Dot 04. Universal Design - Introduction & History

It was really hard to choose topic to be discussed for the rest of this half semester. Each technology seems intriguing. However, after reading, thinking, and contemplating, I decide to discuss not about technology as a product, but the important principle we should know in order to design a technology. It's Universal Design. I first heard this terminology in Alan Foley's class (IDE600) and we have some discussion about it. Apparently it really got my attention and has made me think a lot.

So, how did Universal Design emerge?

According to CUD (Center for Universal Design), almost each aspect in society's history influenced Universal Design's birth.
Changing demographics, that is, people are living longer this time due to healthier living, better medicine, and vaccines and sanitation that have virtually eliminated many killer infectious diseases (The Denver Post, 1998).This means, more old and disabled people (as well as veterans from world wars) are still living, and their needs are as important as ours to be considered.

Federal Legislation. The Disability Rights Movement that was inspired by The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, has a great impact on the legislation of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. These laws interdicted discrimination against people with disabilities, and provided access to education, places of public accommodation, telecommunications, and transportation.

Barrier-Free Movement. As people who dealt with designs acknowledge the importance to address the needs of people with and without disabilities, they began to struggle with the implementation of the standards. They realized that designing accessible features resulted in a more expensive, and (usually) ugly products. Those situation as well as the environmental changes reality have brought a recognition to design features that benefited everyone (less expensive, unlabeled, attractive, and marketable). This become the foundation for the universal design movement.

Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology. This concept become apparent in the middle of 20th century, as an application of scientific principles and and engineering methodologies to address the technological problems of rehabilitation including communication, mobility, transportation as well as prosthetics and orthotics needs of thousands of disabled veterans who returned from World War II (1940s). The label "assistive technology" was then applied for personal use devices that were created to help people with physicial, sensory, and cognitive disabilities to function more independently.

Changing Economics. At 1980s, product manufacturers were beginning to recognize the potential of broadening the market of 'accesible' products. Regarding the growing size and diversity of potential customer, "globalization" (another emerging economic trend) was also be the focus of consumer businesses in order to survive and success. These situation escalate the need for design that is responsive to individual preferences and abilities. And because Universal Design adresses the diverse needs of majority consumers, it has become a very marketable approach.

Changing Social Climate. The growing population of disabled people has brought another impacts, that is the quest for independence and equal rights. Consumers of Assistive Technology now requested the consideration of their impact on the image as well as the function of the product. Peter Francese (in a 1990 issue of Capturing Customers) noted, "As more Americans age, products that offer youthfulness without denigrating aging will do well. These consumers are not like their parents — they don't feel that older is ugly" (American Association of Retired Persons, 1992).

Now that we know the history of Universal Design's existance, what we need to know next is the Universal Design principles (standards), its' differences with Assistive Technology, and also the Universal Design in Education, since we're now all enroll in education fields. Those topics will be covered in the next postings.

PS. So, from your own understanding (your best guess), what do you think of Universal Design's definition?

First Stroke. Summarize of The Three Dots.

When I started this blog, I realize that I only have a little knowledge about Wiki. However, as I began to spot the 'dots' about Wiki, I understand that Wiki -as a medium for people to collaborate their knowledge- has played a significant role in knowledge aggregation. This feature has been beneficial in improving people's learning as well as in the delivery of instruction (that may not possible in classroom).

Wikipedia, the most powerful wiki presently known (Naufal, in his article), apparently has some drawbacks that people may object. The good thing is, Wikipedia's honesty in admitting its limitation, although it also defended and reasoned itself. Nevertheless, Wikipedia's positive and negative sides which we know, more or less represents the characteristics of Wiki.

So, having spotted these dots, how can we draw a line?

Hmm, I like the statements made by Naufal,
"It is not that wiki is still not in our minds or that wiki is really strange. It is that we are unaccustomed to collaborative work. Knowledge work is inherently collaborative. Wikis are a great way to learn to collaborate. Collaborative and cooperative learning should be encouraged to facilitate constructivist learning (Hooper & Hannafin, 1991;Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Palloff & Pratt, 1999)"

I think, although the idea of Wiki might not be complete this time, we can still rely on the fact that it has made a big contribution to education (and instruction). Research has shown that teachers and students can get very creative and develop innovative and useful activities for learning (Synteta, 2002 in Naufal article) as well.

Dot 03. Common Objections of Wikipedia

People who are comfortable with Wikipedia (use it as resource or even contribute) might find it hard to read all the objections/ criticism about this website. It's somehow painful to know something that you highly valued are being opposed by groups of people. To be honest, I know that there are controversies around Wikipedia, but somehow I choose not to be bothered by the criticism (Yes, I was ignorant). Because I'm a pro Wikipedia. As I mentioned before, it has been a part of my life since yearrss ago.

However, now, I have to open my eyes. I have to have a fair judgment. I encourage myself to read all the criticism. And so, I read Criticism of Wikipedia, Why Wikipedia Is Not So Great. As I read those articles, I found another article that apparently replied the criticism. This is the link of the article : Wikipedia:Replies to Common Objection.

I found that it is an interesting article. It stated that there are many reactions toward Wikipedia. Some of them love the idea of Wikipedia as collaborative website which anyone can contribute their knowledge or ideas. Some others think that the idea of Wikipedia is somehow absurd that it does not require any considerations. However, some people have stated their criticism about Wikipedia. In that article, Wikipedia (itself) tried to reply those objections. The common objections are divided into four parts. First part : "Letting arbitrary Internet users edit any article at will is absurd", Second part : "Wikipedia can never be high quality", Third part : "Scalability", Fourth part : "Miscellaneous Concerns".

It's very interesting to read how Wikipedia replied (countered) each objections. Some of the criticism have been discussed in our class discussion board, as well as in this blog (previous post). I hope that article might add new perspectives to you (as it does to me).