed to large, and roofs
similar to the prevailing norms in the surrounding context, but
also, a spatial syntax that creates a non-institutional experience,
e.g. culturally normative levels of privacy.

For people with disabilities severe enough (usually mental

impairments and often physical impairments as well) that they
cannot live independently in the community, group homes have
become the alternative to institutionalization. They are a form
of cooperative homemaking with a paid staff, similar in concept
to the boarding home which at one time was a prevalent form of
housing for young industrial workers of both genders (Hayden,
1981). A major difference, however, is that group homes are not
owned by a resident manager but rather by agencies or organi-
zations that manage networks of dispersed facilities.

Although principles of normalization guide the design of group

homes, in the U.S. at least, there are many factors that prevent the
complete realization of the normalization ideal. Most group
homes have 2–4 staff members present at all times, working in
shifts. They are owned and administered by state and voluntary
agencies, often the very same organizations that once operated
institutions (some still do). The cost of operating group homes is
covered by the state but, being funded by taxpayers, has its limits.
172 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Because of the perception that larger homes are more cost effi-
cient, most group homes (in the U.S.) house 6–12 people. The
residents often have both physical and mental impairments. The
normative form for a house so large in the U.S. is typically a
2–3-story structure, but the degree of disability of the residents
often precludes a multistory design. Thus these homes tend to
look very different than other homes in the immediate vicinity
because they are much larger in land coverage and longer and
lower in profile.

Different household compositions than conventional single family homes

demand a different form for group homes. The right photo demonstrates
that they don’t have to look strange and awkward.
Photos: IDEA Center

In the single family context of most American communities, the

group home requires parking for a large number of automobiles
since there needs to be enough room for two shifts of staff
(most of whom drive to work) as well as visiting professional
staff. Parking a row of 4–6 vehicles at the curb is not socially
acceptable in the low density American landscape.

There are many other physical differences between group

homes and the typical American single family home related to
different fire safety requirements, the need to supervise medica-
tions, the need to provide an efficient workplace for the staff
and, in severe climates, the need to provide a protected area for
loading and unloading wheelchair vans.

The awkward and unusual appearance of many group homes

could be avoided by devoting more resources to their construc-
tion, especially by reducing the number of occupants. However,
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 173
Buffalo, New York, USA

there is not much public support for the construction of very

expensive homes for indigent people who don’t appear to be
productive members of society. In truth, most, if not all resi-
dents of group homes are fully employed or fully engaged in
educational programs, but the public perception is different
because they do not work in “normal” occupations and are not
studying in conventional educational facilities. The lack of
resources devoted to making the group home fit more smoothly
into the social fabric of communities is an instance of recipro-
city. The social value of the residents is reflected in the physical
structure of the buildings. A social policy that commits ade-
quate resources as well as rhetoric is needed to improve the
social integration of people with severe disabilities. In the U.S.,
the current status of group homes represents the “halfway
pregnant” nature of much current social policy toward people
with disabilities. In fact, one critic called it “disabled policy”
(Berkowitz, 1987).

The contradiction between the ideals of de-institutionalization

and the reality of facilities like group homes is a fertile ground
for universal design education. It provides the opportunity to
examine the relationship between movements for social justice,
social policy and environmental design. Bringing a critical
perspective to this investigation opens up a dialogue about the
place of disability and how social policy has fallen short of the
ideal. Moreover, it is an excellent ground for examining the
nature of “normality” itself. What is “normal”? How have
notions of ‘normal’ changed throughout history and cultures?
How do scale, shape, material and other physical factors signify
normality or difference? Could the group home be a model for
other housing options? Could it become a legitimate housing
option for people without disabilities? Would that make this
house form less stigmatizing? Furthermore, the group home
can be studied as a historical evolution of the material feminist
idea. In fact, the material feminists proposed cooperative house-
keeping for the broader population as a way to reduce the bur-
den of unpaid domestic work for women. Perhaps, as housing
types evolve, e.g. senior housing or hospice housing, the group
home will be less stigmatized.

A pedagogy based on the concept of cooperative housekeeping

for people with severe disabilities as an entry point to a broader
social critique is very interesting to students and provides an
opportunity to teach a more significant lesson, one that is trans-
ferable to almost any other design project where public funds
174 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

are used to house a disadvantaged population. In fact, there are

clear parallels with housing for older people, the poor, students,
people with AIDS and victims of domestic abuse. Can housing
adopt a universal design that will accommodate people who
need significant levels of support and/or supervision? The
challenge in this question is to find housing forms that truly
embody the ideals of democracy and social justice yet meet the
specific needs of the group. This should include, in the context
of an academic exercise, examining alternatives to the social
policies, attitudes and economics of the existing order and how
those alternatives might provide a basis for a different design
response. In universal design, students should engage these
issues seriously. By doing so, their minds will be opened to
alternative social realities, not only alternative physical forms.

The Iron Cage

“Despite the advantages it offers, bureaucracy suffers from
the irrationality of rationality.” (George Ritzer, 2000)

Max Weber was a German sociologist who studied the evo-

lution of bureaucracies in societies around the world (Weber,
1921). Based on his analysis, he argued that the culture of the
Western world (today one could extend this to the increasingly
Westernized global culture) was increasingly dominated by the
values of efficiency, predictability, calculability and introduc-
tion of nonhuman technologies. He called this process ratio-
nalization and argued that bureaucracies were the best
manifestation of this process. He observed that the bureaucracy
has a tendency toward formal rationalization – the search for
the optimum means to a given end shaped by rules, regulations
and larger social structures. Weber argued that the process of
formal rationalization can lead to an “Iron Cage” of rationality
– a situation where the rationalized detail of the regulatory pro-
cess creates so many constraints that irrationality is the result.
Nothing could be a better example of this process than the regu-
latory world of barrier-free or accessible design in the U.S.

Technical knowledge is necessary to create barrier free buil-

dings. To design an effective ramp, for example, one must know
the maximum slope that can be negotiated by a severely dis-
abled individual, e.g. a person who uses a wheelchair. Those
within the design professions who had the requisite technical
knowledge in the early days of the barrier free design move-
ment during the 1950’s and early 1960’s were the architects of
rehabilitation facilities and equipment. Together with rehabilita-
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 175
Buffalo, New York, USA

tion professionals and consumer advocates, they invented the

specialty of barrier free design. The emphasis on regulatory
activity as a way to implement barrier free design in the U.S.
resulted from the general lack of technical knowledge and
interest in the subject within the design professions. Although
voluntary efforts were initiated during the early 1960’s to
encourage designers, particularly architects, to engage the issue,
it became clear by the late 1960’s that accessibility to the
environment could not be achieved on a voluntary basis.

The first Federal legislation on barrier free design, the

Architectural Barriers Act, was passed in 1968. In 1975, a
government review exposed the lack of compliance with this
law (GAO, 1975). Since then, a succession of laws and
regulations gradually expanded the types of buildings covered
and strengthened enforcement policies. In addition, the techni-
cal provisions of regulations also greatly expanded. The initial
voluntary standard was less than 10 pages (ANSI A117.1,
1961). The same standard today has almost 70 pages
(ICC/ANSI A117.1, 1998). Each step along the way, there has
been considerable resistance from the building industry and the
design professions (Steinfeld, 1977). With the advent of com-
plex regulations, legal processes and penalties, the need for
knowledge grew but it was not necessary, as in the early days,
to learn about the needs of people with disabilities directly; all
that was necessary was to learn the regulations and the process.

Although advocates, like the authors, support the regulatory

process as the only way, in the current framework, to insure that
access is provided, there is no question that the regulatory
system has evolved into an “Iron Cage.” Two examples illustrate
the problem.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has regulations that

cover all buildings constructed with Federal funding, including
housing, and another set that covers all public accommodations.
However, the agency that develops the rules that are used to
specify the technical design criteria, the U.S. Access Board, is
not mandated (i.e. therefore not allowed) to develop rules for
housing. The ADA Guidelines (1984) for public accommoda-
tions are being revised to reflect new knowledge from research
and practical experience, but the housing standards will not be
changed. There are some significant differences between the
two sets of criteria but they are, to anyone but an expert, very
difficult to find. Thus, architects are forced to use the obsolete
176 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

design criteria or follow the more up to date and improved

technical criteria and risk having their buildings cited as non-
compliant by overzealous regulators who only accept compli-
ance with a specific set of standards.

Although the U.S. Federal government develops the ADA

Guidelines, each state in the country can develop building code
requirements for accessibility for use in the state. Many states
have adopted the ADA Guidelines but many others have deve-
loped their own standards. Thus, architects and developers
working in many states have to know the differences. As each
state develops new rules that are not in the ADA, the rules tend
to be disseminated to other states and eventually find their way
into the national standards. The accessibility “industry” thrives
on adopting new rules to address the needs of specific consti-
tuencies rather than completing research on the needs and care-
fully examining the value of those rules using empirical
methods. Over time, then, the complexity of the rules has incre-
ased with questionable results in terms of improving accessibi-
lity. A serious negative backlash from the building industry
developed because of the arbitrary and confusing regulatory
situation. In fact, the detailed rules actually prohibit innovation
through universal design in many cases.

Thus, what started out as a social movement to create equal

opportunity access to resources in society has been transformed
into a bureaucratic exercise in enforcement. In the litigious
U.S., this has produced a veritable industry of accessibility
“experts” whose main technical skills are remembering the
details of the regulations and knowing how the government
interprets them. While creating employment opportunities for a
few, the regulatory environment has created an adversarial
relationship between advocates on one side and architects and
building owners and developers on the other. Moreover, it has
resulted in a situation where the design professions, both in
academia and in practice, do not look upon barrier free design
as an opportunity for creative design. The discourse of barrier
free design is basically viewed as a part of building code com-
pliance or technical problem solving. This is evident by the
general lack of aesthetic content in the literature on the subject.
Most examples of barrier free design perpetuate the cold clini-
cal look of its institutional precedents.

In general, the tendency to legislate reform can be understood,

from the public’s perspective, as a lack of trust in professionals.
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 177
Buffalo, New York, USA

In contemporary post-industrial societies, the belief in the

goodwill of an elite professional class governed by its own stan-
dards of ethics and interests is no longer operative. The history
of barrier free design suggests that the public’s mistrust may be
well founded. Few designers, (who, in the U.S., are mostly
white, temporarily able bodied males) personally identify with
the interests of people who have disabilities. The regulatory
route may be the most effective political strategy that a minority
group can use to insure the provision of basic human rights.
Through the policy-making process, advocates can appeal to
humanistic values espoused by the society as a whole. The top-
down imposition of political pressure is also much more effi-
cient and effective than trying to educate and monitor every
professional or building in every community in the country.

From the profession’s perspective, regulations represent an

intrusion on the architect’s responsibility and a demonstration
that they are losing control over the power to make design
decisions. Since the regulations constrain the way buildings
look, they also represent an attack, by outside interests, on the
«sacred» aesthetic domain of architects. Given the trends, it is
likely that future regulations will proscribe such detailed design
features as the shape of roofs on group homes and the fonts
used in signs. The shift of power and territorial infringement
has put the profession on the defensive to the point where pro-
fessional associations are just as likely to resist improving
access to buildings as they are to promote it.

Regulations in themselves, however, do not ensure social

change. Regulatory activity is a political process in which nego-
tiation and compromise take place. The accessibility achieved
through regulations is only as extensive as the rules incorpora-
ted in them. These rules are almost exclusively minimum
requirements. Thus, the codification of barrier-free design in-
sures accessibility to a degree, but tends to reduce creative
thinking that might result in more accessible places, products
and systems. Perhaps the most limiting impact of regulations is
that they perpetuate the myth that accessibility is a technical
problem rather than an opportunity for engaging imagination.
It is noteworthy that when the design for Frank Loyd Wright’s
Guggenheim Museum was completed, there were no regulations
mandating access to public buildings. Unfettered by rules, he
created an imaginative solution to the problem of making
buildings accessible – he sloped the building instead of building
a ramp.
178 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The critical examination of accessibility regulations is a good

point of departure for introducing universal design in an edu-
cational context. Both faculty peers and students generally
share the profession’s anathema toward imposition of rules from
outside its world and the loss of control over the territory of
design. An educational activity that starts with a critique of the
regulatory approach, exposing both the necessity of regulations
and their detrimental effect, can then move on to pose the chal-
lenge of an alternative. The alternative, of course, is universal
design.

In opposition to the idea of designing to meet regulations that

protect a class of people, the driving idea behind universal
design is that the physical world should serve the needs of all
people including those who have a disability. This concept
effectively transforms the mental representation of a building
user. Rather than designing a building for a stereotypical ave-
rage person or special interest group, universal design promotes
a culturally pluralistic representation of building users. Rather
than focusing on the blind adherence to rules, universal design
requires that designers learn about the design issues behind the
rules and how to generalize to situations where rules are not
applicable.

Universal design practice first emerged in the field of product

design, where there are very few regulations related to usability
by people with disabilities. This, like the Guggenheim example,
supports the view that regulatory activity can actually retard the
integration of disability as part of “normal” design practice.
Designers of “universal” products and buildings focus on use-
fulness as a source of imaginative exploration as opposed to
rules as a constraint. Moreover, they recognize that people with
disabilities are not the only ones to benefit from more useful
artifacts. Historically, many revolutionary products originated
as assistive technology, including the typewriter, the telephone,
e-mail and voice recognition. Their utility appealed to everyone
and these products have truly changed our way of life.
Usefulness has a great deal of appeal if it benefits a wide range
of people.

Universal design, however, goes quite a bit further than simply

transferring technology from the realm of rehabilitation to the
general consumer market. Successful universal designs appeal
to a broader constituency because of their sound ergonomic
principles and attractive appearance. It is not enough to provide
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 179
Buffalo, New York, USA

Add on structures perpetuate

the stigma of disability, but
accessibility practiced as uni-
versal design can be an inspi-
ration for form making.

Everson Museum of Art (c.

1975) I.M. Pei, Architect,
Photo Edward Steinfeld

High Museum, Richard

Meier, Architect, Photo
Edward Steinfeld

a feature people want; universal design has to make that feature

easy to use and attractive to the consumer. As everyone knows
from personal experience, even revolutionary technologies like
the VCR, can be daunting when it comes to usability. Clearly
the idea of universal design is highly compatible with goals of
contemporary capitalism. And, in fact, product manufacturers
have been quick to use it as a marketing tool to expand markets,
particularly to the older population.

Universal design has several attractive characteristics that make

it a more powerful idea than barrier free design. First, it
expands the constituency of design from disabled people to
elderly people, children, women and others who have been
under-represented in the design consciousness. Second, the
180 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

focus of universal design is on invention rather than regulation.

Third, universal design overcomes the perpetuation of social
difference. The idea is to infuse design with an inclusive
approach. Barrier free design, on the other hand, is associated
with the bureaucratic culture, which leads to the Iron Cage. Its
underlying concern for people is disguised and hidden by regu-
lation, which is associated with social control. In particular,
design by regulation assumes there is only one “best” way to do
something. And, its constituency is limited to people with dis-
abilities and the accessibility industry. Universal design offers a
new philosophical position for the practicing professional. It
offers an opportunity to «eliminate the fascism in our heads»
(Harvey, 1989, p. 45) by incorporating the perspectives of
groups that have been marginalized by the design professions.

Universal design is not, of course, immune to a negative conno-

tation from the perspective of formal rationalization. The very
name itself connotes a single universal «solution» to any design
problem – the “one best way”. The idea of a sensibility that
responds to all can too easily be perceived as a doctrine that
denies the legitimacy of many particular perspectives. Universal
Design, if narrowly conceived, could submerge the identity of a
group within the «universal». Normalization theory shares this
same tendency, a «search for invisibility». It demands norma-
tive appearances, rejecting the avant-garde because of its con-
notation of difference. This is, in some ways, contradictory to
the idea of embracing difference. Even people with disabilities
are proud of their differences, the distinctions that make them
unique. They just don’t want to be stigmatized because of them.
Designers, particularly those who teach in academia, are suspi-
cious of an ideology that appears to reject difference and explo-
ratory formal explorations. That is why we believe that the term
“inclusive design” or the European term “Design for All” are
more accurate terms for what universal design is all about, par-
ticularly because we have had to invest much time overcoming
the false perceptions described above.

Utopia
“Every daring attempt to make a great change in existing
conditions, every lofty vision of new possibilities for the
human race, has been labeled utopian.” (Emma Goldman c.
1912, first published in Shulman, 1972)

Ultimately, the universal design idea is a utopian notion. This

label “utopian” has both positive and negative connotations. On
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 181
Buffalo, New York, USA

the one hand, it embraces idealism, the optimistic belief that

“yes, it can be accomplished – we can do it”. On the other hand,
it suggests impracticality, the impossibility of reaching a goal –
the naiveté of believing that “it could happen” and perhaps even
the inability to separate fantasy and reality.

Many university faculty are wary of utopian claims. They argue

that the term ‘universal’ is a specious and dangerous concept.
There has, after all, been an enormous amount of suffering and
waste in the world due to the adoption of universal solutions
and demise of pluralism. In fact, “universal design” is, accor-
ding to the experts “design for all people,” but, to the outsider,
the concept of “design for all” seems an impossibility.

Utopian ideas have a tendency toward absolutism. The term

“universal” itself, meaning “including or covering all or a
whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception”
(Hoad, 1992), conveys an abolutist agenda. One of us had a
high school teacher who told her class: “Be careful about using
absolute terms such as every, all, always, no, none, never – it is
difficult to support statements containing absolutes: All people
need love. No one benefits from violence in society. Usually,
this is the case, but there are exceptions. There are very few (if
any) instances of absolutes in our worlds. And absolute procla-
mations are dangerous because they tend to close the possibility
of critical examination.”

Every utopian notion creates skepticism in intellectual circles

because of the inherently exclusive nature of most ideologies
and groups espousing those ideologies. In the early days of its
evolution, those within the universal design discipline presented
it (whether intentional or not) with a kind of redemptive or sal-
vation approach. Either one had “seen the light of universal
design” or one was still “in the dark of form-driven design”.
Those who had “seen the light” were “saved” and it was their
obligation to enlighten the rest of the world – to spread the
word. Those who had not “seen the light” weren’t quite as
“good” as those who had.

Coupled with this is the natural tendency for proponents of a

utopian concept to dismiss other types of design explorations
that, because of different goals and agenda, do not embrace the
principles of the movement. To the outsider, much of the work
produced by other designers is, ipso facto, defined by the pro-
ponents of universal design as illegitimate (or not discussion-
182 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

worthy) because it doesn’t adhere to the stated Principles of

Universal Design (Connel, et al., 1997). The Principles at
times, act as barriers or dividers between “right” design and
“wrong” design. When presented or perceived as a dichotomous
choice, there are many other legitimate design enterprises that
are de-legitimized: the work of those experimenting with form-
driven environments that primarily are intended to challenge
our preconceptions of spatial organizations and conditions, the
work of phenomenologists who explore environments and pro-
ducts with the intention of heightening our physical experien-
ces, and even the work of proponents of sustainable design, a
field that even shares the utopian perspective and whose practi-
tioners are natural allies.

Faculty who teach from these other perspectives often argue

that the design of the material world should create physical
challenges, a position diametrically opposed to the universal
design principle of reducing effort and making them intuitive
and simple to use. And, in fact, people do enjoy and value many
activities that require added effort and cause inconvenience.
Some examples are a devout woman whose faith is reinforced
by the symbolism of pushing open of heavy church doors, a
child who enjoys the strain of reaching to turn on the bathroom
faucet while imagining that someday she’ll be big enough to
turn it on by herself, or, the environmentalist who values the
additional effort required to empty a composting toilet because
it reduces environmental pollution.

Also excluded are those whose work is intended to create dis-

turbing and unsettling conditions for the sake of challenging
social, cultural, political, and/or economic preconceptions and
provoking critical reflection. Examples include Revington’s
Luminous Veil Bridge Project in Toronto, which calls attention
to the problem of suicide, parts of Jahn’s Chicago Stock
Exchange in which the panic of potential market crash is incor-
porated into the interior space of the building. These works
seem quite inappropriate for the field of universal design – per-
haps even antithetical to it. They don’t fit the definition or the
mold that has been established, and, therefore, they are not con-
sidered in the discourse. The problem? Although the intentions
of universal design are inclusive, its structure is inherently
exclusive; therefore, its practices contain contradictions.

These barriers could prevent the discipline from adopting a set

of critical perspectives and, ultimately, a critical practice – a
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 183
Buffalo, New York, USA

practice that continually challenges and questions itself in order

to grow, a practice that considers other kinds of design and
other ways in which the physical world could shape our bodies,
minds, and spirits – a practice that considers various forms of
design education such as those structured to support difference
or to reveal the social construction of beliefs.

As noted above, utopian ideas have a positive side as well. The

three primary characteristics of a utopian idea are idealism,
change, and critique. All of these are positive attributes.
Although an absolute idealism can be naïve and inconsequen-
tial, an idealism tempered with pragmatism is what distinguis-
hes the mundane from the significant in design. Moreover, the
courage to take risks and search for new approaches, perspecti-
ves and solutions are attributes valued highly by most design
educators. Finally, and most importantly, utopian ideas emerge
from a critique of the status quo. When embraced thoughtlessly
with sloganeering and militancy, outsiders question the sincerity
of this critique. But, when adopted with considerable reflection
and articulated well, educators should respect it as a valid point
of departure for good design. Thus, universal design, as a uto-
pian construct, has the inherent qualities of a powerful design
philosophy, one that should be respected by other faculty.

Two utopian ideas, are particularly useful as a theoretical

framework for understanding and communicating universal
design in a positive sense as opposed to the negative. The first
of these is Sir Thomas More’s deliberate combination of the
Greek words eutopia (good place) and outopia (no place) to
generate the term utopia (More, 1975, originally published
1516). The second is Ruth Levitas’s contemporary description:

[u]topia is the expression of the desire for a better way of

being. This includes both the objective, institutional appro-
ach to utopia, and the subjective, experiential concern of dis-
alienation.… It allows for the form, function, and content to
change over time. And it reminds us that, whenever we think
of particular utopias, we learn a lot about the experience of
living under any set of conditions by reflecting upon the desi-
res which those conditions generate and yet leave unfulfilled.
For that is the space which utopia occupies. (Levitas, 1990)

More’s definition is place-dependent and Levitas’s is state-

dependent. More’s creates a space; Levitas’s fills it. The double
condition of More’s two aspects of utopia – good place, no
184 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

place – sets up the possibility of introducing Levitas’s view as a

mediating device: the desired state is where ‘good place’ and
‘no place’ intersect.

These ideas of utopia can help us understand the spaces, places,

objects, images and events that are the results of universal
design practice. The physical products and places of universal
design, and their attendant psychological states, often articulate
the dichotomy inherent in desire – the utopian ideal of ‘design
for all’ and the reality of getting closer, but never reaching the
goal.

Utopian ideas help us to rethink and realize the seemingly impossible.

Left: Parc des Buttes-Chaumont, Paris, France, Photo Beth Tauke
Right: Tuno By, Denmark, Photo Beth Tauke.

Places and products that have the characteristics of universal

design are located cognitively somewhere between what is and
what is desired. Thus, the desired place becomes a ‘substitute’
place. This place of ‘design for all’ is asymptotic, namely, an
approach between two conditions that continues to move forever
closer, but that never achieves full merging or closure. This
asymptotic condition of universal design does not completely ful-
fill the promise of ‘design for all’ but forever attempts to close
the gap through an increasingly informed practice of designing
for a continually broadening and deepening population.

The reflection required to pursue “an increasingly informed”

state of consciousness is one form of critical practice. It is this
reflective activity that has not been adequately communicated
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 185
Buffalo, New York, USA

as a part of universal design practice. More emphasis on this

aspect of universal design will help to achieve validation of the
concept within both the academic disciplines and professions of
design. While emphasizing the positive connotations of utopian
thinking, it is also important to avoid reinforcing the negative.
Universal design educators can avoid espousing an idealism
that is obviously impractical. They can avoid an absolutist
stance that implies to one’s peers that their own work has little
value. And, they can embrace a real inclusiveness by adopting a
tolerance of other perspectives, even those that appear contrary
to the espoused Principles. Universal design educators can also
demonstrate the true sincerity of their devotion to inclusiveness
by expanding the sphere of their interests and activities beyond
disability to aging, gender issues, cultural differences, sustain-
ability and other issues that might emerge as cultures change.
This will not only inform the development of universal design
as a philosophical approach to design but also build bridges to
other faculty who share equally utopian perspectives.

Conclusion
Universal design education could be enriched significantly by
exploring and communicating the intellectual traditions that
underlay the concept, like the idea of reciprocity between social
life and material culture and the concept of social justice. Using
the group home as an example, we have demonstrated how the
concept of normalization has parallels in the theories of the
early feminist movement. This idea has significant implications
for curriculum and criticism, especially in the design studio. We
proposed that group homes could be studied as a form of co-
operative housekeeping. As a corollary example, the concept of
independence can be examined as a basis for the design of an
autonomous living unit, thereby making connections to the
sustainable design movement. No doubt there are many other
such connections and thus many other threads of intellectual
discourse that could inform our work.

A cultural critique can become part of all design projects. Too

often, design studio instructors give an assignment in the form
of a problem to solve without leaving room or encouraging a
redefinition of the problem itself. Yet, the most creative design
usually starts with such reflection. In reality, any assignment is
a program to question and critique, examining the relationship
between material culture and social life, studying the differing
social definitions of places or objects and comparing the
186 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

perspectives of the client, the designer and the user as “other”.

The literature of disability studies can be an excellent source of
ideas for such a critique. Some suggestions include:

1. the impact of disability in public encounters and what is

implied for the design of public places,
2. perfection and deformity in aesthetic values and what they
imply for fashions of taste and style,
3. disability as a career and the implication for design for the
lifespan,
4. disability as “otherness” and its relationship with “marginal
space”.

The idea that universal design is an alternative to the rule based

approach of barrier free design is another powerful educational
strategy. Since there is much resistance to the rule based appro-
ach among creative designers, it can be used as a foil to generate
interest among students in its alternative. Since students need to
know the rules they will have to follow when they enter practice,
an assignment through which they have to study them and
uncover their limitations and irrationalities may be a good intro-
duction to universal design. From there, the underlying princi-
ples of design behind the rules and others that are not even
represented by the rules can be uncovered and students can be
challenged to find better solutions than rule based design would
generate. On the other hand, an exclusive focus on design by
rules, such as using the ADA as a basis for universal design edu-
cation, is likely to miss the whole point of the movement.

Although pedagogy certainly should be the focus of universal

design education, politics are as critical to the success of educa-
tional ventures as the merit of pedagogy. Academia is a place
where intense competition among ideas is a normal state of
affairs. As advocates of universal design, we have to be prepa-
red to persuade our colleagues and students of their intellectual
value. The concept of universal design has many connotations
that appeal to the values and perspectives of progressive acade-
mic culture. These include a concern for human values, acti-
vism, cultural pluralism and social justice. Yet, at the same time,
universal design can have connotations that can engender suspi-
cion and resistance by other faculty as well as students. These
include the perception that universal design, as a utopian con-
cept, has an absolute idealist agenda, an exclusionary structure
and unrealistic goals.
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 187
Buffalo, New York, USA

These negative connotations, however, can be overcome with a

focus on the intellectual traditions to which universal design is
linked and by insuring an open, critical perspective in peda-
gogy. We especially need to emphasize the idealism inherent in
the concept and, to avoid the perception of naiveté, we need to
emphasize that universal design is a search for ways to “close
the gap” between the utopian ideal and the current status quo.
The ideal of universal design may be more palatable when pre-
sented as a touchstone against which we try out various ideas
about our ways of living in the world. In this way, the strengths
and dilemmas of universal design are used to help us see what
we are without prescribing what we should be. We can use its
processes, products, and environments to actively participate in
the unending debate about human nature and the best possible
evolution of society. In fact, we prefer to use the term universal

Universal design is socially integrating, functional for everyone and

inspiring as well. Above – Bara Funda, Sao Paulo, Oscar Niemeyer,
Architect, Photo: Edward Steinfeld
Below – Tribeca Bridge, New York, Photo: Edward Steinfeld.
188 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

designing, a verb rather than a noun, because the verb form puts
the emphasis on going there, rather than getting there.

Reflective thinking should be the norm of universal design edu-

cation, emphasizing the critical stance that brought it into being
in the first place. We need to practice an inclusive intellectual
discourse by acknowledging connections to other perspectives
in education and design, in particular, those that share a utopian
character, emphasize the value of diversity and encourage a per-
son-centered design practice. And, we need to be tolerant of
other, more divergent educational perspectives, recognizing that
there is a place for many viewpoints in design education.

References
American National Standards Institute (1961). A117.1 Making
Buildings and Facilities Accessible to the Physically
Handicapped. American National Standards Institute. New
York 1961.
Berkowitz, E.D. Disabled Policy. Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge. 1987.
Cooley, C. H. The looking glass self. Human Nature and the
Social Order. pp. 179–185. Scribner’s. New York 1902.
Connell, B.R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A.,
Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M. and
Vanderheiden, G. The Principles of Universal Design. Center
for Universal Design, North Carolina State University.
Raleigh, NC 1997.
Goldman, E. Socialism: caught in the political trap. Shulman,
A.K (ed). Red Emma Speaks. New York: Random House.
(c. 1912, first published 1972).
Harvey, D. The Condition of Postmodernity. Blackwell.
Cambridge, MA. 1989.
Hayden, D. The Grand Domestic Revolution. MIT Press.
Cambridge, MA. 1981.
Hiller, T. and Hanson, J. The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge
University Press. Cambridge 1984.
International Code Council ICC/ANSI A117.1 Accessible and
Usable Buildings and Facilities. International Code Council.
Falls Church, VA 1998.
Hoad, T. F., ed. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English
Etymology. Oxford University Press. Oxford, UK: 518. 1992.
Levitas, R. The Concept of Utopia. p.8. Hemel Hempstead,
Philip Allan,. UK: 1990.
 Edward Steinfeld
and Beth Tauke Universal Designing 189
Buffalo, New York, USA

Mead, G. H. Ed. Charles W. Morris. Mind Self and Society.

University. of Chicago Press. Chicago. 1934.
More, T. Utopia: a new translation, backgrounds, criticism.
New York: Norton. 1975, first published in Latin, 1516.
Rothman, D. The Discovery of the Asylum. Boston, MA: Little
Brown. 1971.
Ritzer, G. The McDonaldization of Society. Pine Forge Press.
Newbury Park, CA. 2000.
Steinfeld, E. Major issues in developing building standards, in
Michael Bednars, (Ed.), Barrier-Free Environments.
Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross. Stroudsburg, PA: 1977.
U.S. Access Board. Americans with Disabilities Act
Architectural Guidelines, Washington: U.S. Access Board.
1984
U.S. General Accounting Office Report to Congress: Further
Action Needed to Make All Public Buildings Accessible to the
Physically Handicapped. Washington, DC: GAO. 1975.
Weber, M. Trans. Economy and Society. Bedminster Press.
New York. 1968.
Wolfensberger, W. The Principle of Normalization in Human
Services. National Institute on Mental Retardation.
Toronto.1972.
Wijk, Maarten. Differences We Share. Delft, Netherlands:
Faculty of Architecture, Delft University of Technology.
Delft. 1997.
190 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 191
USA

2.2 An Opportunity for

Critical Discourse in
Design Education
Polly Welch, Associate Professor, Department of Architecture,
University of Oregon.
Stanton Jones, Associate Professor, Department of Landscape
Architecture, University of Oregon, USA

Background
Universal design education in the United States has been foste-
red and documented primarily through the leadership of Elaine
Ostroff, who developed the Universal Design Education Project
(UDEP) in 1989, the first funded program in universal design
curriculum development. Case studies from the project’s
twenty-two participating schools (Welch, 1995; 2000) present a
range of approaches and materials across four design fields –
architecture, landscape architecture, interior design and product
design. These teaching examples illustrate substantial differen-
ces in operative definitions of universal design and pedagogical
philosophies and illuminate the exploration of an emergent
definition of universal design as «good design». While adoption
of universal design values has been slow among most design
faculties in the Unites States, instructors and students in interior
design and product design have been more receptive to this shift
in thinking than those in architecture and landscape architec-
ture. This chapter describes the experience of two professors in
these latter disciplines who use universal design as a vehicle for
critical discourse in their design teaching.

The authors, as University of Oregon faculty, were selected in

the second round of Universal Design Education Project
(UDEP) funding for teaching innovations and had the opportu-
nity to build on the experiences of the first round of schools.
The strategies employed by the authors in teaching universal
design are also influenced by their prior professional experien-
ces as well as the specific contexts of their departments and dis-
ciplines.
192 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The design disciplines at the University of Oregon, housed in

the School of Architecture and Allied Arts, include Landscape
Architecture, Architecture, Interior Architecture, Planning, Fine
Arts, Art History, Arts and Administration, and Historic
Preservation. While the authors are the only design faculty who
explicitly teach the application of universal design values to
design students, their thinking has been significantly influenced
by two professors in Arts and Administration and Fine Arts,
whose practice and teaching challenges traditional knowledge
paradigms regarding culture, class, gender and ability.

The Architecture department and its program in Interior

Architecture offer both undergraduate and graduate degrees.
The department has a long history of a humanistic, non-compe-
titive curriculum that currently attracts students for its strengths
in regionalism, sustainability, and building craft and technology.
The Landscape Architecture program, also serving graduates
and undergraduates, has a reputation for its strength in land-
scape ecology, history and design technologies.

Ideals and objectives: Main Themes

Several important themes inform the approach taken to teaching
the value of universal design at the University of Oregon. First,
universal design is a value that establishes a quality of relationship
between people and designed environments or physical objects,
based on an inclusive definition of users and the potential of the
built environment to empower and enable users. It is related to, by
virtue of history, but not synonymous with, the disability-focussed
terms accessible design, barrier free design and adaptable design
or, in the United States, design that complies with the require-
ments of the American with Disabilities Act. Because universal
design was first conceived by accessibility advocates in the disabi-
lity movement, the idea was framed initially with a disability con-
struct of design issues. In 1998 Ronald Mace supplemented his
original definition of universal design (1991), by emphatically sta-
ting that «[universal design’s] focus is not specifically on people
with disabilities, but all people» (1998).

The Seven Principles of Universal Design Project (see main

Appendix 1) has helped to explain universal design by prescri-
bing some of its essential physical characteristics and cognitive
qualities. The Universal Design Exemplars Projects ii built on the
Seven Principles and gathered visual examples of universal
design applications to real places and useful objects. Each effort
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 193
USA

to codify the characteristics of universal design has wrestled with

the residual notion that it serves primarily people with disabili-
ties, and, secondarily, meets the needs of others. These projects
offer practitioners, teachers and scholars important resources for
launching an ongoing discourse about the practical applications
of universal design and the merits of designing inclusively.

Secondly, the civil rights principle that serves as the legal foun-
dation of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) – that
people with disabilities have the same rights to use and enjoy
the built environment as everyone else – is an important aspect
of teaching universal design. The notion that civil rights extend
to the allocation and utilization of physical space is not new.
African Americans and women, among others, have had to
challenge spatial practices that either unduly separated them or
ignored their existence altogether (Weisman 1992; Grant 1996).
There are important teaching opportunities in examining the
parallels and provoking critical insights about the nature of
equity in design. Landscape architects and architects have gene-
rally ignored their role in shaping the environment as an oppor-
tunity for fostering social justice (Jones 1996, 1998) and their
agency in reinforcing stereotypes through their designs (Welch
and Jones, 1999).

Third, if universal design is a value that addresses the needs of

all users, as Mace asserted (1998), then its application must
recognize that many individual users have multiple identities.
Universal design has typically been extended from being a
disability issue to being a lifespan issue. Design concerns have
extended most easily from disability issues to the needs of old
people because the aging population shares characteristics of
diminished mobility and stamina, sensory limitations and the
need for assistive technology. «Lifespan» therefore has been
interpreted by many faculty and practitioners as focussing on the
latter half of life when users’ relationships to the environment
are similar to those of people with disabilities. Consideration of
small children has been largely overlooked except for differen-
ces in stature. Teenagers, as is their common fate in the U.S., are
largely ignored. Cognitive and developmental needs of children
and adolescents may be in direct conflict with some universal
design principles. For example, the lever door handle is now a
ubiquitous example of universal design but under certain circum-
stances its benefits of «low physical effort» (Principle Six) iii
may be outweighed by its lack of «tolerance for error» (Principle
Five) when small children are present. (see Figure 1)
194 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Fig. 1. The child’s safety gate illustrates the need for further development
of the lever door handle to be fully universal in a family housing setting.

If universal design recognizes that most individuals have

multiple facets of identities, that is, people also characterize
themselves in relation to race, class, gender, ethnicity, physical
size and sexuality, then the design strategies need to reflect that
greater complexity. An old person’s interaction with the envi-
ronment may be equally a factor of her ethnic traditions, espe-
cially family structure and gender expectations, as her
diminishing energy and sensory ability. A mother who uses a
wheelchair may find raising children alone to be challenging in
new ways when negotiating the places that parents and children
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 195
USA

frequent. Recognizing multiple facets of identity is especially

important in framing environmental design decisions at the
larger scales of buildings, landscapes, and communities (Welch
and Jones 2001c) where the environment may provide fewer
individual affordances and individuals collectively make a
broader array of demands on the place.

The field of environment-behavior studies has been a source of

research-based information on the needs of specific user groups
– elderly people, people with disabilities, hospital patients,
office workers, low income families, pedestrians, and museum
visitors, to name a few. The taxonomy that has evolved over
time for identifying user groups has hardly been systematic and
often labels groups of people by their shared experience as
occupants of a building or place type. The literature tends to
convey homogenous, typical users whose environmental beha-
viors and needs are generic to the group being described and
seldom address the implications of other facets of identity. The
literature is an important resource for understanding one facet
of identity but it is only partially informative unless it is com-
plemented by input from real users with real, complex identities
and needs.

User consultants have been found to be one of the most effec-

tive strategies for teaching universal design values (Lifchez
1987; Welch 1996; Ostroff 1997). Design education in the
United States generally does not value the perspective of non-
designers in teaching design and schools generally have such
limited diversity of students and faculty that the perspectives of
the school population may not be sufficiently representative.
While Lifchez invited people with physical disabilities to be
ongoing clients for his students, most of the UDEP schools
asked users consultants to visit studio reviews and provide feed-
back on students’ proposed designs. Users who are able to arti-
culate their day-to-day experiences in the built environment can
give students insights into their proposed design that is both
memorable and interrogative, enhancing the likelihood of the
student gaining a critical perspective. The UDEP students had
varied reactions: «some students experienced disbelief and
outrage at the indignity of the misfit between people and the
environment; some felt like inadvertent accomplices in their
profession’s careless attitudes; others remained skeptical that
design could possibly respond to the range of issues that users
present.» (Welch 1995, 254). This range of responses reflects
196 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

yet another opportunity to engage students in critiquing the role

of design in addressing the needs of multiple, diverse users.

