Universal design for built environment

Literature review
Riddhi Sanghvi (08 SA 129)

Universal design for shopping malls making it a user-friendly public space Everyone needs to be part of social life through the use of public buildings (Build for All Manual, 2006).

Why shopping malls?

Shopping centers are used by a broad range of people, including the young, the elderly and the disabled. They must be designed to be usable by all comers, and universal design (e.g., installing escalators and elevators instead of stairs) is an important part of ensuring shopping centers are user-friendly. In recent years, shopping malls have become increasingly large and complex. This raises the need for design that allows visitors to travel smoothly to their desired shops and facilities and, upon leaving, to find the right exit without becoming disoriented. What is more, shopping centers must offer visitors an enjoyable shopping experience that provides a counterpoint to their daily routine.

1. FOCUS September 2002 Volume 29 Rights of Disabled Persons and Japan The United Nations General Assembly at its 56th session adopted a resolution supporting the drafting of a "convention on the rights of persons with disabilities." The resolution is meant to promote the human rights of disabled persons and their participation in society based on the principles of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. UN action The Plan of Action for the International Year of Disabled Persons, adopted at the UNGA 34th session (1980) declares that Disabled persons should not be considered as a special group with needs different from the rest of the community, but as ordinary citizens with special difficulties in getting their ordinary human needs fulfilled. (Toshio, 2002) 4. Universal Design Designing any product or environment involves the consideration of many factors, including aesthetics, engineering options, environmental issues, safety concerns, and cost. Typically, designers consider the average user. In contrast, "universal design" is the design of products and environments to be usable by everyone, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. When universal design principles are applied, products and environments meet the needs of potential users with a wide variety of characteristics. Disability is just one of many characteristics that an individual might possess.

Universal design can be applied to any product or environment. Making a product or an environment accessible to people with disabilities often benefits others. For example, automatic door openers benefit individuals using walkers and wheelchairs, but also people carrying groceries, babies and young children, and elderly citizens. Universal Design Principles: At the Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State University a group of architects, product designers, engineers, and environmental design researchers established seven principles of universal design to provide guidance in the design of products and environments (Connell, Jones, Mace, Mueller, Mullick, Ostroff, Sanford, Steinfeld, Story, &Vanderheiden, 1997). Following are the principles of universal design, each followed with an example of its application. 1. Equitable Use. The design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities. For example, a website that is designed so that it is accessible to everyone, including people who are blind, employs this principle. 2. Flexibility in Use. The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities. An example is a museum that allows a visitor to choose to read or listen to the description of the contents of a display case. 3. Simple and Intuitive. Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user's experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level. Science lab equipment with control buttons that are clear and intuitive is an example of an application of this principle. 4. Perceptible Information. The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user's sensory abilities. An example of this principle being employed is when television programming projected in noisy restaurants includes captions. 5. Tolerance for Error. The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintended actions. An example of a product applying this principle is a software application that provides guidance when the user makes an inappropriate selection. 6. Low Physical Effort. The design can be used efficiently and comfortably, and with a minimum of fatigue. Doors that open automatically for people with a wide variety of physical characteristics demonstrate the application of this 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. A flexible work area designed for use by employees with a variety of physical characteristics and abilities is an example of applying this principle.

8. Universal Design- its history For the vast majority of our history, the development of our public rights-of-way has overlooked users challenged by various physical conditions. The deaf, blind, handicapped, and others are a class of citizens that for too long were not accounted for by planners, designers, contractors, politicians, or agency officials. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was put into law in order to recognize and protect the civil liberties of people with disabilities.

The ADA was a great first step in raising the quality of life in our communities. The concept of universal design was born out of the ADA, and seeks to further its mission. Universal Design is an approach to the development of products, in this case public buildings, to be as usable and accessible as possible by as many people as possible regardless of age, ability or situation. To be clear, universal design is not the mere adherence to minimum ACCESSIBILITY standards. It is a holistic approach from the beginning planning stages all the way through construction that focuses on creating a facility that will be seamless for all users. (universal design, 2007)

9. What is Universal Design Universal Design is the design and composition of an environment so that it can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible by all people regardless of their age, size, ability or disability. An environment (or any building, product, or service in that environment) should be designed to meet the needs of all people who wish to use it. This is not a special requirement, for the benefit of only a minority of the population. It is a fundamental condition of good design. If an environment is accessible, usable, convenient and a pleasure to use, everyone benefits. By considering the diverse needs and abilities of all throughout the design process, Universal Design creates products, services and environments that meet peoples' needs. Simply put, Universal Design is good design. (what is universal design, 2012)

11. History of UD Social History The 20th Century brought about major social changes with respect to civil and human rights. Medical advances during this period meant that the likelihood of surviving an injury or illness was far greater. People were living longer and the average life expectancy of people with severe impairments was increasing.

Driven in part by factors such as the large number of Second World War soldiers returning home with disabling injuries, the rights and needs of older people and people with disabilities were brought to the forefront. Governments responded with the introduction of equal rights and anti-discrimination legislation. The Evolving Design Industry Disability-specific design As new laws served to promote social inclusion and prevent discrimination, pressure was placed on the design industry to meet the demands of creating accessible and usable products, services and environments. As the social movements of the 20th Century were gathering momentum, the design industry responded with targeted efforts. Concepts such as barrier-free design, which aspired to remove barriers for disabled people from the built environment, appeared The more generalised concept of accessible design emerged in the 1970s and promoted the incorporation of accessible solutions into the general design of products, services and environments. Assistive Technology At the same time that the mainstream design industry was evolving, the parallel field of assistive technology strove to provide more specialised solutions for people with specific requirements. Add-on products, that could make a formerly inaccessible product accessible, were more commonly developed and became more readily available. User-centred design and Human factors Of major influence to the development of Universal Design were design approaches that considered the needs of users from the very beginning of the design process. The concept of making a physical alteration to an object to suit a person's needs dates back to early man when materials such as animal bones were first used to create tools. Fields such as Human Factors, Ergonomics and other functional design approaches look at the physical anatomy and the behaviour of the person and use this information to create designs that fit. These design approaches have been of particular interest for health and safety reasons, for example the layout of controls for the operation of potentially dangerous machinery.

More recently the term user-centred design is used to describe design that identifies and addresses the needs, abilities and limitations of the user. Merging design fields Combining and drawing from developments in all of the above fields, the concept of Universal Design was introduced. References:

Ostroff, 2001 Mendelsohn, 1997 Umbach, 2006 (history of universal design, 2012)

12. Benefits and drivers The case for making our society more universally accessible and usable to all is a compelling one on many fronts. Universal Design proposes a progressive and evolving approach to the development of inclusive environments that can be accessed, understood and used to the greatest extent possible. Not only does Universal Design make good business sense, it also has many compelling social and legal drivers.

Benefits to the individual Benefits to society Business benefits

Legislation and standards Benefits to the individual from Universal Design The human-centred approach to design that Universal Design supports is user-friendly and convenient, but is also respectful of user dignity, rights and privacy. The degree of difficulty that people experience when using a product, service or environment can vary, such as:

A person who has no significant problems but who would appreciate a well-designed accessible and usable product, service or environment;

A person who has little difficulty with all features; A person who has difficulty with some features; A person who has trouble with most features; A person who is unable to use the product at all.

The degree of personal benefit will vary accordingly therefore. If a product, service or environment is well designed, with accessibility and usability in mind, all of the people in the categories above will benefit. The social benefits of Universal Design for a changing world The age-distribution of the world's population is changing dramatically. People are living longer as a result of medical developments in the last century and healthier lifestyle changes. The following key statistics show some the demographic changes expected in the first half of the 21st century:

A child born today has a 50 percent chance of surviving to over 80 years of age. By 2021, it is predicted that 15 percent of the Irish population will be over the age of 65. By 2021, the number of people over 80 years of age will have increased by two-thirds. By 2050 it is estimated that there will only be two 18-64 year olds for every one person over 65 in Ireland, in comparison to six for every one at present.

Within the coming decades in Europe and Ireland, the number of people who are available and capable of assisting and caring for older people will decrease considerably. The number of people living with physical, sensory, mental health or intellectual impairments is increasing, as is the life expectancy of people with particularly severe or multiple impairments. Independent Living Universal Design creates inclusive design solutions and promotes accessibility and usability, allowing people with all levels of ability to live independently. The ability of a person to remain as independent as possible can be influenced by how accessible and usable products, services and environments are. Factors

that promote independent living, such as Universal Design, have a key role to play in dealing with this global phenomenon. Ability as a Continuum Universal design assumes that the range of human ability is ordinary, not special. Elaine Ostroff, 2001 No two people are the same and no two people have exactly the same ability. The considerable variation that exists between people can be influenced by both external and internal factors. Ability can vary according to the type of activity in which a person is participating or the environment in which that person is carrying out the activity. Every person experiences reduced functioning at some stage during his or her lifetime. For example "noisy environments impair anyone's hearing; [a] dimly lit rooms impair anyone's vision; and having the flu reduces anyone's stamina" (Molly Follette Story and James Mueller, 2001) A Universal Design approach therefore requires an appreciation of the varied abilities of every person and to design in such a way that the resulting product, service or environment can be used by everyone regardless of age, size, ability or disability. Participation in society In this technological age, the skills required to participate in society are becoming increasingly complex. As each technological innovation is adopted the risks to people who do not adopt of being excluded from accessing a whole range of financial, state, social or cultural services or amenities increases. Technology is increasingly embedded into the built environment and products so that the lines of what is specifically product, ICT or building design have become blurred. In order the facilitate people with differing abilities, of differing ages and sizes within society, systems and building must be designed with the user at the centre of the design process. A universally designed environment promotes equality and makes life easier and safer for everyone. Business benefits for a changing market The benefits to business of adopting a Universal Design approach vary from increases in potential markets to increased customer satisfaction. For more information on business that have taken advantage of the business benefits of Universal Design read the case studiesprovided. Increased Market Reach

