The process of designing a “Universal Design” consists of a set of steps that we need to follow in order to reach the best outcomes, but it is also important that we don’t restrict ourselves to these steps. We might use these steps as a guide, but just like how we shouldn’t restrict our thinking to the technology available, we must think in a way to design something that would include everyone and get inspired to follow the steps included in designing in a universal way.
As in most processes of designing any product, we first need to know the need or the requirements of the user. This is very vital to the whole designing process as this process determines whether the user will use this product or not. In this part, we should consider what we understood from the Ethics in Universal Design; and that means that we should not approach the intended users in an improper manner as they might find it offensive or stigmatizing to them. This is why it can be a great help to conduct interviews with people who are surrounded by the intended users perhaps (this method would be useful in situations when we are trying to get more acquainted about a certain disability, and know what people with this disability need). For example, for our Autism project, Virginia and I contacted people who work with autistic children in order to know more about the needs of these children. This was very helpful as it is more challenging to communicate with people with autism due to their difficulties in communicating with others.
The technique of translating these requirements is another vital stage in the process of designing a universal product, as this stage defines if the designer fathoms and grasps what the actual needs are. If this goes wrong, the developer might not fully understand what the future users actually need.
According to Jakob Nielson, he states that “one of usability’s main laws is that designers are not users. This insight is about as important as vice presidents are not users and users are not designers”. This is one of the major laws in human computer interaction, to fully realize that as a designer, you’re not the user. And that the user might perceive the whole system in a completely different way than it is intended. This is why it would be useful to know the mental models of the user in order to design something that would be easy to use, functional and good looking at the same time.
One of the things that I really liked in the lecture that discusses the Analysis Procedure is that Lars stressed on one of the problems that most developers and designers need to overcome, a problem that can cause a lot of problems for the future users. “Making Technology drive the design”. This course has opened my eyes in many ways, and helped me see the world from other people’s eyes, whether physically disabled, autistic or visually impaired. We must never restrict ourselves to what the technology can do. This might be something very hard to hear for a developer as this can exacerbate their usual design process, but the idea and the impact that the product will give is more important than the technology available. And with our world that’s getting advanced at full speed, the capabilities of technologies are becoming limitless. So why should we limit ourselves to technology when we can open our eyes to future opportunities?
From the many things that I learnt in Human Computer Interaction, one of the most important thing is the involvement of the user in the design process, as in the end of the day the user is going to be using the system and not the designer. This is a important issue in Universal Design as well; to make the user feel that he or she is a part of the designing.
In the last lecture of this course, I was quite touched with the video that depicted a man who had a memory of 30 seconds, not letting his future or past affect him in any way. Along with the many videos that we watched during the courses, this video intrigued me to think “What can we do to help?”. “What can we do to include everyone?”. these are not easy questions that can be answered in a few minutes. These are open questions, but it is our responsibility now to make a change, make the change that our society needs. One of the sentences that Lars said during the first lectures during the course, “Who sets the normal standards?”. This question left a mark in my head because it is very true. Who says that this is normal and that is abnormal. Who says that someone able to walk is normal, and someone unable to walk is “disabled”? Just like how no one is capable of choosing his or her gender, no one is capable of choosing to have a disability. A disability should not DISable a person, but ENable him or her instead, as it’s just different, nothing more, nothing less and different does not mean abnormal.
Regarding the last question in the last lecture that discusses “User Experience”, it can be concluded that usability evaluation diverges from user experience evaluation in the fact that the latter one evaluates the emotions of the user, how the user feels while using the system. Whether its frustration, joy, surprise, negative vibes…etc. In other words, it can be said that the User Interface evaluation is more subjective than objective, while usability testing usually involves collecting data in an objective manner. This is why interviews, questionnaires and more are used in order to evaluate user experience due to its subjectivity.
All in all, the content of the course was very interesting to me as an individual living in a society that has its norms, standards and stereotypes. The lectures made me open my eyes wider, think outside the box and try to look at the world from other people’s eyes. It made me realize how simple yet difficult it is to have Universal Design in our society as a guide to lead us how to design. What harm does it make if we have a smooth ground level entrances without having stairs? Or if we design a house that can be accessible by everyone, regardless of their age? How will it differ if we add alternative text that can be spoken by the computer to describe images? All these questions and more started popping up in my head after scrutinizing things in the products and items that we use in our everyday life after this course, items that cannot be used by everyone. I really hope that one day, we can say that we achieved Universal Design. It might be a long way to go, but if it’s achievable and if we’re determined, nothing can stop us.
Non-excluding Design 