Fourth, universal design has a greater likelihood of being incor-

porated into students’ thinking and design work if the value is
infused into all aspects of teaching rather than taught as stand-
alone subject matter (Welch 1995). The single subject matter
course called «Universal Design» was noted by some UDEP
faculty for sending the message that universal design is another
skill to be learned and applied, and risks losing sight of its lar-
ger value as contextual, critical exploration of the fit between
people and design. Infusing universal design across the curricu-
lum has been tried in a number of UDEP schools where faculty
inserts materials and exercises into a variety of courses and
levels of design studiosiv. A more subtle effort at infusion was
the meeting of faculty at Buffalo to discuss what universal
design really meant to the teaching of design (Adaptive
Environments 1996). In this venue, not only were the faculty (a
mix of adopters and non-adopters, I believe) asked to actively
and critically consider how to reflect universal design values in
design teaching but each learned more about it in the process.
«Infusion diminishes the potentially marginal status of the
course content and introduces new discourse by challenging
ableist, gendered, classist, eurocentric course content.» (Welch
and Jones, 2000)

Fifth, for students to develop a complete and operational under-

standing of universal design requires a variety of curricular con-
tent. Five components are critical for students to move from
general awareness to engagement and ultimately, integration,
the ability to design inclusively (Welch and Jones 2001b):

– Technical data
– User needs research
– User involvement
– Self awareness
– Ethical and political considerations
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 197
USA

Fig. 2. Model for development of curriculum content (Welch and Jones,

2001b)

And finally, teaching universal design is an opportunity to

increase critical discourse in design training. Most curricular
material on accommodating people with disabilities has, to
date, been presented as technical in nature – the slope of a
ramp, the width of a door, the layout of a bathroom. When
accessibility requirements are presented in the context of buil-
ding code, students too rarely question the origin or reliability
of the information nor are they inclined to imagine equivalent
or enhanced alternatives to the requirements. When universal
design is presented primarily through exemplars it can have the
same effect on students. They are inclined to replicate what they
have seen but not able to generate new inclusive solutions.
Critical analysis of whose needs are addressed by universally
designed places and objects seems to help internalize the value.
To engage students in examining the values inherent in their
training – the «truths» by which their professions judge design
– and the degree of inclusivity in the precedents they select to
emulate, encourages a critical perspective that can profoundly
impact their world view and design aspirations. Needless to say,
this type of critical assessment of built places is largely missing
from both trade journals and scholarly journals in architecture
and landscape architecture, leaving instructors to develop their
own original materials.

Strategies
The primary focus of the Oregon faculty has been twofold:
exploring the nature of infusion and the implications of univer-
sal design as a design value rather than technical knowledge
198 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

(Welch 2000). Over the course of five years the following stra-
tegies for incorporating universal design values into the many
realms of intellectual interaction with students and colleagues
have been explored:

– Creating a smorgasbrod of universal design teaching mate-

rials that other faculty could incorporate into their classes
– A weekend workshop focussed on environmental equity
– Infusing readings, exercises and images into a variety of
subject matter courses.
– Design studios that foster inclusive planning and design values

The Oregon UDEP grant proposed to infuse the entire environ-

mental design curriculum by offering faculty a variety of curricu-
lar materials about universal design that they could insert directly
into their teaching or merge with existing materials. The authors
selected History/Theory courses for the first effort at infusion
because those professors were probably not familiar with univer-
sal design, were engaging students in critical discourse, seemed
to be likely potential adopters, and their involvement in testing
universal design teaching materials would stimulate useful dis-
cussion. History, theory, criticism courses generally establish for
the design student a repetoire of historical precedents from which
to draw aesthetic vocabulary and design inspiration. Many of the
images to which students are exposed in these courses represent
the exclusive values of a dominant culture, perpetuation of social
stereotypes and stigmas, and assumptions about appropriate use,
often without critical commentary. The UDEP faculty believed
that its universal design materials would encourage faculty to cri-
tique these precedents from multiple perspectives and offer addi-
tional images and information that might provoke discussion and
critical investigation.

For a variety of reasons the history/theory faculty were not tea-

ching during the initial UDEP grant period. So a letter was sent
to all faculty in both landscape architecture and architecture,
describing the UDEP grant and the universal design resources
available to them, with the expectation that some of them might
be willing to be early adopters. No interest was forthcoming,
not even a hallway conversation. The UDEP faculty shifted to
testing the resource library themselves – a bibliography of rea-
dings and videos, and a slide collection of universal design
exemplars. Each UDEP instructor had introduced universal
design into coursework at least as a lecture and all four were
experimenting with exercises that would reinforce the impor-
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 199
USA

tance of universal design to the subject matter of their courses.

In hindsight, the internal team dialogue and values development
was a critical precursor to showing other faculty how universal
design values could be a pedagogical nexus of their teaching.

An opportunity to match the UDEP grant with internal univer-

sity funding presented itself. The call for an event that would
have relevance and appeal for students and faculty from all
departments in the school made possible expanding the propo-
sed UDEP event from a «talking heads» presentation on univer-
sal design to an event that would address inclusivity in the arts.

Power and Place: A weekend workshop

to explore attitudes
To raise awareness and provide an opportunity for students to
engage universal design, outside the curriculum, the faculty
team planned a weekend event, titled Power and Place. The
intent was to provide a participatory experience that would
engage simultaneously students’ empathy, their critical thin-
king, and their creativity. A focus on art installations was selec-
ted over the more typical design intervention workshops that
had been used at other UDEP sites, to make this workshop
experience distinct from the problem-solving realm in which
students are already being well trained. In particular the organi-
zers wanted to clearly differentiate this event from a diagnostic
effort to make the university campus accessible. The workshop
structure and outcome were designed as an opportunity for
social critique through creative expression that would be trans-
formative for the students and might provoke commentary,
engagement and response by passersby and possibly the com-
munity at large. The event was preceded by a presentation by
Barbara Krueger, internationally recognized installation artist,
who spoke about how she constructs visual commentary on
socially controversial issues.

The UDEP faculty team comprising four design disciplines –

architecture, interior architecture, landscape architecture, and
arts and administration – planned a forum for students to exa-
mine their attitudes and feelings about people different from
themselves, through the lens of power and inclusion. Students
were invited to explore their own exclusion experiences, listen
to others’, and jointly imagine and construct an art installation
to reflect their shared understanding of how the university envi-
ronment supported inclusion.
200 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Four nationally recognized advocatesv for inclusive design pre-

sented examples of their work as an initial framework for dis-
cussion and subsequently worked closely with design teams,
answering questions and sharing critical perspectives. Universal
design was mentioned a number of times by different presenters
as an important value. It was not the goal of the weekend, per
se, and yet, when completed the participants had learned a great
deal about including a variety of people in their design conside-
rations.

The faculty developed a sequence of personal and group activi-

ties to assist participants in uncovering for themselves the mea-
ning of “inclusive” or “universal” design. Participants began the
workshop by working together in small groups to identify and
share their own experiences with respect to personal stereotypes
and exclusion. They were asked to brainstorm responses to
three questions:

1. What part of your ignorance do you hope to address through

your participation in the workshop?
2. In what ways have you personally experienced the environ-
ment as a barrier?
3. Define as a group, “inclusive design” and “inclusive place.”

The resulting dialogues between individuals and across discipli-

nes raised challenging questions for participants about their
personal assumptions, the stereotypes implicit in their educa-
tion, and the relative absence of discourse on ethical issues in
their professions.

No single building on campus was sufficiently accessible and

inclusive of the wide range of participant needs to house all of
the weekend’s events. The change in venues became an oppor-
tunity for kinesthetic, experiential learning about spatial accom-
modation. Participants formed teams that were assigned a new
«identity» that would impact how they moved through space.
This movement exercise, facilitated by a member of the Dance
Department, afforded each participant the opportunity to heigh-
ten their own awareness of the environment around them in
relation to their own bodies and to the movements of others.
One assignment, for example, was: “Be sensitive to the uni-
queness of each environment you pass through. Use all of your
faculties to fill the spaces.” One group of students joined hands
to reach from wall to wall and filled multi-height spaces with
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 201
USA

the sounds of their voices. Another assignment asked students

to maintain contact with an edge at all times, drawing them off
the planned pathways and requiring them to negotiate spaces
and materials not planned for circulation.

The movement exercise was intended to encourage participants

to look at very familiar places and pathways in a new way and
to suspend visual and analytical judgments temporarily while
experiencing space differently. Considerable thought went into
planning an experiential exercise that would be as engaging as
the popular empathic techniques of trying out a wheelchair or
wearing a blindfold, while avoiding the pitfalls of misrepresen-
tation that come with momentarily simulating the experience of
being blind or paralyzed. (Welch 1995)

Following this exercise, the teams were given their weekend

assignment – to brainstorm and develop ideas for the creation
of an art installation on the university grounds, that would pro-
mote public awareness of the University’s commitment to inclu-
sivity, especially as expressed within the public realm of the
campus. The problem statement was «to explore and express, in
a non-competitive workshop environment, the inclusivity com-
mitments of the University as described in the tagline that appe-
ars at the bottom of every university document: «An equal
opportunity, affirmative action institution committed to cultural
diversity and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities
Act.» While many participants had assumed that this legal state-
ment of inclusivity was focused on employment and administra-
tive practices, it quickly became clear to the participants that
this statement could, and in fact did, have implications for the
built environment. With recent political and judicial decisions
threatening the future of affirmative action, a growing disparity
between «haves» and «have-nots» in American society, and the
global increase in social and cultural balkanization, critical
exploration of these issues seemed timely.

The groups were consciously organized to ensure an interdisci-

plinary mix of students and community membersvi because stu-
dent assistants insisted that participants would form
homogenous teams if given the chance. The invited panelists
were available to the teams for consultation and inspiration
throughout the entire day as they crafted their installations.
Each group had a small budget for purchasing materials and
access to a truck to obtain whatever the group needed to imple-
ment its idea. Many of the selected materials had been recycled
202 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

from other student projects or were obtained from a local re-

cycling center.

At the end of the weekend, workshop participants, community

members, and curious bystanders gathered for a tour and pre-
sentation of the seven installations. While most of the instal-
lations were constructed as objects or sequences of objects that
could have been placed anywhere on campus, at least one was a
response to a specific university symbol, a statue of The
Pioneer, prominently located in front of the administration buil-
ding. The Pioneer, visible from the main road through campus,
had been wrapped in paper. Another statue, The Pioneer
Mother, situated in a copse of trees and not very visible from
campus circulation routes, was strung with wind chimes. The
student artists commented:

We wanted to call out the differences in where these statues

were located, who saw them, and whom they saw. There are
many connections here. An act of architecture was placed
between them... inaccessible architecture... We weren’t just
talking about gender, but about who represents the school...
Even when the wrapping is gone, people can walk by and
remember that there was wrapping.

Fig. 3. The Pioneer statue wrapped in paper.

Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 203
USA

The Table installation was located on a plaza in front of the

Business School. Wind chimes made from pots, pans and eating
utensils hung at the corners of the plaza to draw people to the
site. An old kitchen table with six place settings and different
types of chairs was placed in the center of the plaza. A reflec-
tive was tied to each chair balloon at approximately head
height. Clothes and accoutrements that represented people with
different facets of identity were arranged at the place settings.

Fig. 4. The Table Installation.

204 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The group’s posted commentary read, in part:

“Sitting at a table is a social activity.

It may be for a meal or a political negotiation.
The table creates intimacy as well as separation.
Where and how you are seated symbolizes your status,
authority and power.
The location of your place at the table defines you.
Sometimes the location of your table defines you.
You are where you sit; you are where you are seated; you are
how you sit.
You are where you eat; you are where you speak; you are
your visibility; you are how you get there.

You can......leave the table

or...............upturn the table
change.......the shape of the table
change.......the shape of the seating at the table
change.......the ideas of the people at the table

Think about your ideal table.

Think about your place at the table now, and where you
would like to sit tomorrow.
Expand your thinking.”

“Our intention is to create a place where stereotypes and

assumptions are not an issue. ‘We are able at the table.’

Participants’ written reflections over the subsequent months

described a sense of empowerment and engagement that
directly impacted their work and their lives. The workshop rein-
forced the importance of addressing attitudes by combining
empathy and creativity in the search for inclusive design.
(Welch and Jones 1998)

This workshop was primarily an exploration into an alternative

pedagogy, one that could address the fundamental role of atti-
tudes and awareness of others’ needs in placemaking. By raising
participants’ awareness of inclusiveness and providing an oppor-
tunity to implement their insights, participants appeared to have
become more receptive to and interested in acquiring the know-
ledge needed to support these values in the design process. The
participants, however, needed opportunities to follow up on new
sensibilities that they had developed in the workshop. The shift
from awareness to critique and implementation requires more
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 205
USA

than three short days. Three years later, participants continue to

comment on the essential value of this experience in their per-
sonal and professional development. A few have independently
pursued more in-depth work on universal design values; many
have been frustrated by the absence of further opportunities in
the curriculum for further discourse and development and
assume that they can re-engage their new found sensibilities
when they move on to practice.

While these kind of events increase both visibility and partici-

pation, and can attract funding to sustain universal design tea-
ching and research, they are also extremely time consuming and
place an enormous burden on individual faculty in terms of
planning, coordination and implementation.

Infusion of inclusive design values into

existing classes
Teaching the values of universal design requires more than adding
another content area to the curriculum and introducing more
knowledge for the student to assimilate. To be most effective uni-
versal design needs to be taught as a critique about the values
underlying the way designers plan and shape environments.

First, the instructors had to confront the students’ confusion

about the difference between universal design and accessibility,
reflecting the inadequacy of instruction on access codes. Design
faculty tacitly assumes that code instruction is every instructor’s
responsibility so students’ awareness depends on whatever
information an instructor chooses to pass on in studio reviews.
There is no specific area of the design curriculum that systema-
tically covers accessibility codes in detail. It is unlikely that the
rationale behind an access feature, such as the danger of protru-
ding objects, is covered anywhere in the curriculum. Many stu-
dents have expressed an interest in a coherent presentation on
accessibility codes. If universal design is different from accessi-
bility why does it matter what students know about accessibi-
lity? One strategy was to use students’ awareness of the
accessibility codes to explain the need for, the genesis of, and
the long-term value of universal design. More recently, as de-
scribed below, the strategy has evolved to addressing universal
design as an approach to achieving good design, quite separa-
tely from achieving accessibility.

Infusing universal design into teaching also needs to address

206 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

process as well as substance. Systematic use of word

slides/overheads reinforcing concepts and terminology aids
non-auditory learners as well as students whose native language
differs from that of the instructor. In a studio setting, including
non-designers at reviews supports universal design by valuing
the importance of multiple perspectives. Encouraging students
to present their design work so that the ideas are intelligible to
non-designers reinforces how universal design impacts design
communication traditions.

Stan Jones incorporated universal design concepts into his Land

as Media course five years ago. A technical course designed to
teach students the basics of contour manipulation and storm
water management, Jones challenges his students to consistently
address, in all of the course assignments, the many social factors
inherent within the design of built landscapes. He also expects
them to evaluate all of their design work – both in his course and
in other concurrent classes – in terms of “who is included?” and
“who is excluded?” by design decisions. Jones includes a lecture
on universal design and the ADA and occasionally uses empa-
thic exercises accompanied by in-depth discussions by people
with disabilities midway through the term. By linking social
factors to the technical embedded in every design action they
undertake, Jones’ course helps students to design inclusive envi-
ronments that are both technically sound and socially just.

Polly Welch, in Human Context of Design, a required course for

all architecture students, scrutinizes each lecture for opportuni-
ties to critique accepted knowledge from the perspectives of
alternative perspectives such as race, class, gender, culture and
ability. She uses case studies and contradictory readings to
demonstrate that prevailing wisdom can be challenged, interro-
gated, and supplemented by materials that include the perspecti-
ves of those who have been traditionally invisible and voiceless
in the design of the built environment. For example, she has
developed a discussion on building codes, regulations, and
zoning laws as instruments of social priorities. She encourages
students to examine the purpose of segregating land uses in
zoning, the assumptions about human behavior in traditional
fire codes, and the attitudes about people with disabilities
reflected historically and recently in accessibility regulations.

To encourage students to think critically, Welch first asks them

to reflect on their life experiences of being different. The «Who
am I « worksheet, adapted from University of California at
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 207
USA

Berkeley’s diversity training, lists various social identities inclu-

ding race, religion, culture, sexual orientation, ability/disability,
gender, ethnicity and class. Students reflect on the extent to
which they are aware of the various parts of their identity:
– how they learned about that identity: under what circumstan-
ces they are most aware of that identity, have felt different,
excluded or vulnerable;
– how they celebrate that identity; and
– what they have felt witnessing others being stereotyped or
excluded.

White, able-bodied men, in particular, who are tired of being

seen as perpetrators «rediscover» facets of their identity, often-
times invisible, that have exposed them to the experience of
being different in their childhood or adolescence. Dutton (1991)
points out in his chapter on the hidden curriculum, the enor-
mous meaning and power of knowledge when it is constructed
from the real experiences of students – their «lifelines».

This exercise precedes short student papers where they are

asked to respond to topics such as:
• Social Diversity and Architecture: Think about who is well
represented and underrepresented in the professions of archi-
tecture and interior architecture, on the faculty and curricu-
lum of design programs, and among the clients who employ
architects. Does it matter? How do we connect with a profes-
sion that has been historically elitist in nature? What are our
responsibilities to be inclusive and what do we need to act
and think inclusively?
• Making Socially Responsible Places: What can architects do
to design socially responsible places? What aspects of design
can reflect the designers’ social awareness and sensitivity?

Welch assigns two projects for students to learn more about

someone else’s experience of the built environment.
- Students interview a person different from themselves to learn
how well the built environment meets that person’s needs.
- Students select a facet of identity that would lead to a different
experience of the built environment and research what issues
designers should take into consideration.
Students tend to pick commonly identified identities like blind-
ness but a significant number use the opportunity to think
broadly and contribute perspectives that are often overlooked by
designers: carlessness, pregnancy, left handedness, colorblind-
ness, and panic disorder.
208 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Each student conducts a term long assignment to conduct an

environment-behavior analysis of a public place and make
recommendations for improving it. One lens they are asked to
use in their formal observations is who occupies the place and
who is absent. They critique this along with other data to deter-
mine why some places are more inclusive than others. At the
end of nine weeks Welch’s students demonstrate their under-
standing of environment-behavior concepts, including universal
design, by showing how they have incorporated them into the
design projects they have worked on in their studios.

In the course, Housing and Society, Welch uses housing as a

vehicle for examining how the planning and design professions
address social, economic and political issues. She gives a
design problem that asks students to design a unit of housing
that can be lived in over forty years of a household’s transfor-
mations. Emerging demographics point to the need for archi-
tects to design housing that responds to new American
household configurations. Among these trends are women bea-
ring children at an older age, dual worker families, a fifty per-
cent divorce rate, blended families (second marriages between
people with children from previous marriages), the likelihood
of some family member having a temporary or permanent dis-
ability, increases in life expectancy and the majority of older
people wanting to stay out of institutions and to grow old in
their homes.

Stage 1: Starter House for Young Couple – Year One

Stage 2: Divorced Single Mother with Two Young Children –
Year Ten
Stage 3: Blended Family with Four Children – Year Twenty
Stage 4: Older Couple with Aging Parent – Year Thirty
Stage 5: Growing Old at Home – Year Forty

The purpose is to challenge the U.S. notion that every change in

household makeup requires a new living environment. Most of
the changes needed by the different household configurations
can be accommodated by design strategies that anticipate and
provide options for a variety of different life circumstances.

Design studio problems that foster

inclusive planning and design values
Another strategy for embedding universal design into design
education is to assign design studio problems that require a cri-
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 209
USA

tical analysis of exclusion and inclusion. The authors developed

a joint Architecture/Landscape Architecture studio that took a
critical look at how existing residential neighborhoods could
accommodate greater density and meet the needs of a diverse
and aging population. Students critically examined the homoge-
neity implicit in neighborhoods developed over time in accor-
dance with traditional zoning and explore the ramifications of
designing for greater diversity. Then investigated whether per-
mitted increases in density could also enhance livability, by
encouraging building innovations that respond to: changing
household composition and housing needs throughout people’s
lives; changing uses of and demands on neighborhood open
space; increasingly multigenerational and multicultural commu-
nity makeup; and a more sustainable community.

Students worked in multidisciplinary teams that encouraged

them to consider the differing perspectives of others – from
other countries, from other backgrounds, and from different
disciplines. Design exploration took place at multiple scales
from unit design to neighborhood placemaking to urban water-
shed. While the focus was on inclusion and exclusion, universal
design was an identifiable model for creating solutions that
meet the needs of a wide range of people. Applying universal
design to problems at the scale of neighborhood and land use
was difficult for the students to comprehend at first because
most of the existing exemplars illustrate universal design at the
object or interior design scale. The instructors encouraged stu-
dents to read and critique contemporary planning theory and
social research for its relevance to this project. A few specific
exercises were developed to illustrate diversity among the stu-
dents.

Students made individual posters of a favorite home place

where they had lived at some point in their lives and were asked
to identify the special qualities they associated with it (Marcus
1995). They also identified the «cast of characters» that were
important to the place. The students discovered from this exer-
cise that there was a broad array of life/family/housing experi-
ences within this studio. These home places exist within
individual contexts, with a host of outside influences contribu-
ting to the qualities of the place students chose to illustrate. The
next step was to explore how these seemingly disparate experi-
ences might be woven into a tapestry of housing and land use
types that approximates how the students’ define a good neigh-
borhood.
210 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Students were asked, in groups of five to seven individuals, to

develop a single-block (400’ x 400’) of a mythical neighbor-
hood that included all of their favorite home places. They were
free to choose to have each student’s place represented once and
only once, or select some for repeated inclusion into a fabric of
‘higher density’. They were also free to choose how many total
units to include in the block, as well as any additional elements
that they felt would be appropriate or important to the livability
of the neighborhood.

An exercise to envision the diversity of possible household

types seeking inclusion in a neighborhood, the students divided
into pairs and drew numbers from 1–7. They were asked to illu-
strate a household containing that number of people. The twelve
resulting households were pinned up for discussion. The student
pairs were then asked to identify household configurations that
were missing from the initial group and illustrate those as well.
The twenty-four examples represent a range of households that
reflect a diversity of age, ability, culture, composition, as well
as economic and social status. The instructors asked the stu-
dents to use these typical households as representative of who
might choose to live in their neighborhoods to test their hypo-
theses about neighborhood improvements.

For the design project, students were divided into teams to ana-
lyze a real neighborhood and were asked to: 1) increase density
and 2) explore how to make the neighborhood more inclusive
by determining what types of households don’t live there, why,
and what interventions would make the neighborhood more
appealing to them.

A variety of non-designers were invited to discuss the students’

proposals and provide feedback. In addition to offering concrete
ideas about making neighborhoods more welcoming, they were
especially critical of the inadequacy of architecture drawings to
communicate with users. Some students chose to apply univer-
sal design values to the presentation of their work, adding
explanatory text, Braille, and other graphic devices to make
their drawings understandable to non-designers.

Studio is an excellent venue for students to explore how the

design process might be enhanced to bring in opinions and
experiences beyond their own: user participation and student
driven research. The overall challenge of teaching universal
design in the studio setting is to help students think creatively
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 211
USA

and inclusively, at the same time, so that their final designs are
simultaneously aesthetically ‘beautiful’ and socially equitable.

Conclusions
Teaching universal design as a value embedded within each and
every design decision is a daunting challenge. Yet, to help stu-
dents see beyond code driven user requirements and to enable
them to think creatively about how to infuse their own design
work with the values of inclusivity and equity, requires a critical
shift in design thinking. The themes described earlier, that have
informed the authors’ teaching, are also ongoing agenda for
pedagogical invention and offer the following challenges for
sustained, collective inquiry by those teaching universal design.

The Seven Principles of Universal Design provide a foundation

for guidance on achieving universal design but need further
development to be more informative at scales larger than pro-
ducts, rooms, and buildings. Students working on projects with
greater spatial complexity, increased physical scale, and users
with a broad range of identities, found the principles difficult to
apply. Nor do the principles inform complex tradeoffs in buil-
ding or preserving environments that need to meet multiple
goals, such as wilderness habitat preservation in the face of
recreational development, or safe places for children’s play in
light of the role of trial and error in cognitive development.
Students and faculty in landscape architecture, planning, and
architecture are in a unique position to investigate and develop
the inclusive qualities of the Seven Principles at larger scales.

Using «facets of identity» as a tool for teaching and discussing

diversity and inclusivity in the creation of the built environment
reinforces for students the importance of thinking broadly about
users in the design process. Many students, especially 18–21
year olds, believe they are eternally healthy and immortal. They
are also at a critical stage in their own identity development that
leaves them open to discuss how individual traits or ‘facets’
might be supported by the actions that designers and planners
take. By affording students the opportunity to see themselves as
multifaceted users of the places they design, educators create an
opportunity to broaden the discussion to encompass facets stu-
dents do not yet possess. This allows the value of inclusivity to
permeate the discussion in a way that personalizes the issue,
and makes it one that students can grasp, internalize, and use.
Available research on users generally is oriented to the single
212 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

facet of identity, posing a challenge to instructors to integrate

across user categories. A more promising approach than relying
on personal experience and research, however, is to bring the
user/consultant more prominently into the teaching process.

Incorporating users into design teaching would, in the United

States, be a radical departure from prevailing design pedagogy,
challenging the very notion of expertise that design professio-
nals collectively value and promote. Public participation, as a
planning and design activity, has been effectively co-opted by
developers and bureaucrats, seeking to justify their worldview
(Hester 1996, Jones 1998). A return to substantive input from
multiple constituencies is a first step to creating more inclusive
environments. Design students must be exposed to the value,
processes, and politics of user participation during their design
training to be able to exercise a more democratic practice of
making inclusive places.
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 213
USA

References
Adaptive Environments. Universal Design Education Project
2.0. Unpublished report. 1996.
Adaptive Environments. Access to the Design Professions:
Report to the Task Force. Unpublished report. 1999.
Blandy, D., Tepfer F., Zimmer L., Jones S., and Welch P.: Power
and Place. In EDRA 28/1997 Proceedings of the
Environmental Design Research Association, Montreal,
Quebec. 1997.
Dutton, T.: Voices in Architectural Education: Cultural Politics
and Pedagogy. Thomas Dutton, Ed. New York: Bergin and
Garvey. 1991.
Grant, B.: Accommodation and Resistance: The Built
Environment and the African American Experience. In
Dutton, Thomas and Lian Hurst Mann. Reconstructing
Architecture: Critical Discourses and Social Practices.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 1996.
Hester, R.: Wanted: Local Participation with a View in. In
EDRA 27/1996 Proceedings of the Environmental Design
Research Association, Salt Lake City, UT. 1996.
Hunter, D.: Creeps! Disability in Landscape Architecture.
Master’s Thesis in Landscape Architecture, University of
Oregon. 2000.
Jones, S.: Beyond Belligerent Compliance, in Landscape
Architecture Magazine. 1998.
Jones, S.: Decolonizing Landscape Architecture:
Multiculturalism and the Landscape of Future Possibilities
in Wagner, C. (ed.) Design For Change: 1996 Annual
Meeting Proceedings of the American Society of Landscape
Architects. pp. 162–68. 1996.
Lifchez, R.: Rethinking Architecture: Design Students and
Physically Disabled People. Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press. 1987.
Lusher, R. and Mace, R. L.: Design for Physical and Mental
Disabilities. In the Encyclopedia of Architecture. New York:
John Wiley and Sons. 1989.
Mace, R. L.: A Perspective on Universal Design. 1998.
[Link]
Marcus, C. Cooper.: House as a mirror of self: exploring the
deeper meaning of home. Berkeley, CA: Conari Press. 1995.
Ostroff, E.: Mining Our Natural Resources: The User as
Expert. Innovation, the Quarterly Journal of the Industrial
Designers Society of America, Volume 16, No. 1. 1997.
[Link]
214 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Weisman, L.: Discrimination by Design. Chicago: University of

Illinois Press. 1992.
Weisman, L.: Re-designing Architectural Education. In
Rothschild, Joan. (ed) Design and Feminism. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 1999.
Welch, P. (Ed.): Strategies for Teaching Universal Design.
Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments and Berkeley, CA:
MIG Communications. 1995; 2000. Also available at:
[Link]
Welch, P. and Jones, S.: Teaching Universal Design Through
Inclusiveness. In Designing for the Twenty First Century:
Proceedings of an International Conference on Universal
Design. 1998.
Welch, P. and Jones, S.: Evolving Visions: Segregation,
Integration, and Inclusion in the Design of Built Places. In
EDRA 30/1999-The Power of Imagination: Proceedings of
the Environmental Design Research Association. 1999.
Welch, P.: TAKING SPACE: Locating disability in design educa-
tion and practice. In Confronting Conservative Architecture.
ACSA Eastern Regional Conference, Boston, MA. 2000.
Welch, P. and Jones, S.: Advances in Universal Design
Education in the United States. In Preiser, Wolfgang and
Elaine Ostroff (eds.) The Universal Design Handbook. New
York: McGraw-Hill. 2001a.
Welch, P. and Jones, S.: Designing to Transgress: A Model for
Teaching Universal Design Values. Forthcoming article.
2001.

End Notes
I Portions of this chapter have been previously published in The
Universal Design Handbook and in Confronting the Conservative
in Architecture: Proceedings of the 2000 Northeast Regional
Meeting of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture.
II Images have been collected through two competitions. The first
universal design images were made available by Universal
Designers & Consultants, Inc. in 1996 as a slide collection called
Images of Excellence in Universal Design, jointly sponsored by the
National Endowment for the Arts and the National Building
Museum. (See [Link] The
most recent collection of universal design images, Universal Design
Exemplars, is available as a CD-ROM from the Center for
Universal Design and was funded by the National Endowment for
the Arts, NEC Foundation of America and the Trace R&D Center at
the University of Wisconsin-Madison. (See
[Link]
Polly Welch and Stanton Jones
University of Oregon An Opportunity for Critical Discourse in Design Education 215
USA

III These principles refer to the Seven Principles of Universal Design.

See Main Appendix 1 of this document or
[Link]
IV These schools include Iowa State, Miami University, Michigan
State University, Purdue University, State University of New York
at Buffalo, Missouri State, Tennessee State University, Texas Tech
University, and Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
V Presenters included Susan Goltsman, landscape architect and prin-
cipal of Moore Iacofano Goltsman of Berkeley, CA; Joe Meade,
Recreational Wilderness Manager and Access Specialist, United
States Forest Service, Washington, DC; Ricardo Gomes, Professor
of Industrial Design, San Francisco State University; and Kristy
Edmunds, artist and director, Portland (OR) Institute of
Contemporary Art.
216 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 217
USA

2.3 Infusing Universal

Design Into the
Curriculum
Wolfgang F.E. Preiser, Ph.D., University of Cincinnati, USA

This chapter reports on the organizational structure, pedagogy

and teaching methodology, as well as the content of a universal
design course and curriculum elements at the University of
Cincinnati’s College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning.
It describes course structure and teaching methods, and it
details the course content, emphasizing in particular the practi-
cal work, including post-occupancy evaluation (POE), and ana-
lytic, evaluative methods in general. The cooperative education
system, unique for the University of Cincinnati, as far as the
United States is concerned, as well as the field-based, “service
learning” approach to instruction are outlined and thoughts
about future directions in this endeavor are presented.

Organizational Structure
The University of Cincinnati
At the University of Cincinnati, the School of Architecture and
Interior Design is housed in the College of Design,
Architecture, Art & Planning. As the name of the College
implies, there are three other schools besides Architecture and
Interior Design, namely, the School of Design, the School of
Art, and the School of Planning. Current enrollment at the col-
lege is approximately 1,200 students. The College has been in
existence for over 75 years, and presently occupies a facility
that consists of an older part dating from the 50’s and 70’s, and
a recent addition designed by Peter Eisenman (East Facade, see
Figure 1), which was completed in 1996, with a total square
footage amounting to 310,000 square feet.

The School of Architecture and Interior Design has an enrollment

of 450 students in architecture and 200 students in interior
design. The existing MS Arch. Program has about 20 students
enrolled. There are 25 full-time and 5 part-time faculty members.
218 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Fig. 1. East Facade of the College.

Photo: Bulletin of the University of Cincinnati in 1997.

The cooperative education system, which is unique for the

University of Cincinnati, provides all students the opportunity
to work in professional practices for a total of seven quarters, or
almost two years, prior to being able to graduate. The
Professional Practice Division of the University assists students
in job applications and placement. This means that at all times,
50% of the student body are present on campus while taking
course work, while the other 50% is away. A network of over
400 firms has been established, with additional internship
opportunities being available in a number of firms in London,
United Kingdom, and Germany.

Curricular Structure
At the present time, the curriculum is undergoing major change
by being transformed from a six-year Bachelor degree as the
terminal, first professional degree, to a Master of Architecture
in the 4+2 format, meaning four years of undergraduate study
leading to a Bachelor of Science in Architecture degree
([Link].), plus two years of graduate study culminating in the
Master’s degree.

While there is no sequence of courses focusing solely on uni-

versal design in this curriculum, elements of universal design
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 219
USA

are infused at different levels, culminating in a singular elective

course at the fifth year level. This starts in the freshman year in
an introductory course called “Introduction to the Theory of
Environmental Design II”. It continues in mid-level courses,
such as, “Introduction to Programming”. The latter two courses
are required, and have to be taken by all architecture and inte-
rior design students. Further immersion into universal design
subject matter is possible through several elective courses,
which the author offers upper level students, such as, “Building
Evaluation” and “Universal Design: Case Studies in
Architecture”. Both of these courses are field-based and service
learning oriented, and they get the students involved in studying
real people in real world projects in the local community, as
opposed to abstract book learning.

Further opportunities exist for students to enroll in independent

study credit for purposes of pursuing individual or team investi-
gations or projects emphasizing universal design issues. Such is
the case with a team of two students who are currently participa-
ting in a universal design competition at the national level, focu-
sing on a universally designed elementary school. Finally,
students who are so inclined may choose their thesis subject to
be universal design oriented. Thesis implies a theoretical written
investigation in addition to a comprehensive final design project
prior to graduation. In such cases, the author may be asked to
serve on thesis committees and to advise on directions and
resources for the thesis. Accordingly, networking at the national
and international levels is a common method in order to provide
the student with the absolutely highest quality information, pre-
cedents or access to literature, documentations and advice.

Incentives
Recent surveys of major employers in architecture and interior
design in the United States ranked our interior design program
graduates first and our architecture graduates third in the nation
(Cramer, 2000). Our graduates are most valued by employers
for their capacity of critical thinking, a product of both signifi-
cant professional experience and theoretical/academic instruc-
tion, starting with the first year and ending at the time of
graduation. Thus, questioning basic assumptions behind pro-
gramming and design decisions is a position commonly held by
our students.

Part of this questioning has to do with who one considers the

client to be, and further, what the client’s needs are, depending
220 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

on such factors as age, gender, cultural and ethnic origin, and so

forth. Universal design and its seven Principles facilitate such
questioning, and it can easily be incorporated into research
and/or value-based programming, which, in turn, becomes a
solid foundation for good design. In all of the courses the
author is offering, students are encouraged to produce work
which is of very high quality and which can become part of the
student’s portfolio.

Teaching Methods
Relationship to Planning/Architecture/Design
Theory
The approach taken to instruction on universal design topics is
heavily biased toward environment/behavior studies, a field
which has grown up over the past 30 years (Preiser, 1999). The
foundation and theoretical perspective regarding person-envi-
ronment relationships was described as a “habitability frame-
work” (Preiser, 1983). Over time, this framework evolved into a
conceptualization which is not static, but rather a dynamic,
forward-moving and evolving system with feedback and feed-
forward loops, and a “driver”or engine which moves the sys-
tem. These could be planners, programmers, designers, of
products, environments and systems, but they could also
involve the end-users. This was described in the book Design
Intervention: Toward a More Humane Architecture (Preiser,
Vischer and White, 1991).

Most recently, in a state-of-the-art review of evaluation practi-

ces, as far as the built environment and products are concerned,
this conceptualization was extended to be applied to universal
design. Universal design evaluation (UDE) bases its perfor-
mance criteria on the seven Universal Design Principles listed
in the introduction to this book, and develops the notion of uni-
versal design performance evaluation (see Figure 2), (Preiser,
2001a) even further than reported in the Universal Design
Handbook (Preiser, 2001b). 8

8 Editor’s note: Evaluation methods are also described in detail in chap-

ters 1.4, and 2.5.
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 221
USA

Fig. 2. Universal Design Evaluation (UDE) Process Model.

User Involvement
It is the author’s basic teaching philosophy to involve end users,
as well as consultants, guest lecturers and other feedback sources
in his courses and projects. In the past this has included organiza-
tions serving persons with disabilities, such as the blind, and, in a
particular instance, the involvement by both undergraduate and
graduate students continued over a number of years by visiting
and carrying out field-based research at the New Mexico School
for the Blind. Projects such as these teach research and data
gathering skills, and by definition they have to be carried out
with the members of the population that is to be studied.

Furthermore, students involved in these projects learned how to

write research proposals for purposes of grant funding, and fur-
ther, how to write up and publish the results of these studies. In
some cases, Master’s Theses were prepared by using this appro-
ach to studying phenomena with intense end-user involvement.
Some of this work received national recognition through several
awards, thereby exposing the work of students not just at the
local university level, but in the entire country.
222 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Part of this teaching methodology involves field trips to such

environments as public places, transportation facilities, shop-
ping malls, Alzheimer care centers, retirement homes, as well
as an individual home which was universally designed by the
author. These field trips permit direct observation, recording of
behavior and interaction with the occupants of the above-men-
tioned environments. Through the concept of “service learning”
mentioned above, students get involved in the community and
are asked to synthesize their experiences and lessons learned in
the form of reports and presentations to the “clients,” pertaining
to both positive and negative performance of design features.

Experience-Based Learning
Evaluating facilities in terms of compliance with the Americans
With Disabilities Act (ADA) is a standard requirement for cour-
ses taught by the author. On occasion this involves students using
wheelchairs and checking out buildings and their surroundings
for accessibility. Other methods used include direct observation,
still and video photography, as well as physical measurements of
space, dimensions and ambient environment performance, such
as lighting, acoustics, odor, airflow, temperature, etc. In a project
called “Vital Signs,” which was sponsored by the University of
California at Berkeley and the Pacific Power & Electric
Company, students first interviewed, surveyed and observed the
users of the college complex (see Figure 1 above), followed by
physical measurements of lighting levels and sound levels at so-
called “trouble spots” that were identified through the user feed-
back in interviews and surveys. That way, a very demonstrable
correlation between subjective responses and objective physical
measurements could be established (Vital Signs, 1999).

Analysis of Barriers in the Environment

As indicated above, the analysis of barriers in the environment is a
standard component of courses offered by the author (see
Curricular Structure, above). In fact, on occasion, this is the only
focus of field-based class assignments. Furthermore, it is an
important component of the three-day POE workshop modules on
building evaluation which the author has conducted world wide,
not just with University students, but with architects, planners and
facility managers, on both public and private sector buildings.