Universal Design aims to provide a design which is accessible to, usable by and appealing to as many people as possible. One implication of this is an increase in the market reach. Not only could a product, service or environment become available to a higher number of potential customers, but also to a wider range of potential customers as well. Enhanced Customer Satisfaction and Retention A satisfied customer will tell other people about the product, service or environment, increasing awareness and potentially creating new custom. Market Crossover Success Products that are aimed at a specific target group can sometimes generate interest and demand from unforeseen markets. The OXO Good Grips range is a well cited case study of how a specialised product design (designed with older people with arthritis in mind) can generate widespread demand. Positive Public Image A business that positively contributes to society by incorporating a Universal Design approach is likely to receive a reputation for having a high level of corporate social responsibility. Increased Consumer Expectations In recent decades, the voice of the general public has become more prominent and more influential. People are more confident to speak up when they have a complaint and information and communication technologies (ICT) have made this increasingly easier to do. Direct pressure from consumer groups as well as direct engagement with their customers have encouraged many companies to evolve their design process and improve their customer services to accommodate a wider range of people. Universal Design enables companies to design products and service and environments that more closely match consumer expectations and needs. Accept at First Use A consumer forms an opinion about a product at first use, or even first sight. A recent study suggested that internet users take less than 50 milliseconds (one twentieth of a second) to judge the visual appeal of a website they have visited. If a first impression is negative, a consumer is not likely to pay for a product. If a product is simple, clear, easy to access and easy to use, a consumer will be more likely to proceed with the transaction.

Compliance with Legislation and Standards Standards and guidelines provide practical guidance on how to comply with legislation. The specifications and minimum requirements provided in standards and guidelines often include accessibility and usability recommendations. So, with regard to the design of a product, service or environment, Universal Design is an approach that not only promotes compliance, but has much wider potential for improving accessibility and usability, beyond the minimum requirements enforced by law. Refs:

Sandhu et al., 2002 Vanderheiden, 2000 WHO, 2001 Ostroff, 2001 Eckberg, 1999 United Nations, 2001 Grundy, 1996 ISME, 2005 Central Statistics Office, 2005 Keates& Clarkson, 2004 National Council on Disability, 2004 Story et al., 1998 MaGee, 2003 Story et al., 1998 Lidwell et al. 2003 Norman, 2004 NCSU, 2007 Anderson, 1980, 1981 Lindgaard et al., 2006

(benefits and drivers, 2012)

13. Case studies and examples (CEUD) Many companies and organisations have adopted a Universal Design (UD) approach to evolve their longterm design process and business model. Since every company is different, the implementation of a UDapproach will vary from organisation to organisation. In each organisation there may be a different set of drivers to support UD, be they business or social benefits or legal requirements. The concepts, resources and methodologies proposed by the Centre on this website are presented therefore not as a roadmap but to facilitate discussion and exploration within organisations. Case studies These 3 well documented case studies illustrate the process of developing a UD approach and the business benefits of aligning products and services with the principles of Universally Design.Further case studies can be found on the North Carolina State University's Centre for Universal Design website. In each of the following case studies a user-centred design process was undertaken to gather user requirements, make these requirements understandable and concrete for the developers and involve users in testing and reviews to ensure these requirements were being met. Existing and new products and services were made more usable and accessible to an audience of users which comprised of a wide range age groups, sizes and abilities and disabilities. In each case, this brought about an increase in revenue. These case studies illustrate a justifiable business case to support UD. Read about the 3 case studies on UD Examples of UD The following examples were some of the winners in the universal design award 08 organised by universal design e.V. in partnership with iF International Forum Design and held in Hanover, Germany. The universal design award 08 was launched as a "communication tool" to promote "discussion and debate on tomorrow's standards" with business, government, the public and the research community. The evaluation criteria for the awards are based on a subset of the principles of Universal Design such as "equitable use", "flexibility in use", "simple and intuitive use" and "tolerance for error". The evaluation criteria also included a range of economic feasibility criteria including "market potential" and "feasibility of implementation".

A number of the winners are shown below to illustrate the many ways in which one of more if the principles of Universal Design can be incorporated into the design of a product. Some of designs show simple, innovative changes that improve the Universal Design appeal of well established products. Other designs exhibit a fundamental redesign of a product's functionality, making it more usable to a wider audience. A full listing of the categories and winners can be viewed on the iF International Forum Designwebsite. Information on universal design award 09 is now available. Read the examples of UD

10 things to know about UD 1: Universal Design strives to improve the original design concept by making it more inclusive It is a misconception that Universal Design results in a 'diluted' product that meets the needs of many people, but only to a limited degree. It does not involve a series of compromises to the detriment of the original design concept. Universal Design promotes as inclusive a design as possible. However, features that enhance access or use by some people, should not hinder or diminish the user experience for others. 2: Universally Designed products can have a high aesthetic value A product that is designed with function only in mind is not guaranteed to be attractive. Universal Design does aim to maximise the accessibility and usability of a product, so functionality is important. But Universal Design is not design based on functionality alone. A designer must also appreciate that the usability of a product can be influenced by its appearance. The aesthetic usability effect suggests that people tend to find designs easier to use if they look easy to use. This is regardless of whether or not they actually are more usable!

3: Universal Design is much more than just a new design trend Universal Design is not a design style or trend. Rather, it is an approach to designing that can be applied to any design style or trend. It is an orientation to any design process that starts with considering the needs of the user. Fashion, style and personal taste can still influence the appearance of an accessible and usable product. 4: Universal Design does not aim to replace the design of products targeted at specific markets Universal Design does not aim to replace products that are currently available on the market. Designs targeted at a specific demographic (for example, designs aimed at teenagers) will not be adversely affected by a Universal Design approach. On the contrary, it could ensure that these products are designed to be as accessible and usable as possible by the target market at which they are aimed. 5: Universal Design is not a synonym for compliance with accessible design standards The term Universal Design has been incorrectly used as a synonym for compliance with standards for accessible design. Equal rights and disability legislation prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. Accessible design standards promote compliance with this legislation, by providing designers with specifications and minimum requirements which must be adhered to. Firstly, Universal Design is not only applicable to the needs of people with disabilities, but to everyone, regardless of age, size, ability or disability. Secondly, Universal Design is not a list of specifications; it is an approach to design that considers the varied abilities of users. 6: Universal Design benefits more people than older people and people with disabilities A common misconception regarding Universal Design is that it benefits only a few members of the population, such as older and disabled people. On the contrary, Universal Design aspires to benefit every member of the population by promoting accessible and usable products, services and environments.

No person operates with full capability for every activity for the duration of his or her lifetime. Accessibility or usability can be affected by, for example, a medical injury or condition (temporary, long-term or permanent), an unfamiliarity with a product or environment, a lack of understanding (e.g. in a foreign country), a physical attribute (e.g. height, size), and so on. A Universal Design approach aims to provide a design that takes into account these physical, behavioural, and other, factors. It appreciates that at some point, during some activity, every person experiences some form of limitation in ability. However, it should be added that a hypothetical person who does not experience a disability (in the widest definition of the word) during his or her lifetime will also benefit, at the very least from the positive user experience of simple and intuitive design. 7: Universal Design can be undertaken by any designer, not just the specialists Universal Design is not necessarily a specialist subject. In truth, it can be applied by any designer. The first step is to adopt a user- or person-centred approach to designing. This requires an awareness and appreciation of the diverse abilities of people. 8: Universal Design should be integrated throughout the design process Universal Design is not an add-on design approach. It cannot effectively or efficiently be applied at the end of the design process. It should be integrated into the design process from the very beginning. 9: Universal Design is not just about 'one size fits all' Universal Design has been mistakenly described as the search for a one-size-fits-all design. Universal Design does encourage designers to consider the wide-ranging abilities of their users. And where possible, an optimal design that caters for as many people as possible should be sought after. But a more universal solution can also incorporate, for example, customisable features that can be adapted from user to user, smart features that learn a user's preferences after multiple uses (most relevant to ICT), and specialised solutions to meet particular needs.

The aim is to provide the same (or equivalent) experiences, activities and services to everyone. It is accepted that these may have to be provided through slightly different routes or interfaces, but designers should strive to create a design that does not exclude or segregate. 10: A Universally Designed product is the goal: Universal Design is the process Universal Design is a process, not an outcome. It is not assumed or expected that a 100% universal solution will be achieved, or is achievable, for any given design. Rather Universal Design should be a goal that a designer strives to achieve. (10 things to know about UD, 2012)

3 case studies on UD Case Study 3: Tesco At a meeting with the UK charity Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) in 2000, supermarket giants Tesco were made aware that their website was not accessible to a considerable portion of the population. With the realisation that their current practice was excluding potential customers, they undertook to improve the accessibility and usability of their site. In 2001, a new easy-access version of Tesco.com was launched, making the online shopping service available to a higher number of customers. In 2002-3, the web-based business made a profit of 12.2 million - more than 30 times that made in the previous year. Following the success of their separate Access site, Tesco then explored ways of integrating the two sites. In 2005, a new service was launched with one set of features through two portals. This has enabled their Access customers to access the full set of features and functionality available on the standard grocery site.

HIGHLY ACCESSIBLE

Having lived in, and loved, a modern house built in 1954 in Seattles Magnolia neighborhood since buying it in 1996, architect Karen Braitmayer and her husband, marine mechanic David Erskine, recently came to realize that the house was overdue for some modifications. Braitmayer, whose firm, Studio Pacifica, specializes in universal access space planning and ADA compliance for commercial and residential projects, is a wheelchair user, as is her and Erskines teenage daughter. With its open layout and single-floor plan, the house worked fairly well for many years, but, as Braitmayer says, It was really my daughter growing up that spurred us to make some changes. Her disability is a little bit different from mine, and some of the things I was able to work around for a long time werent going to work for her. Braitmayer called in another architect, Carol Sundstrom of Seattle-based Rm Architecture Studio, who specializes in single-family remodels and with whom Braitmayer has collaborated on many projects.

