We All Use the Big Stall: Universal Design

By: Rebecca Monteleone

Hello, friends and readers! First, let me apologize for how long it has taken me to post this, [insert appropriate excuse for my poor time management skills]. Life, man.

Today, I want to branch out a little bit and talk about something that each of you encounters nearly every day. This topic is something that is becoming more and more integrated into our daily lives so that its ubiquitousness makes it nearly invisible. While its pervasiveness is excellent in some ways, its pedestrian status may cause us to undervalue it. And worse, assume that it is maximally effective and there is nothing to be done. Readers here at [Insert Disability Euphemism Here] know that there is always something to be done. Always.

So what am I talking about?

UNIVERSAL DESIGN.

The History

Universal Design is a term coined in the late 1950s by architect Ronald L. Mace, which he defined as, “The design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialised design.” [Source]

Universal Design (or UD, as people who love acronyms refer to it) is the idea that community and commercial spaces and products should be accessible by their nature. UD is not about adjusting spaces for a specific group of people (i.e. people with disabilities), but about making all spaces and products welcoming to all people. Places and products should be available to a wide range of people by their nature.

It seems almost too obvious, doesn’t it?

Think about it this way, there's no need to pay to install a ramp (which, just for the record, is required by law, folks) if you design your space to be accessible from the get-go. This also enables the architects to better control the aesthetics—accessibility can be beautiful.

Robson Square, Vancouver Canada Photo by Dean Douchard

While Ronald L. Mace was the first to use the term Universal Design, the real champion of the movement was UK architect Selwyn Goldsmith. In 1963, his book Designing for the Disabled, provided the first guide for architects hoping to create accessible spaces. Prior to his work, architects and building planners had no basis for creating welcoming spaces. Their ignorance to the needs of people with disabilities did (and still does) systematically exclude people from participating in their communities.

Goldsmith, who himself was a wheelchair user, interviewed countless people with disabilities while conducting research, practice that was nearly unheard of in the 1960s. The direct result of his first batch of interviews was the magnificent and truly innovative ramped curb!



Look at it. LOOK AT IT. (FUN FACT: Truncated domes [tactile paving] were developed by Seiichi Miyake in 1965 in Japan for the benefit of people with visual impairments, but would not be introduced in North America or the UK until the 1990s) (Source)

Despite his contributions to accessibility and inclusion, Goldsmith did not consider himself a disability rights activist, and in fact, steered wide of any kind of political affiliation. At one point in his career, he was invited onto a local council in an effort to fill their disability quota—an offer he vehemently refused on the grounds that the his disability was not to be politicised. (Read more about Selwyn Goldsmith’s life here)

At the end of his career, Goldsmith took a radical stance on creating inclusive spaces, stating in his final book Universal Design that having what would be considered extreme or complex needs is not aberrant. It is the most normal human condition.

Examples of UD



Roll-under sinks in public restrooms



Rocker light switch



Types of accessible door knobs

The previous two examples are particularly relevant for people without full dexterity in their hands or fingers. What makes UD important, however, is that these architectural components are useful for typical individuals as well. Ever been carrying a load of groceries and been unable to open the door or flip the switch? Universal design is good for all of us.



Accessible pedestrian sign

The traffic signal pictured above provides both visual and auditory information. What strikes me about it, additionally, is the simple symbols that provide step-by-step instructions for its use. Individuals with dementia, intellectual disabilities, or literacy issues will be able to utilise this crossing which in turn empowers independence and community involvement. Providing information in a variety of ways (sound, symbols, text, etc) vastly increases the number of people who are able to use the product or space.



Gallaudet University

Here is an image of Gallaudet University, the United States’ only university for the Deaf. The architecture is deliberate, maximising open spaces and clear lines of sight so that signers can communicate across and between floors.

[Soft Clothing]

Soft Clothing is a sensory-friendly children’s clothing line. “Flat seaming, printed labels, soft fabrics, and seamless features” make their clothing comfortable for children with sensory-processing differences. The line is available through major clothing dealers around the world, and their website can be found here.

Seven Principles of Universal Design (from the Centre for Excellence in Universal Design)

• Equitable Use:

UD should strive to provide identical means of use for all users and not segregate users with more complex needs. For example, forcing a person with mobility issues to use a service elevator directly violates this principle.

• Flexibility in Use:

There should be choice in how a user utilizes a space or product, and adaptability should be inherent in the feature. Something as simple as left or right-handed railings illustrates this principle.

• Simple and Intuitive Use:

The most salient message of this principle is that all features should accommodate a wide range of literacy  and language skills.

• Perceptible Information:

Building on the previous principle, the design should use multiple modes of delivery (symbolic, tactile, auditory) to ensure that all users can understand information.

• Tolerance of Error

The feature should minimise hazards and provide fail-safe features in the event that users incorrectly utilise the design feature.

• Low Physical Effort
• Size and Space for Approach and Use

What about Virtual Universal Design?

Good question, reader! It’s like I’m having a conversation with myself! There has recently been a push to ensure that technology is accessible to a wide range of individuals (with varying degrees of success).

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), published in 2008, currently stand as the most widely used and accepted guidelines for online accessibility. It is broken into four sections:

1. Perceivable: providing alternative formatting and presenting content in multiple ways
2. Operable: providing users to navigate content in the easiest way for them (include keyboard functionality, extended timers, etc)
3. Understandable: making readable content, and producing methods for avoiding and correcting errors
4. Robust: Compatible with current and future technologies, including assistive technologies (screen readers, etc)

FUN FACT: There are several free programs available online to check how well your webpage is adhering to these accessibility guidelines. My personal favourite (yes, I do have a favourite), is the Functional Accessibility Evaluator 1.1 from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

I ran this very blog through it, and here’s what we ended up with:

So…yeah. We’re doing okay. One of the biggest problems cited was that the default language of the page is not specified. Secondly, although it wasn’t picked up here, the alt-text on my images (short statements that describe pictures—these statements appear when you hover over the image or are read aloud by a screen reader) is abysmal. I will correct this as soon as I, as a bit of a luddite, am able to figure out how. Additionally, my styling is evidently pretty poor, which apparently has to do with the way in which I underline and italicise—if anyone knows the more accessible method of styling, please educate me!

One final point I would like to make is about what I will term  content accessibility. This concept has to do with the audience’s ability to interpret the content. According to the Open Society Mental Health Initiative, there is no hard and fast rule for what “easy to read” means [source]. Research shows, however, that the average reading level of the general population (in the US) is 8^th grade, and for those with intellectual disabilities, it is 4^th-5^th grade [source].

So, quickly running some segments of the blog through a Flesch-Kincaid Readability Test, we get…

Between 9^th-12^th grade.

Here’s where I feel I’ve let you down, readers. I knew this fact. I also knew that I was writing at a readability level that was not universally readable. I wasn’t confident in my abilities to convey what I wanted to say at a reading level that was accessible, and I still am not, but I am going to attempt, in the future, to provide more accessible content.

It would be hypocritical not to.

Meanwhile, I am still looking for collaborators who would like to share their thoughts and experiences of disability. If you are interested, have questions, comments, or ideas, please email me at insertdisabilityeuphemismhere@gmail.com. I look forward to hearing from you!

Thank you, as always, for reading.