Sequencing courses in evaluation programming and design has

been an experiment the author has attempted on several occasi-
ons in the past. The purpose of this approach is to immerse the
student deeply into the subject matter, characteristics and capa-
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 223
USA

bilities of the end users they are designing for. Therefore, carry-
ing out facility visits to state-of-the-art facilities of the building
type in question is a quick method for rapid learning about the
building that the student probably knows very little about, such
as Alzheimer care centers, complemented by literature research
and a more formal evaluation effort. The resulting findings and
recommendations can be directly applied to a programming and
design project (Preiser, 1982).

This approach permits students to gather data for the evaluation

and to compile the program in a collective manner; i.e., by
teams of students, while the design will be carried out on an
individual basis.

Contact With Industry/Building Trade

Over the years, the author has built and maintained an extensive
network of colleagues in professional organizations and indu-
stry. Contacts have ranged from serving on the American
Institute of Architects’ Research Advisory Panel in the 1970s, to
chairing committees on programming and post-occupancy
evaluation at the National Academy of Sciences’ Building
Research Board in the 1980s. Numerous conference presen-
tations to such organizations as NEOCON and EURO-
FM/IFMA typically addressed issues and methods in building
performance evaluation, as reflected in their respective con-
ference proceedings and other publications.

Direct involvement by the author with industry in the form of

consulting for client organizations is exemplified by the POE
Training Workshops for Kaiser Permanente (Preiser, 1996), an
excerpt of which can be found in the section dealing with
Practical Work below. In all the other listed three-day work-
shops, a similar approach was used with the participants being a
mix of client representatives (staff, planners, architects, facili-
ties managers), as well as students and faculty representing
local universities’ schools of architecture.

Course Content
Social, Political and Demographic Context and
Issues
The above topics are covered in an elective upper-level course
entitled, “Universal Design: Case Studies in Architecture”. For
information on course context, see the syllabus in Appendix 2
below.
224 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The course uses as a text the Universal Design Handbook, (Preiser

and Ostroff, 2001), which addresses these and other items in a
comprehensive manner and from a global perspective. The struc-
ture of the Handbook with its 10 sections makes a perfect fit for
the 10-week quarters our University system provides for:

– Part I, Introduction
– Part II, Premises and Perspectives in Universal Design
– Part III, Accessibility Standards and Universal Design
Guidelines.
– Part IV, Public Policy Systems and Issues
– Part V, Residential Environments
– Part VI, Universal Design Practices
– Part VII, Education and Research
– Part VIII, Case Studies
– Part IX, Information Technology
– Part X, The Future of Universal Design

Different, even contradicting, value positions are presented

when contrasting universal design in the industrialized world
with that in the industrializing countries. For An outline of the
Universal Design Handbook, see the Appendix of this book.
This text and course also addresses demographic and aging
trends, as well as political and social issues that are connected
with the emerging movement of universal design.

Theory of Universal Design

While there is no one, coherent theory of universal design, there
are a number of elements which the course and its text address.
For example, issues of individual accessibility needs and affor-
dances of the designed and built environment are dealt with by
Powell Lawton (Lawton, 2001), as well as the notion of healing
by design and the impact of the environment on brain develop-
ment are discussed by John Zeisel (Zeisel, 2001).

While the aforementioned “habitability framework” constitutes

yet another element of theoretically linking persons to the envi-
ronment, person-environment relationships and their effect on
the well-being of the occupants of environments or the users of
products are at the core of this course in which students read
and research topics of their own choice within the framework of
the course text categories.

The global network of 69 authors or author groups who have

written the chapters of the course text, constitute an invaluable
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 225
USA

resource which students can tap into, not only as far as indivi-
dual chapters and their content are concerned, but also in terms
of the resource sections contained in most chapters which list
Web sites and addresses of important organizations, publica-
tions and other items. With today’s information technology and
Internet access to resources, this provides students with the
most relevant and up-to-date information possible, literally at
their fingertips.

Practical Work
Field exercises and service learning, as explained above, are
integral components of this course which permit students to get
involved in the community. As the name of the course indicates,
“Universal Design: Case Studies in Architecture”, the course
helps students to immerse themselves in particular segments of
the population and their respective needs, as far as the designed
and built environment is concerned. Using the model of case
study based learning, students carry out evaluative research
using the universal design evaluation framework referred to
above and, by analyzing and comparing the case studies, are
able to distill the lessons learned, both in terms of positive and
negative aspects.

Examples of specific case studies conducted within the past

year are: Alzheimer Care Centers; Family Health Centers; and,
laboratory buildings at the University of Cincinnati, the
Cardiovascular Research Center and the Molecular Science
Research Center (designed by Frank O. Gehry).

In all cases, the objective is, among others, to have the project
report become part of the student’s portfolio.

An Example of Practical Work:

A POE Training Workshop and Facility
Visit
Synopsis of Workshop
A 3-day POE training workshop was held at the Kaiser
Permanente Northwestern Regional Office in Portland, Oregon.
The purpose was to train Kaiser Permanente staff in facility
visit and POE methodology and more important, to evaluate a
prototype medical office building in Longview/Kelso,
Washington, which had recently been completed and occupied
(see Figure 3). The structure of the 3-day training workshop was
as follows:
226 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Fig. 3. Kaiser Permanente Medical Office Building.

Day 1: POE Training for Facility Visits. Approximately 20

Kaiser Permanente facilities-related staff members participated
in lecture presentations on the history, evolution, and methodo-
logy of post-occupancy evaluation and facility visits in particu-
lar. The presentations included slide lectures and videotapes of
previous POE case studies. At the end of day 1, three subteams
were formed that would address different areas of the building
to be evaluated. Base documentation on the building, such as
floor plans, organizational charts, mission statements, etc. were
reviewed. This included questionnaire surveys that had been
sent to the administrator and supervisory staff of the medical
office building prior to the workshop.

Day 2: Data Gathering. On this day, on-site data gathering

was carried out in the medical office building. Methods in-
cluded interviews with administrators and supervisory staff, as
well as walkthroughs and still photography of all major buil-
ding areas. Subteams covered the assigned building areas and
personnel, and they gathered intermittently for review meetings
and reports to the workshop coordinator. At the end of day 2,
subteams were assigned summary draft reports to be presented
on day 3. Photographic slides were processed overnight.

Day 3: Reporting. Subteams reviewed their findings and

drafted preliminary written and verbal reports to be presented
in a final wrap-up session with senior management. All the
recommendations in both the written and oral presentations
were organized into major sections by area or department.
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 227
USA

Furthermore, recommendations were made in three categories

of issues:
• Category 1: Issues that could be addressed immediately.
• Category 2: Issues to be incorporated in future buildings.
• Category 3: Issues that require policy changes.

In addition, issues were grouped according to the views of staff

and patients (called members at Kaiser Permanente).

Facility Visit
A facility visit, like an indicative post-occupancy evaluation
(POE) (Preiser, et al., 1988) does what the name implies. It pro-
vides an indication of major successes and failures in a buil-
ding’s performance. This type of visit is usually carried out
within a very short time span, from two to three hours to one or
two days. It presumes that the evaluator/evaluation team is
experienced in conducting facility visits and is familiar with the
building type to be evaluated, as well as the issues that tend to
be associated with it. The following is an overview of data-
gathering methods that are typical of a facility visit.

Typical Issues Identified in Facility Visits. According to the

author’s experience with facility visits, the most common issues
in building performance range from technical performance
(e.g., poor airflow) to psychological concerns (e.g., lack of pati-
ent privacy); leakage, poor signage, lack of storage, lack of pri-
vacy, hallway blockage, poor air circulation, poor temperature
control, handicapped accessibility, security problems, health
and safety problems, aesthetic problems, entry door problems
with wind and accumulation of dirt, inadequacy of space for
equipment (e.g., copiers), maintainability of glass surfaces
(e.g., skywalks or inaccessible skylights), and so on.

While this list of issues appears to identify only negative perfor-

mance aspects in facilities, positive aspects of building perfor-
mance are usually identified also. Both positive and negative
performance aspects were found and prioritized by the facility
visit team, which consisted of architects, planners and facilities
personnel of the Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region head-
quartered in Portland, Oregon. The author then carried out a
very similar project for the Southern California Region head-
quarters of Kaiser Permanente in Pasadena, California, where a
facility visit was conducted at the Mission Viejo Medical Office
Building.
228 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

In the past, the author found that approximately 80 percent of all

important issues and information can be identified during a 1-day
or half-day visit, depending on the size and complexity of the
building, to a facility in a very efficient and cost-effective manner.

Preparatory Work. It is useful to prepare the respondents at a

health care facility for the impending facility visit by sending
both the structured interview schedule and the quality profile
survey to the administrator of the facility. This helps the admi-
nistrator focus on the types of issues in which the facility visi-
ting team is interested. It is helpful if a limited number of
supervisory staff responds to the quality profile survey, which
is returned to the facility visit team prior to the visit (see
Appendix C for generic interview and survey instruments).
Thus, the team will get a good sense of where the problems and
priorities lie or where the excellent features are to be found in
the facility, even before the site visit occurs.

Archival and Document Evaluation. If possible, as-built dra-

wings of the facility to be evaluated are obtained and analyzed
before the visit. In addition, space utilization schedules, safety
and security records, accident reports, remodeling and repair
records, and any other historical/archival data that may be perti-
nent are obtained and analyzed. These activities do not necessa-
rily occur on the building site.

Performance Issues. A list of generic building evaluation ques-

tions (see Appendix C) is submitted by the evaluators to the cli-
ent organization prior to the site visit. It is common that the
facilities manager or committee delegated to deal with ques-
tions of space planning and building performance reply to
open-ended questions concerning the performance elements.
These questions deal with technical building performance, as
far as environmental conditions are concerned. In addition, they
deal with functional appropriateness (adequacy of space and
health, safety and security issues, for example) and behavioral
or psychological concerns such as the “image” of the facility.
Replies to such questions represent management’s knowledge
not only of problems, but also of successful features of a given
facility.

Walkthrough Evaluation. Following a discussion with man-

agement about the responses to these performance issues, a
walkthrough evaluation is conducted, covering the entire facility
and addressing the issues raised earlier. In addition, the evalua-
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 229
USA

tors use direct observation and, if warranted, still photography

or video to identify and record building attributes that may
deserve particular attention. Within a few hours, a walkthrough
can comprehensively cover a given building.

Interviews. Individual or group interviews with selected per-

sonnel responsible for and familiar with the facility and a de-
briefing of the client representatives conclude the on-site visit
with the client organization. Subsequently, a brief summary of
successful and unsuccessful features of the evaluated facility is
submitted to the client organization for final verification and
review.

Outline of Facility Visit Phases and Steps

This outline of facility visit phases and steps is intended to be
generic, to provide the reader with a basic understanding of
each step’s purpose and results. The phase and steps do not
necessarily apply to all facility visits, nor are all items listed,
needed, or available in every facility visit.

Phase 1: Planning the Facility Visit Overview. There are seve-

ral preliminaries to observe in initiating and organizing a faci-
lity visit prior to on-site data collection. Liaison with the client
organization is a critical aspect of all visits. The client must be
briefed on the nature of the visit, the types of activities invol-
ved, the resources needed, and client responsibilities in carrying
out the visit. After agreement is reached on how extensive a
visit will be conducted, historical and other background infor-
mation that may assist in planning the evaluation is identified
and obtained. Coordination with user groups within the buil-
ding is begun, and potential benefits for participants are out-
lined.

At this point, on-line searches and reviews of the state-of-the-

art literature, including preparation of an annotated biblio-
graphy, are carried out (in this case, focusing on health care
facilities).

Resources for conducting the evaluation are organized, and a

preliminary schedule, work plan and budget are established in
which project team members’ tasks and responsibilities are
defined. At the same time, appropriate research methods and
analytical techniques are determined, and sources for evaluation
criteria are identified. The three steps included in this first
phase are reconnaissance and feasibility, resource planning, and
230 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

research planning.
Phase 2: Conducting the Facility Visit Overview. In this phase
of the facility visit, findings are reported, conclusions drawn,
recommendations made, and eventually, the resulting actions
reviewed. The findings of the facility visits are organized, and
an effective reporting framework is devised. Usually, recom-
mendations imply that the results from the facility visit must be
prioritized, a task requiring continued liaison with the client.
Finally, actions resulting from the facility visit are reviewed to
ascertain that benefits envisioned in initiating the evaluation
have, in fact, been achieved.

The steps involved in this phase are reporting findings, recom-

mending actions, and reviewing outcomes.

Conclusions
The shortcut POE methodology outlined here has proven to be
quite effective in troubleshooting and/or prototype testing of
building designs. This success is partly due to the following
conditions:
– The POE/facility walkthrough is carried out in-house; i.e., by
staff members of the client organization.
– The POE results are fed directly into future medical office
building designs and thus have strategic importance for the
organization.
– Top-level management initiated and supported the POE.
They subsequently received and helped implement the fin-
dings and recommendations.
– Information control is absolutely essential for this type of
POE to be effective. Too often, negative findings lead to
finger-pointing and ill feelings about those who committed
mistakes. As long as information is released to the public
only after clearance by the client organization, this problem
should be resolved.
– Training of in-house staff is one of the most effective ways to
promote continuous use of POE without having to resort to
expensive external consultants.

Experience has shown that the approximate cost of carrying out

walkthrough-type indicative POEs or facility visits is USD 0.50
per square foot of evaluated space. This benchmark value held
true in this project also, and it shows that significant findings
and recommendations can result from a rather inexpensive and
expeditious POE effort.
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 231
USA

Course Improvements and Future

Developments
In the context of the new Masters of Architecture Program at
the University of Cincinnati, scheduled to commence in the
Summer of 2001, it is expected that the aforementioned course
on universal design will become a required course for all gradu-
ate students; and thus, it has the potential of impacting the atti-
tudes and design philosophies of our graduates in significant
ways. First, their approach to programming and designing envi-
ronments will be changed toward the inclusion of universal
design philosophy and concepts. This could be reinforced
through the aforementioned sequence of universal design evalu-
ation programming and design studio work.

Secondly, as graduate students in the cooperative education

system carry out internships in firms around the country, their
thinking may affect that of their employers over the long haul.
Furthermore, students from the School of Design may enroll in
this course if it is cross-listed, and thereby influence the work of
graphic designers, industrial designers, digital designers, and
others in the College.

Finally, as administrators, such as school directors and the posi-

tion of Dean of the College open up, the new universal design
paradigm, as a philosophical and conceptual foundation for
design disciplines, may become one of the criteria for candidate
selection. Through continuous feedback and feedforward,
between students and faculty, as well as the “clients” for case
study field research, the course will be refined and its quality
improved over time.

References
Balaram, S., Universal Design in the Majority World. In:
Preiser, W.F.E. and Ostroff, E. (Eds), Universal Design
Handbook. New York. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
Cramer, James P. (Ed.), Almanac of Architecture and Design
2000. Norcross, GA: Greenway Group, 2000.
Lawton, P., Designing by Degree: Assessing and Incorporating
Individual Accessibility Needs. In: Preiser, W.F.E. and
Ostroff, E. (Eds), Universal Design Handbook. New York.
McGraw-Hill, 2001.
Preiser, W.F.E., Toward Universal Design Evaluation. In:
Preiser, W.F.E. and Ostroff, E. (Eds), Universal Design
Handbook. New York. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
232 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Preiser, W.F.E., The Evolution of Post-Occupancy Evaluation –

Toward Building Performance and Universal Design
Evaluation. Washington, DC: National Academy of
Sciences, 2001 (forthcoming).
Preiser, W.F.E., Environment-Behavior Studies – A (Personal)
Retrospective. In: Mann, T. (Ed.), The Power of
Imagination: Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the
Environmental Design Research Association. Edmond, OK
EDRA, Inc., 1999.
Preiser, W.F.E., POE Training Workshop and Prototype Testing
at the Kaiser Permanente Medical Office Building in
Mission Viejo, California, USA. In: Baird, G., et al. (Eds).
Building Evaluation Techniques. London: McGraw-Hill,
1996.
Preiser, W.F.E., Design Innovation and the Challenge of
Change. In: Preiser, W.F.E., Vischer, J.C., and White, E.T.
(Eds). Design Intervention: Toward a More Humane
Architecture. New York. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991.
Preiser, W.F.E., Vischer, J.C., and White, E.T. (Eds), Design
Intervention: Toward a More Humane Architecture. New
York. Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991.
Preiser, W.F.E., Environmental Design Cybernetics: A
Relativistic Framework for the Design of Space Stations and
Settlements. In: Harrison, A., Clearwater, C. and McKay,
C.P. (Eds), The Human Experience in Antarctica:
Application to Life in Space. New York. Springer, 1990.
Preiser, W.F.E., Habitability – A Conceptual Approach Towards
Linking Human Behavior and Physical Environment. In
Borden, R. (Ed.), Human Ecology: A Gathering of
Perspectives. Washington, DC. Society for Human
Ecology, 1986.
Preiser, W.F.E., The Habitability Framework: A Conceptual
Approach Towards Linking Human Behavior and Physical
Environment. Guildford, Surrey, U.K. Design Studies, Vol. 4,
No. 2, April 1983, pp. 84–91.
Preiser, W.F.E., Behavioral Science and the Design Studio –
Results of an Experiment in Sequencing Post-Occupancy
Evaluation, Programming and Design in a Graduate Level
Studio. L’Hotel d’Architecture – Proceedings of the 70th
Annual Meeting of the Association of Collegiate Schools of
Architecture, Quebec, Canada. Washington, DC: ACSA,
1982.
Preiser, W.F.E and Ostroff, E. (Eds), Universal Design
Handbook. New York. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 233
USA

Story, M.F., Principles of Universal Design. In: Preiser, W.F.E.

and Ostroff, E. (Eds), Universal Design Handbook. New
York. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
Vital Signs Web Address, 1999:
[Link]
/[Link]
Zeisel, J., Healing by Design. In: Preiser, W.F.E. and Ostroff, E.
(Eds), Universal Design Handbook. New York. McGraw-
Hill, 2001.

Appendix 1
Generic Evaluation Instruments:
Structured Interview and Building
Occupant Survey
UNIVERSAL DESIGN EVALUATION (UDE)
Building Evaluation Interview Questions – Indicative Level
We would like to know how well your facility performs for all
those who occupy it. Successes and failures (if any) are consi-
dered insofar as they affect occupant health, safety, efficient
functioning, and psychological well-being. Your answers will
help improve the design of future, similar buildings.

Below please identify successes in the building by responding

to the following broad information categories and by referring
to documented evidence or specific building areas whenever
possible. First, please comment on the issues which have been
most serious in recent times and then comment on the adequacy
of the following:

1) Overall Design Concept

2) Site Design: Contextuality, Access for Deliveries/Waste
Disposal
3) Health/Safety Performance
4) Security Performance
5) Exterior Appearance
6) Interior Appearance
7) Activity Spaces Performance
8) Spatial Relationships, Work Flow, etc.
9) Circulation Areas; e.g., lobby, hallways, stairs, elevators,
escalators, etc.
10) Heating/Cooling and Ventilation Performance
11) Lighting Performance; e.g., day vs. artificial lighting
234 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

12) Acoustic Performance

13) Plumbing Performance
14) Electrical Performance
15) Surface Materials Performance; i.e., durability and main-
tainability of floors, walls, ceilings, etc.
16) Under-utilized or overcrowded spaces
17) Conformance with the Principles of Universal Design
18) Compliance with ADA Accessibility Requirements
19) Efficiency of Space Utilization: Ratio of gross vs. net
assignable area
20) Energy Conservative design/sq. ft./year
21) Other, please specify (e.g., needed facilities currently
lacking)

Occupant Survey – Investigative Level

We wish to conduct a performance evaluation of your building.
The purpose of this evaluation is to assess how well the buil-
ding performs for those who occupy it in terms of health, safety,
security, functionality, and psychological comfort. The benefits
of an evaluation include: identification of positive and negative
performance aspects of the building; better building utilization;
feedback on how to improve future, similar buildings; or, remo-
deling of your own building.

In the survey that follows, please respond only to those questi-

ons that are applicable to you. Indicate your answers by mar-
king the appropriate blanks with an “X”. The key for quality
ratings is: EX = Excellent quality; G = Good quality; F = Fair
quality; P = Poor quality.
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 235
USA

1) Please rate the overall quality of this building:

EX G F P N/A
a) Aesthetic quality of exterior [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Aesthetic quality of interior [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Amount of space [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Environmental quality (lighting,
acoustics, temperature, etc.) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Proximity to views [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Adaptability to changing uses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Security [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) ADA Compliance [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Maintenance [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Relationship of spaces/layout [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
k) Quality of building materials
(1) Floors [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
(2) Walls [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
(3) Ceilings [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
l) Other: Specific issues in universal
design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

2) Please rate the overall quality of the building site:

EX G F P N/A
a) Vehicular access [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Parking [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Delivery [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Waste Removal [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Aesthetic quality of views [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Landscaping [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Pedestrian Access [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Other: Specific issues in
universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
236 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

3) In an average work week, how many hours do you spend in the following types of
spaces (specify). Note: At the bottom line, please total the numbers of hours
spent in each type of space.

Space A -------------------------------------------------

Space B -------------------------------------------------

Space C -------------------------------------------------

Space D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Space E -------------------------------------------------

HOURS A B C D E
0–5 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
6–10 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
11–15 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
16–20 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
21–25 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
26–30 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
31–35 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
36–40 [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
40+ [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

4) Please rate the overall quality of the following areas in the building:

EX G F P N/A
a) Space Category A [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Space Category B [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Space Category C [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Space Category D [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Space Category E [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Restrooms [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Storage [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Elevator(s) [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Stairs/Corridors [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Parking [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
k) Other: Specific issues
in universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 237
USA

5) Please rate the overall quality of Space Category A in terms of the following:

EX G F P N/A
a) Adequacy of Space [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Lighting [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Acoustics [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Temperature [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Air Movement [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Odor [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Aesthetic Appeal [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Security [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Flexibility of Use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Other: Specific issues in
universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

6) Please rate the overall quality of Space Category B in terms of the following:

EX G F P N/A
a) Adequacy of Space [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Lighting [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Acoustics [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Temperature [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Air Movement [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Odor [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Aesthetic Appeal [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Security [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Flexibility of Use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Other: Specific issues in
universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

7) Please rate the overall quality of Space Category C in terms of the following:

EX G F P N/A
a) Adequacy of Space [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Lighting [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Acoustics [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Temperature [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Air Movement [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Odorv [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Aesthetic Appeal [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Security [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Flexibility of Use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Other: Specific issues in
universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
238 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

8) Please rate the overall quality of Space Category D in terms of the following:

EX G F P N/A
a) Adequacy of Space [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Lighting [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Acoustics [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Temperature [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Air Movement [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Odor [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Aesthetic Appeal [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Security [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Flexibility of Use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Other: Specific issues in
universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

9) Please rate the overall quality of Space Category E in terms of the following:

EX G F P N/A
a) Adequacy of Space [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
b) Lighting [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
c) Acoustics [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
d) Temperature [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
e) Air Movement [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
f) Odor [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
g) Aesthetic Appeal [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
h) Security [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
i) Flexibility of Use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
j) Other: Specific issues in
universal design [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

10) Please select and rank, in order of importance, universal design features which
are needed but currently lacking in your building:

1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

2) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 239
USA

11) Please make suggestions in regards to future universal design related improve-
ments in the building delivery process of your building type (e.g., more user
input, better programs, etc.)

-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------

12) Demographic Information:

a) Your Room #/Building Area: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

b) Your Position: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
c) # of years with the present organization: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Checklist Of Useful Documents

Client-Related Information
1) Client mission statement, organizational chart, and staffing.
2) Initial program from building.
3) As-built floor plans (may require updating).
4) Space assignments and schedules.
5) Building-related accident reports.
6) Records of theft, vandalism, and security problems.
7) Maintenance/repair records from facility manager.
8) Universal design and ADA-related audits.
9) Energy audits or review comments from heating/cooling
plant manager.
10) Any other feedback concerning the building which may be
on record.

Building Type-Related Information

1) Identification of select recent, similar and excellent facilities
in the region or country.
2) Programs and other pertinent information on the building
type being evaluated.
3) Identification and assessment of state-of-the-art literature
(e.g., technical manuals and design guides).
4) Building type-specific performance criteria derived from the
seven Universal Design Principles.
240 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Appendix 2
Syllabus for “Universal Design:
Case Studies in Architecture”
School of Architecture & Interior Design
Architecture 23-301-547
College of Design, Architecture, Art & Planning
Instructor: Wolfgang F.E. Preiser

1. Purpose: Why is Universal Design so important? In a

global and aging marketplace, which is rapidly growing
smaller through technology and e-commerce, there is a
need for a range of human-centered products, facilities,
amenities that people need and want. People worldwide
are living about 20 years longer. In the United States
alone, there are over 50 million people who are perma-
nently disabled, and everyone is likely at some time to
experience disability as a mismatch between themselves
and their environment. The need has never been greater to
design buildings, rooms, public spaces, and products that
can be used by all people. This course fosters experiential
learning through immersion into field trips and research
methodology for exploring the effects of built environ-
ments on their users. This may include actual evaluation
and field studies of public places and buildings.
Involvement in actual field research situations will be
preceded by the identification and comparative analysis of
key concepts in the research literature.

2. Approach: Every week there will be one session with lec-

ture presentations by the instructor(s) and one session for
student presentations and discussion. In the lecture pre-
sentations, selected articles from the course text and re-
search literature, as well as other examples, will be used to
provide an overview of the field of universal design. Case
study examples on different building types and user types
will be identified in the research literature, including rese-
arch journals, conference proceedings, reference works,
and relevant data bases. Students will identify research
topics of his/her choice, and will conduct initial readings
into this topic area. This will be followed by a systematic
on-line computerized literature search. A project proposal
will be prepared prior to mid-quarter. It will be critiqued
and executed by the students during the second half of the
quarter.
 Wolfgang Preiser
University of Cincinnati Infusing Universal Design Into the Curriculum 241
USA

3. Topics: Principles of Universal Design; Research Methods;

Setting/Building Types; People Types; other.

4. Requirements:
– Literature search on a topic in the course text.
– A literature review (4+ pages, double-spaced) on three
or more articles on universal design. A summary of
findings will be presented in class.
– Project proposal (2 pages, double-spaced)
– Mid-term literature essay (5+ pages, double-spaced) on
universal design issues pertaining to the final project.
– Final project report (10+ pages, double-spaced)

5. Readings: The required text is the Universal Design

Handbook. In addition, books on a variety of research
methods are available on loan from the library collection.
Recommended books for this course are Inquiry by
Design and Methods in Environmental and Behavior
Research.
242 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 243
USA

2.4 Distance Education

in Universal Design
Molly Follette Story, M.S., The Center for Universal Design,
North Carolina State University, U.S.A.

A Course Is Born
When North Carolina State University decided to increase its
investment in distance education, the university provided fun-
ding for the development of Internet courses to several depart-
ments to support the instructor’s time and the purchase of
appropriate web page authoring software. The university also
offered a summer course to train instructors in the process of
developing such courses.

The College of Design recognized that universal design would

be a good topic for a distance education course. This chapter
describes the Internet course that was developed by the author
with this funding during the latter half of 1999.

The Principles of Universal Design

Interest in universal design is increasing dramatically world-
wide among design practitioners, builders and manufacturers
and particularly, at institutions of higher learning. As a result,
the demand for courses on universal design is increasing.

One of the topics of interest is the Principles of Universal

Design whose development was coordinated by staff of the
Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State University.
Every year, many visitors come to the Center to learn about its
work, particularly the work of the late Ronald L. Mace, the
Center’s founder.

The Principles of Universal Design were one result of a

Research and Demonstration Project conducted from 1994 to
1997 at the Center for Universal Design. The project was fun-
ded by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). The authors
of the Principles included Ron Mace and nine of his colleagues,
a working group of architects, product designers, engineers, and
244 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

environmental design researchers from six different U.S. insti-

tutions: Bettye Rose Connell, Mike Jones, Jim Mueller, Abir
Mullick, Elaine Ostroff, Jon Sanford, Ed Steinfeld, Molly Story,
and Gregg Vanderheiden.

The seven Principles of Universal Design were created to sup-

port the evaluation of existing designs, guide the design process
and educate both designers and consumers about the characte-
ristics of more usable products and environments.

Course Description
The North Carolina State University distance education course
described in this chapter was structured around the Principles of
Universal Design and was designated ID 492, Special Topics in
Universal Design. Because it is the home department of the
instructor, the course is hosted by the department of Industrial
Design; however, the course is appropriate for all design disci-
plines.

The course objectives were described as follows:

The purpose of this course is to give students a basic under-
standing of the concepts and Principles of Universal Design.
It presents the benefits of the universal design approach for
people with disabilities and for all individuals. Students will
be introduced to the history of universal design, the broad
range of human abilities, and numerous real-world examples
of designs that satisfy the Principles. By the end of the
course, students should have an appreciation for the diver-
sity of the human race and be able to recognize universal
designs as well as usability obstacles that have been desig-
ned into other products and environments.

The course, taught entirely via the Internet, is an elective avai-

lable to anyone at the university as well as anyone who registers
with the university to take continuing education courses. The
course runs one semester of seventeen weeks and offers three
credit hours to registered students.

The course is based on and taught from the book, co-authored

by the instructor, The Universal Design File: Designing for
People of All Ages and Abilities (Story, Mueller and Mace,
1998). Chapter 1 of the book presents a brief history of univer-
sal design including the relevant legislation passed in the
United States in the second half of the 20th Century. Chapter 2
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 245
USA

discusses the range of all measures of human ability and the

factors that can affect their variability. Chapter 3 of the book
lists and explores in depth the seven Principles of Universal
Design and the 29 guidelines associated with them. The chapter
includes two to five photographic examples of each of the
guidelines, representing all design disciplines from landscape
design to product details and from architecture to software.
Chapter 4 presents seven case studies, one related to each
Principle, of successful universal design implementations.

Course Schedule
This course is taught completely asynchronously over a period
of seventeen weeks. The class never meets and the students are
never all online at the same time. Each Monday, the instructor
posts a new web page with links to any additional materials eit-
her on other new pages on the course site or somewhere else on
the Internet. The students may work at their own convenience
and pace at any time during the week but the assignment for
each week is due the following Sunday.

In the first few weeks of the course, the students become fami-
liar with the online procedures and technology and the course
content is introductory. The middle portion of the course is
dedicated to exploring the Principles of Universal Design. At
the end of the course, the students must tie together everything
they have learned.

The following section presents in detail the content provided by

the instructor and the work submitted by the students in every
week of the course.

Week 1. Overview of the Course;

Introduction to the Medium
The course deliberately begins slowly to allow the students to
get accustomed to the electronic medium and methods of com-
munication. Some of the students are quite experienced but
others are novices and need time to learn the techniques and get
comfortable.

The assignment for the first week is for each student to intro-
duce him- or herself to the rest of the class on a web-based
Forum provided by the university. The Forum is located behind
a firewall that requires a university user identification and pass-
word for entry. This security measure assures the privacy of the
246 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

students from anyone outside the university. The Forum allows

anyone that has access to post new questions or respond to
questions posted by someone else such as the instructor. The
most remarkable consequence of this private arena is that the
students write with surprising candor about themselves and
their experiences.

Most of the students who take this course are in their 30s and 40s
and have professional experience in a related field such as physi-
cal therapy, home modification, or job accommodation. These
individuals typically desire to increase their knowledge of univer-
sal design so they may improve their current work or start a new
career. Some of the students have disabilities or have family
members with disabilities; these participants enrich the course for
everyone with their personal perspectives on the topic.

Week 2. Introduction to the Topic and Appropriate

Terminology
In the second week, the instructor introduces the focal topic of
the course by defining disability, accessible design, and univer-
sal design. She also provides students with the appropriate
vocabulary to use when talking about people with disabilities.

Two contemporary definitions of disability are provided. The

first definition is included in the new paradigm of disability
created by the United States Department of Education’s
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
(NIDRR). It states that rather than being a characteristic of an
individual, disability is

“… a product of an interaction between characteristics (e.g.,

conditions or impairments, functional status, or personal and
social qualities) of the individual and characteristics of the
natural, built, cultural, and social environments. The con-
struct of disability is located on a continuum from enable-
ment to disablement. Personal characteristics, as well as
environmental ones, may be enabling or disabling, and the
relative degree fluctuates depending on condition, time, and
setting. Disability is a contextual variable, dynamic over time
and circumstance. Environments may be physically acces-
sible or inaccessible, culturally inclusive or exclusive,
accommodating or unaccommodating, and supportive or
unsupportive. For example, on a societal level, institutions
and the built environment were designed for a limited seg-
ment of the population” (NIDRR, 1999, page 68578).
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 247
USA

The second definition of disability is provided by the World

Health Organization (WHO) in its classification called the
ICIDH-2, The International Classification of Impairments,
Activities, and Participation. It is described to be “…a multi-
purpose classification designed to serve different sectors and to
provide a common framework for understanding the dimensions
of disablement and functioning at three different levels: body,
person, and society” (World Health Organization, 1998). In the
document, WHO presents a matrix of dimensions of the
ICIDH-2. Along the horizontal axis are: Impairments,
Activities, Participation, and Contextual Factors. Along the ver-
tical axis are: Functioning, Characteristics, Positive Aspects,
and Negative Aspects. Table 1 below presents interactions
between personal and environmental characteristics and their
effects on participation.

These two definitions of disability are complex but comple-

mentary and provide an appropriate perspective from which to
view disability throughout the course.

TABLE 1. Overview of the Dimensions of the ICIDH-2, The International

Classification of Impairments, Activities, and Participation (World Health Organization,
1998)
IMPAIRMENTS ACTIVITIES PARTICIPATION CONTEXTUAL
FACTORS
FUNCTIONING AT BODY AT PERSON AT SOCIAL (…IN INTERAC
LEVEL LEVEL LEVEL TION WITH…)
ENVIRONMEN-
TAL FACTORS
AND PERSONAL
FACTORS
CHARACTE BODY PERSON’S INVOLVEMENT FEATURES OF
RISTICS FUNCTION; DAILY IN THE THE PHYSICAL,
BODY ACTIVITIES SITUATION SOCIAL
STRUCTURE ATTITUDINAL
WORLD
POSITIVE FUNCTIONAL ACTIVITY PARTICIPATION FACILITATORS
ASPECT AND
STRUCTURAL
INTEGRITY
NEGATIVE IMPAIRMENT ACTIVITY PARTICIPATION BARRIERS
ASPECT LIMITATION RESTRICTION
248 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The instructor then presents a definition of accessible design:

Accessible design is design to accommodate specific indivi-
duals or groups of individuals with disabilities. Because it is
the ONLY solution for some problems and some users, acces-
sible design will always be necessary, at least in certain situ-
ations. Specialized design is usually more expensive than
universal design and because it is atypical, accessible design
may segregate and stigmatize the users it is designed to
accommodate.

She also presents a definition of universal design:

Universal design is a way of designing products and environ-
ments so they are usable by and appealing to everyone
regardless of age, ability or circumstance. Universal design
accommodates people with disabilities, older people, children
and others who are non-average in a way that is not stigma-
tizing and benefits all users.

Then she contrasts the two types of design:

Universal design can be distinguished from accessible design
in the way that the accessible features have been integrated
into the overall design. This integration is important because
it results in the improved general acceptability of the design
and in the social inclusion of all individuals using the design.

Because use of appropriate terminology and behavior are criti-

cally important to this course, the instructor then provides links
to two web pages that present appropriate ways to talk about
and with people with disabilities. The labels people use to des-
cribe others matter very much: they can be respectful or deroga-
tive and can influence the way individuals are perceived and
treated, and even the way individuals perceive themselves. Just
as acceptable terms for ethnic groups have changed over time,
so have terms for individuals with disabilities.

The first site about appropriate terminology is by Brown

University’s Office of Disability Support Services and is an
adaptation of an article called “Unhandicapping Our Language”
by Paul K. Longmore, Ph.D. and Diane B. Piastro (1988).
Brown’s web page features a chart with three columns: the first
column lists terms that are objectionable, the second column
explains why each is objectionable, and the third column offers
a preferable replacement term.

The second page is on the site of the Inclusion Network of

 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 249
USA

Greater Cincinnati, Ohio and is called “What is Inclusion?”

(date not indicated). The page defines inclusion, then answers
the questions, “Why is Inclusion Important?” and “To Whom is
Inclusion Important?” Then it presents suggestions for how to
talk about people with disabilities in two sections titled
“Including Friends With Disabilities” and “Putting People
First.” Below that, the page offers “Top Ten Rules for
Communicating with People with Disabilities.” At the bottom
of the page is a short list labeled “A Legislative Look at
Inclusion” that presents relevant U.S. laws and the ways they
have affected inclusion of people with disabilities.

The assignment for Week 2 is to answer three questions on the

Forum.
1. Have you ever had an awkward conversation WITH someone
about his or her disability? Describe your experience.
2. Have you ever had an awkward conversation ABOUT some-
one and his or her disability? Describe your experience.
3. Have you ever had the experience of being excluded from an
activity due to disability, either your own or a companion’s?
(NOTE: You are NOT required to reveal your own disability.)
Describe your experience. If you have not had the experience,
did you realize that people with disabilities are excluded from
many activities in our society? Please comment.

Most students have had awkward conversations with or about

someone and his or her disability and talking about their experi-
ences helps make all class members comfortable. Some admit
their lack of exposure to or even fear of talking with people
who have disabilities. Some students reveal their own disabili-
ties or mention that family members or friends have disabilities.
The online conversation helps everyone understand that many
of their experiences are common and helps them understand the
perspective each student has brought to the class.

Week 3. History of Universal Design and

Accessibility
In the third week of the course, the students are required to read
three essays about the history of universal design and accessibi-
lity. The first reading is Chapter One, “What is Universal
Design?” from the book Strategies for Teaching Universal
Design (Welch, 1995; posted on the course web site by permis-
sion of the publisher). It offers a history of the movement and
the terminology used to describe various efforts toward univer-
sal design in the last 25 years.
250 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The second reading is Chapter Two from the same book, “A

Brief History of Disability Rights Legislation in the United
States” by Polly Welch and Chris Palames (again, posted with
permission). It covers laws passed in the second half of the 20th
Century and the social and political contexts in which they were
created.

The third reading is Chapter One, “A Brief History of Universal

Design”, from the course text (Story, Mueller and Mace, 1998).
It discusses demographics that are changing, relevant federal
legislation in the United States, the shift in approach from bar-
rier-free to universal design, the emergence of rehabilitation
engineering and assistive technology, changing economic con-
ditions, and changing social climates.

The assignment for Week 3 is to answer three questions on the

online class forum:
1. In what ways do you believe legislation has a positive effect
on the practice of universal design?
2. In what ways do you believe legislation has a negative effect
on the practice of universal design?
3. What motivators for universal design do you believe might
be more effective than legislation?

In their responses, the students made it clear that they recog-

nized the importance of the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (ADA) in providing basic access and opportunities as well
as raising awareness among the general public in the U.S. They
also recognized how legislation can cause minimal compliance
without understanding at best, and resentment of and opposition
to legislation at worst. They also understood that educating peo-
ple as to the benefits of universal design for all users is one of
the best ways to motivate them to practice universal design.

Week 4. The Range of Human Abilities

The topic of the fourth week of the course is the range of
human abilities. People vary a lot in their individual abilities
and personal preferences. They are different from other people,
from themselves as they were last year, and from themselves
when they tried to accomplish a given task under different cir-
cumstances. A disability can be severe or mild; permanent or
temporary/situational; constant or episodic; apparent or invi-
sible. Disability is a dynamic and contextual variable.