The layout of mid-century houses are generally favorable for wheelchair users, says Sundstrom. Even so, she and Braitmayer had to make difficult, but necessary decisions on this house, such as eliminating the dominant, original fireplace to make way for a family room and to better utilize the homes 2,000 square feet, especially those areas that would be accommodating two wheelchairs. The kitchen, once a tight fit for even one person, was completely reworked to cater to any user, and now has four different counter heights, a side-opening oven, smart cabinets and extra room in front of the sink. Still, the general footprint was left intact.

Its interestingmost people put every wheelchair user in the same category, and figure you should just build to ADA specifications, says Sundstrom. But when Karen and I work with wheelchair users, we dont just open the guidelines for universal design and follow the instructionswe measure arm length and reach, and we consider with our clients how long we should anticipate muscle strength, and what must continue to adapt architecturally. In this case, Karen and her daughter have different requirements, and we also needed to think of Davids needs.

For a moment, Braitmayer and Sundstrom considered adding a second floor, but abandoned the idea after concluding that the expense, effort and space required for an elevator and its mechanics would outweigh its benefits, and they ultimately wanted to keep the homes mid-century vibe intact. Sundstrom conceived a plan that borrowed a bit of space from some rooms (such as the master bedroom, which had been larger) and added a bit to others (such as in the mudroom, directly off the garage). Every fracti on of an inch was

considered in this project, she says.

I think I had been a bit blinded by all the years we spent in the home and all the time we worked around things, says Braitmayer. Carol helped us take a fresh look and go forward with the biggest change, which was removing the large fireplacewe sacrificed a bit of the architectural character for usability. The fun part was personalizing our space to make it really accessible, and attempting some things I might not necessarily have been able to try for a client. It was like our own, fun little laboratory.

Read more: http://www.dwell.com/articles/Highly-Accessible.html#ixzz2FKJZuX25

(Heet, 2010)

AN INTRODUCTION TO UNIVERSAL DESIGN Mention universal design and see your companions eyes start glazing over. Though formally flashy chairs and posh penthouses may reside at the sexier end of the design world, universal design actually affects us all. So pay attention and prepare to learn something - your less hale days arent far off; none of ours is. The term universal design is attributed to the architect Ronald Mace, and although its scope has always been broader, its focus has tended to be on the built environment. Those using the term often define it as design for the whole population, with the notion being that a design should work for disabled and

nondisabled people alike. And what idealistic follower of designs evolution would balk at this humanitarian quest? The very term evokes the jet-setting glamour of the late 1950s: a global consultancy with its HQ on Madison Avenue, perhaps, sharing offices with the sharp-suited ad execs from Mad Men, of James Bonds cover job with Universal Exports. Yet at the moment, the subject seems neither all that glamorous nor, well, universal. The classic example of universal design is the curb cut. Initially installed to help wheelchair users navigate from street to sidewalk, these unobtrusive bits of public design turn out to be just as useful for parents with prams and travelers lugging wheeled suitcases. The higher aspiration is full social participation. But as useful as universal design can be, something like a wheelchair ramp sited in an ill-lit side entrance does little to ease the stigma people with disabilities face each day. Certain objects that exemplify universal design have crept into the wider culture. Certainly Braille on elevator buttons or an induction loop at a bank tellers window fit the bill, and one even finds universal design that doesnt wear its Im meant for the disabled badge quite so prominently. The OXO Good Grips potato peeler is easier to use if you have reduced dexterity or weak grip strength, but it is a popular choice for any kitchen. Perhaps the most common approach, a rough principle of universal design, is to make information about an object or a building available through several senses at once. So pedestrian crossings displaying WALK also make noises to help those with visual impairments. Naturally, other people can benefit too - for example, subtitles on the TV intended for the hard of hearing can aid nonnative speakers in learning a language or those trapped in the airport to get their daily dose of news. In the 1970s, much of the political pressure exerted for disability rights came from groups such as the Eastern Paralyzed Veterans Association - often young, otherwise active Americans who found themselves excluded from public life as much by their surroundings as by their wartime injuries. This led to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, which outlaws discrimination based on disability, including inaccessible places, information, and communication. But at the same time, this lineage - and even the wheelchair icon itself - can help to perpetuate the stereotype of people with disabilities as young men in wheelchairs. In the 21st century, demographic changes are altering our perspectives. As lifestyles and modern medicine keep us alive longer, and fewer disabling conditions prove fatal, more and more of us will eventually become disabled. Not the spandex-jacket-and-rocket-pack future the 1950s promised - but culturally, well be healthier, at once grayer and more multicolored, more diverse. It will no longer be possible to marginalize universal design: When more of us have a disability than not, universal design will indeed become universal.

FOR ALL MANKIND The future of universal design is whats in store for us collectively. Heres the heads-up.

VISIBLE TOUCH A lot of universal design feels more like a tacked-on concession to special interest groups than an intrinsic element in the design process. Now lets suppose we flip that around.

GOING OUT OF TUNE Tuning a traditional radio is a simple and incredibly rich interaction. As we turn the dial, we hear snippets of sound as the stations come and go. We navigate by the programs on air, picking up

SENSE AND SENSIBILITY The CD player that Naoto Fukasawa designed for the Japanese manufacturer Muji is as simple as it looks and about as simple as it gets. Its a square box, mounted on the wal

Read more: http://www.dwell.com/articles/an-introduction--to-universaldesign.html#ixzz2FKaqdSux (Pullin, 2010)

Universal Design of Instruction

By Sheryl Burgstahler, Ph.D. (Adapted from the publication Universal Design of Instruction: Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examples ) Students in academic classes come from a wide variety of ethnic and racial backgrounds. For some, English is not their first language. In most classes, there are students with many types of learning styles, including those who are primarily visual or auditory learners. In addition, increasing numbers of students with disabilities are pursuing postsecondary education. Their disabilities include blindness, low vision, hearing impairments, mobility impairments, learning disabilities, health impairments, and psychiatric health impairments. Students want to learn and their instructors share this goal. How can instructors select their curriculum and instructional strategies to maximize the learning of all students? The field of universal design (UD) can provide a framework for instruction. This body of knowledge can guide instructors in creating courses where lectures, discussions, visual aids, videos, printed materials, web resources, labs, and field work are accessible to all students. Universal Design Designing any product or environment involves the consideration of many factors including aesthetics, engineering options, environmental issues, safety concerns, and cost. Often the design is created for the "average" user. In contrast universal design, according to the Center for Universal Design, "is the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design." Universal design is an approach to the design of products and environments, including instruction, that takes into consideration the the variety of abilities, disabilities, racial/ethnic backgrounds, reading abilities, ages, and other characteristics of the student body. Rather than focus on adapting things for an individual at a later time, universally designed learning environments are created to be accessible to everyone from the beginning. When designers apply universal design principles, their products and services meet the needs of potential users with a wide variety of characteristics. Disability is just one of many characteristics that an individual might possess. For example, one person could be five feet four inches tall, female, forty years old, a poor reader, and deaf. All of these characteristics, including her deafness, should be considered when developing a product or service, including instruction, she might use. Making a product or service accessible to people with disabilities often benefits others. For example, sidewalk curb cuts, designed to make sidewalks and streets accessible to those using wheelchairs, are today more often used by kids on skateboards, parents with baby strollers, and delivery staff with rolling carts. When television displays in airports and restaurants were captioned, they would benefit people who cannot hear the audio because of a noisy environment as well as those who are deaf. UDI Principles At the Center for Universal Design at North Carolina State University a group of architects, product designers, engineers, and environmental design researchers established seven principles of universal design to provide guidance in the design of environments and products. Following are the principles of universal design along with an example in academic programs for each. 1. Equitable use. The design is useful and marketable to people with diverse abilities. Example: A professor's website is designed so that it is accessible to everyone, including students who are blind and using speech-to-text software.

2. Flexibility in use. The design accommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities. Example: A museum, visited as a field trip for a course, allows each student to choose to read or listen to a description of the contents of display cases. 3. Simple and intuitive. Use of the design is easy to understand, regardless of the user's experience, knowledge, language skills, or current concentration level. Example: Control buttons on science equipment are labeled with text and symbols that are simple and intuitive to understand. 4. Perceptible information. The design communicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless of ambient conditions or the user's sensory abilities. Example: A video presentation projected in a course includes captions. 5. Tolerance for error. The design minimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintended actions. Example: Educational software provides guidance and background information when the student makes an inappropriate response. 6. Low physical effort. The design can be used efficiently and comfortably, and with a minimum of fatigue. Example: Doors to a lecture hall open automatically for people with a wide variety of physical characteristics. 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. Example: A flexible science lab work area has adequate workspace for students who are left- or right-handed and for those who need to work from a standing or seated position. UDI Guidelines and Examples Universal design principles can be applied to many products and environments. Using the CUD format, UDI can be defined as the design of instruction to be usable by all students, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. When designing classroom instruction or a distance learning class, strive to create a learning environment that allows all students, including a person who happens to have a characteristic that is termed "disability," to access the content of the course and fully participate in class activities. Universal design principles can apply to lectures, classroom discussions, group work, handouts, web-based instruction, fieldwork, and other academic activities. UDI Examples Below are examples of instructional methods that employ principles of universal design. They are organized under eight performance indicator categories, with a goal statement for each. Applying these strategies can make your course content accessible to people with a wide range of abilities and disabilities, ethnic backgrounds, language skills, and learning styles. 1. Class Climate. Adopt practices that reflect high values with respect to both diversity and inclusiveness. Example: Put a statement on your syllabus inviting students to meet with you to discuss disability-related accommodations and other special learning needs. 2. Interaction. Encourage regular and effective interactions between students and the instructor and ensure that communication methods are accessible to all participants. Example: Assign group work for which learners must support each other and that places a high value on different skills and roles. 3. Physical environments and products. Ensure that facilities, activities, materials, and equipment are physically accessible to and usable by all students, and that all potential student characteristics are addressed in safety considerations. Example: Develop safety procedures for all students, including those who are blind, deaf, or wheelchair users. 4. Delivery methods. Use multiple, accessible instructional methods that are accessible to all learners. Example: Use multiple modes to deliver content; when possible allow students to choose

5.

