Inclusivity — And then there was Design for all.
As part of our design process we mapped out three different types of data: the conceptualization of the problem space, the dimensions we could explore, supplemented by the research that we did. One of the more interesting discussions that we had during this process related to ‘inclusivity’. This stemmed from two dimensions from the brief:
“It is important that people who do not speak English well and people who are not fluent readers can access the library’s collections”
“The library aims to make its collections accessible to as many people as possible, including people with mobility or sensory impairments.”
- The Brief
As a graphic design student and frequent traveller this discussion particularly resonated well with me, as I am very fascinated with language and accessibility agnostic design; systems that operate seamlessly where language and ability is neither an enabler nor a barrier to interaction. Such design is almost cathartic, in that it allows you to traverse a world where your own cultural predispositions, education or ability has no bearing on how well you can function.
This discussion further expanded on the accessibility aspect of inclusive design. As responsible designers, we highlighted how design should inherently be made for all — and the additional consideration for designing to include specific groups of people should be something intrinsic to the design itself; so as not to alienate or marginalize specific groups or communities of people when allowing them the affordance to access the systems. Society by our standards is a composite of people from different cultures, ethnicities, belief systems, traits, characteristics and abilities — ergo no specific subset of society should be subjugated to additional ‘favour’ through the design. It is almost reminiscent of when particular groups of people were allowed or afforded certain access to facilities.
In one of the recommended readings Leckie & Hopkins (2002) touch upon how the “library itself is a material expression of shared meanings and values of public life” further supplementing this by highlighting how the institution of libraries by design are inclusive. They state:
“The central library attracts all ages and linguistic groups, has a well-educated clientele, and is regarded as a safe and appropriate destination for women, children, and men. People feel comfortable coming to the central library”
In addition to this they also spoke about how the rules that govern, as well as the spatial construct of a library in the traditional form, allows for people of different backgrounds to co-exist and coinhabit the space.
“Because the central library is a relatively open and unconstrained space, [users] are perfectly compatible”
and building on the rules of governance or social contract that comes with engaging with a library space , there is freedom afforded to users / participants within this space that does not involve any pressure of consumption or exchange of value , as people can stay for as long as they want doing whatever they want to do without any social expectations barring those of normal public conduct.
“it is extremely important as a place where individuals can sit in quiet study and reflection, often for hours, without the pressure to act as consumers that is so pervasive in other sorts of spaces”
We decided to expand upon inclusivity on three fronts:
- Decolonialisation
- Digital Divide
- Accesible to all
Decolonialisation particularly pertains to being language and culture agnostic. Designing for use in a way that the system can be interacted with people from all backgrounds — making the interface so intuitive that it does not need language or cultural references to supplement affordances.
The digital divide looked at understanding how we can bridge the gap of digitally disconnected people i.e. people without smart phones or other digital devices that can be used as tools for communication or engagement with the system in itself.
The accessibility dimension was the overarching theme which looked at designing a system that was understandable and usable by all members of society — ensuring measures were taken to create design that catered to all types of people.
The importance of this facet of the design further came through when we went about using our ‘dot’ based focus area weightage method to identify what aspects of the design were most important to us. As designers we understand that everything in this world that is not natural is designed, and it is therefore the responsibility of all designers to be cognizant and purposeful of what they design. Any artifacts or design outputs will be part of the artificial world, and their existence and whatever implications it may have on the world is something that needs to be considered.
Overall I felt that this aspect of our process, the self-awareness and reflection was important for us to focus on our plan forward.