There are three readings for this week of the online course. The
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 251
USA

first is on a web site of the Trace Research and Development

Center at the University of Wisconsin at Madison (Trace R&D
Center) and is called “A Brief Introduction to Disabilities”
(Vanderheiden and Vanderheiden, 1991). The site presents
information on four major categories of impairment: visual
impairments, hearing impairments, physical impairments, and
cognitive/language impairments.

To provide a sense of the statistics of disability in the United

States, the second reading is the “Highlights” section of the
report, “Disability in the United States; Prevalence and Causes”
by LaPlante and Carlson (1996).

The third reading is Chapter Three, “Understanding the

Spectrum of Human Abilities”, from the course text (Story,
Mueller and Mace, 1998). The chapter discusses how human
abilities may differ by cause, effect, or situation in each of
seven categories: cognition, vision, hearing and speech, body
functions, arm function, hand function, and mobility.

The assignment for Week 4 is to respond to three questions on

the Forum:
1. Have you ever blamed yourself when you had difficulty using
a product or environment?
2. Have you ever modified a product or environment to make it
easier for you to use?
3. What accessible features of products and environments have
you found yourself using?

Some said they had never done so but most students admitted
they had blamed themselves before for having difficulty using a
product or environment. This reaction is very common but inap-
propriate, particularly in this class.

Because no design will ever suit all persons perfectly under all
conditions, everyone experiences designs that need to be cus-
tomized. Most examples cited by the class were examples of
products that were not well designed for large portions of the
population. Some designs could have been made easier for eve-
ryone to use regardless of their capabilities; others could have
been made to be adjustable.

Everyone in the class could identify some “accessible” features

they used frequently such as lever door handles, OXO Good
Grips© kitchen utensils, and various ramps. However, other
252 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

features are often overlooked such as clear signage, spoken

announcements on trains or subways, and public restrooms wit-
hout entry doors. The instructor pointed out that the students
probably had also used many “universal” features without
recognizing them: remote control devices, speakerphones with
volume controls, garage door openers, vibrating pagers, electro-
nic programmable thermostats, etc.

Week 5. The Diversity that Surrounds You

The topic of the fifth week of the course is the effects of design
on disability. As Gregg Vanderheiden pointed out in a white
paper distributed at the RESNA 1997 conference in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, there are three ways to address the gap between
an individual’s capabilities and the demands of the built envi-
ronment:

1. Change the individual;

2. Provide the individual with tools that he or she can use;
and/or
3. Change the environment (Vanderheiden, 1997).

The assignment for Weeks 5 and 6 of the course is for each stu-
dent to go out into his or her own community and meet some-
one new. The instructor asks each student to make the
acquaintance of someone who is different from himself and, if
he often spends time with people who have disabilities, some-
one who is different from others he already knows. This indivi-
dual would serve as the student’s “user/expert,” someone who
lives with and is expert at using the built environment with his
or her particular disability. The user/expert should be someone
the student doesn’t already know, to reduce the personal com-
plexities and the possibility that he or she will tell the student
what he wants to hear. Each student is asked to spend some
time with his user/expert in two locations: one place the
user/expert knows well such as his home, work or school, and
one he doesn’t know well such as a store or restaurant he’s
never visited. The instructor stresses that the purpose of the
exercise is to assess the effects of design on disability (and not
the disability itself).

Each student then writes a report of the experience, answering

the following questions:

1. Who was your user/expert? Where and how did you meet
him or her?
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 253
USA

2. Where did you go? What did you do there?

3. What tools did you notice your user/expert using to make
products and environments more usable?
4. What modifications did you notice that your user/expert had
made to products and environments?
5. Did your perception of your user/expert’s disability differ
when you were in each of the two locations and if so, how?
6. How would you characterize the interactions your user/expert
had with other individuals in each of the two locations (if
any)?
7. How would you characterize your own attitudes and emoti-
ons when you were with your user/expert in each of the two
locations?
8. What would you conclude from this exercise regarding the
effects of design on disability?

The students seemed to enjoy and learn a lot from this assign-
ment. Even students who had disabilities reported that they
noticed some environmental barriers for the first time. Some
students saw significant differences in the behavior of their
user/experts in the two locations visited.

More than anything else, this assignment forces the students to

see the built environment through someone else’s eyes and
recognize obstacles they would otherwise overlook. Observing
the lived experience of someone with a disability and discus-
sing it with him or her is much more powerful, meaningful and
memorable than any simulation exercise ever could be.

Week 6. The Principles of Universal Design

In the sixth week of the course, the instructor introduces the
Principles of Universal Design (The Center for Universal
Design, 1997) (see appendix to the introduction):
Principle [Link] Use
Principle 2. Flexibility in Use
Principle 3. Simple and Intuitive Use
Principle 4. Perceptible Information
Principle 5. Tolerance for Error
Principle 6. Low Physical Effort
Principle 7. Size and Space for Approach and Use
The instructor presents a brief history of the creation process of
the Principles of Universal Design (in which she was involved)
and explains their purpose.

For the assignment this week, the students are asked to read the
254 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

beginning of Chapter 3, “The Principles of Universal Design

and Their Application” of the course text (Story, Mueller and
Mace, 1998). Chapter 3 presents each Principle accompanied
by two to five photographs to illustrate each of its associated
guidelines.

(The user/expert reports begun in Week 5 are due this week.)

Weeks 7 to 14. Principles 1 through 7

In Weeks 7 through 14 (with a one-week semester break in the
middle), the instructor presents each Principle in turn and in
depth.

The students’ assignment for each of these seven weeks is to

find, photograph, and critique an example that demonstrates the
Principle under study that week. The instructor requires the fol-
lowing:

A. Read the sections related to Principle X (the Principle under

study that week) of Chapter 3, “The Principles of Universal
Design and Their Application” and Chapter 4, “Case Studies
on Universal Design,” of the text, The Universal Design File.
B. Select the best design example you can find of Principle X
that is different from the ones shown in the book. The
example can be from any design discipline including archi-
tecture, landscape architecture, interior design,
product/industrial design, graphic design, etc. Choose an
example that is meaningful to you.
C. Photograph the design example. In some cases, you may
need to photograph more than one view of the design to
fully communicate it to the rest of the class. Have the film
developed into electronic images (typically, JPG format on
disk or CD).
D. Give a full verbal description of the example for the benefit
of individuals with visual impairments.
E. Write a critique of the design example.
– Describe the positive aspects of the example: in what
ways does this design satisfy Principle X and what makes
this design easier to use than others?
– Describe the negative aspects of the example: in what
ways does this design fail to satisfy Principle X and in
what ways does this design fall short of being universally
usable?
F. Send the image(s), verbal description(s) and critique to the
instructor via e-mail.
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 255
USA

In these seven weeks, the students in the course study universal

design at the detail level. As they apply each Principle, they
begin to recognize the many issues imbedded within. The first
task is to photograph the example in a way that will communi-
cate it to others. The next task is to write an effective verbal
description of each image, which is a difficult challenge. (What
does the image show? What about this design is relevant? What
is not pictured but is still important to the design? If you could
not see the image, would you be able to imagine it from this
description?) After that, the students typically assess their
examples against the guidelines associated with each Principle.
Sometimes the students overlook obstacles but by applying the
guidelines, the students are often surprised to recognize them.

To demonstrate the content of these seven weeks of the course,

each of the Principles of Universal Design is listed below along
with its definition and some explanatory comments made by
the instructor. A brief synopsis of one example of each
Principle chosen by a student who took the course follows
along with the instructor’s response.

Principle 1. Equitable Use

The design is useful and marketable to people with diverse
abilities.
This means that we should create designs that appeal to
everyone and offer everyone a way to participate.
Principle 1 addresses making designs useful and market-
able to diverse groups of users concurrently: design for
all people.

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Accessible hotel bathroom.
This student identified several features of this room that made it
more universally usable than most and she offered several sug-
gestions to improve it.
– Wide door (the student suggested that it should be easier to
open than this one);
– Lever door handle on door (it would be nice to have a door-
stop);
– Rocker light switch;
– Smooth marble flooring;
– Shower area with no threshold (a supportive tub would be a
welcome addition);
256 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

– Padded, L-shaped bench in shower (the hotel should offer a

roll-in shower chair available on request);
– Wall-mounted showerhead with hose (should be located
closer to the bench or offer two showerheads, one near the
bench and one on the opposite wall);
– Single-lever faucet controls in shower;
– Paddle faucet controls at sink (room should have an additio-
nal adjustable magnifying mirror within reach);
– Open space rather than cabinets under the sink counter; and
– Grab bars used as towel racks throughout the room.

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
This is a beautiful, spacious bathroom that would work well for
most people. I agree with your suggestions and offer a few
more. I’d like to see a seat at the vanity that could be sat on or
pushed under the counter, out of the way. At the sink, I would
prefer single-lever faucets to the paddle style because they are
easier to control with a single hand. It might also be helpful to
locate the faucet at the side of the sink so it is not as long a
reach. The plastic drain piping under the sink is a good feature
because it is less likely to scald skin that comes into contact
with it, although any kind of piping is unattractive to look at
and could have been shrouded from view.

I hope this bathroom was available in the mirror-image confi-

guration, as well, for the benefit of individuals who need grab
bar support on the left side when using either the toilet or the
shower. This is a right-handed room.

Principle 2. Flexibility in Use

The design accommodates a wide range of individual prefe-
rences and abilities.
This means that we should provide for multiple ways of
doing things. People ought to be able to use the design in
any way that suits them personally. Adaptability is one
way to make designs universally usable. Principle 2
addresses individual needs: design for each person indi-
vidually.

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Children’s playground.
This student selected a children’s playground that had been
designed and built to accommodate a wide diversity of children
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 257
USA

and support many different play modes. It included many diffe-

rent types of play areas such as a platform with sufficient space
to contain a wheelchair, multiple slides, and several sets of
overhead bars to facilitate moving around using the hands. In
addition, the material covering the ground under the play struc-
ture was a thick, dense, resilient material (to reduce injury) with
a smooth but textured surface (for easy rolling) that was also
porous (for effective drainage).

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
This playground offers kids a wide variety of ways to play,
dependent on their preferences more than their abilities. It sti-
mulates the senses with its many colors, textures, sounds, mo-
tions, and, I presume, smells! It can be used in a different way
each time a child visits, which will stimulate his imagination and
creativity. Children can comfortably play by themselves or with
many others. This is an excellent example of Flexibility in Use.

Principle 3. Simple and Intuitive Use

Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the
user’s experience, knowledge, language skills, or current
concentration level.
This means that we should make things work the way you
would expect them to work. Principle 3 addresses the
cognitive issues of design use. A new user should be able
to understand how to use the design the first time.

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Microsoft Word Wizard©
This student chose the “Wizard” feature built into Microsoft’s
“Word” word processing software application that provides on-
screen help. She thought it was a good example of this Principle
because the feature was easy to use and provided as much assis-
tance as the user required. A box appeared on the screen that
asked questions and offered choices of actions to guide the user
in using the application. The user could either click an option or
turn off the feature and proceed independently.

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
Early word processing software was simpler to use because the
software was less sophisticated and powerful. “Cutting” and
“Pasting” were new computer concepts but their names were
familiar and descriptive. I remember how satisfying was the
258 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

one-to-one correspondence between the screen image and the

ink-jet printer output, so WYSIWYG (for “What You See Is What
You Get,” pronounced “wizzywig”) was the rule of the day. You
could turn single pixels on or off and produce exactly what you
wanted, crude though the resolution was.

These days, word processing software is complicated, indeed.

The good news is, computer users can employ only those fea-
tures they want. In my experience, individuals learn a set of
“tricks” and stick with those. Sometimes people who work
together share their tricks and the whole group operates at a
higher level. Very few people know all the features of any soft-
ware package. Real-time help or tutoring such as Microsoft’s
various “Wizards” (which are also available in their other soft-
ware, such as Excel and PowerPoint, etc.) can be very helpful to
new users or individuals who are employing features they don’t
often use. While I find them annoying in Word, I use them in
Excel when I’m trying to write an equation and don’t know the
appropriate format or when creating graphs from data. A user
can also set up the computer to read these dialog boxes aloud
when they appear, in a choice of voices!

We have come to interpret “feedback” rather generously. In

many cases, the feedback you get to indicate success is that the
thing you were trying to achieve happens. This is a good exam-
ple of cognitive support from a design.

Principle 4. Perceptible Information

The design communicates necessary information to the
user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user’s sensory
abilities.
This means that we should provide for multiple modes of
input and output. Principle 4 addresses the SENSORY
issues of designs. (For design applications, we are prima-
rily concerned with limitations of sight, hearing, and
tactile sensitivity and less with limitations of smell and
taste.)

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Automobile graphic information module.
The graphic information module on the dashboard of this student’s
automobile was his selection to exemplify Principle 4. It used
understandable graphic symbols and warning lights in differing
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 259
USA

colors. The module warned the driver of problems with the doors
and lift gate latches, the sunroof, and the lamps for the headlights,
parking, tail and brake lights, and imminent frost conditions
(“ICE”). The use of graphic symbols communicated effectively
with users at a glance regardless of their language skills, the icons
and lettering used were easy to see, and the colors used helped
communicate the type and seriousness of the information.

The student recommended that visual alerts could flash to make

them recognized faster. He also suggested that warnings might
be more effective if sound were used to alert the driver in addi-
tion to the visual indications. He commented that spoken words
might be helpful, although the challenge of offering a choice of
several languages would be substantial.

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
When we consider the driver of a car, total lack of vision is not
a possibility although sight limitations such as presbyopia (age-
related far-sightedness) are likely for many drivers. Hearing
limitations are common, especially since in addition to dealing
with road noise many drivers often talk with passengers, listen
to the radio, and/or talk on a cellular telephone. It is important
to provide information to drivers both visually and audibly.

The use of icons instead of words is a good way to communicate

information quickly. Icons take less cognitive processing than
words because there is a closer match; words like “DOOR
AJAR” must be interpreted. For this reason, the illuminated
word “ICE” might be better understood if accompanied by a
snowflake symbol which has come to be understood to connote
freezing temperatures. Redundant audible signals can be quite
helpful for the reasons you suggest. Voice alerts are available
on some cars, but as you point out, they require the user to
know the spoken language – and they can become annoying.

Principle 5. Tolerance for Error

The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequen-
ces of accidental or unintended actions.
This means that we should make it difficult to make a
mistake, but if someone does, he should not hurt himself
or the product. Everyone makes mistakes; but designs
should be forgiving. Whenever possible, mistakes should
be reversible or at least cause no harm.
260 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Rented industrial personnel lift.
This student chose to photograph and discuss an industrial lift
her boyfriend had rented to use in his job installing a new sign
high up on the outside wall of a building. She was surprised
that such a device was available for rent, given the considerable
potential risk involved in its use by individuals without training.
Because of this risk, however, the machine was well designed
and labeled for use by novice operators.

The industrial lift would not operate unless the four legs on the
base were adjusted so that the lift platform was level and each
of its legs was locked in place. To assist during initial set-up
and adjustment, a green light was provided for each leg that
would illuminate when it was properly adjusted. Operating the
lift required that the unit be plugged into a source of electrical
power and the unit be turned on. Raising the bucket of the lift
required the operator to pull out one button (“Enable”) and then
press another button with one hand while turning a knob with
the other. The student commented that these procedures were
cumbersome and would not be possible for many people but
they served to assure the user that “if the basket rises, you’ve
done everything right.”

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
While this lift would not be usable by many people, its safety
features still allow us to have a good discussion of Tolerance
for Error.

The lift manufacturer thought through the process of use well

and, as you say, the lift will not operate unless everything is in
order. The “DANGER” panel is certainly daunting especially
for individuals who cannot read English but I’m sure they were
more concerned with reducing their legal liability than commu-
nicating particularly well. Where they used icons (on the
instructions and some of the controls), they did it well but they
didn’t use them everywhere they could have.

The buttons seem large and easy to push, even with the side or
heel of the hand, which is good. The red color of the “Enable”
button communicates well that it is the one that should be
pushed to disable the unit if need be. It is not ideal that the con-
trols require two hands for operation, but maybe this is done
intentionally so the operator will be vigilant when moving the
bucket, which is an act that requires vigilance (Guideline 5d).
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 261
USA

Principle 6. Low Physical Effort

The design can be used efficiently and comfortably and with
a minimum of fatigue.
This means that we should minimize physical strain and
overexertion. While some universal design experts in
landscape architecture disagree with this Principle
because it defeats the purpose of exercise, most others
agree that designs should not physically overtax users.

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Automatic door opener.
This student chose the button used on a rather heavy glass entry
door to a museum to exemplify Principle 6. The main positive
attribute of this button was how it made the door easy to open for
anyone who used a wheelchair or had their hands full, but he also
appreciated the button’s appropriate vertical placement on the
wall and good visibility. He also mentioned that the door opener
mechanism employed here was less visible than the type that uses
a pressure sensitive mat in front of the door for activation.

The student identified two main negative aspects of this exam-

ple. One was that the button was placed on a side wall too close
to the adjacent doors. This made the button awkward to reach
and forced wheelchair users to press the button and then rush
out of the way of the door as it opened toward them. The second
negative aspect was the large wheelchair symbol on the big blue
button that looked unattractive and stigmatized its use.

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
This is a good universal design being stigmatized away from
use by most building visitors. I usually use power door openers
just on principle whenever I encounter them. If I’m carrying
anything, I feel obligated to press the button to demonstrate to
anyone who happens to be watching that they could use it, too!
How silly. I agree it’s that symbol that makes people think it’s
not “for them.” I’ve noticed that in public places, if a powered
door is offered alongside a non-powered door, almost everyone
will use the powered one. However, if the powered door bears
that symbol, most people will avoid using it. While this beha-
vior is appropriate for parking spaces and toilet stalls, it is
nonsensical in doors, so why label them? Let’s invent a non-
stigmatizing icon for the button that will communicate the same
thing without words.
262 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

In your example, if the fixed pane of glass between the door and
the button were wider, this placement of the button on the side of
the door recess would work just fine. However, as you point out,
this narrow pane forces anyone who uses a wheelchair to push
the button and then race out of the way as the door opens. This
would be particularly awkward for someone who is left-handed,
since the button is on the right. I expect wheelchair users who
could do so would place themselves a safe distance away and
reach around the corner. So, I agree with your suggestion that the
button be placed on the front of the building where it would be
easier to reach, as well as to see. Alternatively, the space next to
the door should be large enough to accommodate a wheelchair
or electric scooter... but that’s a topic for next week (Principle 7)!

Principle 7. Size and Space for Approach

and Use
Appropriate size and space is provided for approach, reach,
manipulation, and use regardless of the user’s body size,
posture, or mobility.
This means that we should accommodate variety in peo-
ple’s BODY sizes and ranges of motion. This Principle
addresses the physical space incorporated into a design
to accommodate the user’s body and any devices or com-
panions needed during use.

STUDENT EXAMPLE:
Orioles Park at Camden Yards.
This student chose to share the now-classic example of Orioles
Park, a baseball stadium in Baltimore, Maryland. It was desig-
ned with input from a committee on accessibility containing
individuals from the local community, and the stadium has a
number of accessible features. The most remarkable accessible
feature is the adaptable seating. About one percent (1%) of the
seating distributed around the park is specially designed to eit-
her serve as regular seating or be adapted. Each of these seats is
supported on a cantilever attached to a post on one side. The
seat can be used to support an ambulatory person or it can be
folded up and rotated around its post out of the way to create
space for a spectator in a wheelchair. Additional notable featu-
res of the stadium include wide routes of travel throughout the
facility plus accessible concession stands, condiment tables and
ticket sales windows. The stadium provides large-print signage,
auditory and visual announcements, and amplified headsets.
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 263
USA

INSTRUCTOR RESPONSE:
Camden Yards is one of our favorite examples of universal
design in public architecture, too, but we didn’t have an origi-
nal photo we could use in the book. Thank you for submitting it
and sharing it with the class.

Getting a diverse group of real potential users involved in any

design project can have a significant impact on the usability and
acceptability of the final results. It is critical to get users involved
in the design development process as early and as often as pos-
sible, and Camden Yards is a wonderful example of this approach.

Weeks 15 and 16. Tying It All Together

In the final two weeks of the course, the students reassemble
the seven Principles of Universal Design and consider how to
make a design satisfy all of them concurrently. Over the previ-
ous seven weeks, the class had a chance to explore each of the
Principles in turn, to see how hard it is for a design to satisfy
even one Principle well. It is much more difficult for a design to
satisfy all seven of the Principles of Universal Design.
Designing for the needs of individuals with a specific disability
is relatively straightforward; designing to address the needs of
individuals with differing disabilities concurrently is much har-
der; and designing for everyone is practically impossible.

The assignment for Weeks 15 and 16 is to redesign an imperfect

design example to be as universally usable as the students can
imagine. They may choose to concentrate on a product or envi-
ronment already submitted as an example of one of the Principles
earlier in the semester or they may select another design altoget-
her. The product or environment must be photographed, descri-
bed, and then assessed against the 29 guidelines associated with
the seven Principles of Universal Design. Each student must also
consult with at least three other people who may include his or
her user/expert from Weeks 5 and 6. Once they have gathered
information, they must each redesign the example to be as uni-
versally usable as possible and finally, critique their redesign
solution to identify its positive and negative aspects.

In the sixteenth week of the course, the instructor introduces the

Universal Design Performance Measures for Products (Center
for Universal Design, 2000). The Performance Measures are the
result of a NIDRR-funded Field-Initiated Project to develop a
means of direct assessment of products against the ideals con-
tained in the Principles of Universal Design. The project was
264 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

conducted by the author at the Center for Universal Design in

conjunction with subcontractor James L. Mueller of J.L.
Mueller, Inc. in Virginia. The purpose of the Performance
Measures was to provide a procedure for evaluating how well
products satisfy the Principles of Universal Design and their
guidelines. The Universal Design Performance Measures for
Products were developed with the input of product designers,
marketing professionals, and persons with disabilities.

Although the Performance Measures were written to apply only

(or primarily) to product design, it was expected that the stu-
dents would find them helpful as they endeavored to design for
universal usability.

The students’ redesigns have ranged from simple (entry doors)

to complex (entire offices). This assignment gave students the
experience of designing for universal use but showed them how
challenging this can be.

Week 17. Course Wrap-Up

In the final web page of the course, the instructor talks about
international efforts in universal design.

More than 20 years ago in the United States, visionaries like

Ron Mace and Patricia Moore began to advocate for and use the
term “universal design” to describe design that was suitable for
any user regardless of age or ability. Some advocates of this type
of design approach prefer to use terms like “inclusive design” to
stress the way that designs are usable by and suitable for popu-
lations that include individuals with disabilities and older adults
who would otherwise be excluded. Other advocates like to use
the term “transgenerational design” or “lifespan design” to des-
cribe designs that are suitable for individuals of varying ages or
by a single individual as he or she ages. Consistent with our
belief in civil rights for all citizens, the approach in the United
States has emphasized that designs should be usable by and sui-
table for any individual, regardless of personal characteristics.
This approach depends on each individual to be a self-advocate.

It is interesting to me to note that the favored term in Europe is

“Design For All”. In Japan, the native term is “kyo-yo-hin”, or
shared design. In these other cultures, the emphasis is much
more on design for everyone concurrently. These terms reflect
different societal attitudes and stress people’s mutual responsibi-
lity toward one another more than the rights of any one person.
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 265
USA

The assignment for Week 17 is to review and comment on each

other student’s redesign. The students are asked to note their
observations, comment on the positive aspects of the redesign,
and suggest ways to improve the universal usability of the rede-
sign. The students typically provide good, constructive feedback
to one another.

Finally, the instructor provides her own comments on each stu-

dent’s redesign effort and offers some closing remarks to end
the course.

Discussion
This course has proven to be more successful than originally
expected or hoped. While the class size has tended to be small, its
composition has been rather diverse with students participating
from across the United States as well as Canada. It is hoped that
there will be increased international participation in the future.

Because the assignments submitted by all of the students are

visible not only to the instructor but to everyone else in the class,
Internet courses encourage student participation. With new infor-
mation presented and assignments due each week, the students
must stay on schedule or get left out of the experience. Also, every
student has equal exposure and an equal “voice” online. The for-
mat of the course makes it difficult for one student to dominate
discussions, as sometimes happens in the traditional classroom. At
the same time, students are less able to “hide” in the crowd.

The online medium also requires students to communicate well

and concisely. They must think through what they want to say
and compose their thoughts in advance, which results in more
effective and efficient information transmission. In addition, the
anonymity inherent in a course in which the participants will
most likely never meet each other encourages them to reveal
themselves (their knowledge, beliefs and fears) more honestly
and fully than is typical in the traditional classroom.

The major assignments in this course require each student to go

out into his local community and interact with it in new ways.
They must each meet someone new and critique the built envi-
ronments with which they interact daily in the context of uni-
versal design. This 17-week experience is likely to influence the
way they perceive design and make them more demanding of
design in the future.
266 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

The quality of the feedback given by the course instructor to the

students in response to their assignments is highly dependent on
the instructor’s knowledge. However, it has the potential to pro-
vide a high level of learning personalized to each student’s effort,
and posting all student assignments and instructor feedback on
the course web site benefits all students enrolled in the course.

The feedback received from the students about the course has
been quite positive. The level of discourse online tends to be
deep and the amount of learning taking place appears to be
unusually high.

Conclusion
This course will continue to be offered once a year but additio-
nal offerings are under development.

The author is part of a group of universal design researchers

that is working on a project (another Field-Initiated Project fun-
ded by NIDRR) to develop a web site of information that will
support universal design education for people all over the
world. Intended for use by design faculty, students, and practi-
cing designers, the site will contain universal design teaching
strategies, instructional materials, project ideas, two-dimensio-
nal images and three-dimensional virtual models, and resour-
ces. The site will also contain links to an online journal and an
online forum for design faculty to use to discuss with collea-
gues issues connected with their teaching of universal design.

While the universal design community is dedicated, we are well

scattered around the world. It is very fitting that universal
design be taught through the medium of the Internet in order to
share what we know in the most efficient way with the widest
possible audience.

References
Note: Internet web sites current as of March 2001

The Center for Universal Design. Evaluating the Universal

Design Performance Measures of Products. Raleigh, North
Carolina: N.C. State University, The Center for Universal
Design. 2000.
The Center for Universal Design. The Principles of Universal
Design, Version 2.0. Raleigh, North Carolina: N.C. State
University, The Center for Universal Design. 1997.
 Molly Follette Story
North Carolina State University Distance Education in Universal Design 267
USA

Available online:
[Link]
[Link]
Inclusion Network of Greater Cincinnati, Ohio. What is
Inclusion?
Available online:
[Link]
LaPlante, Mitchell P., Ph.D., and Carlson, Dawn, Ph.D. Report
7: Disability in the United States; Prevalence and Causes,
1992. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
(NIDRR). 1996. Available online:
[Link]
Longmore, Paul K., Ph.D, and Piastro, Diane B.
Unhandicapping Our Language. Hollywood, California:
Media Office on Disability. 1988. Adaptation available online:
[Link]
Life/dss/[Link]
National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.
NIDRR Long-Range Plan. Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 234,
pages 68576-68614. 1999. Available online:
[Link]
Story, Molly Follette, Mueller, James L. and Mace, Ronald L.
The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages
and Abilities. Raleigh, North Carolina: North Carolina State
University, The Center for Universal Design. 1998. Available
online:
[Link]
file/[Link]
Vanderheiden, Gregg C. Universal Design Versus Assistive
Technology. White paper distributed at concurrent session,
“Assistive Technology or Universal Design?” at RESNA
1997 conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 1997.
Vanderheiden, Gregg C. and Vanderheiden, Katherine R. A
Brief Introduction to Disabilities. Madison, Wisconsin:
University of Wisconsin, Trace Research and Development
Center. 1991. Available online:
[Link]
Welch, Polly (ed.). Strategies for Teaching Universal Design.
Boston, Massachusetts: Adaptive Environments Center. 1995.
World Health Organization. Towards a Common Language for
Functioning and Disablement: ICIDH –2: The International
Classification of Impairments, Activities, and Participation.
Geneva: author. 1998. Available online:
[Link]
268 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 269
Canada

2.5 A Universally
Designed Universal
Design Course
Laurie Ringaert, Director, Universal Design Institute, Faculty
of Architecture, University of Manitoba, Canada

Introduction
The Introduction to Universal Design is a three credit elective
course taught at the Faculty of Architecture, University of
Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, and Canada. At the time of
writing, this is the only course of its kind in Canada. It is unique
in that it includes a class made up of a variety of design dis-
ciplines and thus the course content is diverse. I believe it also
to be unique with the quantity and quality of involvement of
user-experts. I developed this course and have taught it every
fall for five years. Over the period of time I have moved, remo-
ved and continued to try to improve the course. I am describing
the course, as a “universally designed” universal design course
because of the manner in which I have constructed the course to
be inclusive of a variety of design disciplines as well as of the
course content and instruction methods.

Background on the Instructor

Before describing the course, I think it is important to under-
stand my background as the course developer, coordinator and
instructor. One of the first unique (universally designed) aspects
of this course is that I am an occupational therapist teaching in
the Faculty of Architecture. I do not have a design background
but do have extensive knowledge in universal design as the
Director of the Universal Design Institute located in the Faculty
of Architecture, University of Manitoba, Canada. The mandate
of the Universal Design Institute is research, education and
information provision on universal design. As the Director, I am
in charge of all projects of the Institute including developing
research proposals and conducting research. I thus bring the
research findings from the Institute to the course. I have been a
coordinator of a beta-test site for the testing of the World Health
Organization’s ICIDH and am a member of the Environmental
270 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Factors Task Force. I also am a member and chair several buil-

ding codes and standards committees in Canada and thus bring
updates on developments in this area to the course. As Director,
I have to keep on top of what’s happening in North America and
in the world generally regarding universal design and again, this
knowledge is brought to the class.

As an occupational therapist, I bring my knowledge of human

anatomy, disability conditions, human functioning, ergonomics,
occupational performance, assistive technology, human deve-
lopment from neonate to seniors and the interaction of human
performance and the environment. I have worked in several
areas in my career.

I also have extensive experience with disability. My father had

polio shortly after I was born and I therefore grew up with him
having a disability. Through this experience I visited and became
friends with several persons who had contracted polio and con-
tinued to live in an Institution. I learned a great deal from them.
In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s I spent several years as a wheel-
chair and power scooter user due to fibromyalgia. Thus I also
bring my own user-expert experience. As well, I am the Chair of
the Canadian Centre on Disability Studies and in tune with the
disability studies and the Independent Living movement inclu-
ding knowledge of human rights issues. I have served on several
disability-related committees including access committees.

My Philosophy on Universal Design

I see universal design as an evolving, emerging construct. Right
now we are all only beginning to understand and develop the
components. To get a complete picture of universal design, I
believe the construct needs to include a variety of topics: uni-
versal design theory, knowledge in human functioning and its
relationship to universal design, knowledge of human develop-
ment and aging, ergonomics, human rights, legal issues, disabi-
lity studies, demographics, building codes, standards and
guidelines, accessibility studies, design theory, disability and
aging awareness training, understanding of user-experts critical
involvement in the universal design of space, specific universal
design products, universal design requirements for the range
from indoor to outdoor and from small to large scale, research
findings, recent trends. This list is not exclusive and there are
more topics that others would add that I might have neglected in
this list. In developing the course, I try to touch on all areas of
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 271
Canada

the construct in the course. I believe that we are all students of

universal design; that at this time there is no one that knows all
the right answers. This is the way I teach the students. I see
myself as a facilitator to their learning: I provide them building
blocks and resources and they must then take them away and
apply them to their design work.

Structural Issues
The Faculty of Architecture is a multi-disciplinary faculty hou-
sing interior design, architecture, landscape architecture and
city planning. The Introduction to Universal Design course is
offered as a lecture course in the fall term. It is offered at the
Masters level as an elective to all students in the Faculty.
However, the interior design students can enter in their final
year of their undergraduate program since it was only recently
that a graduate level in interior design was offered. This is a
three credit elective course, which is intended to give the design
student an introduction to universal design concepts.

The student is exposed to the following topics: universal design

theory, disability awareness, human rights, building code
requirements and limitations, applications of universal design
with consideration of specific groups, universal design of the
indoor and the outdoor environment, assistive technology and
universal design, universal design and exhibit areas, historical
properties, international perspectives, products, recent research.

Class Composition
The class is open to all disciplines in the Faculty of
Architecture. There are usually approximately 20 students in the
class. Over the years the majority of students have been from
interior design. The next most common discipline is landscape
architecture. I have only had two city planning students and per-
haps five architecture students in total. This is the only class in
the Faculty where students from a variety of disciplines are
brought together in one class at the Masters level. When I origi-
nally developed the course as a new Faculty member, I had no
idea that this was the case. I just set up the course without kno-
wing current customs!

Course Objectives
The course objectives are:
1) To introduce the design student to the concepts of universal
design
272 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

2) To increase sensitivity of the design student to the needs of a

wide variety of individuals
3) To provide the student with a critical review of barrier-
free/universal design standards/codes and guidelines
4) To provide examples of universal design in the design process
5) To provide the student the opportunity to explore a universal
design topic of their own choice in more depth
6) To provide the student the opportunity to put universal
design principles into action in an actual design
7) To provide the student with the knowledge of how to carry
out a universal design site audit

Teaching Methods
The instructor primarily teaches this course but several guest
speakers are brought in and may include design professionals,
persons with disabilities, and a variety of others. The course is
taught in the form of lectures, small group discussions, videos,
tours and hands on experience.

User Expert Involvement

I have always involved user experts, (primarily persons with disabi-
lities), in the delivery of this course. When the course first began, I
had the privilege of having Patricia Falta visiting the Institute on
sabbatical. She is a well-known user-expert architect who has been
involved in accessibility/universal design issues for several deca-
des. She co-taught several lectures with me the first two years.

For several years I have brought in a speaker with a disability

from our local Independent Living Resources Centre (ILRC)
who conducts a disability awareness session. This individual
and I usually co-teach this session. I have also brought in panels
of persons with a variety of disabilities to discuss their needs in
terms of the built environment. Whenever I have had these user
experts come to the class I ensure that expenses such as tran-
sportation costs are covered. In recent years I have been able to
provide an honorarium of $50.00 to the ILRC speaker. This is
important as many disabled people feel they have been exploi-
ted by giving their expertise for free.

In 1997, the Universal Design Institute provided an access-con-

sulting course for six individuals with disabilities. These indivi-
duals represented a variety of disabilities including a wheelchair
user, two individuals who were blind, a power scooter user, and a
person who was deaf. Part of their course requirement was to
attend the Intro to Universal Design Course. They were thus part
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 273
Canada

of the weekly class with the design students and exposed for
instance to the sign language interpreter on a weekly basis. One
of the intentions of the mixture was for the design students to
have needed direct contact with persons with differences and for
the access consultants to be exposed to designers. During class
group activities, the groups were integrated. Again the groups
were mixed for the class group assignment.

Re-design of Entrance to a daycare center. Bev Knutson, Richard Friesen

(access consultant student), Kori Miller, Shital Kothary.

Some of the access consultants continued to act as advisors and

design crits for this class in the subsequent years. In fact, one of
the access consultants became an employee of the Institute. Tanis
Woodland is the Administrative Assistant and also provides tech-
nical information at the Institute. I have included her as a lecturer
in a progressive number of the classes over the past two years.
She provides not only her own user-expert knowledge related to
persons with visual disabilities and wayfinding issues; she also is
a very knowledgeable universal design auditor and has a detailed
knowledge of codes and standards. A contract employee, David
Rapson is a city planner and a user-expert. He is the Project
Manager of the Institute. I have asked him to provide lectures
related to codes and standards as well as auditing methodologies
and updates on specific projects we are involved in. The presence
of these two user-experts, which are known experts in universal
design, provides the students with credibility as we speak about
including user-experts as part of the design process. In class they
discuss their role in design and delivery of projects.
274 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

I have always had user-experts as part of my panel of crits for

the final assignment. I prepare an evaluation form, which is fil-
led out by all members of the panel. I have made user-experts
part of the final assignment on many occasions. I have structu-
red the assignments where the students are matched up either
with an individual or an organization that has a specific design
problem. In most cases, these people are persons with disabili-
ties and the students must work with the “client” to develop the
design solution. I have also had some of the access consultants
involved as mentors to the students during their projects.

Experienced Based Learning

I have always had a session where students could experience the
use of wheelchairs, crutches, canes, being blindfolded, having
their hearing blocked, and having their hands restricted. I have
called this session, “Experiencing the Inaccessible Environment”
to get away from the concept that they are experiencing a disabi-
lity. I reinforce that they are not experiencing a disability, rather
a difference in moving about and experiencing the environment.
I borrow the mobility aids from the School of Medical
Rehabilitation. At the Institute, we have a variety of glasses that
represent various levels of visual impairment and sets of ear pro-
tectors. I usually tape up some people’s hands with duct tape so
that they cannot move their fingers. I also have brought in diffe-
rent packaging in either this class or a later class, which they
must try to open with hands in gloves, or taped up.

To begin the session, I give then a brief introduction to the

session and how to use the mobility aids safely. Tanis and I then
teach them how to move about while blindfolded and also how
to guide a non-sighted person so that they can experience both.
I then give them a sheet with a series of tasks on it and they
travel in small groups. For instance, they must go to the library
across campus and take out a book. There are a number of tasks
to ensure that they do move through a number of environments.
They must change off and experience the various mobility aids,
blindfolds and ear protectors. David has been involved in this
part of the class as well. I also did this same exercise when the
access consultants were part of the class. Those who were
wheelchair users had to use blindfolds and those who were deaf
had to use a wheelchair, etc. Many of the user-experts said they
appreciated the opportunity to experience the “other side”.
The students then return to class where they work in goups to
fill out a form that helps them analyze the problems they
encountered in a variety of built environment areas. We discuss
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 275
Canada

this form along with their experience and feelings regarding the
exercise. Many of them comment on the apparent difference in
attitude they perceive from others while in a wheelchair.

Unfortunately I only have two hours for this exercise. I feel that
this exercise should be longer, but I don’t have more time in the
curriculum and I cannot keep the mobility devices for longer
than a day as the School of Medical Rehabilitation needs them
for their course work.

There are several other experience-based learning exercises that

I use. For instance, I have used in-class exercises that require
small groups to develop a universally designed restaurant and
another where they must design a universally designed automa-
ted banking machine.

Contact with Designers/Architects working in the

Field of Universal Design
Over the years I have brought in various designers who have
designed projects that have included universal design. These
professionals have included a landscape architect, interior
designer and an architect. In some cases, I have taken the stu-
dents to the completed project where the designer has discussed
the process and the work, while in other cases, the designer has
brought slides of their work to the class.

Course Content
The course includes a variety of topics on universal design
including considerations of the indoor and outdoor environ-
ment. I find that I may add a topic related to a particular research
area that I have recently worked on. Sessions are delivered in a
combination of lecture, small group exercise, slides and video.
In some sessions, we go on a tour or have a guest speaker come
to the class. The following are topics that I include in the
course. Delivery of these topics will change from year to year
depending upon resources, new developments or recent research
findings that are available.