6. 7.

8.

from multiple options for learning; and motivate and engage students-consider lectures, collaborative learning options, hands-on activities, Internet-based communications, education software, field work, and so forth. Information resources and technology. Ensure that course materials, notes, and other information resources are engaging, flexible, and accessible for all students. Example: Choose printed materials and prepare a syllabus early to allow students the option of beginning to read materials and work on assignments before the course begins. Allow adequate time to arrange for alternate formats, such as books in audio format. Feedback. Provide specific feedback on a regular basis. Example: Allow students to turn in parts of large projects for feedback before the final project is due. Assessment. Regularly assess student progress using multiple accessible methods and tools, and adjust instruction accordingly. Example: Assess group and cooperative performance as well as individual achievement. Accommodation. Plan for accommodations for students whose needs are not met by the instructional design. Example: Know campus protocols for getting materials in alternate formats, rescheduling classroom locations, and arranging for other accommodations for students with disabilities.

Consult Equal Access: Universal Design of Instruction for more examples of universal design strategies. Employing universal design principles in instruction does not eliminate the need for specific accommodations for students with disabilities. There will always be the need for some specific accommodations, such as sign language interpreters for students who are deaf. However, applying universal design concepts in course planning will assure full access to the content for most students and minimize the need for specific accommodations. For example, designing web resources in accessible format as they are developed means that no re-development is necessary if a blind student enrolls in the class; planning ahead can be less time-consuming in the long run. Letting all students have access to your class notes and assignments on an accessible website can eliminate the need for providing materials in alternative formats. Check Your Understanding Employing universal design principles to fully include one group of students can generate unanticipated benefits to others. The list below provides some examples of other students who may benefit from UD: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Students for whom English is a second language. Students who are deaf. Students with visual impairments. Students watching the video in a noisy environment. Students who have learning disabilities.

Specific Academic Applications of UDI Employing universal design principles in everything we do makes a user-friendly world for all of us. It creates an accessible environment, minimizing the need to alter it for individuals with special needs. Universal design strategies can be employed when engaging in specific academic activities. Access the following sections of The Faculty Room to learn more about applying universal design to

Large lectures Group discussions Test taking

Fieldwork Science labs Computer labs Computers Webpages Distance learning Art work Writing assignments Travel programs Work-based learning

The Process of Universal Design The principles of universal design can be employed to the development and delivery of any course curricula, classroom activity, or student assessment. To apply universal design, the instructor can take the following steps: 1. Identify the course. Describe the course, its learning objectives, and its overall content. 2. Define the universe. Describe the overall population of the students eligible to enroll in the course and then consider their potential diverse characteristics (e.g., with respect to gender; age; ethnicity and race; naive language; learning style; and abilities to see, hear, manipulate objects, read, and communicate. 3. Involve students. Consider perspectives of students with diverse characteristics in the development of the course. If they are not available directly from students, gain student perspectives through diversity programs such as the campus disability services office. 4. Adopt instructional strategies. Adopt overall learning and teaching philosophies and methods. Integrate these practices with universal design guidelines or strategies for learning or instruction. 5. Apply instructional strategies. Apply universal design strategies in concert with good instructional practices to the overall choice of course teaching methods, curricula, and assessments. Then apply universal design to all lectures, classroom discussions, group work, handouts, web-based content, labs, fieldwork, assessment instruments, and other academic activities and materials to maximize the learning of students with a wide variety of characteristics. 6. Plan for accommodations. Learn campus procedures for addressing accommodation requests (e.g., arranging for sign language interpreters) from specific students for whom the course design does not automatically provide full access. 7. Evaluate. Monitor the effectiveness of instruction through observation and feedback from students with a diverse set of characteristics, assess learning, and modify the course On an ongoing basis, monitor effectiveness of the instruction by gathering feedback from student participation and learning and make modifications based on this feedback. Also include universal design issues in the course evaluation and make course modifications based on this feedback. Getting Started Looking at all of these suggestions may seem overwhelming. The great thing about universal design, however, is that it can be applied incrementally. For example, a department might begin by assigning an existing diversity committee or creating a new task force to explore ways of making the department more welcoming and accessible to everyone. For more details, consult Equal Access: Universal Design of an Academic Department andEqual Access: Universal Design of Computing Departments. Using the UDI Checklist, members of the advisory group council could, as they go through the checklist, cross off checklist items not applicable in their department, note as "done" those that have already been

implemented, and label with a recommended deadline date for those they feel should be addressed by the department. Then, using the online version of the checklist, they could order the items by date and add additional notes as appropriate. Presenting the timeline to the department decision-maker on diversity issues could be the next step. Once approval is secured, assigning staff and, when needed, securing budget funds could move the project along. Review the Applications of Universal Design for further information about universal design applications and processes. Consult the following sections of The Faculty Room to learn about access challenges and solutions for students with specific types of disabilities:

Blindness Hearing impairments Low vision Learning disabilities Mobility impairments Health impairments Psychiatric/mental health impairments

Consult the Faculty Room Knowledge Base for questions & answers, case studies, and promising practices. Reference: The content of this webpage is from the DO-IT publications Universal Design of Instruction: Definition, Principles, Guidelines, and Examplesand Equal Access: Universal Design of Instruction. (DO-IT, 2004)

Disability Studies QuarterlyFall 2008, Volume 28, No.4<www.dsq-sds.org>Copyright 2008 by the Society for Disability Studies Participatory Research On Universal Design And Accessible Space At The University Of ArizonaNicholas A. RattrayUniversity Of ArizonaSarahRaskinUniversity Of ArizonaJacklynCiminoUniversity Of Arizona Abstract The framework of Universal Design (UD) is one approach to improving access on university campuses. This paper reflects on a participatory research project on accessible space at the University of Arizona. Student-researchers from the Disability Resource Center conducted map-based qualitative research with members of the campus community to investigate perceptions of accessibility. Data analysis indicates the importance of hidden and invisible barriers, the attitudinal aspects of accessibility, and adaptive strategies of campus users. The paper contributes to investigation of spatial aspects and the lived experience of universal design in institutional contexts, while offering a model for involving students in applied research. Introduction

The framework of Universal Design (UD) emerged in the 1990s as an approach that encourages social inclusion for the broadest range of users (Story 1998). UD has been applied to accessibility for people with disabilities as a way to invoke a philosophy for "design for all" (Iwarsson and Stahl 2003: 61), and can help move beyond the discourse of individual accommodation toward the promotion of wider structural change. Key aspects of universal design encourage the transformation of multiple "environments" built, social, informational in a manner that benefits all users (Scott et al. 2003). On a campus, users include students, faculty and staff, and one of these environments includes the "instructional environment." In the UD paradigm, accessibility indicates not only the degree to which a location or facility is reachable by someone with an impairment, but also includes other factors, such as the usability of instructional materials, transportation services, learning outcomes, and the attitudes in the social environment. In the Spring and Fall semesters of 2007, the University of Arizona (UA) offered "Special Education, Rehabilitation, and School Psychology 399: Universal Design and Accessible Space" (SERP 399), a unique course that combined theory and methods from disability studies, anthropology, and geography in a research project on the accessibility of the UA campus. The objective of the project was to study how universal design has been implemented on campus, while involving students and staff from the Disability Resource Center (DRC) in conducting participatory research (Kitchin 2001; Park 1993). The DRC partnered with the graduate student instructor (Nicholas), who had received a NASA Space Grant Fellowship1 for the project, to implement the project over a two-year period. The other two authors, Sarah and Jackie, participated in the course as student-researchers. In this paper, written jointly by the instructor and these two students-researchers, we discuss the methodologies and more specific findings of our research as well as include undergraduate student's reflections and experiences with accessibility and disability at the University of Arizona. In this pilot project, disabled and non-disabled students and staff2 affiliated with the UA Disability Resource Center (DRC) set out to study the spatial patterns and social meanings of mobility and accessibility for campus users. The researchers used both low- and high-tech spatial techniques "map interviews" and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to investigate the effectiveness of universal design and the ways the built environment reflects and impacts attitudes about disability. Such mapping techniques are an excellent method for engaging students in disability research and stimulating productive discussions between students, instructors and staff members on the multiple social dynamics of accessibility on campus. In addition, course participants examined how UD can be leveraged to improve outcomes for students with a wide range of learning requirements. One of the central goals in the project was to examine what accessibility means on the UA campus from the perspective of disabled students. As discussed below, several important themes emerged from our research, including the hidden barriers to accessibility, the concept of a continuum of universal design, and the attitudinal, social-behavioral and policy-institutional aspects of universal design strategies. Investigating Accessibility Through Geographic Approaches Since one of the broader goals of the DRC-Space Grant project was to get students with disabilities involved in active research, the instructor designed a series of seminars and guest speakers to prepare the student for subsequent data collection. The structure of the project relied on voluntary participation by students and staff affiliated with the DRC.3 The students, who had both undergraduate and graduate standing, were recruited through DRC outreach efforts, course fliers, and word-of-mouth. Although the

project was run as a simulated course, the students actually signed up for independent study projects. Each of the course participated in several weeks of seminars on participatory research, universal design, disability studies, and qualitative data collection to prepare for the research phase. Building on theoretical discussions on universal design, as well as geospatial and qualitative data techniques, our goal was to analyze the social and spatial dimensions of the experience of disability and accessibility. Students engaged in participatory research with members of the UA campus community by conducting "map interviews." Using poster-sized aerial maps of campus, students interviewed a total of thirty people about their experiences with accessibility on the UA campus. Each student-researcher interviewed at minimum of three people, with a 2:1 ratio of community members who identified as having a disability, such as mobility/motor, sensory (e.g. sight or hearing), learning, and emotional/psychological, and community members who did not identify as having a disability.4 Informants were recruited through convenience sampling. In each interview, the informant used different colored markers to indicate how they negotiate the campus, drawing directly on poster-sized maps (see Figure 1 for a sample). Blue marks indicated typical routes used for daily travel. Red marks represented areas, locations, or regions where barriers exist these may be physical (e.g. potholes), social (restricted access), or attitudinal (due to negative perceptions or feelings). Green marks signified locations that represent positive areas; these could result from the presence of friendly people, accessible building design, or useful resources. Also covered in the interview were questions about past experiences, perceptions and social attitudes about disability, and expectations for the future with regard to accessibility. The use of mapping techniques proved useful for several reasons. For one, thinking about the geography of accessibility made an excellent teaching tool that involves building new skills. Students gained an appreciation for taking a more systemic view of the interconnectedness of paths, building, and social relations on campus, while also improving their map literacy. Second, the tangible nature of using colored markers to draw on paper maps helps expose underlying cognitive maps from interviewees. Thus it serves as a methodological tool for ethnographic interviewing. Third, GIS and spatial analysis lend methods for visualization and pattern identification. Visualizing data in digital and low-tech maps helps communicate findings to different audiences Figure 1: Sample Instrument from a Map Interview

Figure 2: Map indicating areas of positive (green) and negative (red) perceptions with respect to accessibility Student researchers used an iterative approach to data collection and analysis. Once they had collected enough interviews to identify areas for focus and improvement, they discussed emerging themes and methodological refinements. In addition, guest speakers were bought in to assist with framing policy issues on campus and conducting data analysis. Of the many findings that emerged from the data, they chose to emphasize key findings that met one of three criteria: 1) themes that were raised routinely by interviewees, in response to interview questions; 2) emblematic data that related to in-class discussions and course readings to demonstrate the diversity and challenge of design; and 3) consistently identified

challenges on campus for which solutions were within easy reach. This last group of findings was deemed important by the majority of student-researchers who felt that research should accompanied with practical recommendations. After analyzing the data that was collected, the student researchers presented their results in a public forum format to campus officials, the DRC staff, and members of the Tucson disability community. For more information or for their report, please visithttp://www.cultureplacehealth.org/spacegrant/, where you can also view additional images of campus and analytical GIS maps (see also, Rattray 2007).

Hidden Barriers, A Continuum Of Universal Design, And The Attiudinal Aspects Of Accessibility Finding I: Just as disabilities can be both visible and hidden, so are some barriers to accessibility The curricular aspects of UD were brought out by one student-researcher: "Many principles of universal design and forms of assistive technology have been implemented into our campus. Teachers use equitable use principle, the perceptible information principle, and the size and space principle in the classrooms. For example, they provide notes that can be accessed online by everyone and they create optimal learning environment for small spaces. This is helpful for students who have attention deficit disorder. I am a fourth-year DRC student and I feel I would not be where I am without it." (Student A, undergraduate, SERP 399 reflective essay, Fall 2007) One theme that emerged from interviews is the high variability with which different users on the UA campus perceive and experience built and social factors. What is identified as "accessible" or "universally designed" is highly dependent on the user. A feature of the built or social environment that functions as a barrier to a person with one kind of impairment may not be readily apparent to someone without a disability or with a different type of impairment. Accordingly, we found a prevalence of hidden or invisible barriers on the UA campus, wherein "hiddenness" or "invisibility" is variable and userdependent. For example, different types of streetscapes offer varying challenges to campus users. Some designs meant to make streetscapes more accessible for all actually create new barriers for some. Whereas curbs, benches, planters, and lights can limit the accessibility of people with mobility disabilities, "curbcuts" or lowered parts of sidewalks that enable wheelchair users to ascend and descend can lead to navigational challenges for people who use assistive technology like canes. The limited number of accessible ramps around campus leads to congestion and an increase in the likelihood of collisions during crowded periods, thus offering no more accessible a route than the crowded and bike-and-skateboardladen paths that most respondents cited as challenging and scary to navigate, regardless of whether or not they identified as having a disability. Such insights about the hidden barriers apply to the experience inside the classroom as well. The increase in faculty use of flexible modes of curriculum delivery has improved the ability of DRC students to feel comfortable and capable in their courses. Although the use of such strategies is far from useful, according

to many students it is far better than their experiences in other educational institutions and has been improving over time. As the student author of Sidebar I explains, a key facilitator to accessibility is the use of highly variable strategies. The visibility of barriers depended greatly on the perspective of the informant, with many people identifying dissimilar barriers. In describing their observations of design for people with disabilities, informants who identified as non-disabled focused almost exclusively on wheelchair users. The strong presence of streetscape accommodations for people with mobility disabilities on the UA campus contributes to the perception among the campus-wide community that wheelchair users are the only or the primary group of people with disabilities on the UA campus, an assertion that is unsupported by campus demographics (mobility impairments make up only 7% of UA's disability community). Such impressions narrow the discourse around design and accommodations by underemphasizing the requirements of campus users with other types of impairments. Whereas the public nature of streetscape features makes them highly visible in their status as barriers to or facilitators of accessibility, other design features remain relatively unknown by the public. For example, one interviewee who uses an electric wheelchair with a joystick described the impossibility of using many restrooms on campus, due to the physical limits of stalls even so-called accessible stalls that prevent him from closing the door. His experience highlights the problem of unequal access to bathrooms, a widespread issue that related to one of our course readings on the ableist design of sanitation facilities (Kitchin and Law 2001). Barriers that are relatively invisible to the majority of campus users include those that affect people with auditory, visual, or psychosocial disabilities. Like people with mobility disabilities, these community members tend to navigate campus through fairly predictable patterns to avoid barriers and follow preferred routes, although these may not always be the routes proposed by the university as "accessible." Individuals with anxiety-disorders, for example, alter their navigation through campus to avoid certain crowded or loud areas. The fact that the campus is not on a city grid means that visual and audio systems indicating safe periods for crossing paths or streets usually do not exist. The lack of these cues can lead to navigational challenges, even in terms of establishing preferred routes. For example, one respondent described the DRC a spot that is widely lauded for its superior built and social environments as hard to navigate because its wide array of access points equipped with automatic doors proves confusing for her service dog. Another space celebrated for its beautiful, creative, and "inclusive" architecture, the new Poetry Center, which is crafted primarily from glass, was cited by one interviewee with a visual impairment as "the worst." He maintained that, "the glare in the auditorium is so bad that normal people have refused to attend classes." In this case, not only does a subset of the campus population with vision impairments experience the design of the building as profoundly disruptive, but according to this campus user so do community members whose vision is intact. This example demonstrates the ways in which design intended to invoke a socially democratic ethos of accessibility for all can simultaneously create barriers to accessibility for some or even most. Finding II:

Universal design occurs on a continuum, along which both disabled and able-bodied people utilize dynamic and novel strategies Another student-researcher involved in the study described the ways in which everyone, regardless of disability status, has to adapt when they change living environments, and the ways in which this shared experience might have implications for future design: "As a physically disabled student who moved from the sunny shores of southern California to the sandy streets of Tucson I had to change a few things to make this city more accessible. The buses are most always late and hot, it takes even longer to load a person in a wheelchair, and only about half the buses in this city are capable of lowering to make access easier. Because UA is older and many parts of it are considered historic, there are many areas and buildings that are not accessible or accommodating. But, the newer parts of the college are amazing. As a student of the DRC, I have never felt as though I was inconveniencing anyone with my disability, requests, or need for accommodations. Rather than having one office for everything and taking days to find help, there are many. Whether you get around by wheels, legs, or some other form of mobility, there are a lot of obstacles in your way on a day to day basis. The world is changing to accommodate the people that live in it. This is a good thing and it is people that sit in this class with me today who are making that change possible and hopefully speeding it up." (Student B, undergraduate, SERP 399 reflective essay, Fall 2007) Many respondents, whether or not they identified as having an impairment, said that they regularly had to change strategies to adapt to the UA campus. Although some respondents framed their dynamic relationship with campus in a negative light, most people described their strategies in a value-neutral way or at least in such a way that recognized that no environment is perfect. Informants discussed the way in which emergent human-environment interactions could be considered positive as well, for example as evidence of the ingenuity of members of the UA community. One central theme in adaptive strategies deals with natural factors such as weather and time of day on the UA campus. For example, to accommodate areas of campus that are poorly lit at night some respondents walk or bike different routes or drive instead of walking or biking, an important consideration given the high number of respondents who live within walking distance and believe that the campus does not have enough parking, but choose to drive at certain times of day (or night) anyway. They do so for a variety of reasons, including the fear of tripping on curbs that are less visible in the dark, as well as personal safety concerns. Similarly, some respondents change their path during times when population size swells on specific parts of campus, for example near athletic arenas during games or on the main mall area during popular class times when many people are rushing from one side of campus to another. Many respondents also change their routes during periods of heavy rain when some areas of water diversion become backed up, forming treacherous pools and splash zones of water run-off. Both of these examples demonstrate the way that respondents adapt strategically to fixed design elements (street lights, gutters/curb cuts), which take on different meanings (positive, neutral, or negative) during periods of dynamic change, some of which are unforeseeable (e.g. monsoon rain that moves in unexpectedly and quickly). Another dynamic factor that respondents cite as complicating their ability to adjust to these natural factors is that everyone else on