Introduction to Universal Design: This provides the basic the-

ory of universal design. It discusses social, historical and demo-
graphic perspectives that have lead to the movement towards
universal design. There is a discussion of the World Health
Organization’s International Classification of Impairment
Disability and Handicap (ICIDH) and how the environment com-
276 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

ponent is related to universal design. This class also includes a

discussion and an exercise on the seven principles of universal
design as developed by the Center for Universal Design in North
Carolina. These seven principles are woven here and there in sub-
sequent classes. I have found the Universal Design Exemplars
Slides produced by Universal Design Consultants to be very use-
ful and I use these throughout the course. The proposed Universal
Design Exemplar CD-ROM from the Universal Design Center in
North Carolina will also prove to be useful in this session.

Disability Awareness Session: This session includes a co-lectu-

rer from the ILRC. The purpose of the session is to discuss
myths about disability, proper etiquette and phrases to use to
discuss any issues around disability. An excellent movie entitled
“All Ways Welcome” is used as the basis for the discussion.
Students are given a short “quiz” at the beginning of the session
to help them evaluate their level of disability knowledge.

Universal Access: A Human Rights Issue: The purpose of this

session is to introduce human rights legislation both from
Canada and the USA and internationally to show how universal
design is related to human rights: how access to services, pro-
ducts and environments is a basic human right. I have brought
in a speaker from the provincial human rights commission who
also happens to have a mobility disability.

Liability and Universal Design: The purpose of this session is

to discuss liability issues related to universal design. Recent
court cases from the USA and Canada are discussed in this
session. I have included a lawyer who happens to be blind and
specializing in disability rights issues at this point.

Universal Design and Human Functioning: The purpose of

these sessions is to relate the functional needs of a range of
human abilities to universal design. In this session, I show a
video by Susan Duncan entitled: “Crossing the Line” (1999). We
discuss how people move in the environment with differing abi-
lities and how they use the environment to cue their movement.

Building Codes/Standards and Guidelines: This session intro-

duces the students to various access/barrier-free codes/standards
and guidelines and their content and what they lack in terms of
universal design. Students learn via lecture and a hands-on mea-
surement exercise what the content of these is. At this point I
demonstrate two of the Institute’s publications: Access: A Guide
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 277
Canada

to Accessible Design for Designers, Builders, Facilty Owners

and Managers (2000) and ACCEX: Universal Design Expert
Software System (2000). The software contains many of the
most commonly used codes and standards in Canada and the
ADAAG from the USA. The software is a one-stop shop of
codes and standards information and also provides expert infor-
mation. Students can then use the software in the Institute for
any of their projects. I have found the ADA series videos from
the Center for Universal Design in Raleigh, North Carolina, to
be particularly useful for this lecture and for related topics. I
have often brought in Dr. John Frye during this lecture as he is a
codes expert and developer of the aforementioned software.

Universal Design of Public Indoor Public Spaces: In this

session, I try to focus on slides and materials related to indoors
public spaces. It includes exhibit spaces as well as information
on indoor products. We may go on a tour in this session. I have
also discussed applications to retail space in this session and
have introduced our recent booklet: “Is Your Business Open to
All?” by L. Ringaert, B. Knutson, and D. Rapson (2000) which
is a primer on universal design for small businesses.

Universal Design of Historical Properties: This session is

interesting as we discuss the often-difficult relationship be-
tween historical properties and universal design. We discuss
some of the basic principles behind this topic. I show a video
and some slides and often go on a tour of a recently renovated
historical site.

Universal Design of Outdoor Public Spaces: This session

includes discussion on public rights of way and outdoor recrea-
tion areas. We may go on a tour at this point to a local land-
scape architect’s recent project.

Universal Design and Housing: discusses universal design

features of single and multi-dwelling housing. Students are
involved in a mini-group exercise to discuss what the features
should be in this type of housing. Several brief videos are
shown and discussed. I have on occasion brought in a consumer
who built a custom home, have brought in Canada Mortgage
and Housing Corporation speakers or have visited a multi-unit
housing complex.

Conducting a Universal Design Audit: In this session we either

go to another site off campus or conduct an audit at the campus.
278 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Off campus we have audited a local high school and a recreation

facility. The class begins with a discussion on what should be
included in the audit, various audit checklists, and a demonstra-
tion of how to use measurement tools such as smart levels. I
have used the video The Accessible Place of Business by John
Salmon to provide an introduction to conducting an audit. The
students are then provided with a checklist and an area and they
must go and do a mini audit. They come back to the class and
prepare a mini report. Tanis and David assist in this class.

Universal Design and Assistive Technology, Automated

Banking Machines and Products: I have handled this class
when done in a variety of ways. For instance, I have given them
a group exercise where they must develop a universally designed
automated banking machine. They must consider all user groups
to come up with the final product. I have brought in various
speakers for this session including assistive technology vendors
and persons with product information. I have also alternatively
shown videos from various manufacturers and shown slides.

Universal Design and International Perspectives: Because of

my international travels I have taken many slides and am able to
show some international aspects. I have also brought in spea-
kers from the Canadian Center on Disability Studies including
Olga Krassioukova (International Director) and Henry Enns
(Executive Director). That Center is carrying out work interna-
tionally and they have many interesting slides showing the level
of accessibility internationally. The Universal Design Institute
has also carried out a study on codes and standards internatio-
nally (Betty Dion Enterprises Ltd. & Universal Design Institute,
2000) and this information is discussed.

Universal Design and Professional Issues: I have presented

this class in some of the years. I have tried to have designers
who have specialized in universal design in their practices. I
also have discussed some models of practice that are emerging
as well as the emerging market for universal design.

Assignments and Evaluation

I have tried to be creative with the assignments. There are two
assignments in the course. The first is worth 40% and the
second is worth 60% of their mark. The mid-term assignment
involves the students picking a topic of their choice, selecting
three articles (preferably research articles, but these are hard to
find in this area) from a search they do in the library and then a
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 279
Canada

critical analysis of the articles in terms of universal design and

in terms of two building codes/standards or guidelines. The pur-
pose of the assignment is many-fold:

A) encourages the students to do a search of library databases

for articles.
B) encourages them to do a critical analysis article.
C) allows them to become familiar with one topic and specific
aspects of building codes and standards.
D) provides the opportunity for the students to write a paper since
many of them do not write papers per se in the design school.

Many of the students use this as a beginning for their literature

review in their thesis or practicum. This assignment is due at
midterm and is usually a ten page double-spaced paper. I ask
them to provide a copy of the articles that they read and I thus
keep adding to the article collection at the Institute.

The second assignment is worth 60% and involves multi-disci-

plinary group work. The intent of the assignment is to match
the students up with a real world design problem and have them
develop a design. The final product is to be a drawing or series
of drawings and a paper. I have been lucky each year in that I
have had many opportunities for real world projects for the
students. I have had the following projects over the years: re-
design of a backyard garden for a wheelchair user; re-design of
an office common areas for a disability organization; alumni
house re-design of main floor and entrance; re-design of an
older home to allow wheelchair access into entrance; re-design
of front entrance to a long term care facility; re-design of the
Independent Living Resource Center; re-design of an entrance
to a daycare; re-design of a turnstile entrance for a large gro-
cery store; re-design of a ramp and entrance at a public market;
design of a pathway and accessible canoe launch for a river-
bank development; and development of design for a streetscape
for a small rural town.

I have always brought in a multi-disciplinary panel to assist in

the critical review of these projects. Typically on the final day
of class, the students present their work to the panel. I try to
include faculty members representing each of the disciplines as
well as persons with disabilities who are experts on universal
design issues. For instance, Tanis and David from the Institute
have been included for the past two years. I have also brought in
others that were trained in the access consultant course.
280 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

Including the faculty members on the panel is done for a num-

ber of reasons. First, it ensures that someone with a design
background is giving his or her opinion since I do not have that
background. As well, it is an opportunity for me to include
some of what appears to be the most keen of the Faculty to be
aware of what we are doing in the hope that I can also influence
their thinking. I have developed an evaluation form that each
member of the panel fills out. The form consists of a rating in
each area out of five as well as a place for comments. I aggre-
gate all of their scores with mine to determine a mark for the
group. I also aggregate the comments. The students receive the
aggregation of the scores and the comments in one document.

I will elaborate on two of the projects that were carried out.

Downtown Winnipeg Forks Ramp Re-design. Geoff Zywina, Patricia Falta

(architect/design crit), Shawn Houghting.
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 281
Canada

Design for a Streetscape

The development of the design for a streetscape for a small rural
town was quite interesting. The University Industry Liaison Office
sent out a notice that they were looking for courses to match with
requests from the community for project. I sent in information on
the Universal Design course. It worked out that a small town in
Manitoba was looking for design work. The Industry Liaison
office matched us up. The small town paid the Office a fee, which
would cover any expenses, related to the project. We met in the
town with various community people and they expressed their
views on what they would like to happen. In this case the present
street was adjacent to an abandoned railway line which previously
ran through town. The townsfolk wanted to make this street more
vibrant and include recreation, parks, commercial areas and attract
tourists. Two groups of mulit-disciplinary students prepared their
design and programming for the space. Because of the multi-disci-
plinary nature of the group they were able to address planning,
interior design, architecture and landscape issues. Some of the
towns-people attended the final presentation and then the drawings
and written document were sent to the town. One or both of the
designs will be entered into a design competition at the Inclusion
for Design conference in Montreal, Quebec, in June 2001.

Walkway system and boat launch

Again the students met with a community organization called
Save Our Seine who were requesting the design. The students met
with the group initially to find out what their needs were. In this
case there was a combination of interior design and landscape
students working on the project. The project was well received
by the community group and was entered into the Universal
Design Conference Competition in Rhode Island in June 2000.

Students comment that they appreciate the opportunity to work

together in these multi-disciplinary groups. They comment that
it not only assists them in understanding the other professions,
the project is strengthened by a variety of in-puts.

Textbooks
I find that there are no real textbooks in universal design at this
time and they need to be developed. I have attempted to include
a variety of books as mandatory and as optional. From time to
time I have placed the Canadian CSA –B651 standard on the
mandatory list because at the time it was probably the best
access standard/code/guideline in Canada. The students could
282 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

also use this in their practice when they graduate. I have also
tried several books as course texts over the years. These differ
from year to year and include: the Center for Universal Design’s
book: “The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All
Ages and Abilities” (1998), “Universal Design: Creative
Solutions for ADA Compliance” by Null &Cherry (1996), and
“Beautiful Universal Design by Liebrock” (1999). I also have
prepared notes and copies of articles into a bound copy that
they purchase from the university bookstore. In these notes is
an entire section on helpful universal design-related websites.

I find that by having this as a half-year course and trying to

cram a lot into it, I don’t have time to regularly discuss the rea-
dings in class. I remind them to refer to the readings that
accompany each session. Because this is an optional course, I
find that the students are reluctant to purchase the textbooks. As
well, they are usually at the end of their studies and ready to
graduate and they say that they have run out of money.
Needless to say, I have not found a good textbook solution and
the whole textbook issue remains a dilemma for me.

Course Evaluation
This year I asked the students to keep a structured journal of what
they were learning both inside and outside the class. I had set up
a sheet of questions outlining some questions to ask them. I
asked the students to hand in their journals twice during the term.
I did not provide marks for handing them in. The journals were
particularly helpful to me as they provided insight as to what was
and what was not working in the class. Sometimes when I
thought a class was not going particularly well, the journals sur-
prised me in that they commented on how much they enjoyed the
class! The journals also gave me a much broader picture of where
they were at the beginning of class and their personnel universal
design development over the term. This was particularly evident
regarding interactions with persons with disabilities as well as an
increased awareness of inaccessibility in the community. I would
highly recommend this process. I will however, provide some sort
of participation mark for them handing it in next year. I obviously
will not “mark” the document. The idea is for the student to have
the opportunity for a free flow of ideas.

I do have some attendance difficulties particularly towards the

end of term. This is a problem since this is such an interactive
class and so much of it is hands-on experience. Part of the pro-
blem is that this is an optional course and the students feel that
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 283
Canada

assignments for required studios must take precedent. I have in

the past taken attendance and created a system of marks lost
depending upon the number of days missed. I do not like this
system as I feel like a sergeant major!

Student Evaluation of the Course

Each year I have the students fill out an evaluation of the course
over and above the usual university evaluation. My evaluation
form gives me more detail and relates specifically to this course.
Overwhelmingly the students comment that they would like to see
this as a compulsory course. For me another evaluation of the
effectiveness of the course is that I will get students who are
taking or who have taken the course telling me how they have had
to argue for other professors to allow them to include universal
design features in a studio project. I have also had other professors
comment on how a student from this class is influencing them.

Improvements to the Course and

Future Plans for Development
As is the way with any course that is taught, I am constantly
changing the methods of delivery and the topics in this course.
Part of this is due to various opportunities and/or new develop-
ments that I feel that the students should be aware of. I struggle
with deciding on should we go on a tour, which takes time and
they don’t get all the detail a three-hour lecture session would pro-
vide. At the same time, it is so important for the students to see
real projects. Unfortunately, I have had to cut back on the number
of tours over the years so that enough content can be included.

I would like to provide studio time in the class so that they

could work on the final project and receive on-going feedback.
I find that the way it works now is that they save everything till
the end and do a rush job on it. I would like to give the students
the opportunity to present what they have learned from their
literature review in class since they have become “mini-
experts” on the topic. It all boils down to needing to make this a
full course rather than a half course.

I would also like to include students from other disciplines such

as occupational therapy and engineering. I feel that this arran-
gement would be mutually beneficial to all. Regarding evalua-
tion, I have found that the final project being heavily weighted
with a 60% grade does not really provide enough separation of
the abilities of the students. I plan to introduce either another
284 UNIVERSAL design Part 2 North America

individual assignment or a small test into the course to assist in

providing a better indication of marks.

I feel that this course should be compulsory and not an elective. All
of the students should have to take it. I also feel that there should
be universal design supplementary lectures and additions to studios
throughout the students’ design education. In this way, the informa-
tion can be integrated throughout their theory and practice.

To be an even more universally designed course, it would be

helpful to have input into the actual course design from persons
from the community and user-experts. More could also be done
with more resources to pay guest speakers and additional course
developers. At this time we do not have these resources.

Related Activities in the Faculty

In addition to the Introduction to Universal Design course, I also
am an advisor to six to eight thesis and practicum students who are
incorporating universal design into their work. Most of these stu-
dents are landscape architecture students. I have had one interior
design student and now have a city-planning student. Two of my
students have graduated. I am also called upon to provide the occa-
sional guest lecture in a design professor’s class and have been
invited on occasion to be a studio crit. This year a multi-discipli-
nary group of us from the Faculty provided advice to a group of
multi-disciplinary students for an aging-in-place housing design
competition. I also provide a yearly lecture to the year-one occupa-
tional therapy students. I have had three interior design students
take a reading course from me and apply it to their option in aging
elective. We have also accepted two occupational therapy and one
city planning intern at the Institute. Their internships focus on rese-
arch and they become research assistants during their placement.

Conclusion
This has been an overview of the universal design course that I
have developed and taught over the past five years through the
Universal Design Institute in the Faculty of Architecture,
University of Manitoba. I have titled this chapter “a universally
designed universal design course” because of the nature of the
delivery, instruction, evaluation and content of the course. This
course is taught by a variety of people including me as an occupa-
tional therapist, persons with disabilities and a variety of guest
speakers. Because of the multi-disciplinary nature of the students
who take the course, a wide variety of topics in universal design
must be covered, thereby providing a very universal design appro-
 Laurie Ringaert
Universal Design Institute Universally Designed Universal Design Course 285
Canada

ach to the course content. The final project comes directly from
the community and involves students working with stakeholders
to determine solutions. User-experts are involved as design crits
and as mentors throughout the project. The involvement of the
community and of user-experts is another important tennent of
universal design. Thus for a variety of reasons, I have universally
designed this course. I continue to perfect this course but acknow-
lege that the course has room for growth and improvement. I hope
that others can learn from my experiences and I look forward to
learning from other “students of universal design”who are develo-
ping curriculae in this most interesting and challenging area.

References
Betty Dion Enterprises Ltd & Universal Design Institute.
International Best Practices In Universal Design: A
Comparitive Study. Betty Dion Enterprises Ltd. Ottawa,
Ontario. 2000. bdion@[Link]
Center for Universal Design. ADA Video Series. The Center for
Universal Design, North Carolina State University. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
Duncan, S. Crossing the Line: Designing for People with Disabi-
lities. ADAdaptations Inc. 1999. [Link].
Finkel, G. (Ed) Access: A Guide To Accessible Design For
Designers, Builders, Facility Owners And Managers.
Universal Design Institute, Winnipeg, Manitoba. 2000.
Follette-Story, M., Mueller J., Mace R. The Universal Design
File: Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities. Center
for Universal Design, Raleigh, North Carolina. NC State
University. (1998).
Frye, J & Frye, K. ACCEX: Universal Design Expert System.
Universal Design Institute. Winnipeg, Manitoba. 2000
Leibrock, C. & Evan Terry J. Beautiful Universal Design: A
Visual Guide. Culinary and Hospitality Industry Publications
Service. 1999. [Link].
Null R. & Cherry K. Universal Design: Creative Solutions for
ADA Compliance. Professional Publications, Inc. Belmont
CA. 1996.
Ringaert L. & Frye K. Universal Design Resource 2000
Universal Design Institute. AHEAD. 2000.
[Link]
Ringaert, L., Knutson, B., & Rapson D. Is Your Business Open To
All? Universal Design Institute. Winnipeg, Manitoba. 2000.
Salmon, J. The Accessible Place of Business Video. Universal
Design Consultants. [Link].
 286

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Edward S
New York 287

Part 3
Asia and Australia
288 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 289
Cowan University, Australia

3.1 Introducing
Universal Design to a
Colonial Context
Drs Annette Pedersen and Christopher Crouch, Edith Cowan
University, Perth, Western Australia

Universal design has become of paramount importance in archi-

tectural teaching practice during the last decades. However, in
late capitalist society production is still divorced from social
and ethical considerations. Using design curriculum as an
example, the authors argue that more inclusive and responsible
teaching practice prepares students to realise their full potential
in their future careers, which might not be related to design.
Equally these pedagogic strategies have potential value beyond
teaching in the design disciplines. An inclusive curriculum, by
valuing diversity, and introducing the idea of ethical and
responsible practice is as relevant to mathematics as it is to
architecture or economics. The authors locate their critique of
modernity within Western Australian culture, engaging with
postcolonial theory and applying it as an emancipatory tool.

Introduction
In Western culture modernist technologies and ideology sepa-
rated the 19-century designer physically and socially from the
object s/he made. This separation of production from social use
prompted John Ruskin, in relating design production to wider
social and cultural criteria, to argue for the full cultural educa-
tion of the designer, rather than the technicist training s/he was
receiving. As the justification for much funding of design cour-
ses is the need to provide vocational training, the utopian edu-
cational project growing from Ruskin’s philosophy seems to
exhaust itself before it reaches the studios of contemporary
design instruction. More recently, legislation following human
rights movements around the world has raised the urgent
necessity for a more inclusive design process, sometimes
known as ‘universal design’.

At a post colonial conference at Notre Dame University,

Fremantle, Western Australia in 1993, Aboriginal writer
290 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Mudrooroo addressed his largely white audience with a bemu-

sed query; ‘What is this thing known as ‘post colonial’? Have I
missed something? Have all you bastards gone home?’ In rai-
sing this issue in such an academic forum, Mudooroo high-
lighted the quandary for Australians attempting to work within
an ethical and socially responsible framework. Not only have
we ‘bastards’ (sic) not left his land, but Australia is still a
British colony. The Queen of England is also the Queen of
Australia. Post colonialism is arguably capitalism’s contempo-
rary face, but within this intellectual arena little account is
taken of those who are still colonial, there is little acknowledg-
ment of the ethical dilemmas facing continuing colonial states
such as Australia. In this chapter the authors interrogate the ide-
ologies of modernity that underpin both the colonising desires
of European nations and design education and processes. Using
examples from recent pedagogic projects in Western Australian
universities, we argue that an inclusive education encompassing
broad cultural and social issues produces more competent ana-
lytical designers, and provides a critical foundation for those
design students not following prescribed design paths.

Such a pedagogic process also enables the introduction of uni-

versal design across disciplines. The principles of universal
design or access intersect with principles of inclusive curricu-
lum, social justice and ethical practice. The negotiation of an
ethical relationship with an ‘other’ translates across disciplines
and levels of study. This ethical relationship is of as much
importance to school curricula as it is to tertiary studies. While
architects or engineers may deal with the practical aspects of
construction design, raising awareness throughout a population
actually militates against the forms of oppression which ultima-
tely create disability, gender or race as defining and subjugated
categories.

Aims and issues

The trial architectural design curriculum project presented in
this chapter sought to significantly broaden design educational
parameters. Its intention was to explore an inclusive pedagogy
that embraced the notions of co-inquiry and collaboration, and
acknowledged an appreciation of contemporary life experience
and diversity. The project had the potential to significantly
improve the education offered to students, equipping them with
an understanding of the diversity of the community they work
in, and skills with which to responsibly solve problems in their
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 291
Cowan University, Australia

future workplace. The focus was on the cultural and social

orientation of the students, consultants and teaching staff in
order to further a discussion regarding responsible work prac-
tice and ethics. The students were introduced to the concept of
‘Universal Design’ and worked throughout the semester with a
group of community consultants each of whom had a disability.
Underpinning the curriculum was a constant interrogation of
the modernist concept of the ‘universal’, the classical legacy of
the ‘golden mean’, and a constructive play with modernist
‘modular’ or ideal man (sic). By implication this includes not
only issues of gender, but also notions of the non-European
body, and the ways in which non-European spaces are related to
specific cultural contexts.

The trial studio was named The Universal Design Studio. The
Universal Design Studio did not necessarily promote the use of
the term itself or advance its adoption in design schools. Rather
students were encouraged to interrogate its ideals within the
framework of the history of design functionalism and aesthetic
outcomes, and the social responsibility of the design professio-
nal. However, the naming of the studio gave it a profile within
the school so that other students quickly realised that those
enrolled in the project had access to knowledge that they did
not. Seen somehow as experts in this field, the ‘Universal
Design’ students became a reference point for all the design stu-
dents in the school, disseminating knowledge throughout the
semester and into the following year. Students were not just
taught basic skills, but were also given handbooks and instruc-
tion manuals, and most importantly, the wherewithal to make
such technical information socially productive. The contextuali-
sing nature of their studies meant information was readily
applicable at many levels. Students who had completed the stu-
dio became increasingly knowledgeable in the subject area, and
articulate in raising these issues at all levels of their lived expe-
rience. (For detail of the studio curriculum see Appendix)

This case study, one of a number undertaken by the writers at

various universities, experiments with inclusive curricula for
the design studio. Australian university design schools have a
strong focus and emphasis on the development of design tech-
niques and the exploration of aesthetic outcomes. The central
aim of this trial programme was to encourage an active partici-
pation with a set of ‘real’ users with whom genuine relation-
ships could be formed. All the consultants engaged in this
process have physical impairments, some more obvious or
292 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

visible than others. These relationships, it was hoped, would

establish in the students a stronger sense of the complex con-
nection between functional, socio-historical and aesthetic
concerns by allowing the definition of the ‘user’ in the practical
scenario of architectural design to intersect with these concerns.
It also gave the students a sense of responsible and ethical
practice, not always an educational concern within traditional
design studio confines at university level.

The project was designed to be critical, exploratory and pro-

active to develop the unique potential that a combination of the
creative arts, architecture and landscape architecture, has to
offer for alternative, more inclusive pedagogic models. This is a
significant development from the modernist design process that
often follows a formally institutionalised procedure to solve
design problems. The initiative develops existing strategies for
making explicit culturally-based differences in the perception of
form and the requirement for space and makes these an integral
part of the design process. The project also addresses a commit-
ment that The University of Western Australia has to inclusive
curriculum which is ‘about curricula and teaching practices that
by their very nature allow for student differences, be they indi-
vidual, gender, cultural or racial or socio-economic background
differences, which all contribute to differences in learning
styles’ (UWA, 1996). This commitment is now endorsed by all
Western Australian universities.

A specific problem of the learning experience of students in

some university design studios is the distance they are kept from
real interaction with ‘users’. Instead, they are required to under-
stand ‘users’ who are represented through the creative use of ima-
ginary scenarios that operate uncritically within the dominant
paradigms of an institutionalised ‘modernist’ design culture.
Students are required to project onto these metaphorical scena-
rios an understanding of the social, political and economic forces
that define and constrain design practice outside the university
environment. Given that most design students at Australian uni-
versities are recent school leavers, (seventeen years of age), a
high percentage of whom are still partially or wholly economi-
cally dependent (upon parents, government assistance and other
support mechanisms), much of this projection is naive.

The Universal Design Studio project followed on from a unique

studio project to design housing for an Aboriginal community
in the north of the state. The student work was commissioned
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 293
Cowan University, Australia

by the Western Australian Aboriginal Housing Board. There is

not scope within this chapter to discuss this project (See
Pedersen & Revell, 1998: 1–11) but it was an important precur-
sor of the Universal Design Studio because those students were
also introduced to ‘real’ users who would eventually inhabit the
homes they were to design. Students were forced to acknow-
ledge through this project the exclusory nature of much of their
previous design instruction, and the way in which their previous
conceptualising about design initially resulted in sets of design
in which indigenous domestic needs were ignored. The commu-
nity expressed a need to have their cooking facilities on the
verandah, they wished to have housing that was communal,
they required safe shelter for women and young children and
separate housing for young unmarried men. In negotiating these
differing needs for shelter the students became aware of the role
that architecture has in disciplining the user.

The disciplined body (in the circumstances of this chapter it

belongs to the subject defined by difference of race or diffe-
rence of physical type) is a body that has to conform, despite
the exclusion of such a body from the benefits of mainstream
representation and acknowledgment. This disciplined subject
has little or no control over his or her environment, both physi-
cal and intellectual, and can best be characterised by the term
‘subaltern’. The subaltern, while voiceless, is nevertheless
expected to be productive. Disciplinary control and the creation
of the productive, docile subject is specifically connected to the
rise of Western capitalism. This chapter is a discussion of some
of the implications of the divorce of production and design pro-
cesses from the complex realities of socio-historical and cultu-
ral contexts. This has occurred in the western world as a result
of the conflation of modernity’s interest in an undistinguishing
functionalism (rooted in a utopian, but ultimately exclusive,
idea of the universal) and capitalism’s investment in ‘forcing the
majority, whom it exploits, to define their own interests as nar-
rowly as possible’ (Berger, 1978: 154). As the modernist agenda
crumbles, or at least is seriously interrogated, it is timely to
reconsider the above concerns in relation to design pedagogy.

What is designing?
Pam Roberts, in a recent Western Australian publication,
Promoting Equity & Diversity – A Guide to Inclusive Language
& Practice in Engineering, states; ‘Engineers design and create
products and services for society by identifying society’s needs
294 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

and providing solutions’ (Roberts, 1999: 2). This text is prima-

rily focused on socially appropriate uses of language in the
work environment. It is useful to concentrate on the first para-
graph of this text and discuss it in relation to the reality of the
Australian community in terms of cultural diversity, and to the
design disciplines represented on our university campuses. That
is to say, engineering, architecture, landscape architecture and
graphic design amongst others. There are many similarities be-
tween the disciplines of engineering, architecture and graphic
design. These practitioners all ‘design and create products and
services for society by identifying society’s needs and providing
solutions’ (Roberts, 1999: 2).

Arguably, design is an intellectual and formal problem solving

process. However this definition avoids a pair of complex issues
associated with design and designing: Who is it that identifies
problems and deems them fit to be solved? Is design simply
about the finished object, or does the object emerge from a
complicated net of material, conceptual and cultural processes?
One legacy of modernist design is the assumption that the
designer, in the purest, essentialist state, is acultural and ahisto-
rical, responding to demands for functional necessity through
rational functional design principles (Crouch, 1990: 63–65).
This utopian position is easily disproved by any casual glance
about a department store. For every rational piece of functional
design there are a hundred useless objects (probably more)
designed with the very opposite of practical self-empowerment
and emancipation in mind. This is something that Theodor
Adorno pointed out sixty years ago when he referred to the cul-
ture industry perpetually cheating its consumers of what it per-
petually promises (Adorno, 1986: 139), but it is a concept with
which the designing fraternity seems reluctant to acknowledge
its complicity. Design practices are deeply rooted in ideology.
The problem with any ideology is that its hegemonic success
means that it becomes transparent, it is all around us but
because it is ubiquitous we are unable to see it in operation, and
its practices take on the quality of ‘commonsense’.

When the design process does not result in a built or construc-

ted object or outcome, the importance of understanding how
ideology contextualises practice is immediately evident.
Designing a solution may entail a prioritising of resources, of
policy making, of allowing certain things to happen and dismis-
sing others. For example, designing a workplace environment
that is sympathetic to parenting needs might imply flexible wor-
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 295
Cowan University, Australia

king hours and subsidised travelling costs for workers, rather

than the construction of a crèche on site. To design a solution to
a problem involves its location within a complex of social, cul-
tural and aesthetic processes. Further, it is about understanding
the physical and ideological construction of the culture that the
designer serves. This chapter is itself a design, a design for an
inclusive pedagogic practice.

The Western Australian Context

Our writing, indeed much of the theory underpinning our peda-
gogic project, is informed by a contemporary field of study that
has been termed ‘post colonialism’. Homi Bhabha writes:
‘Postcolonial criticism bears witness to the unequal and uneven
forces of cultural representation involved in the contest for poli-
tical and social authority within the modern world’ (Bhabha,
1994: 171). It is important to remember that within the context
of Australian history since 1788, (the date of British settle-
ment), this contest has consistently ignored the authority of the
indigenous population of Aboriginal peoples. Under the legal
ruling of terra nullius, it has functioned as if Aboriginal peoples
exist somehow outside the discourses of colonialism so that
they eventually became invisible in cultural discourse. What are
the ramifications for a culture struggling to come to terms with
its colonial past? How are the processes and objects of material
culture tied in with this central issue of history? A glimpse of
colonial Australian decorative design over the last century sees
a constant dialogue between designers struggling to find an
essential ‘Australianness’ in design and continually using
Aboriginal imagery in an attempt to do so. Far from remaining
a legal problem to be fought out in court, the legacy of the colo-
nial struggle between the colonising and the colonised indige-
nous cultures is manifest in the goods on the shelves in every
tourist shop in Australia.

Frantz Fanon writes: ‘Every human problem must be conside-

red from the standpoint of time. Ideally the present will always
contribute to the building of the future’ (Fanon, 1967: 12 –13).
In our discussion of inclusive curriculum and universal design,
in our contribution to the ‘building of the future’, we begin by
rooting our work in the temporal. This is achieved by situating
our writing within a contemporary Western Australian context,
with a backdrop of Australian colonial history. To speak of
Australian practices is in many ways misleading. Australian
federal political constructions, the differing histories and
296 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

models of European explorations, invasion and colonial settle-

ments, and the differing climatic and geographic conditions of
the six Australian states creates a diverse perspective. Hence
our location of this discussion in the particularities of our home
state, Western Australia. Perth, the capital of Western Australia
has a population of approximately two million people. It is the
most geographically isolated city in the world. Add to this the
fact that nearly 30% of the population of Western Australia are
overseas-born and only 30% of these born in the colonial cen-
tre, the UK, and it becomes obvious that understanding cultural
diversity, and administering it, is of some significance to the
state. More than 11% of Western Australians speak a language
other than English at home, with more than 30% of the popula-
tion in the Kimberley and Pilbara regions in the north of the
state speaking Aboriginal languages. Because of this complex
diversity, the state also provides translation services for over 50
different languages (Department of Immigration &
Multicultural Affairs, 1999).

In the Engineering and Science Faculty at The University of

Western Australia 22.5% of the students are women, and 10.8%
International full-fee paying. In the School of Architecture and
Fine Arts over 50% of the students are women, and slightly
more than 10% International students, mainly from South-East
Asia, but increasingly from USA and northern Europe. In terms
of the overseas population by major countries of birth in
Western Australia, 43% are from the UK, 8% from New
Zealand, 5% from Italy, 4% from Malaysia, 3% from former
Yugoslavia, 3% from India, 2% from the Netherlands, 2% from
South Africa, 2% from Germany and 2% from Vietnam.
Despite these figures, there is a continuing perception in
Australia that the bulk of our migrants are from non-European
backgrounds. This is plainly not true. However it is equally
obvious that the Australian population is becoming increasingly
diverse, and even were it not, globalisation demands that we are
able to deal with diversity in a productive and equitable manner.

Gender is as crucial an issue in Australia as elsewhere in the

world today, and while we focus on the culturally disciplined body
it must be acknowledged that as white middle-class academics in
Australia, although not Australian born, our lives are easier, the
obstacles to our personal growth via access to education, health-
care etc, far less than the problems we would face if we were, for
example, Aboriginal women. Our life expectancy alone is pro-
bably thirty years longer that of an Aboriginal woman of our age,
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 297
Cowan University, Australia

our children far less likely to die in infancy, adolescence or in pri-

son. In Australia it is more difficult to be Aboriginal than to be
African or Chinese for example. While Aboriginal peoples repre-
sent less than 4% of total population, over 30% of the Western
Australian prison population is Aboriginal, infant mortality and
general death rates for the Aboriginal population are 4 times
higher than the rest of the population, and more than 35% of adult
Aboriginal peoples are unemployed. Aboriginal people in Western
Australia have only received state education since 1948 and the
‘drop-out’ rate of Aboriginal students remains disproportionately
high. (Western Australian Advisory Committee on Reconciliation
(WA), 1996: passim)

As Australians, we tend not to be very good with issues of race.

The entire ‘Sorry’ debate, a populist campaign instigated to
extract an apology from the federal government for the excesses
of the past in the country’s racialised politics, and the refusal of
John Howard’s liberal government to co-operate in this aspect of
national reconciliation only highlights how inadequately the
Australian nation is dealing with the complex history of European
settlement. Even the idea that racism itself occurs is difficult to
accept, often the response to the suggestion that something is
racist is in the manner that sexism is reacted to in the example in
the engineering inclusivity text (Roberts, 1999: 19).

In the creative arts it becomes even more difficult, discouraging

racism or sexism can be taken as censorship. We are keen to
maintain freedom of speech, freedom of expression, but at
whose expense? For example, in western art history the nude,
the body of a woman, has been the accepted focus of the artistic
gaze for many centuries – it took the physical attack on the
Rokeby Venus by a Suffragette before critical attention was
brought to bear on this aspect of artistic practice. If drawing a
relationship between high art and pornography seems fanciful,
it is useful to remember that these forms of artistic expression
began their existence in private collections, hidden away for the
private pleasure of the lord or master. For example, the vast art
collection of the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in Milan assembled by
the ecclesiast Federico Borromeo from 1595, also exhibits
small items of jewellery featuring detailed erotic images of
women. Time and history has bestowed upon such works the
sanctioning label of ‘art’ rather than ‘centrefold’.

Disability is socially produced, as are racism, sexism and all

forms of social oppression. These are all constructs, human
298 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

invention. The contemporary Western Australian background to

the universal design project we discuss in this chapter is one of
an institutionalised racism and an institutionalised body fascism
that is schizophrenic in its manifestations. The administration of
cultural and economic capital in Western Australia is pluralistic
and contradictory. For example, the Ministry for the Arts rou-
tinely funds curatorial projects that the Minister is unhappy
with. The Ministry funds the Perth Institute of Contemporary
Arts which is in safe but vigorous opposition to much that the
state government stands for. However the geographic location
of the institute in Perth’s Cultural Centre, next to the state gal-
lery and library, simply reiterates what Jean-François Lyotard
foregrounds in The Postmodern Condition; that such seemingly
oppositional moves are simply ‘programmed effects’ which ulti-
mately have no ‘effect on the balance of power’ (Lyotard, 1989:
16). To imagine that the Australian Federal government, its judi-
ciary, its educational institutions and the mass media are wor-
king within one closely defined ideology is a crude caricature,
but the reality is that ‘subalternity and alienation have their
roots in economic relations’ (Bahro, 1978: 378) and these insti-
tutions are the agents by which notions of the subaltern and the
alien are formed and perpetuated. The subaltern class is a
non–hegemonic group or subordinate class. Not unified, the
subaltern class is ruled by the state and their interests subordi-
nated to that of the state. These individuals are not exploited by
the state as are the working class in a Marxist model, rather
they are disenfranchised and without a speaking position. In
relation to the modern state, it can be argued that both
Aboriginal peoples and peoples with disabilities fall into this
category/class. It is only by an escape from the subaltern exi-
stence that the possibility emerges for such individuals to parti-
cipate in what Bahro calls the ‘synthesis of the historical
process’ (Bahro 1978: 146). By this he means the construction
of the individual not just in a legal sense – with for example the
right to enter public buildings in a wheelchair – but also in
terms of ethical and intellectual individuality, which ‘presses in
turn for more productive transformation’ (Bahro, 1978: 272).

So, while universities and major industry pursue policies of

inclusivity driven by economic rationalism, the Australian
Federal government refuses to acknowledge Native Title (pos-
sibly also due to economic concerns). While the Federal
government actively pursues policies that promote an under-
standing of physical difference, legislating for universal access
to government buildings and public places, the mass media
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 299
Cowan University, Australia

continues to perpetuate the role of the idealised physical stereo-

type in its never ending quest for liquidity. This see-sawing
between disciplinary action and the need to create a culturally
productive social docility is well documented. Michel Foucault
makes the point that while institutions such as prisons, hospi-
tals, and training institutions were/are historically part of a tech-
nology of discipline for working class people, it is the case that
cultural disciplining is a universal phenomenon that also opera-
tes through universities and schools (Foucault, 1987: 135–169).

Modernity and the concept of the

Universal
The legacy of modernity in design education in the English
speaking world, much of which is colonial or post colonial, at the
beginning of the twenty-first century is a dualistic one. On one
hand there is the cultural and ideological legacy of the Deutsche
Werkbund’s push for the standardised Typische form, with its
associated ideals of rationalisation, industrialisation and unitised
training. This aspiration to a functional universalism where
design and its physical and conceptual processes are reduced to
the acultural and ahistorical acquisition of skills is in opposition
to an educational model which contextualises the design process
within cultural and social frameworks. This alternative, which
argues for plurality and difference, is best characterised by Doll’s
metaphorical ‘dancing curriculum, where the steps are patterned
but unique’ and which is located in a world of complex and con-
tradictory social realities (Doll, 1993: passim).

Despite its decline in prestige in academic circles over the last

twenty years, the cultural context that Western Australians work
within is that of modernity (and continuing colonialism). It is
ironic that new movement towards inclusivity in design should
adopt that old modernist term ‘universal’, and this irony was
fully explored in our exampled design curriculum project. The
cultural and ideological struggle in the first third of the last cen-
tury saw many attempts to create universalist systems in art and
design that echoed the previous century’s attempts to create
universalist systems of thought and communication. This univer-
salising project was flawed from the start because of its Euro-
centric origins. Esperanto is a good example of this. On one
hand, Esperanto was a laudable project which attempted to erode
cultural difference and exclusivity by the production of an artifi-
cial language which communicated across cultural difference.
Its universality however, is confined within the paradigms of
300 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

European language structures, its vowel sounds are European, its

alphabet is European, its cases European. Antonio Gramsci was
never happy with Esperanto arguing that it suppressed the diffe-
rences in power reflected in the contested use of colonised and
colonising languages, it created an ambience of cultural compe-
tency rather than cultural literacy that facilitated an understan-
ding of cultures that could only ever operate at the most
superficial of levels, forever avoiding the deep cultural antago-
nisms that made such a language necessary in the first place (1).