campus must adjust to them as well. Certain pedestrian routes where rainfall is handled more effectively become more crowded when people avoid other routes that, while more direct, are saturated with water. A second dynamic factor deals with growth and expansion. Many respondents said that the increasing campus population makes navigating campus more difficult due to overcrowding and ongoing construction, forcing them to change their routes routinely. Growth and expansion may be one reason why certain areas of campus are highlighted as both positive and negative. For example, that the campus mall area is wide and has remained unchanged for the duration of time that most respondents have been on campus makes it attractive as a thoroughfare for pedestrians because it is a known route that remains comparatively uncrowded. However, its slick surfaces and minimal north-south crossway space for wheelchairs make it a less preferred route. Some respondents remained hopeful that new construction offers new and increased possibilities to include UD concepts, and that a larger UA population, overall, would mean a larger population of people who could demand more design accommodations. Interpersonal relations are a third major way that people think about adapting to the campus environment. Respondents were overwhelmingly positive in their reports of how they made UA "work for them," with regard to those UD elements that were more dependent on social interaction. Multiple respondents cited the attentiveness and high quality of the DRC, a related campus unit known as the Strategic Alternative Learning Techniques, the shuttle cart services, other support services, and the UA population in general, in response to their requests. Even during interviews, the courteousness of the UA community was demonstrated: one interviewer had the experience of observing another member of the UA community finish her lunch quickly and leave the only table in the interview area that had a big enough space to accommodate the interviewee's electric wheelchair, when the community member saw the interviewer and interviewee approach the area. Such anecdotal evidence was consistently identified by informants. In addition to being a source of positive, negative, or neutral experiences, human interactions in which respondents had to employ strategic adaptations provided a source of reflection and humor. Collaborators in SERP 399 experienced this during one class field excursion to the student union, when a UA community member wasn't quite sure what to make of it when one member of the class who uses a wheelchair held open a door, politely, and gestured for the class and her to enter it. For this nondisabled person, it was unconceivable to enter through a door held open by someone in a wheelchair since it appeared to violate a cultural norm about assistance. Whereas this "reversal" (through the eyes of the UA community member) garnered much discussion about the limits and potentials of dynamic roles among people both with impairments and without, another story from one respondent speaks to the ways in which some people utilize or assume roles as resources. This respondent, whose vision is degenerating, found that wearing sunglasses within spaces that had been previously hostile to his bringing his companion dog prescribed by a doctor for a condition unrelated to his sight and not a certified service animal allows him this accommodation on which he was previously challenged. He commented: "Nobody wants to come up to a disabled person and say, 'Are you really blind?'" Just as he deploys strategic techniques to make UA work for him, this informant "works for" the UA community in return. He will adjust the stance and distance of his companion dog when in the presence of someone who is allergic to dogs. Another service dog user simply avoids marching band practice areas so as to prevent her dog from becoming distracted. For these community members, as for most, dynamic adaptation is an ongoing experience of give-and-take.

Finding III: Some of the most important and achievable strategies in Universal Design require the fewest material resources. They are attitudinal, social-behavioral, and policy-institutional Just as interpersonal relations are a major way that people think about adapting to the campus environment, so are attitudinal, social-behavioral, and institutional factors considered critical sites of opportunity for interviewees, who recognize that the limits of material resources make some redesign or new design opportunities impracticable. Many interviewees and student-researchers discussed with mixed feelings their awareness of the low financial burden and therefore, relative ease of some facets of Universal Design that have not yet been implemented on campus. Such examples range from faculty adhering to campus policy of providing online notes to consistent drop-off points for the shuttle services (an invaluable aid for people with visual impairments).On the one hand, these strategies represent potential change for the future that should be easily realizable. On the other hand, that these changes have not yet been made despite long histories of advocacy is particularly frustrating. Most respondents who noted these strategies highlighted the ways in which structural factors, such as policy-institutional factors, influenced individual factors, such as attitudinal or social-behavioral factors. For example, similar to the way that respondents' ability to interact dynamically with their environment are limited by certain static factors such as streetlight placement and rainwater management, respondents' social relationships are similarly affected by structural factors. Some respondents noted that the urgency created by poor class scheduling, in which too many people must navigate long distances between classes in too little time between classes, can increase social challenges faced by both people with impairments and without: People who might otherwise by polite and available to help (e.g. holding open a heavy door, helping to pick up items dropped) have to sacrifice such community participation to rush to make another class in time. Respondents discussed this experience from both sides as the potential "helper" and "helpee" and recommended that more time be scheduled between classes. In another example, a few interviewees noticed the prevalence of power doors for which the opener is not turned on. In this case, administrative commitment to simply ensuring that an existing technology functions routinely can make the difference between accessibility and inaccessibility. One strategy that received a lot of positive feedback from campus administration when we presented the results of this study is a simple change to the cart services used by people with both long-term and shortterm impairments: routinization of pick-up and drop-off points. This change can serve a wide variety of cart service users who depend on navigating consistent routes, whether campus users with visual impairments who prefer curbs to curb-cuts, users with anxiety disorders who prefer less crowded areas, users who use technologies such as crutches or wheelchairs and prefer to be dropped off at a ground-level entry instead of a stair-step entry, and more. Another strategy to which university administration seemed receptive is the development of a format for public discussion of issues in accessibility and design on the UA campus. Students from SERP 399 recommended creating a blog or another online format that would have minimal monitoring of content (to keep discussions limited to the goals of the site) and that administration would be responsible for reading and considering as future design issues arose.

A third student-researcher described the development of his own consciousness and social behaviors through his participation in SERP 399: "Wandering around campus has made me think about how accessible my own hometown is. Like UA, my town puts pride in its school accommodation programs for people ranging from those with dyslexia to troubled teens. But my hometown's high school, which prides itself on welcoming all, is rather unwelcoming. For example, the brand-new building has several entrances but only the main one is accessible for people with a variety of disabilities, such as a mobility disability or low visual fields. Both the UA and my hometown have social situations that are accepting and understanding. All groups of people mix and become friends. Acceptance of all social classes is incredible, but access is also incredibly important when trying to make people feel welcome. UA tries to welcome all through things like campus health and the DRC. My hometown is working, too, on things that have easy access for all, such as our library and other new buildings. Both places know that in our ever-growing world all people need to be accepted and brought into the community." (Student C, undergraduate, SERP 399 reflective essay, Fall 2007) Advocating for policy-institutional change that requires a low financial commitment has not been a successful strategy for making the campus more accessible, however, which is a point of significant frustration for some interviewees and student-researchers. Almost every person involved in this study who has a mobility disability had at least one story of feeling "trapped" both literally and metaphorically by policies that limited their abilities during times of emergency. All of these stories had to do with risk management policies and procedures for elevator management. One student described his inability to exit a dormitory during a fire drill because staff would not allow his friends to carry him in his chair down a stairwell, despite his advocacy for this technique and assertion of their willingness to practice it. Another interviewee an alum who still participates in the UA community, who uses a wheelchair, and who has experience in first response as a military veteran and paramedic articulated his frustration with the handling of the university's approach to fixing broken elevators, which he described as prioritizing technology over people. Dissatisfied with what he experiences as the administration's unwillingness to change its policy, he has continued to write letters to a number of administrators including the university President, despite receiving responses that he felt were marginalizing, patronizing, and unsupportive of people with disabilities. However, these instances of policy-institutional adversity have provided important opportunities for demonstrating solidarity and resistance. One interviewee, who has a mobility disability, described the UA community's strong allegiance to equitable access through examples of professors who have cancelled classes spontaneously when accessibility technologies such as elevators break, or in displays of outrage over the inequity fostered by insufficient design and poor administrative responses to technological breakdowns. This undergraduate student was "impressed" and felt "like a very important community member" when these professors lodged such spontaneous protest, which they continued by expressing their dismay to university administration. Another interviewee, a graduate student who almost missed his oral comprehensive examinations due to being stuck in a broken elevator, spoke of the positive social support of his department's staff and faculty, and the university's engineers and technicians, for example, when having to fix the elevator after-business hours or on weekends. Such comments demonstrate the ways in which people support one another despite policies that might otherwise prevent them from doing so.