Language is the vital element in any cultural exchange, Frantz

Fanon at the very beginning of the first chapter of Black Skin,
White Masks, focuses on the importance of language stating;
‘For it is implicit that to speak is to speak absolutely for the
other’ (Fanon, 1967: 17). Marxist philosopher V. N. Volosinov
discussing the relationship of the class struggle to language
writes; ‘Sign becomes an arena of the class struggle’ (Volosinov
quoted in Moi, 1985: 157). This is language rooted in history,
politics and cultural endeavour, not ahistorical and acultural
Esperanto. Modernist design with its emphasis upon the ‘ratio-
nal’ and ‘functional’ can be viewed in much the same way as
Esperanto. The need for a design that was egalitarian, that was
pragmatic and useful began a necessary process in the levelling
of what had been oppressive cultural and economic differences
(Crouch, 1999: 46–71)

In the process of creating what modernist designers saw as an

‘acultural’ and ‘ahistorical’ design form that subsumed cultural
variation, an intrinsic refusal to acknowledge difference could
only lead to an oppressive form of design. By this we mean a
design culture based around a formalised and idealised concep-
tion of the functioning European body. This formalised concep-
tion was both physical and cultural, where the industrialised
culture of the European worker was to determine how the con-
structed environment was to be conceptualised and built.
Modernist universalism created an abstracted (disciplined)
body, docile and productive, which operated within a set of
functional paradigms that once withdrawn from its original cul-
tural context becomes disempowering rather than emancipatory.

A critique of modernity’s rationalism is not a critique of the role

of reason, and the role of reasoning in design, or of the utopian
aspiration to a universality and transparency of cultural activity.
Rather it is a critique of the way in which a historical form of
rationality has become redundant, and often oppressive. While
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 301
Cowan University, Australia

momentarily emancipatory for European culture, the ‘rationa-

lity’ of modernist culture requires interrogation and criticism to
make it relevant to new conditions. To paraphrase Foucault; the
rationality of the abominable – rationalising the atrocities of the
Gulf War, or the bombing of Serbians civilians by NATO planes
for example – is a fact of contemporary history. This does not
give irrationality any special qualities however. At the core of
contemporary moves towards ‘Universal Design’ are the succes-
ses and failures of the last attempts, and the dialectic between
the two positions needs constant acknowledgment for ‘functio-
nalism’ to have value as a design tool.

Design Thinking
Traditionally in the western world design is a teleological, crea-
tive, problem-solving process leading to a constructed or built
solution (Booth, 1983: 283). The teaching of design takes place
in a studio, rather than a lecture theatre. The design process
itself typically includes a ‘series of sequential steps from pro-
ject acceptance, design, construction drawings, implementation,
post-construction evaluation and maintenance’ (Booth, 1983:
283). This basic model is used by graphic designers, interior
designers, landscape architects, architects, industrial designers,
engineers and scientists to solve problems. Within this tradition
design is taught as a linear process dealing with solving one
specific problem, each student working alone on their indivi-
dual problem (Booth, 1983: 283). In addition to such a process
an important aspect of design education is the ability of the stu-
dent to locate a learnt specialism within complex and contradic-
tory social realities, to be aware of the limiting qualities of that
specialisation as well as its benefits. Further to this self-awa-
reness is the need to contextualise design practice within cultu-
ral systems, and by so doing critique those systems.

Not only the context but also the methods of delivery of models
of education can militate against such a self-reflexive process.
In our own teaching experience we have found that teaching
students to become self-reflexive is an extraordinarily difficult
objective to achieve. At the Western Australian School of Visual
Arts, Edith Cowan University in Perth, students are encouraged
to use this concept as a core principle to locate themselves in
the complex of cultural structures in which they operate. To
‘locate’ a student must perceive his or her emotional, aesthetic
and intellectual life and how it is constructed, for good and bad,
by education, life experience, the organisation of society and
the systems and functions of its institutions. An initial attempt
302 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

to promote this analytical attitude was the imposition upon the

students of a ‘self-reflexive journal’. However this became a
site for introverted musings rather than a tool for critical
thought and analytical debate. It became clear that students did
not know enough about their immediate cultural environment to
make the project worthwhile without enormous prescriptive
input by tutors that defeated the object of the initial exercise.

Another unsuccessful attempt to encourage students to become

self-aware was a graphic design project in which students were
asked to ‘frame’ themselves visually according to their cultural
origins. Most were unable to invest the brief with any real criti-
cal qualities and produced images that whilst visually success-
ful were touristic, and lacked any indication of understanding
the complexities of this piece of self-ethnography. The most
direct way of achieving any form of self-reflexivity in young
students in our experience, has been to provide them with ‘real’
experience, and to take them outside of themselves. That is to
say, provide a curriculum where as part of their design course
they engage with real users over an extended period, and in
which their subjectivites are forced to become articulated
through outside agencies. By so doing students need to take
responsibility for their work beyond the narrow confines of aca-
demic achievement. It also requires students to learn to listen to
individuals they may not regard as having the same authority as
their university lecturers, or possibly themselves. It is this pro-
cess of learning to work collaboratively in a community envi-
ronment that provokes self-awareness. We note however, that
such courses are often extremely difficult to organise in times
of limited resources and the pragmatics of timetabling in the
new economically driven universities.

As we have previously mentioned, the form and content of

design teaching are intimately linked. Also there is a measu-
rable, as well as a linguistic difference between training and
education (Buss, 1995: passim). The problems inherent in the
legacy of modernist industrialised training and competency
based learning, were spelled out clearly by Bowden and
Masters. Graduates emerging from technicist and poorly con-
ceived unitised learning environments;

lack the ability to communicate ideas and to discuss and

debate issues; are unable to relate, communicate and interact
with others from different backgrounds and experience and
are deficient in their ability to conceptualise projects from
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 303
Cowan University, Australia

broad goals through to ultimate evaluation (Bowden and

Masters, 1993: 173).

This is a problem when even potential employers, often cast as

the villains of the piece in demanding specialised training to fit
industry requirements, are not interested in such limited gradu-
ates. A recent report by the British Centre for Research into
Quality, on the careers of British art and design graduates,
observed that the qualities and attributes sought by employers
are; ‘initiative, creativity, independent judgement, oral commu-
nication skills, flexibility and adaptability, analysis, critique and
synthesis’. Such qualities were often developed by autodidactic
students; ‘in spite of, rather than because of the course as often
students were left to develop these for themselves with little or
no help or guidance from within their programme of study’
(Harvey and Blackwell, 1999: 4).

The spectre of specialisation in education, the legacy of moder-

nist technocratic rationalism so ably characterised by Jürgen
Habermas, raises its head here, but we don’t need to be
Habermas to spot this problem (Habermas, 1974, 1984: pas-
sim). In an article published by the Australian Graphic Design
Association, How To Get a Job, Lam Po Tang observes; ‘At
design school, the subjects you study are organised around
areas of technical expertise. Out there, in the world of practi-
sing designers and studios, the work follows areas of applica-
tion of design skills’ (Lam Po Tang, 2000). The transmissive
educational model of specialist teaching, technicist and uniti-
sed, economical when applied to large teaching groups, is incre-
asingly problematic in preparation for the design industry (2). It
also runs counter to the ideas about creativity and productive
thinking which (should) lie at the heart of design education. A
joint research project between British Nuclear Fuels Limited
and the Royal College of Art in London observed that the big-
gest creative constraint for the specialist was stepping outside
the paradigms of what s/he personally knew was technically
feasible and entering into a metaphorical world (Joyce,
Franklin, Neal, Kyffin and Veronies, 1999: passim).

This world of metaphor is not an escape from design solutions,

but an entry point, where analogy helps to define physical and
cultural problems. The student equipped with these skills is not
only increasingly likely to succeed within his/her chosen field
of design, but also, and more importantly, move sideways into
other areas of cultural endeavour. Schön observes; ‘At its best,
304 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

the architectural studio is an exemplar of education for artistry

and problem-solving, architectural studios are prototypes of
individual and collective learning-by-doing under the guidance
and criticism of master practitioners’ (Schön, 1985: 6) (our
emphasis). Herein lurks a fatal flaw, for while within this trans-
missive model there is space for metaphor, that in itself is not
enough, because the problem lies in a disconnection from his-
tory, culture and subjectivity that occurs with the modernist
functional universalising of traditional design practice. Again,
to refer to the Universal Design Studio, one of the first exerci-
ses given to the students was to ‘map’ their impaired consul-
tants’ bodies and create designs from this knowledge working
critically with the concept of the golden mean, to critically
interrogate the dominant paradigms of physical proportion until
they had conceived an ‘amodular’ body. One of the students
designed a complicated system from her consultant’s body and
then abstracted these drawings into beautiful small abstract
paintings. Surely a very pleasing aesthetic metaphor, but enti-
rely meaningless. However, having established a metaphorical
subjective entry point into the issues at stake, later in the semes-
ter, more confident with her understanding of the issues of not
only impairment but a whole range of social and historical
issues, the student produced award-winning designs for a hypo-
thetical Universal Design Access conference.

Conclusion
A recent international conference at Curtin University in Perth,
Re-inventing Design Education in the University highlights the
wealth of contemporary debates around university design peda-
gogy. It is clear that the role of metaphor as a creative tool is
rising in ascendancy in reaction to economically driven compe-
tency based training schemes and their conceptual limits.
However these debates are not exactly new, The Journal of
Architectural Education has documented an on-going discus-
sion around issues related to design education since its incep-
tion in 1949. What is increasingly imperative in the authors’
point of view is the social and ethical obligations of the desig-
ner. Dutton’s Cultural Politics and Education introduces a jour-
nal issue devoted to the theme of his article. He notes that not
only should we understand education in consciously political
terms, but also that education itself – the investigation of know-
ledge, the curriculum, the social, cultural, and gender relations,
the teaching practices – tends to reproduce dominant ideologies
and so serve the hegemonic status quo (Dutton, 1991: 69). He
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 305
Cowan University, Australia

comments further that ‘thinking of architectural education in

this way is woefully undertheorized by architectural educators.
Work in this area is almost non-existent’ (Dutton, 1991: 69).
Our work falls into this educational investigative category.

More recently than Dutton, Groat challenges the profession to

‘reassess architecture’s pedagogic conventions and the definiti-
onal scope of the field’ (Groat, 1996: 166–183). Her paper con-
tends that ‘diversity may mean survival for the field’ in a
professional world known for what Dixon’s article, A White
Gentleman’s Profession? describes as ‘its lack of diversity’
(Groat, 1996: 166–183). While some in educational institutions
are addressing the issues of cultural context, of diversity and
inclusivity, it would appear there is still a long way to go, and
that linking inclusivity, diversity, pedagogy and design itself is
virtually unknown. Indeed, at the recent Curtin University con-
ference the authors were the only participants who linked these
within a philosophical and socio-historical context (Crouch &
Pedersen, 1999: 173–179).

Gramsci’s ideas about the institutionalised intellectual can help

to redefine pedagogical and design structures. Gramsci stressed
the importance of the intellectual not as an institutionalised
administrator or scholar, but as part of a wider, moral commu-
nity. As he argues, the new mode of intellectual life:

can no longer consist in eloquence, which is an exterior and

momentary mover of feelings and passions, but in active par-
ticipation in practical life, as constructor, organiser, ‘perma-
nent persuader’, and not just a simple orator. (Gramsci,
1997: 344)

In such a model, the role of the Master, or the specialist, is con-

stantly under scrutiny as the paradigms of, in our case design
culture, are questioned in practice. There will always be institu-
tional structures that provide armatures for institutional and
institutionalised study. Under a Gramscian model however they
cease to be external forces which limit and are limited, but can
be transformed into a means of freedom, instruments to create
new ethical and political forms and a source of new initiatives
(Gramsci, 1997: 244 & 359–369).

The International Journal of Inclusive Education promotes con-

temporary discussions surrounding inclusivity and social jus-
tice. For example, McCarthy, Dolby and Valdivia argue issues
306 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

of identity and multiculturalism are far more complex than the

simple or easy opposition of the West to multiculturalism
(McCarthy, Dolby and Valdivia, 1997: 89–100). As they argue,
it is the specific and local nature of identity that post colonia-
lism acknowledges. While these writers go no further than dis-
cussing this in relation to literature in their article, this chapter
deals with these issues in relation to studio practice and design
action (3). Indeed we are able to go much further than this, for
it is in the application of theory to practice that we are able to
enter into what Gayatri Spivak terms a ‘responsibility structure’
with the subaltern, thus enabling a learning which flows both
ways. That is to say, between teachers and students, between
disabled persons and intellectuals, between the academic world
and the subaltern (Spivak, 1996: 293).

It is in this learning process that the rich core of our project is

revealed with its extensive emancipatory potential. In the
modern world formal history is the history of the state, there is
no history of the subaltern. As Antonio Gramsci reminds us,
such a history can only ever be a monograph (Gramsci, 1997:
52). In Australia there is a history that exists before and outside
the history of the modern state; the oral histories of Aboriginal
peoples whose Dreamtime stories predate formal European his-
tory. For the contemporary Australian state these histories have
no legal authority. In the modernist design world the amodular
body, the disabled body, the racialised body, are all subalterns.
These bodies fall outside knowledge, they do not speak.
Gramsci proposes an active role for the intellectual, those
whom he refers to as, ‘organic intellectuals’ (Gramsci, 1997: 4).
That is to say the intellectual has a role of conscious responsibi-
lity to provide a link between the ruling class, the working clas-
ses, and what we would term the ‘disenfranchised’ (or subaltern
in the post colonial world). For us as academics it is our respon-
sibility to provide a space to critique the constraints of moder-
nity in such a way that fractures occur. Thus our work may
enable moments in which those who have been unable to speak
in modernist [design] discourse, the impaired or the racialised,
are inserted into the circuit of academic and ultimately, design
work. This means for the design disciplines that rather than spe-
cialised texts on design being published and exclusionary buil-
dings erected, an understanding of diversity across culture, race
and physical type is built into any design considerations from
the inception of the process.

Bhabha discusses the ‘move away from the singularities of

 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 307
Cowan University, Australia

‘class’ or ‘gender’ as primary conceptual and organizational

categories’, which he sees as having resulted in the awareness
of a variety of subject positions currently informing ideas of
identity. He argues that it is in the negotiation of the range of
subject positions in contemporary cultures, from the ‘periphery’
or boundary to authorised rule, that dominant discourses in
western culture can be challenged (Bhabha, 1994: 1). One can
argue that design studios have traditionally been taught within a
modernist paradigm in which the studio ‘master’ occupies the
privileged subject position, the position of authority, and the
student is deprived of active subjectivity. Post colonial dis-
course, on the other hand, provides a theoretical position from
which each subject may speak. Modernity revisited through
post colonial discourse provides a space for what Bhabha terms
‘enunciation’. In this way design itself can be interrogated and
translated in order to value difference. The use of post colonial
theory in a colonial context is of course fraught with problems.
Nonetheless, such a curriculum exploring the dialectic relati-
onship between the theory, the colonial reality of Australian
society and practice, and between political and social can lay
the foundations for a truly emancipatory subjectivity.

One of the key issues of post colonial theory has become that of
identity and the space, or site, of difference. Within this space is
a play of private and public, past and present, the physiological,
psychological and the social. Post colonial theory put to prac-
tice within a modernist paradigm has the potential to disrupt the
binary oppositions of such a discourse. Within the traditional
model of the design studio, within the framework of the modern
design aesthetic, post colonial theory’s enunciative potential can
play havoc with exclusionary and oppressive practice. Post
colonial theory can provide a translation service between
modernity’s limiting binaries and boundaries and more contem-
porary notions of difference. This can be clearly seen in the trial
Universal Design Studio. Working in this instance within a
modernist design institution/discourse/paradigm, the students
called into active question those principals. Furthermore they
quested beyond those modernist boundaries, through exercises
of self-reflexivity, metaphor and collaboration, to reach for,
investigate and make visible within this particular institution,
the profoundly silent subaltern figures that predate the history
of modernity. In addressing inclusivity both in terms of tea-
ching strategies and then design itself, this trial project actively
explores ways in which we can transform our sense of what it
means as an Australian, ‘to live, to be, in other times and diffe-
308 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

rent spaces both human and historical’ (Bhabha, 1994: 256).

In interrogating the idea of ‘universal’ within an inclusive curri-
culum, the students ultimately ruptured modernist design para-
digms. In exploring and mapping a geography of disability as a
metaphor for the social, the studio unpacked some of the totalita-
rian effects of the modernity’s desire for the ‘universal’. The
abnormal body, the disabled body, is traditionally oppressed
within institutional confines, those repressive regimes of the
modern world which construct an individual’s identity. In allo-
wing space for a play of different subjectivities the students
found that disability is both a socially and historically relative
identity that is produced by society. The modernist ideal of the
universal is based on a narrow understanding of the ‘able body’.
That is to say, there is a presumption that individual subjects can
be reduced to identical units. We need look no further than le
Corbusier. Under institutionalised economic rationalism, differ-
ence is socialised as social oppression. Thus for these design
students direct engagement embracing multiple political con-
cerns became an emancipatory process. And for us as academics?
Putting ourselves on the line by contesting privileged knowledges
in order to empower our students in the margins of academia
simply reinforced yet again the idea that knowledge is power.

End notes
(1) To be culturally literate is an entirely different thing from
being culturally competent. It can be seen as the difference be-
tween being a passive consumer of culture and being a producer
of culture, the difference between a cynical appropriation of
ideas, and the sophisitcated use of them in furthering the pro-
cesses of communication.

(2) A Tale of Two Studios published by the Australian Graphic

Design Association, measures the creative successes of two
British design studios. Pentagram, which has a transmissive
management model, allocating specialist tasks to teams is no-
where near as successful as Wolff Olins that employs a horizon-
tal, rhisomic model. This has the potential to have profound
implications for design education.
[Link]
19.10.2000

(3) There are twenty-two schools of architecture in Australasia.

Some institutions such as Curtin University, combine architec-
ture, construction and planning; others, such as Deakin
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 309
Cowan University, Australia

University, combine art and architecture; while others combine

architecture and building, as does Papua New Guinea
University of Technology. The School of Architecture and Fine
Arts at UWA is unique among Australian universities in hou-
sing three studio-based disciplines; architecture, landscape
architecture and fine arts. Thus the UWA school provided an
ideal site to trial innovative pedagogic practices related to
design disciplines. The Universal Design trial studio took place
in 1999. (See Appendix)

Bibliography
Adorno, T. & Horkheimer, M. Dialectic of Enlightenment
Verso, London. 1986
Bahro R. The Alternative in Eastern Europe, NLB, London.
1978
Berger, J. Ways of Seeing, Penguin Books, London. 1978
Bhabha, H. The Location of Culture, Routledge, New York.
1994
Booth, N. Basic Elements of Landscape Architectural Design,
Elsevier, New
York. 1983
Bowden and Masters. Implications for Higher Education of a
Competency-Based Approach to Education and Training,
DEET, Canberra. 1993
Buss, D. The Impact of Modularity on Art and Design in Higher
Education, University of Plymouth Press, Exeter. 1995
Crouch, C. Why teach design history? In Thistlewood, D. (ed)
Issues in Design Education, Longmans, London. 1990
Crouch, C. Modernism in art, design and architecture, St
Martins Press, New York. 1999
Crouch, C. & Pedersen, A. in Swann, C. & Young, E. (Editors)
Re-inventing Design Education in the University Conference
Proceedings, School of Design, Curtin University, Bentley.
2000
Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs.
Population Flows Immigration Aspects, Canberra. 1999
Doll, W. A post-modern perspective on Curriculum, Teachers
College Press, New York. 1993
Dutton, T. Cultural Politics and Education, in, Journal of
Architectural Education, M I T Press, Washington, Vol 44,
No 2. 1991
Fanon, F. Black Skin White Masks, (translated by Charles Lam
Markmann) Grove Press, New York. 1967
310 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Foucault, M. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison,

Random House, New York. 1979
Forgacs, D. & Nowell-Smith, G. Selections from cultural
writings / Antonio Gramsci. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, Mass. 1985
Goetz-Schierle, G. The Pedagogy of Architectural Technology,
in Journal of Architectural Education, M I T Press,
Washington, Vol 51, No 2. 1997
Gramsci, A. Selections from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio
Gramsci. (Ed. Quintin Hoare & Geoffrey Nowell-Smith),
Lawrence & Wishart, London. 1997
Groat, L. Reconceptualizing Architectural Education For a
More Diverse Future: Perceptions and Visions of
Architectural Students, in Journalof Architectural Education,
M I T Press, Washington, Vol 49. No 3. 1996
Habermas J. Dogmatism, reason and decision, in Theory and
Practice, London. 1974
Habermas J. Modernity: an incomplete project in Foster H. (ed)
Postmodern Culture, London, Pluto Press. 1984
Harvey and Blackwell Destination and Reflections: Careers of
British Art, Craft and Design Graduates, Birmingham, UCE
Press. 1999
Joyce, Franklin, Neal, Kyffin and Veroneis. What Stimulates the
Creative Process in The Journal of Design and Technology
Education, Volume 3, number 2. 1999
Lam-Po-Tang
[Link]
2000
Landry, D. & MacLean, G. (Ed) Selected Works of Gayatri
Chakravorty Spivak, Routledge, New York. 1996
McCarthy, C, Dolby, N.,& Valdivia, A. N. The uses of culture:
canon formation, postcolonial literature and the multicultu-
ral project, in The International Journal of Inclusive
Education, Vol 1, No 1. 1997
Moi, T. Sexual/Textual Politics, Routledge, New York. 1985
Pedersen, A. & Revell, G. Design in Derby – Teaching for
Diversity in Arts on the Edge Conference Proceedings, Edith
Cowan University, Mt Lawley. 1998
Roberts, P. Promoting Equity & Diversity – A Guide to
Inclusive Language & Practice in Engineering, National
Women in Engineering Committee, Barton. 1999
Schön, D. The Design Studio, RIBA Publications Limited,
London. 1985
University of Western Australia. Inclusive Curriculum,
Discussion Paper. 1996
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 311
Cowan University, Australia

Western Australian Advisory Committee on Reconciliation.

Western Australia’s Other History, Council for Aboriginal
Reconciliation, Midland. 1996

Appendix
The 1999 Universal Design Studio was a funded Equity Project
conceived by Annette Pedersen in The School of Architecture
and Fine Arts at The University of Western Australia. The
course curriculum was designed by occupational therapist Jaye
Johnson, architect Romesh Goonewardene and Annette
Pedersen. The curriculum had to satisfy course requirements,
provide the students with enough information to give them an
understanding of recent public access legislation, the mechani-
cal requirements and physical limitations of a variety of disabi-
lities and also address a commitment to inclusive curriculum.
This meant a substantial departure from the usual studio pro-
gramme and a shift in emphasis from studio teaching staff to
the students themselves.

The equity funding was used to employ six consultants to work

with students in the design studio for the thirteen-week semes-
ter. Each of these consultants had a disability. Design studios at
UWA usually have six contact teaching hours each week. The
contact hours in this studio were extended to nine to include a
three-hour life drawing class each week. The life models used
in this class were selected to compliment the studio focus on
‘amodular’ bodies. That is to say, rather than being artists’
models they were, for example, extremely aged, heavily preg-
nant or disabled people. The consultants were invited to join the
students in these drawing sessions.

The teaching programme commenced with an intense one-day

seminar to introduce Universal Design to the School. All staff
and students were invited to attend. An information package
was presented followed by a video documentary of Universal
Design. Following this the audience were introduced to the con-
sultants. Dividing the audience into groups, each consultant
then accompanied them on a tour of the School and its grounds.
Each group had to document the accessibility of the School and
report back to the studio staff. The idea of the seminar was to
introduce Universal Design to everyone in the School and to
encourage all the students to begin to think about access in both
real and design terms.
312 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

The first studio design exercise required the students to work in

small groups with their consultants to document various imagi-
nary access scenarios to the University. For example, one group
had to document their consultant as an international student
attending the university for the first time to enrol. For this
group, as their consultant was in a wheelchair, the difficulties of
simple things such as negotiating showers in the student accom-
modation, crossing the road and finding a suitable toilet on
campus, proved highly enlightening. This exercise took three
weeks. The students had to co-ordinate their work with their
consultant without any assistance from teaching staff. At the
conclusion they were to design and publish an ‘Access
Information Package’ for the campus Equity Office.

The second exercise was to map an ‘amodular’ body. This exer-

cise presumed a relationship of trust between the students and
their consultants. The students were required to map their con-
sultants’ bodies and movements and use them for a design. One
of the students ‘mapped’ her consultant’s irregular movement
up and down a staircase and used the information to compose a
musical score. The time allocated to this exercise was two
weeks. At this point in the semester an informal jury was orga-
nised to provide valuable critical feedback for the students. The
jury included the studio consultants and representatives from
the Equity Office, the Student Guild and the State Disability
Services Commission.

The third exercise required the students to design a folly within

an existing university building, Winthrop Hall. The folly was
for an international Universal Design Conference and Fair and
had to allow access for all members of the public. As the buil-
ding was constructed nearly one hundred years ago before any
thought of access had occurred to the architect, this provided a
real challenge. The students were provided with extensive plans
of the building in which to locate their designs and were
required to produce a range of detailed drawings and scale
models. Three weeks were allowed for this third brief.

The final studio brief was to design a chemistry laboratory and

chemistry faculty building allowing universal access. As the
university was in the process of constructing a new chemistry
building, the students were able to utilise the range of data
already assembled for the university architects. Having their
consultants on hand to tour existing laboratory facilities high-
lighted a range of access issues that even the architects had not
 Annette Pedersen and
Christopher Crouch, Edith Introducing Universal Design to a Colonial Context 313
Cowan University, Australia

considered. Again the students had three weeks in which to

complete their design work.

A bibliography of readings selected to complement the studio

course was pinned up in the studio and students were expected
to complete weekly readings which were then discussed in stu-
dio. Although all the students were architecture students, the
studio staff were interdisciplinary. That is to say; architects, an
artist and an art historian, with a range of other specialists
bought in for studio sessions throughout the course. At the end
of the semester a Universal Design Feedback Forum was orga-
nised for the students and their consultants. This was co-ordina-
ted by the Student Guild. The School usually organises Student
Perception of Teaching tests at the completion of semester.
However it was believed that while SPOT tests are useful they
do not allow for community feedback which was important in
this case. Furthermore it was important to both debrief all the
participants in this project and to document their experiences
for future work.
314 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 315
India

3.2 Universal Design

Education and
Development
Prof. Singanapalli Balaram, [Link]. (NID); Fellow (SIDI),
National Institute of Design, Paldi, Ahmedabad, India

Introduction
The concept of Universal Design is widely understood today as
“an approach to creating environments and products that people
of all ages and abilities are able to use to the largest extent pos-
sible”. Though this approach is often most beneficial to older
people and people with disabilities, universal design benefits
every one to some degree. In many parts of the world Universal
design is attracting increasing attention. However, in the part of
the world, which we call the “Developing world”, designers are
required to grapple with so many other pressing issues that
Universal Design finds little attention in their professional prac-
tice. As a consequence Universal Design Education also finds
little space in the curriculum of design schools there. Ironically
it is in this part of the world that the majority of the world’s
population with disabilities lives; and that the elderly popula-
tion is rapidly increasing. Fortunately, significant work is being
done at design institutions by students and faculty members
making Universal Design Education as an option available and
as an activity sponsored by National or International voluntary
bodies. This article is based on the author’s experience and
observations of such complimentary type of Design Education.

The Significance of Universal Design

Education
Education is not a mere imparting of knowledge and skills
necessary for one to earn a living. It is also to broaden one’s
horizons. Education is not a mere give and take. It is shaping
the whole mind-set of the future generation. The dominant trend
in all futuristic thinking is this: more equality, more non-discri-
mination and more freedom. Universal Design is all this and
thus Universal Design Education is better education for the
world.
316 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

In the past there used to be special schools, colleges and

Universities for women. Today such need has become largely
redundant. Co-education is preferred and considered “progres-
sive” because any action that brings the discrimination down
and equality up is progressive. If progress is measured by how a
Nation takes care of its weaker subjects, then Universal Design
Education certainly is progressive. Recognition of Universal
Design Education as “Progressive” Education is an important
step. Only then, will Universal Design Education be perceived
positively and accepted universally by all educators and educa-
tional institutions. It is necessary to remove the present stumb-
ling block where universal design is looked upon as an act of
Social Service. This patronising attitude cripples the spirit of
universality.

Limitations of the Developing World

The developing world, which is a majority in terms of the num-
ber of people, has typical characteristics quite different from the
economically developed world. These characteristics have bea-
ring on the kind and method of Universal Design Education
required in those countries.

These characteristics are:

1. Population Pressures
Developing world populations are large and they usually put
enormous pressure on the resources available in a country. This
leads to scarcity of resources and scarcity of facilities, and the
competition constantly increases.

2. Illiteracy
In countries like India a major percentage of the population is
illiterate. This has bearing on the kind of media needed for
communication and the role of education in the country. There
is still prevalence of oral culture where the printed word has
limited influence. Even visual literacy is low.

3. Unemployment
As the population is larger than the work available, particularly
aggravated by the increasingly labour saving machines and
mass production, the employment available in a developing
country is getting less and less. This is leading to large-scale
migration and brain drain on one hand and increase of poverty
on the other.
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 317
India

4. Lack of Capital and infrastructures

In developing economies, most of the nation’s capital is utilised
towards such basic needs as food, health, primary education,
law and order, defence, railways, irrigation etc. Very little capi-
tal is thus available for developmental activities like higher edu-
cation, industrial development, research in science and
technology and commercial investment. Lack of capital also
leads to lack of infrastructure. Design also gets low priority in
such countries.

Pre-requisites for Universal Design

Education in Design Curriculum in the
developing world
There are some aspects, which are essential pre-requisites for
making new changes in the curriculum and for the inclusion of
Universal Design Education in a sustainable and effective way.
These are more crucial in developing economies where popu-
lation pressures and rate of unemployment are very high.

These aspects are:

a) Career opportunities
Career opportunity is a key motivator in students opting to
study a particular course. When Universal Design would offer a
future where economically rewarding jobs and occupations are
available in the society/industry, the students would opt for
Universal Design Education.

b) Government Policies
Policy directives and laws by the governments are some sure
ways of including Universal Design component in all schools
and universities nationwide. Such policies should not be merely
made in the parliament but should be executed effectively by
the local management. There should be legal enforcement and
penalties for schools that do not follow the policy. There should
also be incentives such as tax rebates as well as scholarships
and special grants for schools that do follow the policies.

c) Interest groups
People with disabilities (PWD), people with lesser abilities
(PWLA) and senior citizens (SC) are a minority today. But
demographic studies show that these groups are increasing in
developing countries and may in he future make up such large
numbers that their interests cannot be marginalised. These
318 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

groups should form associations and organisations to press for

their interests to be attended in the education system nation-
wide. This is already taking place in many developing countries
including India.

d) Public Awareness
Finally and most importantly, there should be a general public
awareness towards Universal Design Education and its impor-
tance to society. Such awareness brings acceptance of Universal
Design Education by society at large. It will have very signifi-
cant impact in the developing world where parents and elders
still continue to play a dominating role in deciding their ward’s
education.

Universal Design Education in the

developing World: The institutions
In the above context, the way universal design is approached in
the developing world could be shown through an example of the
National Institute of Design in India. The approach adopted at
other Indian design institutions is similar.

According to rough estimates (as census are not available)

India’s population with disabilities is a staggering 50 million. If
we add to this the growing elderly population and the growing
population of the less able, the figures become amazingly vast.
In spite of this magnanimity of scale, there is no legal binding
by any organisation towards this marginalised population. No
design institution in the country offers courses or
degree/diploma specialisation in Universal Design; in a recog-
nised way. But fortunately several activities in this area are
happening, with the sole initiation of individual designers and
design teachers. The methods adopted successfully to sustain
design and design studies in Universal Design are significant
and would be focus of this article.

The National Institute of Design (NID) is an autonomous non-

profit organisation under the government of India. The purpose
of this organisation is to support the industries in India with
design training, design service and research. These industries in
India are diverse and include large-scale industries as well as
vast small-scale industry sector; craft production and home
based cottage production. As an institution of national impor-
tance, the NID’s priorities are expressed in its “Internal organi-
sation, structure and culture” document as below:
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 319
India

“NID’s concern is the quality of the physical environment

and its relevance to human needs. The task is educational-
professional education of designer and education in the
wider context, through service to industry and the communi-
cation links established to provoke informed and sober public
discussion. The endeavour is not only to respond to existing
demands with discrimination and without preconceptions but
to create an awareness of problems of contemporary signifi-
cance that are as yet generally unrecognised. Its challenge is
responsible pace-setting.”

NID is small in size with its existing strength of about 280

students and 48 faculty members. It provides comprehensive
Education in Design, offering ten specialisations in different
areas of Design. These specialisations include Product design,
Furniture design, Ceramic design, Textile design, Apparel
design, Graphic design, Video programmes, Animation design,
Exhibition design and New Media. It is the only design institu-
tion in the country having such a variety of design disciplines
under one roof.

The programme at NID has two entry levels: one programme of

four years’ duration is for the school leavers; the other, the advan-
ced entry programme of two and a half years’ duration is for gra-
duates of architecture, engineering and fine and applied arts.

The overall structure of NID’s programme is a combination of

theory, skills, design projects, and field experience. Sponsored
design projects are brought into the classroom to provide pro-
fessional experience. Complimentary studies in Science and
Liberal Arts widen the students’ horizons and increase general
awareness of contemporary issues. Students are involved with
real-life projects through NID’s Design Service wing and spon-
sored classroom projects. Thus one learns by doing. This expo-
sure ensures that they leave NID as young professionals,
experienced in actual service. Academic evaluation at NID is a
system of constant performance review, founded on professio-
nal standards and individual potential, rather than on a system
of marks and examinations.

There is a common programme called Foundation Programme

for one year, after which the students branch out into various
disciplines of their choice. However, the education is genera-
lised, and common courses such as Science and Liberal Arts,
History of Design, Ergonomics and Design Management
320 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

continue to take place. In the Second year students also take up

an Open Elective course which is offered across the disciplines.
A mix of students from different disciplines opt for their prefer-
red topic offered as Open Elective. The programmes are conclu-
ded with a six-month diploma project conducted in the field,
usually sponsored by Industry or a non-Governmental or
Governmental Organisation. Evaluation is done through work
presentation to an expert jury.

Methods of Universal Design

Education: Its management and
teaching
As mentioned earlier, there is no specialisation offered, nor a
department established, nor a curriculum devised to include
Universal Design in a structured way. There is also no policy
direction for the institution to start Universal Design teaching
or practicing or researching. Yet – the NID has been able to sus-
tain Universal Design activities and win a National award for
creation of barrier free Environment and for its attention to the
needs of the disabled people in December 2000. How is this
achieved?

Faculty Motivation
The institution employs design teachers who have strong social
values and firm national commitment. In their professional
design practice, these faculty members take up assignments
related to disability, elderly issues and other subjects in the uni-
versal design field. When there are no clients to commission
design jobs in this area, these faculty members work on self-
sponsored projects in the area. Thus these teachers have become
role models for the students and young designers to follow.

Career possibilities
In countries where the economy is poor, most of the young stu-
dents tend to choose an education that can provide them with
well paying careers in future. It is thus necessary to regularly
inform them of the career opportunities in the Universal Design
area. These jobs may not be able to give higher pay when com-
pared to other commercial careers, but these jobs may provide
social recognition, honour and personal fulfilment along with a
reasonable pay. The incentive is not in cash but in kind. The
campus placement wing plays a great role in explaining this
fact and influencing the young minds towards Universal Design
as an important and meaningful option.
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 321
India

Exposure and awareness: A Course

In the present design education, the institute aims at flexibility
and generalisation. In such education, the skill courses are
specific but the project courses are open. The choice of subject
to be taken as project course is left to the individual student. As
Universal Design is an emerging area of knowledge, it needs to
be sufficiently exposed to the students at an early stage at the
institution. This will positively influence their choice of
Universal Design subjects as projects. At NID Foundation year
offers an important course titled “Environmental Exposure”.
This course aims to expose the student to the present realities.
Special needs are one such reality. It is a field based, experien-
tial type course. The students go out of the campus, stay with a
village community and experience their way of life, thus deve-
loping an understanding of the people and their way of living.
This course creates wonders in moulding the student’s attitudes
and in developing value towards Universal Design. Besides
bringing the future designers face to face with the user, it
encourages open minded thinking so necessary for creative
solutions.

Design concepts and concerns: A course

Important among the core design courses being taught at Indian
design institutions is the course pertaining to Design process.
The course title has changed a few times but it is an essential
course, which teaches the student the structured method or vari-
ous methods of designing. Design method is the heart of
Design. Today the scope of this course is broadened to include
not only the methodology but also the concepts, concerns and
values that form an integral part of the methodology. The
course format involves discussions, surveys, and interviews of
people, design thinkers and professionals. This course is also
offered in the first year of the graduate and postgraduate pro-
gramme.

Universal Design is an increasingly important design concern.

The students are introduced to the area of Universal Design and
the design opportunities that are available in that area. This
method proved very effective in influencing students in taking
up projects and thesis in the area of Universal Design in the
advance years of Design learning. Courses such as Design
concepts and concerns establish firmly the relationship and
relevance of Universal Design to the design profession.
322 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

User involvement

A group of visually impaired people testing a product designed for them

and interacting with the designer.

The institute maintains a constant rapport with various local

organisations dealing with disability and extensively involves
experts dealing with disability and people with disabilities in
design learning in a number of ways. Such people are used as
resource persons, providing information on a given problem or
as co-guides in instructing a student in a project related to spe-
cial needs. They are most valuable in evaluating a design solu-
tion and also giving feedback after using a new design in
prototype form over an optimum period. The NID has close
collaboration with local institutions such as Blind people’s
Association and B M Institute of Mental health. There is an
important advantage in such involvement of disabled individu-
als and their organisations. Their presence in design institutions,
which otherwise are often fashionable and elitist, has positive
effects on the Design community. The design students going to
these organisations with project work find themselves in the
midst of people with disabilities and gain an experience which
makes a lasting impact on the young minds. Such experiences
spread in the campus and inspire other students to choose
Universal Design Education.
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 323
India

Electives

Open elective course. A wallet designed for use by both visually impaired
and non-impaired people. The brightly coloured and differently textured
strips are so placed inside the wallet that the blind person can recognise
the value of a currency note by tracing it along with these strips.