Taking A Realistic, Collaborative Approach To Achieving Universal Design By way of conclusion, we include the personal reflections of student-researcher Jackie Cimino on her experience in this undergraduate participatory research project: My participation in the SERP project as an undergraduate was enlightening. The diverse group of students, faculty members, and interested administrators, some of whom identified as having a disability, allowed for some very interesting research and discussion regarding accessibility. The informants included individuals with mobility impairments, learning disabilities, as well as visual impairments. The readings prepared the group to be active participants in research, and the activities gave way to discussions about accessibility on the UA campus. The project gave students and faculty the chance to learn first-hand about universal design on campus and then present the findings in a final presentation. The final presentation revealed the findings about different types of barriers, both physical and attitudinal, that exist at UA; it also gave recommendations for ways to alleviate or fix the barriers that the group found. Interviewing subjects about their experience on the UA campus made me, along with the rest of the group, very aware of how true the statement, "no space is perfect," really is. Everyone came into the class with their own personal experiences from campus and was then made aware of how other people's experiences differed and the reasons behind those differences. The class became cognizant of different types of disabilities, hidden as well as visible, and the technologies, strategies, and accommodations that are present at UA. After we conducted interviews, analyzed data from interviews and discussed our findings, the attitudinal aspect of accessibility resonated with me the most. This seemed to be the theme for the class: attitude. The barriers that people had the most issue with centered on the attitudinal part that went along with a particular physical barrier. In most cases, when our class was shown evidence of a barrier and then given more evidence about the same barrier causing a negative social experience for an individual, the reaction was almost always negative. On the other hand, identifying barriers that were able to be fixed and were accompanied by a positive approach from the University made us feel satisfied. This project says a lot about the University of Arizona's care for their entire community. The Disability Resource Center has done a great job making accommodations easy for a diverse community of students and faculty. Arizona has put in the effort and care to make moving about the campus an enjoyable experience and that knowledge alone makes moving about the campus a more positive experience. The participatory approach taken in the project offered student-researchers the opportunity to confront the challenges of conducting research, while also contributing their own perspective. As students with disabilities, they had the opportunity research issues that hold meaning in their own experience on campus. Courses like these offer students (and staff in this case) the opportunity to learn new skills in and outside of the classroom setting. Bios

Nicholas A. Rattray is a doctoral candidate at the University of Arizona. His dissertation in cultural anthropology examines disability and spatial exclusion in Cuenca, Ecuador. Sarah Raskin is a doctoral student in Medical Anthropology at the University of Arizona. Her dissertation research is on community responses to healthcare decline in central Appalachia. Jaclyn Cimino is a senior at University of Arizona studying psychology, and plays for the wheelchair tennis team, where she was the 2008 National Collegiate Women's Champion. Works Cited

Iwarsson, S., and A. Stahl (2003). Accessibility, usability and universal design Positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disability & rehabilitation 25, 2, 5766. Kitchin, R. (2001). Using participatory action research approaches in geographical studies of disability: Some reflections. Disability studies quarterly 21, 4, 61-69. Kitchin, R. and R. Law (2001). The socio-spatial construction of (in)accessible public toilets. Urban studies 38,2, 287-98. Park, P. (1993). What is participatory research? A theoretical and methodological perspective. In Park, M. Brydon, B. Hall, and T. Jackson (Eds.), Voices of change: Participatory research in the United States and Canada. (pp. 1-20). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. Rattray, N (2007). Evaluating universal design: Low and high-tech methods for mapping accessible space. Practicing anthropology 29,4, 24-28. Scott, S.S., J.M. McGuire, and S.F. Shaw (2003). Universal design for instruction: A new paradigm for adult instruction in postsecondary education. Remedial and special education 24, 6, 369-79. Story, M.F. (1998). Maximizing usability: The principles of universal design. Assistive technology 10, 1,4-12. Endnotes

1.

The Space Grant program is sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and awards fellowships to graduate students at land-grant universities for science and technologybased project that benefit the wider community or underserved groups (see http://spacegrant.arizona.edu). Return to Text

2.

For the purposes of the paper, the students and staff that did the data collection will be referred to as researchers or student-researchers, and the interviewees will be referred to as informants. In some cases, student-researchers were involved in data collection and as informants. Disability

status was self-identified by students, staff, and informants. Return to Text

3.

This research is based on the valuable contributions of the participants of the Universal Design and Accessible Space project. The Spring 2007 group included Kyle Mutz, Jackie Cimino, Aaron Foster, Meghan Sooy, Jean Dill, Zack Fogle, Jean Paul Jorquera, Paul Brooks, and Bryan Barten. The Fall 2007 group included: Bunny Sumner, Jackie Cimino, Jordan Glovsky, Ryan Buchholtz, Hunter Fattaleh, Chris Woods, Alberto Guzman, Sarah Raskin, and DaraSherafat. Sarah Raskin and Jackie Cimino contributed extensively to the composition of this report. In addition, we thank Sue Kroeger and the Disability Resource Center, Barron Orr and Susan Brew from the UA NASA Space Grant program, the Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology, the UA Department of Anthropology and the Center for Applied Spatial Analysis for their support. Special thanks are due to the Carioso Foundation of Tucson for providing extra funding to support interns in the Fall 2007 semester, Kyle Mutz and Jackie Cimino. More information is available athttp://www.cultureplacehealth.org/spacegrant. Return to Text Permission for qualitative collection was obtained through the University of Arizona Institutional Review Board. (Nicholas A. Rattray, fall 2008)

4.

Whither universal design? V S SUNDER, TNN Jun 30, 2012, 05.46AM IST Two words I have been hearing a lot of late have been 'universal design' , which encompasses other phrases such as 'accessibility ' and 'barrier-free environments' , which I have been concerned with especially after I started having to use a wheelchair for most activities needing my moving around a bit. The fact that my extended family includes a large number of architects had ensured that I had heard of the 'National Institute of Design' at Ahmedabad as being the Mecca for design of various sorts. Also contributing to this knowledge was the fact that a close family friend for several decades had been the late Dashrath Patel, the first director of design education at NID. A few weeks ago, I heard about a fellow wheelchair-user who had applied for and been selected for the Graphic Design course 'under PH category'. Although the institute recognized the existence of such a 'PH category', its designers do not seem to have done so. Going by the description one finds in the blog vishalsaw .blogspot.in maintained by Vishal, our would-be designer on a wheel-chair, most of the classrooms as well as the rooms in the boys' hostel are on the 1st, 2nd or 3rd floors; and the main buildings have no elevators. To be fair to our designers, they apparently do have some ramps on the ground floor, but they seem to have decided that nobody in a wheel-chair would need to go any higher!

Before dashing off a 'fire-and-brimstone' article to ToI, I thought I should discreetly check with Vishal about his subsequent experiences with NID, and learnt of the refreshingly encouraging reception Vishal seems to have been receiving from the administration; they have already built some ramps in the hostel and campus areas; they have commenced building a room in the hostel for people like Vishal; they have identified a place where a new elevator will be built. It is only fitting that NID should lead by example for others to follow. Not everybody is as lucky as Vishal. In fact, not long before I first heard about Vishal and NID, I had also heard about a visually impaired person studying Computer Science in an Engineering College affiliated to Anna University, Chennai, being told by the University officials that technical professional courses like engineering are not for visually challenged people and asked to go out of the college without spoiling the results of the college. I would be very surprised if his college in Erode was anywhere near as sympathetic as NID. Let me conclude with this amusing tidbit, that people like Vishal need to pull their weight to make a reality before long: (I hear he has already started in the right direction and is preparing to start an NGO called 'Give some space'!) The Guidelines and Space Standards for Barrier Free Built Environment for Disabled and Elderly People prepared by the Central Public Works Department, Ministry of Urban Affairs and Employment, India, 1998, says, among other things, that: The scope and responsibilities which have been identified in various organizations will include the following: ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS 1. There should be a conscious attempt of all educationists to develop young architects/planners with an awareness of creating barrier free environment for physically handicapped. 2. A detail design exercise should be carried out in all schools of architecture in their curricula as an essential subject of architecture education. (Note: I have taken the liberty to edit the italicised lines above, merely to conform to the King's English.) VS Sunder is a professor of mathematics who incidentally works out of a wheel-chair at the Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai. (You can read more about about this column in his blog http:// differentstrokesvss .blogspot.in/.) He wishes to use this space to sensitize people periodically (roughly two Saturdays a month) to the concerns of the differently-abled members of our society (Sunder, 2012)

Universal Design Means Accessibility for One and All

By Rachael Zimmermann - November 2006 - ADA

Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations has been a reality for facility executives for more than 15 years. ADA regulations define accessibility largely in terms of numbers and specific measurements, and because of this, facility executives can sometimes lose sight of the intent of the law. There is an alternative way of thinking about accessibility, however. Universal design is an inclusive philosophy that says all spaces should be inherently accessible for all users. Rather than focusing on users with specific disabilities, universal design creates solutions that will work for everyone, regardless of age, mobility, visual, auditory or mental ability. The range of human capability throughout the life span is the driving force of universal design philosophy. As many universal design experts like to say, universal design is cradle to grave design; in other words, design that addresses the needs of every stage of human life. While ADA guidelines focus on modifying the built environment to be accessible for people with disabilities, universal design holds that the entire range of human capability should be at the heart of the design process. The traditional design process assumes that designers will be designing for people just like themselves, says Valerie Fletcher, executive director of Adaptive Environments. Universal design requires thinking about all users. Universal design is a holistic concept that can be applied to everything from dishes to computer software to electronics, but it is especially applicable to buildings and public spaces. Because these spaces get a huge amount of use by a vastly diverse population, a design that is accessible and usable for everyone is crucial. Beyond the Requirements Universal design requires thinking broadly about usability rather than focusing exclusively on the requirements of ADA. Why go beyond the requirements? One reason is to eliminate the stigmatizing effect inadvertently produced by, for example, a separate wheelchair-accessible entrance. While this entrance may comply with ADA guidelines, if it is located at the far end of the building or is difficult to find, anyone who has to use the entrance may feel as if they are being treated differently. A universal design alternative would be wide, automatic sliding doors that accommodate all users and allow groups including people using wheelchairs, with strollers, or walkers to enter together. Another alternative would be a building entrance that incorporates a gently sloping ramp into a set of stairs, with flat surfaces and benches at different intervals for people who need to rest, says Leslie Young, director of design at the Center for Universal Design. Its a question of how welcoming you want your facility to be, says Young. How do you want people to feel? Experts in the field of universal design emphasize that facility executives first concern must be compliance with ADA guidelines, because ADA is in fact a civil rights law. But where ADA guidelines are prescriptive, universal design is a more holistic way of thinking about accessibility. By thinking about what users needs will be in different situations, a facility or design element is better able to serve a wide range of people. And this type of philosophy is certainly congruent with the goals of