In India design institutions such as NID recognize the need for

flexibility in the design education because of the nation’s neces-
sity for a vast variety of design services. Most Design schools
therefore have Elective courses as important components in the
curriculum. These are offered both as departmental electives
pertaining to specific area of design and also as open electives
which any design student irrespective of his specialisation or
department can opt for learning. Universal Design is one of the
electives, which is being offered. The elective is made more
interesting by using the experiential format. The student adopts
a person with the specific disability he is working on. The off-
campus experience, the newness of learning and the challenges
it offers to designers – all these aspects make the student
learner fascinated with Universal Design. The design solutions
of such elective courses are made into prototypes and given to
people with disabilities for test-use and a feedback session is
held. After this, the better solutions are taken for production
either at the NID workshops or at the collaborating institutions
dealing with disabilities. Both the designer, the therapist and
the user are involved in the creation as well as realisation of the
design.
324 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Diploma/degree project

Toys for mentally handicapped children – a diploma project. These toys

could be used by the non-retarded children as well and be enjoyable.
Student: Gayatri Menon.

At a design university the diploma/degree project is the final

project which qualifies the student for the award of degree or
diploma. At some architectural and design schools it is given as
thesis submission, but at the National Institute of Design, it is
given in the form of a project lasting six months and more. The
topic for the project is chosen by the student in consultation
with the teachers and the department concerned. This is an
opportunity for influencing students to take up projects or thesis
related to Universal Design.
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 325
India

The importance of this method is twofold. Firstly, due to ade-

quate time available, the project allows the students to explore
the topic or problem thoroughly and create an implementable
and practical solution. Many a time, the design solution is sub-
mitted in the form of a working prototype, which could be
tested. Secondly, a diploma or degree project is sponsored by an
industry or organisation which has a long term interest in the
project. In the context of poor economics, the funds made avai-
lable by the sponsor are crucial for the high quality of work.
More important than funds is the fact that the industry or orga-
nisation is likely to implement the project. As we are aware, the
ultimate aim of design is not merely a brilliant creative solution.
The ultimate aim of design is a product or communication or an
environment or a system that reaches the people for whom it is
designed and which improves the quality of life around.

Universal Design Education for non-designers

Good ideas don’t confine themselves to any professional speci-
alisation although some professions such as Arts, Architecture
and Design are popularly considered creative. However, the fact
is that all human beings are creative. It is common experience
that many non-designers do get great break-through ideas but
often these ideas die prematurely as these were not developed
further and taken to conclusion. In special areas such as disabi-
lity, old age and less ability, the users (the disabled and the
elderly) and people dealing with these users such as therapists,
nurses, family members and voluntary workers are particularly
most knowledgeable. They often come up with innovative and
amazingly beautiful solutions. Such individuals will be very
useful for the cause of Universal Design if they were given
design training. The National Institute of Design plans to start
[Link]. or Ph.D. level programmes for such non-designers.
Such programmes need to be tailor-made based on the candida-
te’s background, educational qualifications and experience.
Since the programme is offered to people who are already wor-
king, the learning format needs to be flexible. It is guidance
based and uses computer technology for distance education.

Promotion
Universal Design Education needs to be promoted actively in
developing economics where there is increasing pressure on
limited finances. Without such promotion Universal Design
Education will have a danger of being marginalised. Promotion
is done in the following three ways at the National Institute of
Design:
326 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Recognition through awards

Apart from encouraging students to participate in competitions
in the field of Universal Design, the institute also channels
external private funds, fellowships etc towards universal design.

Mass Communication
Projects in the field of Universal Design are published widely
through local media –
newspapers, magazines and television.

Intellectual Activity:
Seminars and workshops are organised from time to time to
keep the focus of faculty and students on Universal Design.
Such an activity also helps bring external experts in this area
close to the institute and interact with the faculty and students.

Creation of Positive Climate

It is necessary to establish, on campus, a positive climate in
which Universal Design Education will grow. One of the instru-
ments of establishing such a conducive climate is the physical
environment. The institutional campus itself is made barrier
free and efforts are constantly made to improve the access fur-
ther. Old structures are modified to become barrier free and
Universal Design is carefully considered while planning new
structures. The other important instrument is the appointment of
staff/faculty with special needs and admission of students with
special needs. Disability should not be an impediment to the
opportunity to learn or to work. It may mean special effort and
establishment of special machines and special facilities but that
is worthwhile. In developing countries, this expense can be met
through approaching industrial houses and international organi-
sations for sponsorship of equipment and facilities. The co-
habitation and co-education of able and disabled students
together is an important step in removing the mental barriers.

Content of Courses
Cultural contexts
Universal Design is the need of the present times, but this
should not be confused with Design in one cultural, economic
and physical context being suitable in any other and different
context: It certainly will not be suitable because the contexts are
crucial determinants of the design solution and its relevance.
This is a basic principle to observe while working out contents
for Universal Design and special needs courses. One major
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 327
India

example is the design of wheelchairs, which brings access to

the lower limb disabled, sick or the elderly. However, wheel-
chairs are of no use in countries like India where the major
population is rural and performs all household work at ground
level. Besides, in all the rural areas there is severe lack of out-
door paved surfaces on paths and roads. Even the ground inside
the house is mostly unpaved and indoor spaces are too small to
allow easy manoeuvring of the wheelchair. A team of design
students from NID and Queens University (Canada) worked on
this problem and designed a Ground Level Assistive Device for
India (GADI) which is a suitable Indian design alternative for a
wheelchair. The design also takes into account the local materi-
als, village skills and low expenses. This product is presently
being manufactured by the local “Blind People’s Association”
and is found to be extremely useful in the wake of the
Earthquake disaster which struck Gujarat in January 2001. The
“GADI” can be used for a variety of needs by others including
as play material for children. It could be used by anybody in
any situation which requires a slight elevation from the ground.

Ground level Assistive Device for India (GADI) – An international

collaborative student project.
328 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

The Importance of Challenge

Young people thrive on challenges. Designing an assistive
device for persons with disabilities is a laudable intention and
good social act but not a challenge to design. In a market either
with non-existent or with prohibitively expensive ugly devices
for the disabled, even a mediocre design can win laurels. If the
young students were to take to Universal Design, there should
be challenges. A good solution for a disabled person is a good
solution for everybody. Designers should see to it. If the lift
switch is located so that it can be reached by a wheelchair user,
an abled person can also reach it. The car Ford Focus takes care
of elderly and thus takes care of the young too. The challenge
therefore is to design devices or communication that are crea-
tive solutions relevant to both abled and the disabled; rich in
aesthetic value and highly competitive in a commercial market
when placed next to other products. All other aspects being
equal, universality is our added value and the edge over other
designs.

Approaches to Universal Design

Universal Design as addressing diversity rather
than patronage
People with special needs should be recognised as special
people: Speciality is diversity and is not to be treated as some-
thing that is missing. This requires an attitudinal correction. Or
else there is danger that any difference or diversity could be
labelled as less-ability. History tells us the glaring example of
how Jews were considered inferior to others. In countries like
India girls are still considered inferior to boys. These discrimi-
nations will perpetuate unchecked unless the sane world resists
them now. A democratic way is to look at a difference only as a
diversity without making any comparative judgement. Diversity
is a value in itself. It enables diverse abilities to co-exist with-
out prejudice and delivers help to whoever need it without
patronising but as a sense of duty by other responsible social
beings.

Attitudinal Changes Required

The core of Universal Design attitude is the acceptance of the
fact that every human being is less able in one way or another
(a matter of degree) and at one time or another (a matter of
time). Even young, healthy people can grow old or become
pregnant and can thus experience lessened abilities.
Alternatively situations and environments can also cause
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 329
India

limitations on a healthy, young person’s abilities. Noisy envi-

ronments can impair hearing and dim lighting can limit vision.

The research project for the elderly at the Royal College of Art,
London, is very appropriately “ named Designing for our future
selves” to highlight this aspect. At NID a Post diploma pro-
gramme was announced in 1998 as “Design for the less abled”
to include all kinds of limitations. The attitudinal shift that
needs to be inculcated in the young learner is that Universal
Design is not designing for “them” out there. It is designing for
“ourselves’” in a comprehensive way, to include all people
possible, for all times possible. In a somewhat exaggerated way
it is “Design for all and for all times”.

Traditional value base

Developing societies are often also less literate societies.
Education for these societies should be viewed broadly and
not confined narrowly only to literacy. Confining to literacy
would mean excluding the majority population from our
concern.

Fortunately, many developing countries are tradition bound.

These traditions often have admirable social and familial
norms, which are essential to promoting positive attitudes
towards people with special needs. The important aspect to note
is that these traditional norms are so deeply rooted that they are
still holding in this new millennium in spite of modernisation
and technological progress. In Indian society, for example,
respect to elders is important. The elderly are consulted when
important decisions are made, and are given prominent place in
religious rituals and social events. Compassion towards the poor
is promoted through Hindu religious concepts such as “Daridra
Narayana” – which means God lives in the poor (so you must
serve them) and “Atithi Devo Bhavah”, which means the guest
is like a divine opportunity (so you must feed him).

While many religions portray God as omnipotent having a

physically perfect form, some of the gods in India’s Hindu
religion are less perfect, and therefore more like humans. Hindu
religion has “Bala Krishna” – God as child, with all childish
vulnerabilities and “vamana” – God as dwarf. Some of the
traditional games in India are also worth mentioning here.
These games indirectly develop the child’s compassion towards
the disabled and the less able. Such games are the “Blind fold
game” and the one legged game. These games will have the
330 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

same effect as the simulation exercise used in Universal Design

Education: without actually naming them so.

In traditional societies, which are most prevalent in the develo-

ping world, traditional social and family structures are dominant
even now. Decisions about young people’s education are made
by the parents or other elders in the family. In the past in the
joint family, any person in the family with special needs is auto-
matically cared for by others. He or she is accepted and facilita-
ted as normally as a child is accepted and facilitated in a home.
People With Disabilities are treated not with pity or a patroni-
sing attitude but with an attitude which recognises the individu-
al’s special needs. They are given work appropriate to their
special abilities. Inculcation of such a value base is necessary in
the school/college education where Universal Design Education
is being given.

Conclusion
While the scale and magnitude of the demographic situation of
the people with lesser abilities (the disabled elderly and the
weak) is amazingly vast in India and other developing coun-
tries, there are traditions in these countries which have inherent
Universal Design principles. Under the constant pressure of
modern living; new technologies and increasing urbanisation,
many of these traditions are now threatened with extinction.
The present need is to prevent such extinction and redefine
these traditions to address the contemporary contexts.

Man always looks at new developments and new technology

with curious suspicion. This suspicion is more prevalent in the
poor and the disadvantaged. There is no denying the fact that
the fruits of most new developments and technology reach first
the people who are already in the front and this obviously incre-
ases the gap between the developed and the developing, and
between the abled and the disabled. Realising this fact and
applying new technology such as information technology for
Universal Design is essential in developing countries. Let it be
emphasised that the new technology is new opportunity and
hope for better as well. One would see such applications all
over India.

People are also thinking minds. More people also mean more
mind power. As there is increasing number of problems, the
number of solutions is also increasing. In India, a number of
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 331
India

innovative technical and design solutions relevant to the

people’s needs here have originated from the people themselves.
These solutions also take into account appropriate materials and
appropriate production methods. Furthermore there are thera-
pists, nurses and social workers full of knowledge and wisdom
who act as a springboard for innovative design solutions.

In view of the above factors, the essential considerations for

developing Universal Design courses in developing countries,
ought to be as below:

a) Upholding and re-articulating the traditional principles of

Universal Design to meet the changing needs of the society.
This provides a value base and an attitude essential for
Universal Design Learning.

b) Surveying and documenting the various design solutions crea-

ted and successfully applied by different people at different
locations in the country. The authors of such solutions may
not be trained designers and solutions may need design sup-
port in refining and developing. But such solutions rooted
well in the problem contexts are excellent educational and
inspirational tools.

c) Design is not an isolated activity but a team effort. A contin-

uous dialogue and collaboration with people in the field is
crucial in developing course content as well as in sustainable
monitoring and course correction as we go along.

d) Design teachers must actively pursue the application of new

materials and new technologies in creating new universal
design solutions. This could be done as a classroom project
or a commissioned professional project. One such classroom
project is “Mandala”, carried out by the design students at
the NID. The project is to find means of reintegrating senior
citizens into the community. The solution is usable by
anybody. It uses the advanced technology of Apple compu-
ters. Another project presently in the planning stage by the
author is the use of the modern material Titanium for
Universal Design solution.

The future holds the prospect of Universal Design Education at

many design schools in India because there is an increasing
demand from the people. The National Institute of Design will
soon be starting a regular Post-graduate and other advanced
332 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

level programmes in the area of Design for special needs, and

Universal Design will be part of these programmes. In future
the Institute plans to establish a centre for special needs with
Universal Design at its core. This centre will not only support
education at the institute but also Universal design activity in
the country by developing Universal Design standards, codes
for barrier-free environment; research through fellowships,
reference materials; policy guide lines for government etc. Such
a centre will not only be a resource for other design institutions
in the developing world but also be a model to be adopted.

The key challenge faced by the world today is globalisation.

Technological changes have revolutionised communications and
brought people face to face. But people are diverse since their
places, climate, and cultures, religious beliefs and roots are dif-
ferent. In my personal opinion and perhaps an exaggerated sim-
plification, disability is only a difference from ability. At least it
needs to be seen that way. Our tolerance to difference of any
kind – be it another religion, another skin colour, another coun-
try or another need – will be the most important step towards
world peace and harmony.
 Singanapalli Balaram
National Institute of Design Universal Design Education and Development 333
India

References
Balaram S. Design for Special needs. New Delhi,
Encyclopedia Britannica – Asia edition. 1999.
Kose, Satoshi (ed) Universal design conference papers
Tsukuba, Building Research Institute. 1999.
Ranjan A: Balaram S (Eds.) Young designers 2000. Ahmedabad,
National Institute of Design, 2000.
Sarabhai, Gautam. NID: Internal Organisation, Structure and
Culture. Ahmedabad, National Institute of Design.1969.
334 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 335
Singapore University

3.3 Universal Design:

Tertiary Education and
Promotion in Asia
Prof. James D. Harrison and Kenneth Parker, Singapore
University

1. Tertiary Universal Design Education in

Singapore

Introduction
There exists some published work on the education of Universal
Design, Accessibility and Mobility topics and it is not the inten-
tion to examine these topics. But, in order to effect change – to
promote the development of a truly non-handicapping built
environment for the widest spectrum of users, there is a pres-
sing need to heighten awareness.

Raised awareness can lead to a greater involvement with issues,

and from this follow solutions and improvements. Without the
awareness (or low threshold of awareness) of a problem – there
is little impetus to tackle the problem. For example – if there
are perceived to be very few wheelchair users then there is a
lower priority given to them in providing an environment for
them; in effect there is a «chicken and egg» situation – percei-
ved few users so little need to provide for them/little provision
for users and hence little use!

«The mind is its own place, and in itself

Can make a heav’n of hell, a hell of heav’n
What matter where, if I be still the same,»
John Milton, Paradise Lost

So the challenge is to examine how awareness can be raised,

attitudes changed, and the whole educational machine kick-
started to involve students, educators and those in a position to
modify the built environment in a real, social and human topic
area.
336 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

«The American Institute of Architects has had as its mission

statement «the increase of public awareness to good design».
(Pressman, 1997)

But awareness should catalyse empathy, not sympathy, and lead

to a condition of active advocacy – a process of change for the
better.

Some numerical examples illustrate that the minorities of per-

sons with a disability, although small in percentage terms, are
significant in number:
• By 2030, one in every four Singaporeans will be aged 60 and
above. Projections by the United Nations see the number of
people 60 years and older increasing from the present 550
million to 1.2 billion in 2025 (The Straits Times, 1998).
• In Western Australia in 1993 a report (Alessandri, Leonard &
Bower, 1996) grouped disability into five main categories:
physical (69%), sensory (18%), psychiatric (8%), intellectual
(3%), acquired brain injury and stroke (2%). The report finds
that 305,000 Western Australians have a disability (18% of
the population), within 25 years the number with disabilities
is set to almost double to more than half a million. Almost 3
in 4 people with disabilities live in metropolitan areas and
the most common types of disabilities are physical (about
13% of the Western Australian population).

Minority users of the built environment can be categorised as:

– Persons with physical disabilities
– Persons with sensory disabilities
– Persons with cognitive disabilities
– Persons with multiple disabilities
– Elderly citizens

The Imperative for Accessible Design

A building incorporates many aspects of functional require-
ments, which are given different priorities according to the buil-
ding’s use and other factors, often rather arbitrarily arrived at by
designer or client during briefing (the specifying of a building
or project). At the most basic level, all buildings (and the built
environment generally) have to conform to certain minimum
standards of safety, structural soundness, energy consumption,
health and hygiene aspects and similar functions. In recent
years, developing standards worldwide have begun to require
that buildings used by the public should also be accessible for a
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 337
Singapore University

wider range of users than simply the «normal» fit young adult,
and allow for safe and convenient use by a wider range of
people, including those who have disabilities (permanently or
temporarily), are elderly or are encumbered by pushchairs (baby
buggies/strollers), wheeled luggage and so on. In many coun-
tries this is reinforced by legal requirements such as codes or
building byelaws or, more generally, by anti-discrimination acts.

In the book chapter «Rethinking the Border in Design» by John

Seely Brown and David Duguid the following is stated:

«Part of what makes a building «well designed» is the way

its designers marshal center-periphery relations. A building
stands distinct from, yet related to, its environment.»
(Yelavich, 1993)

Architecture has been ascribed three characteristics, the last of

which distinguishes it from mere building: «Commodity,
Firmness and Delight». The functional requirements, structural
stability and so on are taken care of in the first two, but it is the
third – the introduction of a more intangible aspect of aesthetics
which many see as the vital part of creating architecture, rather
than making a building. The three should not be mutually
exclusive, but it is the subjective which provides the more
heroic, creative and artistic aspects and which often disting-
uishes the great architects from the hacks. Sadly, this belief
often leads to less able designers hiding behind visual devices
to cover up mediocre design.

In the education of the architect, current thinking is to attempt the

difficult task of integrating the technical (including functional
planning) with aesthetic decision-making. Of the two aspects, it
is the aesthetic that is the more exciting and (apparently) creative,
and students are encouraged to experiment with visual qualities
(in design schemes on paper or the computer screen, rather than
real buildings) as these generate enthusiasm and imagination.
The more quantitative side of practicality remains the dowdy
poor relation, often considered only as an afterthought, or inclu-
ded unwillingly to satisfy tutors’ requirements.

The topic of Accessibility usually falls within the category of

the technical and quantitative. As a design generator it is not
attractive and can rarely be particularly glamorous. Although
most people want to live a long life, they have no desire to get
old, with the consequent deterioration that it entails, or to
338 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

become infirm or disabled, even from a glamorous skiing acci-

dent. For the young university student this is especially true, as
his peers will invariably be young and fit, but it also holds for
most of us. How then can the teaching of accessibility, as a vital
fundamental principle for design, be inculcated at the right
point in education – just when ambition, excitement and creati-
vity are at their peak in the young mind, and ageing and infir-
mity are distant specks on the horizon of life?

Architectural Education
Project-based Learning
The process by which architects learn to design buildings tends
to be an elusive one, even if the goals are reasonably well defi-
ned. For the most part these use methods that are primarily heu-
ristic and personally explored. Most learning, apart from lecture
courses on the more technical or theoretical subjects (construc-
tion, structures, history of architecture etc.), uses the method of
project work, wherein students are set design problems, of dif-
fering degrees of complexity or with special sets of objectives.
In the development of a design scheme, to be presented as dra-
wings, models (or, more often today, as computer-generated
graphics), the student will be expected to undertake various
exploratory work as he/she sees fit, to find exemplars, analyse
site and functional requirements, make calculations of critical
technical parts (beam sizes, use of energy related to heat
loss/gain of the building envelope), and so on. In planning,
recognition of function and user needs will be developed into a
planning strategy, with circulation, relationships of rooms and
activities, layout on site and many other aspects, relative to
the given constraints of the project. In most Schools of
Architecture, accessibility issues tend to be learned by default,
if at all, and present just one of the functional aspects, along
with fire safety and escape, services routes etc., and it may
seem a minor diversion compared to some of the other, more
pressing parameters – unless one is a disabled person, of
course!

Lecture Course Content

As well as learning through design projects, taught subjects
account for a proportion of the teaching time. Topics of accessi-
bility may find their way into lectures in various ways: by the
discussion of buildings codes, for instance, or an appreciation
of the optimum types of materials to be used for non-slip floo-
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 339
Singapore University

ring surfaces, or the specification of appropriate components

for sanitary accommodation, handrails and many other details
which go to helping a person use a building more conveniently
or safely. Building services courses should include information
on the need and scope for making a building accessible and
usable, for example through the specification of lifts, the
requirements for accessible sanitary accommodation, control
and alarm systems for use in elderly people’s habitats.
Generally the inclusion of such items in the curriculum is very
much a matter of how informed and concerned the teaching
staff are about matters of accessibility, and may be minimal or
even entirely lacking.

Levels of Approach
In most Schools of Architecture, access issues can be introdu-
ced and followed up at the following levels:
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate (taught course)
• Postgraduate (degree by research)
• In-practice Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

Learning is a cumulative process, in general, and emphasis will

depend on the kind or previous exposure that the learners have
already experienced. In many cases, the teacher may be starting
from scratch, at any of these levels. Experience suggests that
any approaches to the teaching of access issues, whether they
are spread over 6 days, or 6 months, should have the following
common sequence:
1. Benchmarking the individual’s current knowledge base and
previous experience, preconceptions and reasons for wishing
to study this topic;
2. Raising accessibility/design awareness, through:
– examples, visits
– meetings and contact with users, etc.
– simulation exercises
3. Pragmatic analysis/application of Codes and functional
requirements;
4. Holistic practical application of principles, from strategic
down to detail level – designs, appraisals/surveys, peer edu-
cation;
5. Summation, feedback, debriefing, group appraisal of pro-
duct. Review of changes in knowledge and attitude since the
first «benchmarking» exercise.
340 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Awareness and Knowledge

Much of the inertia in introducing accessibility into teaching
curricula in Schools of Architecture and related courses in plan-
ning, interior design and design-centred engineering is through
a lack of teachers who are aware and knowledgeable about the
topic. This presents a very significant constraint to creating an
accessible world (Harrison and Parker, 1997). Feelings of
embarrassment, uncertainty about political correctness and lack
of real knowledge combine to deter many from addressing the
issue in their teaching.

«We are our experience which consists of reflecting the world

in the magic mirror of awareness. Anything else that we
might regard as constituting «us» is unconscious and so has
only indirect reality for us.» (Nunn, 1996)

A lack of awareness of the need for, and realisation of, accessi-

bility will be as equally prevalent amongst teachers as in stu-
dents, and this is a problem that should be addressed as a matter
of urgency. In fact, it may be the teachers who are less able to
make the shift in mindset than the students. Often the first reac-
tion to being confronted with the question of access is to think
of ramps as the first answer, rather than the «level-thinking»
approach, which reconsiders the fundamental organisation of
floor levels and vertical circulation from the outset. From expe-
rience, a reasonable proportion of young minds in Schools of
Architecture are willing to address social issues and matters of
concern in design; it is more that they may be misled by tutors
into being made to feel that these are either irrelevant or too
complex to handle. When given choices to decide their own
thesis topics, or to select from a given number of hypothetical
design solutions, there does not appear to be any discernible
reluctance on the part of students to select those that have social
issues as part of their content.

There may, however, be strong attitudinal barriers put up by the

teaching side; accessibility (along with other practical pro-
blems) is seen to stifle creativity – or at least the production of
exciting-looking project work, which can easily be identified as
«creative». Other objections given may range from a belief that
access issues are either too specialised for undergraduates to
confront, or are too trivial (and this attitude persists in architec-
tural practice, too, where architects consign these areas to detail
design by draughtsmen who are familiar with the requisite
Codes and building regulations).
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 341
Singapore University

In reality there is no lack of information on designing for

persons with disabilities, but these, along with codes on
accessibility, tend to look very complicated to the newcomer, or
fail to convey the real reasons why such modified design
thinking is necessary.

Demystifying Accessibility
Any attempt at introducing accessibility as a universal principle
in the teaching of architecture must tread the fine line between
being identifiable as appropriate and applicable, related to stu-
dents’ experience and sensibilities, and avoiding becoming seen
as «do-gooding», in a patronising way. This last attitude will
perpetuate the problem of consigning designing for persons
with disabilities to the limits of «special needs» – with separate
routes, facilities and entrances, rather than being inclusive and
relevant for all users in the same place.

It may also be difficult to find appropriate and simple examples

of good design of accessibility in action; in itself, the best
accessible design is indistinguishable from everyday good
design. Only a trained eye, or a person who has experienced the
barrier-strewn world at first-hand elsewhere, will appreciate the
integration of level floors, convenient handrails and all the com-
monplace things that go to make up the building that accords to
universal design.

Methodology of Learning
Basic Design Courses
Students of architecture generally start out their architectural
education with open minds. Basic design courses provide exhi-
larating projects through which the student learns to weigh the
design parameters, as well as find ways and new confidence to
explore creative ideas and apply imagination. Training in obser-
vation, recording and analysing, and communicating intentions
should be an intrinsic part of the first year studies. Identifying
human needs, and providing for these by planning, design of
three-dimensional spaces and utility objects forms a part of this,
along with the why and how of making a building in all its
aspects. (Harrison, 1996)

«Skills training begins with an explanation of the skills to be

learned. Since this is the first in a series of skills training
sessions, the information is intended to establish a positive
orientation to skills training and to the potential for
behavioral change.» (Beddel & Lennox, 1997)
342 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Anthropometrics and Ergonomics

for First Year Students
One commonly taught project in almost any first semester will
cover aspects of anthropometry and simple ergonomics – the
dimensional aspects of the human body and applications of this
to functional design of everyday objects and places.
Traditionally, however, the exemplars for the human physical
dimensions have been taken from sources that have been con-
cerned with medians and the «average» man and woman. It has
even been found that data being used in one School of
Architecture in a developing country was based on American
army personnel – who would have been selected as conforming
to certain height and weight constraints. Current enlightened
thinking appreciates the fact that there is no such thing as an
«average user» and that designers should consider those who
have limited physical mobility and manipulation, as these are
the most vulnerable and thus the most deserving of considerate
design. A tall man may be able to reach down, but a short per-
son, such as a child, will have to bring a stool to stand on in
order to reach a tall switch, for instance.

Anthropometric dummies can be constructed to aid the appreciation of a

diverse range of user abilities.

This first introduction to the relationship between the physical

world and human needs is a vital part of the formative process
of the designer, but very few Schools of Architecture have this
approach in place. The ideal course would cover mean and
median sizes of the human body, and also incorporate such
circumstances as the limited reach, manoeuvrability and eye-
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 343
Singapore University

height of a person sitting in a wheelchair, or an appreciation of

how a person would use a staircase if they had a paralysed leg.
Following the analytical part of the projects, a related design
exercise would be set; both to consolidate the knowledge acqui-
red and apply this in a practical way.

To make this academic exercise all the more significant,

situations where students are designing for real clients would
be ideal. Few Schools of Architecture have faculty members
with physical disabilities, so user-groups, from disabled peo-
ples’ associations or senior citizens groups, could be brought in
to help to devise design projects, meet students and pass on
their experiences, including what they find good and bad in the
built environment, and act as critics for reviews of project work.

Empathy and Simulation Exercises

«Certainly, the ability to enter the private world of another

person in a nonjudgmental way is essential to our use of the
concept of empathy.» (Beddel & Lennox, c1997)

a. Introduction
In order to bring students to an understanding and appreciation
of the range of obstacles faced by people with disabilities they
need to see, at first hand, what constitutes a barrier or a diffi-
culty. Whilst passive observation of a user, either in real life or
through a video film, is a telling way, a far more memorable
method is to require the participant to try using a wheelchair, or
to be temporarily disabled in some way, and then to have to
cope with a familiar world in a new way.

Opinions vary about the efficacy of simulation exercises, in

which participants are «disabled» in various ways, and have to
use assistive devices in order to move around. (Further informa-
tion on this topic has been published (Harrison and Parker,
1997b)). In order that they do not underrate the limitations that a
person with a disability has to bear, it is really necessary for the
exercise to be sustained over a reasonably long period, and the
subject(s) to be honour-bound not to cheat. Obviously it is impos-
sible to really feel the whole range of frustrations and handicaps
that a wheelchair user, for instance, has to face in a typical jour-
ney to work, or trying to use public transport. But it is generally a
memorable experience and, provided that the subjects are pro-
perly briefed and the exercise properly conducted, is likely to
have more of a beneficial effect than cause real misunderstanding.
344 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

A Simulation Exercise, experiencing the barriers presented by the built

environment to persons with physical and sensory disability.

b. Briefing
It should be said that the correct briefing and conduct of the
exercise is most important; it may trivialise the exercise to
allow students simply to «play» with wheelchairs or walking
frames for only a short period. Initially, embarrassment may
manifest itself in horsing around, but after a time the gravity of
the problems should begin to be felt. The opening part of a
well-conducted exercise should follow a well-defined route,
which provides both sufficient barriers and also purpose-
designed amenities to demonstrate how easy it is for a designer
unwittingly to cause a barrier to, say, a wheelchair user, and
also how simple matters such as a wide and easily-opened door
can make life a lot easier.

c. Inter-disciplinary Personnel
Personnel for the conduct of the exercise should include an
experienced Occupational Therapist, who will explain the
nature of some of the more commonly-experienced disabilities,
as well as how to use the assistive devices provided, to strap up
legs, demonstrate how a wheelchair should be handled and
adjust crutches. They should accompany the groups around the
first stage, until each individual is familiar with their allotted
«disability». Safety is an important consideration and, in order
not to cause actual physical danger to the students, the briefing
should apprise them of possible hazards. The Occupational
Therapist should also attend the debriefing session, which
should be held at the end of the exercise. For discussion at this
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 345
Singapore University

session, students should be required to log all the difficulties

and feelings that they had during the exercise, and to then com-
pare their experiences.

Occupational Therapists are excellent at describing different abilities and

instructing on the correct use of assistive devices.

The participation of an experienced designer or disabled user

will also be useful, to explain everyday situations and how they
can be overcome, and to accompany the group at the start.
Ideally the given exercise route should not present too many
insurmountable barriers, but also demonstrate the importance
of ramp slope, door openings, floor finishes and many other
design considerations. One useful experience is for the trainees
to see how a person needs grab rails and space in the right
places, in order to transfer from wheelchair to toilet and back
again. To the majority of architects and architectural students
this comes as a complete revelation.

d. Logistics
In theory the simulation exercise is a very good thing, but logis-
tically it may have drawbacks. The class size in a School of
Architecture could have around 100 students, so would need to
be broken down into smaller groups, with the exercises phased
over the academic year. Hire or loan of the right amount of
suitable equipment might be difficult or expensive, too, and the
pressure on time will be a problem for both trainers and stu-
dents. For smaller elective groups, of students from higher years,
more sustained exercises would be possible and associated pro-
jects could be tailored to their stage of academic development.
346 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

More limited objective exercises could be devised, with equal

success, in which groups of students concentrate on one aspect
of accessibility (such as staircases for ambulant disabled and
elderly people, or a swing door). By selecting a suitable example,
testing it themselves under simulation conditions, observing
how real-life users cope with it (and possibly interviewing these
subjects and/or making a video of the item in use), as well as
measuring and analysing its success or weaknesses, students
could collectively cover a whole range of design aspects as a
design guide for their use – possibly to be published on the
World Wide Web or the educational establishment’s Intranet.

e. Debriefing
The experiences of the participants should be discussed in a
group, led by an experienced facilitator. Recording, on a flip-
chart or overhead projector transparency, is useful to emphasise
the value of each individual’s response, and also to help share
collective experiences.

From the individual’s point of view, reference to his/her original

«Benchmarking» statement will prove invaluable, to show how
much attitude, awareness and (recent) experience has been
affected by this exposure. Individual participants should be
encouraged to write up their findings, perhaps in the form of a
logbook, and continue to keep this updated with experiences
and new information during the course of the academic session.

The debriefing is an essential component of Simulation Exercises and

Access Audits.
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 347
Singapore University

Associated Design Exercises

In conjunction with the simulation exercise, simple planning
exercises can be devised, in which full-size mock-ups of spaces
can be created and tested by their designers, using the range of
assistive devices. Generally such exercises will be limited to
fairly simple situations; as staircases and ramps, for instance,
would be difficult to construct without more sophisticated test
rigs. The use of masking tape on a conveniently tiled floor (each
tile being 300 mm square) has proven useful at the Asian
Training Centre on Ageing, School of Nursing, University of
Chiang Mai (ATCOA) training sessions on designing for the
elderly and disabled. Here, different types of toilet and
bathroom configurations are explored by groups of up to 5
people, and drawn up after conclusion.

Another possibility would be to arrange for a small group of

students to design a space for a particular individual – a wheel-
chair user, perhaps, and to work with that person to propose
adaptations of his/her working space, kitchen or other functio-
nal area. Unfortunately, willing real-life subjects are all too
rare, but in an enlightened institution they might be employed
as part time studio demonstrators or the equivalent.

A washroom ‘mock
up’, using sticky
tape for walls and
a chair as the
water closet, being
tested for use-
ability.
348 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Access Surveys
Access surveys provide a useful way to identify the range of
barriers that many buildings and the built environment (which
includes streets and transportation facilities) present. They can
focus one’s appreciation of the accessible qualities of an envi-
ronment, and will help to attune students’ minds to identifying
handicapping or potentially hazardous conditions in many
aspects of the built environment. Standard survey forms (or
«audit» as it is sometimes referred to) may be used but, as a
learning exercise, it can be advantageous for students to design
their own survey forms in the first instance. They would then
try them out in a limited exercise, as a learning exercise, before
amending them and comparing these to existing forms. These
might differentiate between interiors of buildings and outdoor
spaces or streetscapes, according to the context. Surveys should
have a positive outcome, possibly in the form of a set of propo-
sals for upgrading, or an information sheet to help a disabled
person choose which buildings to visit. Without a useful end
product, the impression that the participant takes away is prima-
rily a negative one, and may confirm misconceived ideas that
access issues are always non-creative.

Design Projects & Design Theses

Critical Analysis
One of the problems associated with the teaching of accessible
design is that there is a continuing dearth of good examples to
demonstrate that it can create and not hinder elegant design.
When students experience their everyday habitats from a wheel-
chair, or grope their way round in a blindfold they might con-
clude that everything about accessibility is negative. Whilst it is
easy to be critical, this should be undertaken in the spirit of
analysis, followed by synthesis and proposals for improvement.
Any critical study of a building or place should conclude that,
whilst the (unintentionally-placed) barriers that we find in our
built environment are random and individual (since they are not
actually intended to be barriers, but are so by default), the well-
designed and accessible environment can be perceived as a
holistic system. In this light, design intentions are more than the
piecemeal removal from a design already in process; they are a
fundamental part of a whole system of design – and one that is
delightfully simple, once grasped.

So that young designers do not see designing for accessibility

always as a negative and constraining factor, design projects
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 349
Singapore University

should test the designers’ ingenuity, whilst throwing the respon-

sibility of creating user-friendly architecture onto them. From
experience, the majority of students will rise to this challenge,
even if it is out of sympathy rather than empathy – the latter
being the ideal motivational source.

Design Project Work

In a School of Architecture, design project work, although
rarely built, is a serious task. Responsibility for many aspects of
the complete building, from constructional system, through
environmental control and human comfort strategies, to specifi-
cation of materials, components, or fixtures and fittings, may
all be required to be covered (in principle if not in detail) in the
more advanced project work. Depending on the level of deve-
lopment of the students, such applications will become increa-
singly sophisticated as they progress, and the parameters will
increase with the scale and complexity of the project vehicle.

In work in the lower and intermediate years, it would be reason-

able to expect that some demonstration of planning for elderly
people or people with disabilities would be evident in project
work. In order to emphasise certain points on accessibility, a tutor
might set a project which had a «special needs» requirement,
such as a housing project for elderly people, through which the
students might experience applying the principles of design for
safety and independent personal mobility as basic criteria in their
design solutions. Where codes on accessibility are already in
force, students would normally be required to satisfy these, as a
bare minimum, in any project that is designed for public use.

Elective Work
Much of what has been discussed previously would be equally
applicable for postgraduate or more experienced design stu-
dents, either if they had not experienced this teaching at a lower
level, or if they wished to continue studies in this field, (for
instance, if their dissertation proposal covered some aspect of
accessibility or sensory limitation.)

Electives can allow many activities to take place, provided that

they relate in some way to the betterment of design or its cultu-
ral or technical bases. From experience gained in running elec-
tives with Masters students of Architecture (with recent
professional practice experience), there is reason to be optimis-
tic for the longer-term future of accessible buildings. In a
semester of 13 teaching weeks, groups of between 8 and 16
350 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

students, who had chosen this elective over other different

topics, came to the subject with little or no previous exposure to
it, but rapidly developed experience and confidence to trust
their own judgment and to collect their findings in a form
which could be passed on to others.

A ‘typical’ elective programme structure (by week):

1. Introduction and discussion. The nature of barriers and dis-
ability. Definitions and attitudes.
2. The concept of Non-handicapping Environments, Universal
and Inclusive Design. Video presentations and discussion.
3. Simulation exercise. Feedback on experiences.
4. Discussion. Special needs. Physical, sensory and intellec-
tual disability. Potential architectural solutions.
5. Design for visual impairment.
6. Design for hearing impairment.
7. The wheelchair and ambulant disabled – ergonomics,
ramps, etc.
8. Mobility and safety in the built environment. Hazards and
the need for codes and legislation.
9. Access audits for buildings, streets and transportation sys-
tems.
10. Aesthetic aspects, advocacy methodologies.
11. Products and solutions, high and low technology answers
for specific spaces and activities.
12. Lifetime homes, adaptable housing, design for “our future
selves”.
13. Future developments, codes and legislation. Awareness into
action.

But, it should be noted that the above can be delivered in a dif-

ferent order and can be adapted to capitalise on any ‘live’ pro-
jects that may arise. Coursework and project work can also
cover specific areas and, where possible, guided peer learning is
a preferable modus operandi. It is also beneficial to visit vari-
ous disability groups to show that these topic areas are related
to the quality of life of people.

In the first year of running the Masters Elective course, the

group underwent a simulation exercise, meeting with disability
groups, social workers and occupational therapists. As part of
the submission requirement, the group were asked to select a
topic and medium to demonstrate what they had learned during
the elective. From the contacts made, they chose to make a
video which primarily tracked and recorded some aspects of the
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 351
Singapore University

daily life of a willing subject, who is a paraplegic. They simply

filmed some of the more difficult situations that he faced, and
compared it to an able-bodied person in the same situations.
This was backed up by interviews with occupational therapists,
and footage of discussions amongst themselves. The intention
was that this would form the starting point for the elective
group in the following year – which has proved a useful gambit
in subsequent years.

Measurement and assessment are key components of an Access Audit.