ADA, because design that is easier for someone with a disability might also be easier for everybody. Curb ramps are a good example of universal design because they are effective not only for wheelchairs, but also for mothers with strollers and people on skateboards and bicycles, says Edward Steinfeld, director of the Center for Inclusive Design and Environmental Access at the State University of New York at Buffalo, and one of the original authors of the principles of universal design. (See box below.) Family restrooms are also a good example of universal design. Family restrooms address the needs of all ages and all sexes, Steinfeld says. They address the needs of parents with children who need assistance, and also adults who assist older adults. The extra space and uni-sex nature of a family restroom also addresses the needs of an individual with a disability who requires assistance. It All Adds Up Universal design also makes business sense. According to the Census Bureau, there are 54 million Americans with disabilities, with $175 billion in discretionary spending ability. According to Joan Stein, president, Accessibility Development Associates, that amounts to twice the spending power of teens, and 17 times the spending power of 8-12 year olds. The biggest mistake facility executives make is not marketing to people with disabilities, she says. Build it, then market it. The baby boom population, a group now more likely to have or develop mobility, visual or auditory disabilities, is a demographic that can also be well served by universal design. According to the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP), 4 million people turn 50 each year, and in 2003 these individuals had $400 billion in disposable income. With people living longer and better, the number of individuals over the age of 65 who want to remain active and independent is only going to grow. In a study called The New Retirement Survey, conducted by Harris Interactive for Merrill Lynch, 76 percent of baby boomers reported that they want to continue to work and earn money into retirement, and that, after the conventional retirement age of 65, they plan to launch into a totally new job or career. The study also reported that a new model for retirement is emerging, one that involves cycles of work and leisure. That translates into a larger percentage of the population that may have mobility, visual or auditory disabilities, but still intends to remain active. Fletcher agrees, saying that it is more and more common to have a wide age range in office population. Universal design is all about user-centered design, she says. And users are getting more and more diverse. An Eye on the Future Not only is universal design the right thing to do for the 21st century, it also represents the general trend of what consumers will expect, according to John Salmen, president, Universal Design Consultants. Smart commercial executives would be leaders in universal design because that is the way things are going, he says. People expect things to be accessible. Salmen cites the Target Corporation as a company that has embraced the concept of universal design. The company has devoted a section on its corporate Web site to promoting its design for all concept. Wider aisles in Target stores accommodate not only Target patrons in wheel chairs, but also shopping carts, strollers, young children with toys running up and down the aisles, and people with a walking stick or seeing eye dog, while also allowing other patrons to share this space. Stores are laid out in a practical, intuitive way, making related products and departments easy to find.

Of course, universal design goes beyond facilities. In the pharmacy department, for example, Target has re-designed pill bottles so dosage instructions are printed in large type, and the name of the drug is on the top of the bottle for easy identification in a drawer. Personalized colored rings mitigate the risk of mix-up in households with people taking different prescriptions. Salmen also says the open nature of universal design is an advantage, and views it as a horizon concept, meaning that it is ever-evolving based on the needs of the market. You get better and better design out of designers because its a moving target, he says. Because its not a strict code, and there are no regulations, the design question is, what does the market want? A Different Way of Thinking Although they may not realize it, facility executives are a prime resource for good universal design practices, says Fletcher. Facility executives have an appreciation of the users needs, she says. They have to deal with the users long term, so they often know before anyone else what will work and what wont work. Incorporation of universal design principles does not necessarily mean a major renovation project, but rather, a more inclusive way of thinking about users when making even minor updates or repairs. Consider something as simple as replacing a paper towel dispenser, says Salmen. Before making changes or decisions, ask yourself questions about whether this meets the principles of universal design. Steinfeld agrees. Universal design updates can be done incrementally do it within your means. You dont need to do it all at once, he says. Its a philosophy of practice, not a set of rules. Experts say adopting the mentality of universal design can also be a competitive marketing advantage. The green building movement and the LEED rating system have become a way for facility executives to show they are environmentally conscious, and universal design can provide the same type of opportunity. Compliance has to be the bottom line for facility executives, Salmen says, but universal design, like green design, is the right thing to do. Facility executives should be concerned about universal design because accessibility is becoming the expectation, not just the law. Fletcher agrees, and sees much in common between the two movements. LEED and universal design really have the same goals, she says, human health and well-being. (Zimmermann, 2006)

SarveBhavantiSukhinah/ SarvesantuNiramayah SarveBhadraniPashyanti, Ma KashchidDukhBhagBhaveta Letevery one without distinction be happy. Let every one be without any ailment. Let every one look like Arya, noble and righteous. Let there be no one to have any share of sorrow or grief. A Sanskrit shloka from a traditional Indian Inscription with a translation in English

Professor PrabhatRanjan awarded for promotion of employment for disabled people Pranava K Chaudhary, TNN Aug 10, 2012, 10.53PM IST

PATNA: PrabhatRanjan (a native of Bihar) currently working as professor at DhirubhaiAmbani Institute of ICT, Gandhinagar, (Gujarat) has been awarded for the promotion of employment for disabled people for the year 2012. Awards in this category are given to people who work for the cause of accessibility and universal design in any of the areas such as built environment, transport infrastructure, service provision, information& communication technology (ICT), universally designed consumer products, mobility & independent living aids, or assistive technology. PrabhatRanjan has developed Environment Control System using body, voice and brainwave sensors to allow persons with severe disability to help them operate computer, TV, Light, Fan etc and even possible carry out task to earn them livelihood. . Ranjan started his work for differently abled persons through a small student project in 2007. In this, he developed a hand gesture controlled remote that allowed a person with restricted finger movement to operate Television. He carried forward this work and developed environment control system based on body, voice and brain-wave sensors. His work on using brainwave sensors to enable severely disabled has brought hope to thousands of persons by making them functional in day-today life. "Persons with no body part movements or voice can also benefit from such technology and improve their quality of life", Ranjan told TOI over phone. "I have been incorporating a variety of technology to provide solutions to unique needs of each individual and has been using cheap touch screen based tablets in innovative way", he said. (Chaudhary, 2012)

National Institute of Design, Italy students brainstorm on inclusive city public spaces TNN Aug 25, 2012, 12.35AM IST

AHMEDABAD: How would be the city's now famous heritage walk look like if the streets were paved in a way that could guide the tourist on his own, while respecting the residents' privacy. These ideas kept a group of 30 students from National Institute of Design (NID) and University of Ferrara, Italy, busy for the past fortnight. NID's Gandhinagar campus played host to the students from Italy for the workshop on the theme of 'Accessible mobility for public spaces & cultural heritage in Ahmedabad.' As part of the workshop, the students got divided into four groups and took up projects to provide revamp plans for Blind People's Association, Adalajstepwell, GeetaMandir bus depot and heritage walk of the city. VipulVinzuda, coordinator, transportation and automobile design, NID, said that the project aimed at inclusivity. "We chose the projects very carefully to provide diversity and local relevance. We wanted the students to get sensitized to the local situation, needs and feasible solutions, while keeping in mind all user groups," he said. Professor Giuseppe Mincolelli from University of Ferrara said that it was a valuable experience for Italian students. "The purpose of design is social improvement and we worked to improve the heritage conservation and public services. We believe that with intelligent design solutions, we can improve accessibility and inclusiveness," he said. Aravinda D K, a transport design student, who was part of the heritage walk project, said that they have proposed an idea for paved streets and mobile dustbins on the route. "We had to work on narrow streets so we also devised plans for autos that can be used as emergency vehicles and signal towers for the visitors from outside," he said. Abhishek Kumar, who worked on GeetaMandir project, said that the group pitched in for colour-coded pathways for passengers and revamped parking plans to decongest the area. (National Institute of Design, Italy students brainstorm on inclusive city public spaces, 2012)

Works Cited DO-IT. (2004). Retrieved 2012, from university of washington: www.washington.edu/do-it universal design. (2007, february 13). Retrieved september 2012, from great streest dt. louis: www.greatstreets.stl.org 10 things to know about UD. (2012). Retrieved 2012, from center for excellence in universal design: http://www.universaldesign.ie/exploreampdiscover/10thingstoknowaboutud benefits and drivers. (2012). Retrieved 2012, from center for excellence in universal design: http://www.universaldesign.ie/exploreampdiscover/benefitsanddrivers Examples. (2012). Retrieved 2012, from CEUD: http://www.universaldesign.ie/exploreampdiscover/definitionandoverview/examples history of universal design. (2012). Retrieved 2012, from center for excellence in universal design: http://www.universaldesign.ie/exploreampdiscover/historyofud

National Institute of Design, Italy students brainstorm on inclusive city public spaces. (2012, augast 25). times news network. what is universal design. (2012). Retrieved 2012, from center for excellence in universal design: http://www.universaldesign.ie/exploreampdiscover Chaudhary, P. K. (2012, augast 10). Professor Prabhat Ranjan awarded for promotion of employment for disabled people. times news network. do.it. (n.d.). Retrieved 2012, from www.washington.edu. Heet, E. (2010, september 14). HIGHLY ACCESSIBLE. dwell-at home in the modern world. Nicholas A. Rattray, S. R. (fall 2008). Participatory Research On Universal Design And Accessible Space At The University Of Arizona. disability studies quarterly. Pullin, G. (2010, march 10). AN INTRODUCTION TO UNIVERSAL DESIGN. dwell. Shrivastava, D. R. (2009, july). Scheme for Participation of. NATIONAL PROGRAMME FOR CONTROL OF BLINDNESS. delhi, india. Sunder, V. S. (2012, june 30). whiter universal design. times news network. Toshio, K. (2002). http/Rights/of/Disabled/Persons/0Japan/.htm. Retrieved 2012 www.barrier free living article.htm. (n.d.). Retrieved from accessible lifestyle. www.VirgeniaNavigator.org. (n.d.). Retrieved 2012 Zimmermann, R. (2006, november). Universal Design Means Accessibility for One and All.