In following years the groups produced analytical appraisals

based on building surveys, of transport interchanges, and of
environments as used by people with sight and hearing pro-
blems. In each case this was their own chosen topic, and has
formed a resource for other students (as well as being shown in
overseas contexts, to encourage other teachers to set up similar
courses). In the academic year 1997/98, elective students pro-
duced a useful wayfinding map, for use by people with disabili-
ties, of Orchard Road in Singapore, the main shopping and
hotel area; this complemented a brochure listing accessible
buildings which is produced by the Handicaps Welfare
Association and the Tourist Promotion Board in Singapore,
which is updated every few years. By carrying out this work in
conjunction with the major disability group in the country, the
students have a positive goal, which raises the profile of access
as a valid topic, in education as in other aspects of life.
352 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Dissertation Topics: Individual Study of

Accessibility Topics
Each year a number of final year students choose a topic related
to some aspect of disability, design for ageing or more speciali-
sed areas related to special needs provision for their elective.
Sometimes this is a primer for the subsequent design thesis
work, but not necessarily. At the National University of
Singapore, students are able to choose the stream in which their
topic most naturally rests; amongst these, the most obvious
ones are building studies, environmental studies or urban
studies. Supervisors for these topics would not necessarily be
architects, but could be building services engineers, or from
other specialised fields.

Research and Postgraduate Work

As with dissertation topics, areas for higher degrees by research
may benefit from mutual relationships between supervisor and
research student. This is already true in the sciences and engi-
neering, but appears to have been slower to catch on in Schools
of Architecture. The setting up of a dedicated research centre,
or unit within a more generalised one, would be an ideal way to
encourage more researchers and generate greater interaction
between allied disciplines.

Reciprocal Teaching
Cross-discipline teaching, and joint project work should be
encouraged; for example an “Introduction to Universal Design”
class can be conducted with students studying Industrial
Design.

The success of teaching accessibility in Schools of Architecture

depends to quite an extent on the contribution of people from
outside, who have experience and expertise – including disabled
people who have first-hand knowledge of using accessibility
aids and the built environment with all its faults. Specialists in
the field of Occupational Health and Rehabilitation can prove
useful contributors, although many professional designers have
scant idea what they do, or how their expertise might help in the
design of a building to be user-friendly. Similarly, many medi-
cal and health professionals are unaware of the potential
contribution that the architectural profession could bring to
rehabilitation and adaptation of homes for disabled people and
many similar situations.
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 353
Singapore University

Occupational Therapists can make a useful contribution to the

running of simulation exercises and, just as they can help archi-
tectural students, so can design teachers reciprocate by assisting
in the teaching of simple aspects of building adaptation, reading
and preparing sketch proposals for home adaptations and so on.
At the National University of Singapore, a member of the
Architecture staff regularly runs a short workshop with student
Occupational Therapists from the School of Health Sciences at
a local Polytechnic, to demonstrate aspects of drawing; in return
their tutor comes into the School of Architecture to help con-
duct simulation exercises. As well as the synergy of sharing
skills, it also means that students learn some awareness of
parallel professional skills, which may be useful in the future.

Teaching the Teachers

Many teachers of architecture continue to equate designing
accessible environments with liberally dispersing long ramps
floor to floor and large blue wheelchair/handicapped users
signs. Or their limited knowledge of building codes may feel
that disabled users will be adequately served, just as long as the
rules are satisfied to the letter. As a result, they may discourage
their students from attempting to explore more logical and wor-
kable solutions in design project work. Alternatively, they may
feel that engineering solutions, with a plethora of specially
designed lifts and hoists, automatically opening doors and other
expensive features should create an accessible building. In this,
there is surely a need to acquaint all studio teaching staff and
specialist lecturers with the principles, value and relative sim-
plicity of designing for universal accessibility; such a possibi-
lity is so obvious, and yet there have been few, if any initiatives
specifically for this amongst Schools of Architecture. And even
if there were, they would probably only attract those who were
already reasonably knowledgeable and committed.
354 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

2. Advocacy and Promotion of Universal

Design in Asia
Continuing Professional Development:
Short Courses
Schools of Architecture which have the expertise, and can call
on the services of outside specialists, have a duty to extend their
knowledge to today’s practitioners in as many ways as possible.
One of the most significant of these is in the form of a taught
workshop course, which is aimed specifically at the design pro-
fessions – architects, engineers, planners, and anyone involved
in the commissioning or running of buildings. Depending on
the participants’ specialisms and backgrounds, courses could
follow many of the aspects discussed previously.

Whereas full-time students have broadly similar background

knowledge bases, maturity and experience of learning, professi-
onals who partake in in-career upgrading (or who are coerced to
attend courses to maintain their professional recognitions) are
more diverse in their educational needs and wants. For this
reason, a more participative learning style is recommended. For
example, the participants can be requested to develop their own
access audit checklist and will, later, be more appreciative of a
‘real’ checklist when this is provided.

In Chiang Mai in Northern Thailand the Asian Training Centre

on Ageing (ATCOA) runs an annual course on designing for
elderly and disabled people, aimed at professionals and caregi-
vers from mixed disciplines, which some architectural teachers
have attended. To date, there have been few other educational
initiatives in Southeast Asia.

This is clearly an area in which there is a need for the develop-

ment of courses and teaching materials that are attractive and
usable in different places.

«Understanding others involves more than intuition or «gut»

feelings. Such an unstructured and subjective approach to
understanding others is not sufficiently rigorous or reliable
to be useful.» (Beddel & Lennox, 1997)

Lectures and discussions have their limitations and simulation

exercises have a role to play in changing, and adding to,
people’s experience and heightening empathy and involvement.
Meeting the end users with disabilities and seeing the «human
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 355
Singapore University

face» and real need for non-handicapping built environments is

genuine and, to some, quite emotional.

However, not everyone agrees that simulation exercises are the

answer:

«These are degrading no amount of explanation can be used

to show how this exercise devalues people with disabilities.
(If I copied my father’s walk to find out what it was like, I
would be modelling his position rather than recognising his
attributes and strengths as a human).» (Felix, 1998)

This is not easy to answer, but the above refers to the European
experience and not to simulation exercises in Asia. Obviously,
there are cultural and behavioural differences («horses for cour-
ses») and the disability movements are well developed and
empowered in the West (with legislative acts – for example, the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and various anti-discri-
mination laws and codes). When run properly, simulation expe-
riences are very powerful tools (and, incidentally, they are a tool
currently used in U.K. hospitals when training nurses and
Occupational Therapists). Examples of four major simulation
programmes in Asia, all with positive results, are described
below:

– The Asian Training Centre on Ageing (ATCOA) in Chiang

Mai, Thailand, runs courses about designing for persons with
disabilities and the lasting impact is seen from the many par-
ticipants who keep in touch (networking).
– The United Nations Economic and Social Commission for
Asia and the Pacific (UN ESCAP) held a training/awareness
course in May 1997 in Bangkok, Thailand. This exercise was
instrumental in supporting a UN Pilot Project to improve the
street facilities for a one square kilometre of Bangkok in
advance of the FESPIC Games (Harrison & Parker, 1998).
The success was so great that over 20 kilometres of tactile
paving strips (a textured surface that has a number of designs
which can inform a blind person through contact with a cane
or directly via their feet) and safe footpaths and street furni-
ture have been installed (with facilities for wheelchair users,
the deaf and the blind) which benefits all users.
– The «Day in a Wheelchair» event in Singapore on 14 March
1999 was probably the largest simultaneous simulation exer-
cise held to date. This had a number of agenda – to provide a
simulation exercise for about 150 able-bodied participants
356 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

(spread over 17 routes in Singapore), to bring the problems

of access to the built environment, and the problems of inde-
pendent wheelchair-bound living, to the attention of the
public, politicians and the media. Two research questionnai-
res were issued to the participants to gauge their pre and post
experience feelings and attitudinal shifts, and the findings
were positive.
– Simulation exercises conducted on the Elective Course «The
Accessible Environment” at the School of Architecture,
National University of Singapore. This course is targeted at
level one Masters in Architecture students and has proven
popular and influential, being well subscribed for six conse-
cutive years.

Other Initiatives
The awareness and confidence of professional designers needs
to be increased, as a matter of urgency (Harrison and Parker,
1997a). Research work done by units looking at aspects of
designing for disability and the creation of accessible environ-
ments should address this need, and the dissemination of good
examples, (including case studies, specific design solutions,
cost appraisals etc.) is one way in which this could be done.

Ongoing research and technical studies can help professionals

by applying expertise to:
– commentaries on current and proposed design codes and
building regulations;
– writing readable articles on accessibility topics, in professio-
nal journals, including critical analysis of built examples;
– development of award schemes, to encourage professionals
(and, equally important, clients and building owners) to spe-
cify and create accessible buildings.

3. Discussion
Priorities in teaching accessibility-oriented education in Schools
of Architecture and allied design may be summarised as:
– introduction to anthropometrics for disability as a part of
basic design courses;
– continuous stress in design project work on need to design
for barrier-free environments;
– consistent approach to technical and constructional aspects;
– elective courses, with simulation exercises and project-based
goals;
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 357
Singapore University

– encouragement of integration of current research topics into

postgraduate and thesis work;
– teaching the teachers;
– continuing professional development courses, to inform and
update professionals’ skills;
– interpretation of existing legislation on accessibility in the
built environment, building codes and implications of other
pressures, such as Anti-discrimination Acts; comparison with
other countries’ codes, and feedback to code-makers;
– mutual links between other disciplines with similar aims and
with user-groups, particularly welfare associations of dis-
abled people;
– need for a database of a range of exemplars, ranging from
high- to low-tech, and including no-cost solutions.

Overcoming the initial uncertainty about how effective such

teaching should be is the most significant hurdle. It is necessary
only to demonstrate that access is achievable, and by what
means, and that even the simplest improvement could make a
world of difference to a person who is now handicapped by the
unconsidered environmental mistakes of their habitat.

We are nearing the end of the United Nations «Decade of

Disabled persons, 1993–2002». It is thus timely to ask why and
how we are preparing our future generations of designers of the
built environment to provide habitats for everyone without dis-
crimination relating to age or ability.

Those with intellectual disabilities should not be forgotten, and

a safe, well-signed, built environment will prove better and less
intimidating for this user-group too. But, as this cohort grows in
numbers and percentage terms, their wants and needs will
require attention – especially if and when life spans increase
dramatically, with advances and application of medical techno-
logy, to 120–130 years.

Who should decide the form that future habitats may take?
When professional planners, urban designers and architects are
involved in decision making at strategic levels, they must trans-
cend the boundaries of their own disciplines, to listen to the
views of other parties who have knowledge of other particular
aspects of how to make the urban structure work, not just more
efficiently, but with greater diversity and with greater emphasis
on human quality of life values, which are less easy to quantify.
Taking the holistic view is not easy, and implementing it
358 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

demands new attitudes to be developed – but its benefits will be

far reaching – both in the number of people that it serves and in
the long-term satisfaction that it brings.

The main forms of active discrimination are well known –

sexual discrimination, religious discrimination and racial discri-
mination. Developments in anti-discrimination legislation and
education help to reduce prejudices and change society’s attitu-
des and tolerances. Discrimination is found in many other
forms – sometimes intentionally but often occurring unintentio-
nally, through ignorance or apathy. Where persons with disabili-
ties and elderly persons are hindered by the built environment,
and thus unable to use it in the same way as the majority of the
population, this may be defined as discrimination (Imrie, 1996).
Experiential discrimination occurs where certain individuals or
groups are denied the same experience as others.

But increased awareness is not the «end goal’ – this is just the
catalyst to change towards achieving a truly accessible environ-
ment. There are many «barriers» to be overcome – attitudinal,
physical, mechanical, technological, economical, social and
cultural – but the resulting habitat will be worth the struggle
and effort and the benefits are many in both the near and long
terms. An investment in non-handicapping built environments
is an investment towards a better quality of life, and can be a
common goal for all inhabitants.

References
Alessandri, L. M., Leonard, H. and Bower, C. Disability
Counts: a Profile of People with Disabilities in Western
Australia. Perth, Western Australia: Disability Services
Commission. 1996.
Beddel, Jeffrey T. & Lennox, Shelley S. Handbook for
Communication and Problem-solving Skills Training : A
Cognitive-behavioral Approach. Wiley. New York. 1997.
Centre on Environments for the Handicapped. Access by Design
– Implementing the Disability Discrimination Act. Videotape.
London. 1997
Felix, Robert. Letter to K. J. Parker. Leeds Metropolitan
University, U.K. 1998.
Harrison, J.D. Access in the Curriculum. Access by Design, the
Journal of the Centre for Accessible Environments. London,
U.K. May/August 1996.
 James D. Harrison
and Kenneth Parker Tertiary Education and Promotion in Asia 359
Singapore University

Harrison, J.D and Parker, K.J. Universal Accessibility:

Awareness and Attitudes. MERA (Man – Environment
Research Association), International Conference on
Environment-Behaviour Studies for the 21st Century. Tokyo,
Japan. 1997. (a)
Harrison, J.D and Parker, K.J. Disability Simulations and
Access Audits: Studying Disability and Accessibility. 31st
Annual Conference of the Australian and New Zealand
Architectural Science Association: Principles and Practice.
Queensland University of Technology. Brisbane, Australia.
1997. (b)
Harrison J. D. and Parker, K. J. Pavements for Pedestrians –
Regaining the Street. Designing for the 21st Century,
International Conference on Universal Design, New York.
1998.
Imrie, R. Disability and the City: International Perspectives.
London: Paul Chapman Publishing. 1996.
Nunn, C. Awareness: What it is, What it does. London; New
York: Routledge. 1996.
Ostergaard P. Handicap, Architecture and Design. CD-ROM.
Christian Ejlers, Publishers. Denmark. 1996.
Pressman, Andy. Professional Practice 101: A Compendium of
Business and Management Strategies in Architecture. New
York: J. Wiley & Sons. 1997.
The Straits Times. U. N. Hopes to Change Biases Against
Elderly People. Singapore: Newspaper. 6 November 1998.
Yelavich, Susan (Ed.). The Edge of the Millennium: An
International Critique of Architecture, Urban Planning,
Product and Communication Design. New York: Whitney
Library of Design. 1993.
360 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Photo: FotoKnutsen AS
Kaname Yanagisawa
Chiba University, Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design in Chiba University 361
Japan

3.4 Collaborative
Design Studio for
Universal Design in
Chiba University
Professor Kaname Yanagisawa, Ph.D., Department of Design
and Architecture, Chiba University, Japan.

Background
The Department of Design and Architecture at Chiba University
was founded in 1997, when it was reorganized from two depart-
ments, the Department of Industrial Design and the Department
of Architecture. There are two courses taught independently:
industrial design and architecture.

We are trying to combine various studio programs to promote

student exchange and give the students a wider view of design,
from product to architecture. The collaborative design studio
was started in 1998. In the second collaborative studio in 1999,
we aimed to have both courses participating together in the
Universal Design Competition.

Outline of the collaborative design

studio 1999
Theme: Designing a restaurant interior from the viewpoint
of universal design
Period: December 1999 to February 2000.
Process: The work was undertaken in close collaboration
between the faculty staff and students from both the
Design and the Architecture courses. At first, a lec-
ture on universal design was given to both groups
of students. The students then used the existing
building as a case study for a survey, presented
their findings and exchanged ideas. In the next sta-
ges, the students used the case study as basis for the
design of a universally designed restaurant.
Result: It was the first time both groups of students were
able to exchange ideas and gain knowledge of each
362 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

other’s fields. The students learned the concept of

universal design through the collaborative work
between the two courses.
Feedback: We hope to continue the idea of making a mixed
group with design and architecture students next
year, thus promoting more mutual understanding.

Case study and review

Students surveyed the existing building as a case study and ana-
lysed it from the viewpoint of universal design. This included
elements such as non-physical barriers, useful spaces for all
generations, colours and textures that aid orientation, or com-
fortable environment. They took two weeks for the case study
and its presentation.

On the day of the review, the faculty staff first made a brief
comment on the students’ works. The students from both cour-
ses then looked closely at the presentation board before presen-
ting their schemes individually. To conclude the session, the
faculty staff of the architecture and design course reviewed the
works and exchanged opinions.

Both architecture and design students looked closely at each work.

Design work and review

On the design of the restaurant, the architecture students
worked individually. The design students formed groups of 3–4
students who worked together, which is normal practice in the
design course. Although the architecture students and the
Kaname Yanagisawa
Chiba University, Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design in Chiba University 363
Japan

design students did not cooperate directly, they exchanged ideas

informally quite often during the design stage.

Common to both groups was that they made an effort to intro-

duce the idea and feedback to their design work from the last
case study review. Some students chose to design a new buil-
ding, while other students designed a scheme for renewing an
existing structure. This part of the studio went on for a period of
three weeks.

On the day of the final review, students of both courses, archi-

tecture and design, made a presentation in turn. Faculty staff of
the architecture and design course and three guest critics re-
viewed the works, and exchanged opinions.

A group of design students gave a presentation to the others.

Types of design solutions

Each student or group of students created various kinds of inte-
rior spaces in the restaurant. The faculty staff concluded to
realize the studio in which both architecture and design students
would make a group together for more cooperation. There were
few differences between the approach and results of architec-
ture students and design students, but the students understood
the concept of universal design in slightly different ways, and
consequently chose different design solutions. The types of
design solutions were as follows:
364 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

1. Physical solution
A lot of students thought that the concept of universal design is
the same as barrier free design. They tried to avoid steps,
making a flat floor, or introduced a slope and an elevator. Some
students made wider circulation or corridor spaces for easy
movement for elderly and handicapped persons. These physical
solutions might be fundamental to universal design.

2. Environmental or cognitive solution

Some students considered colour or material an important issue
in universal design. They thought that friendly colours and
coordination of materials would make people feel comfortable
and make the environment understandable. Both issues may of
course be of particular importance for elderly and handicapped
people. Other students introduced systems to provide easy liste-
ning music, aroma, nice view of nature, for healing and joy. All
these environmental and cognitive approaches have relevance in
a universal design context.

3. Selectiveness for all types of people

Some students considered that selection of place for different
users of the restaurant would be important. They therefore
introduced various types of places that could be chosen accor-
ding to user’s preference or ability, presenting a variety of
colours and decoration, food types and interior atmosphere, size
of room and seating arrangements, seating styles and levels of
privacy. As universal design is the design for all types of peo-
ple, having multiple choices might well seem a reasonable idea.

4. Exchange between generations

Some students introduced a place to promote intercourse
between different generations. An example of this is a design
where the restaurant has an area designed both for children’s
play and for elderly people – promoting contact between them.
Given that there are sufficient attractive spaces for all generati-
ons, everybody might have a chance to get together. We should
create places where everybody can meet – children and elderly
people, handicapped and non-handicapped people, males and
females, residents and visitors.
Kaname Yanagisawa
Chiba University, Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design in Chiba University 365
Japan

Some results from the studio

Mr. Yasuyuki Iguchi, Architecture student
This student focuses on psychological comfort. He uses various
and distinctive colours, materials, and geometric forms on
walls, ceiling, and floor, creating an easily understandable and
comfortable space.
366 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Ms. Yoko Oikawa, Architecture student

This student created several small buildings, offering a diversity
of colours and materials. She studied the psychological effects
of colours and materials, and applied them in her design. The
result is several small rectangular buildings, which look diffe-
rent and have different sizes, spaces, colours and materials, to
match individual taste.
Kaname Yanagisawa
Chiba University, Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design in Chiba University 367
Japan

Mr. Yosuke Kitazawa, Architecture student

This student chose to refurbish an existing building. He desig-
ned its interior from the viewpoint of universal design. He
widened the hallway and rearranged the setting of furniture and
partitions for easy moving. He also introduced several devices
to give a comfortable feeling to visitors.
368 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Ms. Akiko Itai, Architecture student

This student designed a restaurant that can change its interior
setting according to season and time. Furniture, decoration, par-
tition, lighting, food, and table settings are removable and
changeable, adjusting to summer and winter, or daytime and
nighttime. Visitors might enjoy a different atmosphere in a
space each time they go.
Kaname Yanagisawa
Chiba University, Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design in Chiba University 369
Japan

Mr. Jun Murakoshi, Mr. Shun Hashizume, Ms.

Akiko Tanaka, Ms. Yukiko Koide, Mr. Yutaka
Yoshiyachi, Design students group work
This group designed a building to promote exchange between
different generations. They put wooden decks and other commu-
nication spaces, like those that old Japanese houses used to have.
370 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Ms. Junko Tanaka, Mr. Kentaro Sekine, Ms.

Kyoko Higashihara, Design students group work
This group designed several types of dining spaces in a building
to meet different people’s needs and interests. These include a
large open space, a space with table and furniture, Japanese
tatami-matted space, a cave-like space, an outdoor terrace and
outdoor garden. They also designed unique outdoor paths for
attracting children’s play.
Kaname Yanagisawa
Chiba University, Collaborative Design Studio for Universal Design in Chiba University 371
Japan
372 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Photo: Jon Christophersen

 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 373
Nagoya City University, Japan

3.5 Universal Design

Competition for
Students 2000
Nagoya/Japan
Prof. Makoto Yanagisawa, Nagoya City University and Tadao
Shimizu, Chiba University, Japan.

Background of the Participating

Universities
There are design and architecture departments in many
Japanese universities and colleges. Many of the design-related
departments are found in the faculty of art or in art colleges; the
rest are in technological or educational schools. On the other
hand, most architecture-related departments belong to technolo-
gical schools, colleges or universities. From an educational
point of view, design and architecture therefore seem to be
separated.

The reason for this separation is that design, in its early days in
Japan, was interpreted as an applied art. It was consequently
logical to situate the design education in the schools of art,
while architecture, where the focus was on structure and materi-
als that resist such external forces as earthquakes, became a
part of the engineering schools. However, as the idea got disse-
minated that both design and architecture are important for the
creation of environment in which people live and that both are
essential for the enhancement of the quality of life, the wall be-
tween the two was lowered and now, mutual relationship and
the importance of the collaboration is being discussed in the
field of education.

Essentially, universal design should be taken into consideration

as a basic element whenever something is being planned or
designed. Therefore, universal design is now being used as a
catalyst for considerations to promote the collaboration and har-
monization of design and architecture. Universal design is get-
ting much attention as a subject which should engage various
374 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

fields, across the conventional boundaries of design and archi-

tecture and including information design. Universal design is a
comprehensive theme covering diverse subjects such as tools,
architecture and urban issues. Unfortunately, universal design is
not yet nationally recognized, and with few exceptions, the
course is not officially incorporated into the curriculum.

About the competition

Six professors of design and architecture with particular interest
in universal design organized a committee to hold the competi-
tion for students. As organizers and planning committee mem-
bers, they encouraged students both nationwide and at their
schools and universities.

However, through the nationwide promotional activities, the

entries were not limited to the students of design and architec-
ture; there were also entries from students majoring in informa-
tion design and education and from landscape architecture
students – the latter attend schools of agriculture as well as
those who are. This proves that the competition has made a
great contribution to the dissemination of universal design. The
general interest in this subject was reflected in the number of
inquiries made to the Secretariat. The fact that judging was
open to the public and the applicants proved to be encouraging
for the students and provided an opportunity of exchanges
among the participants.

The objective of the competition

This student competition was held in the spring of 2000, organi-
zed by Prof. Makoto Yanagisawa, Nagoya City University, and
sponsored by Matsushita Electric Works Ltd.. The objective of
the competition was to provide an opportunity for design students
to enhance their understanding of universal design and help them
to reflect the acquired knowledge in their own projects.

Entries and judging

By the closing day (2000, Mar. 1st), 45 entries were submitted
from ten Universities and six Graduate Schools in Japan. The
jury committee was composed of six judges, selected from
Japanese schools of architecture and design:
Makoto Yanagisawa (Nagoya City Univ./Chair person)
Toshiharu Arai (Kanazawa College of Art)
Kazuo Kawasaki (Nagoya City Univ.)
Takahito Saeki (Kobe Design Univ.)
 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 375
Nagoya City University, Japan

Tadao Shimizu (Chiba Univ.)

Gen Taniguchi (Nagoya Univ.)
Judging was done in two stages. During the first stage all
entries were scrutinised and a short list of 12 works were selec-
ted for the final stage. Uniquely, the judging process was open
to both the entrants and the public. At the second and final
stage, held on May 6th at Nagoya City University presentation
hall, each of the finalists presented their works for an audience
of more than 170. After the presentations, discussions and
voting, the judges selected three prizewinners and nine honou-
rable mentions.

Future development
There are requests to continue this type of competition. It will
be ideal if it becomes an international open competition not
limited to the Japanese students. But at the same time, we
should take into consideration cultural, social and economic
differences that each individual country has in terms of univer-
sal design. No set of established values or standards should be
imposed. Further international exchanges of information will
become more and more important.

The prizes
The first prize
The first prize was awarded a proposal entitled «Japanese tradi-
tional Veranda + mud room = mud veranda?» by Tsukasa
Sasaki, Shiho Mohri and Genki Tanaka. All are second year stu-
dents at the Master Course of Architecture at the, Graduate
School of Nagoya University.

In their work a survey was conducted to assess the current situ-

ation of a traditional commercial area adjacent to a station. The
result shows an increase of older people, decrease of the
younger generation, and decline of business due to large-scale
suburban shopping establishments. As a consequence, houses
and properties in the area have been sold off, causing several to
be vacant. Based on these facts, the authors have proposed to
use a vacant lot to put up a temporary building with a Japanese
traditional veranda and mudroom. Their intention is to create an
arena for direct communication among neighbours, thus enhan-
cing the relationship among a broader range of people in the
community and helping them to create a development as well as
developing ideas for its implementation. Japanese traditional
Verandas and mudrooms function as semi public spaces, brid-
376 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

ging the private and the public open space. Spaces with such a
function can be found in any traditional residential area in
Japan. In this proposal various ideas and devices are introduced
to attract and facilitate the gathering of the neighbours inclu-
ding access for old and handicapped people to the temporary
building. Members of the judging committee highly evaluated
the fact that this work has introduced universal design in a
broad perspective, and that it is not limited to the solution of
existing barriers but also incorporates extensive future visions.

“ENGAWA”+“DOMA”=“ENDOMA”
“Engawa” and “Doma” have been the traditional spaces for connecting
interior and outdoor space. They have been instrumental in creating open-
ness of the house providing delicate interplay of the interior space with the
outside urban and natural environment. But most of Japanese contempo-
rary houses don’t have such spaces. Using the open spaces that are eve-
rywhere in the town, we tried to make the places for intergenerational
communication. This trial is UD for reconsidering the milieu of all.

Authors: Tsukasa Sasaki and Shiho Mori, Dept. of Architecture, Nagoya

Univ.; Motoki Tanaka and Shinichi Kurimoto, Dept. of Civil engneering
and Architecture, school of eng., Nagoya Univ.
 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 377
Nagoya City University, Japan

The second prize

The «Universal Grip», by Goshuu Sawada and Hideki Kato,
senior students of Life Environmental Design Dept. of Nagoya
City University, received second prize.

The authors had started out with a basic question of how people
change the way of gripping things according to the shape of the
object. They analysed this using numerous models, which were
tested in collaboration with the residents at nursing homes.
Based on the findings, they made a design proposal for a key
holder. Further studies comparing the proposed object with
existing products in the market to find out the advantages of the
former and the disadvantages of the latter are expected.
378 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

UNIVERSAL GRIP to SMART GRIP

We think that it is necessary to design things to impress and please their
users, which means that it is important to know human beings well. Our
hands have evolved for a long time. We surveyed the function of them,
which are to hold, grip, grasp, catch, clutch, grab, beat, hit, slap, strike,
twist, scratch, turn, tear, knock, etc. After that we reached the conclusion
that five of them are the most important to live our everyday life. Then, we
made the design survey of the forms which are friendly for every body,
including those who have handicaps in their hands.

Authors: Takehide Sawada and Aicih Prefectual University Fine Arts and
Music Design Master Course, Hideki Kato, Nagoya City University School
of Design and Architecture Department of Human Environmental Design
 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 379
Nagoya City University, Japan

The third prize

The third prize was warded to a work titled «Hearty Parking
Sphere», a design by Megumi Morishita. The author attends the
second year of Environmental Design Engineering at the gradu-
ate school of Fukui University.

The proposal is a simple roof for parking lots made of thin air
bags. The height of the roof can be adjusted according to the time
of day and changes of climate. It is a user-friendly design particu-
larly with regard to wheelchair users, old people and others who
may need much time to get in and out of the vehicles. Although
there might be structural problems with strong winds, it was
highly evaluated as a visionary proposal from a young student.

HEARTY PARKING
For the people who drive cars, a parking lot connects roads with architecture. While a road is space for cars
and an architecture is people but only as incidental facilities of a architecture for cars. To get on or off cars
in the rain or the snow is very uncomfortable in a parking lot without a roof, especially for the handicapped.
Many parking lots don’t function as an interface of architecture with cars.

For the effective interface function, I would like to propose a design of a parking lot with a concept of
“HEARTY PARKING”, which is comfortable for people on a rainy or snowy day. At the time of getting on and
off of the car in the rain, you might have experienced that someone has held an umbrella over your head,
which has made you very pleased. My design comes from those experiences of an umbrella by someone else,
and it is designed not only for bad weather but also for the night. Considering the general and comprehensive
idea of UD, I would like to propose a parking lot with a partial roof of the design of an air skin structure.
Author: Megumi Morishita, Fukui University graduate school, Master of engineering
380 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Honorable mentions
Proposals receiving honourable mentions included the follo-
wing:
– A detachable handle to hold cups securely, particularly suited
for people who have reduced strength problems with hands
and fingers.
– A design to enjoy all four seasons in an urban park without
being aware of handicaps.
– A design for an urban park which can be used by everybody
in all four seasons, regardless of handicaps.
– A unique and delightful radio with a design based on the
result of a survey which showed that a simple shape and sim-
ple handling which respond to the fingers are effective for
the visually impaired and people with memory disorders.

FOURP Our Cup with Four Points

– An environment and furniture at a children’s playground where people of different generations can play
with children. This design proposal is based on a study conducted on site and the furniture was actually
made and used for experimental purposes.
Author: Tomoko Yagi, Art education senior at Fukui University
 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 381
Nagoya City University, Japan

EASY TO USE RADIO

Authors: Shinya Matsuyama, Wakayama University, Faculty of Systems
Engineering Design and Information Sciences Design Fundamentals

Summary
Interestingly and favourably, when seen as a whole, the entries
to the design competition were by and large based on honest
research. Also, it was impressive that the design solutions were
attempted not only for a single objective but had social implica-
tions, taking the surrounding situations into consideration.
Students may be interpreting «universal design» as an expanded
concept in which people and nature live in harmony, not limited
to solutions of physical problems. It is indeed the direction that
the organizers of the competition had anticipated.

Judges’ comments
Prof. Toshiharu Arai (Kanazawa University of Art and Craft)
Universal design is based on the concept that people are really
living life cycles with a wide variety of abilities and that they
are continuously building different relationships. When we look
382 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

at that fact, new or intrinsic relations are conceived between

people and tools. A common subject assigned to the competi-
tion must be to understand the problems as facts and how to
find a solution _ not just for the sake of problem solving, but to
look for creative solutions with a universal dimension. Logic as
a base of things and formativeness as a form of things; how can
they be represented in design clearly and balanced? It is exactly
what was requested.

Judging the entries was very stimulating as it encompassed

whole life space including environment, architecture and pro-
duct design. Design activities originate from specific sites or
situations but there are many different answers to their develop-
ments. I thought that in the universal design competition, the
process itself could be a study of universal design since it is still
in the cradle. Now I feel that it was right to believe so including
the process of public judging. Future challenge in the area of
product design is to create 1/1 model or 1/1 model of details to
check the function and finish the final design based on such
models.
I would like to extend my deep appreciation to all the students
of various fields who have participated in this competition.

Prof. Kazuo Kawasaki (School of Design and Architecture.

Nagoya City University)
The term «universal design» is rapidly gaining ground.
Especially in Japan, it is almost like a craze as the aged society
arrives. Under such circumstances, students have seriously wor-
ked on the ideas and drawings to embody the philosophy of uni-
versal design. This was the first competition of its kind, yet
entries were versatile, ranging from tools and equipments for
daily life to urban landscape. We had about fifty entries but
were able to go through the first-stage judgment actively and
carefully. Applicants showed models and made visual presenta-
tions in the second stage presentation. I believe that the public
judging was innovative and of great success.

My judging criteria were on what issue the applicant’s awa-

reness is focused and what his/her theme is, i.e. awareness and
understanding of a problem. Drawings and designs are impor-
tant, as solutions for the problems while understanding should
be transformed into design expressions as social answers.

Based on such personal criteria I verified the originality of the

ideas in the first-stage judgment. In the second-stage, I checked
 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 383
Nagoya City University, Japan

if the answers and solutions were expressed clearly and concre-

tely and if the messages could be transmitted as an expression. I
judged that every prize-winning piece is persuasive enough as
solutions, while unsuccessful winners’ pieces remained only as
answers and were not stimulating enough as solutions.
However, the differences were slight and it was difficult to rank
them.

This competition required appropriate written expression for

the concept in the first-stage and presentation skill in the
second-stage. While interpretation of the philosophy of univer-
sal design itself was new, this new methodology for a design
competition was innovative and successful.

I sincerely hope that this type of competition will be widely

accepted and continued. Lastly, I would like to pay respect and
express my appreciation for the efforts taken not only by the
winners but also by all applicants.

Prof. Takato Saiki (Kobe Design University)

“Enchantment of Universal Design” – this competition for the
students brought me some discoveries.

The first discovery is that the entries by the students from vari-
ous fields contributed to make the presentations and judging in
the second-stage very exciting. For those applicants who are
usually studying designs in one’s specialized area, it must have
been a new experience to participate in the public judging.
Recently, there are various competitions, small and large in
scale, but most of them are planned and carried out within spe-
cific areas and directed towards those involved in that field.
Naturally, the results are presented only to that specific area of
expertise. In contrast to such competitions, «Universal Design
Competition for Students» was indeed in line with the objecti-
ves of universal design; designs of relations, sharing of social
issues and creation of safe, comfortable and enjoyable environ-
ment. Entries were full of youthful and healthy ideas to accom-
plish afore-mentioned objectives.

What was particularly impressive to me was the fact that the

applicants were not simply interested in the creation of a pro-
duct but had social viewpoints, had undertaken field work and
tested the designs. They actually went to town and visited insti-
tutions and reviewed the designs directly. Contents of many pre-
sentations have shown remarkable improvement compared to
384 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

the first-stage judging. It made me feel that the design should

always be in response to the changing society.

Another discovery was that the students did not limit the
designs to a visible expression. They linked it to the rules of life
and social information systems and their proposals were based
on that. People who are somewhat retreating in their closed
world are brought back to the ordinary world, and the designs
of the invisible world were experimented to give them energy in
the life space. The students looked at the mechanisms of old life
and society, which are almost forgotten in the course of evolu-
tion and discovered them as design sources.

Judging of the works of such diversified areas was a new expe-

rience for the judges as well but I felt it stimulating as respon-
ses to the questions raised by open-minded students.

Prof. Tadao Shimizu (Design Engineering Dept. School of

Engineering, Chiba University)
This was the first competition of this kind and I assume the
applicants must have felt somewhat lost as to how the theme
should be tackled. It was a thought-provoking experience for
the judges as well. However, it was most delightful to have
entries from various fields with different views and angles.

What was impressive to me was, as represented in the first

prize-winning piece, that the students worked on universal
design not only as a direct solution to satisfy the functional
requirements of the goods or space but tried to expand their
efforts even to emotional aspects. Relatively limited time might
not have allowed the applicants to create anything based on
serious testing. However, the very basic of universal design lies
in the idea of paying attention to a wide range of people and
situations around us and to find the most relevant solution rat-
her than individual completeness. Therefore, this trend is most
welcome. As was described in the qualification, most of the
prize-winning pieces were not mere ideas but based on some
research and further development of the findings. I respected
that point. Currently the market is full of products reflecting
irresponsible thinking of «Let’s try. If it goes well, that’s OK. If
it doesn’t, let’s forget about it and try something else.»
I personally believe that universal design should retain a rather
critical attitude toward such current state.
 Makoto Yanagisawa
and Tadao Shimizu Universal Design Competition for Students 2000 Nagoya/Japan 385
Nagoya City University, Japan

Prof. Gen Taniguchi (School of Engineering Nagoya

University)
Whether it could be a product, building or urban planning, for
those who are engaged in the design-related occupation, univer-
sal design is becoming essential in order to survive in this
industry. Therefore, it should be incorporated in the educational
program for future designers. Looking at 45 entries I felt the
efforts of both applicants and educators were fully rewarded.

The first prize-winning work is an idea to revitalize a once-

active old street space. It is excellent because the proposal
incorporates the concept of universal design. This can be a sug-
gestion for Japan to free herself from scrap-and-build or consu-
ming-and-developing society.

The second prize-winning piece, «Universal Grip», was highly

evaluated as it expressed the process of a man’s motion of
«gripping» which creates various attractive forms.

«Hearty Parking Sphere», the third prize-winning work, is still

incomplete in its detailed technical processing but it is exciting
as I visualize the beautiful landscape it would add to a town. It
is one of the proposals I wish to be materialized.

When I thought of a society full of equipments like «Can I help

you?» I was first sceptical, thinking that it would promote the
alienation of man. But recently, I attended a meeting to study
universal design in airports and there, an apparently healthy
person who actually was hard of hearing talked about his pro-
blem of letting others know of his difficulty. It made me feel
that there is a potential for such equipment. For me, who am
specialized in architecture and urban planning, this competition
was a good opportunity to learn about ideas in the design field.

Prof. Makoto Yanagisawa (School of Design and Architecture.

Nagoya City University)
I wish to put the spirit of universal design into the minds of the
students. I wish to nurture the spirit of caring in their minds. I
wish them to be patient enough to work up from concepts to
concrete ideas. This competition for students was based on
these wishes. Before Prof. Shimizu made a presentation in
America on the results of the competition, I made the following
short speech:
386 UNIVERSAL design Part 3 Asia and Australia

Although I will be 70 years old next January, I don’t know yet

how institutions for the aged should be. I may not understand it
well until I myself get physically weak. It must be too deman-
ding to ask young students to think about environment and pro-
ducts for every type of people. But designers are always
requested to think about the world that they have never experi-
enced. This must be an excellent opportunity for the students to
work on the most challenging assignment.

I was excited to find 45 entries on the closing day. Moreover,

most of the work showed the results of the applicants’ hard
work and it made me happy. The date of public judging happe-
ned to be a holiday due to the schedule of all judges but to my
big surprise, the hall was full of people and the chairs provided
there were not enough. Under such circumstances, it must have
been hard for the judges to have public judging but I believe it
was good for the participants.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to the very, very busy

judges who have worked without any remuneration. The exci-
ting poster is a work of Prof. Kawasaki and we owe much to
Matsushita Electric Works Ltd, which has supported us financi-
ally. Also, I would like to mention the names of the people who
have helped us in organizing the event. Mr. Mikio Higashiyama
a member of Society for Health Design Study from Eba
Corporation., Mr. Yuzo Kurahashi of Nihon Shooter Ltd., Mr.
Sakamoto of Nagoya Isu Co. Ltd., Ms. Ami Wada and Ms.
Miyako Matsushita of Yanagisawa Lab. Many of the students of
the Nagoya City University, the students of Yanagisawa Lab in
particular, helped us extensively. I hope this competition will be
a significant milestone in the education of universal design.