Reimagining Access: Inclusive Technology Design for Archives and Special Collections

Project Brief

This Designmatters Studio challenged ArtCenter students to design innovative ways to improve the digital accessibility experience at ArtCenter’s Archives and Special Collections which could eventually scale and expand into national guidelines.

Through co-creation with people with disabilities, students had a hands-on experience of incorporating human-centered design into their thinking, a process that could eventually shift traditional ideas about interaction and design.

Students were immersed in the history of accessible design through research and participation in ArtCenter’s Reimagining Access two-day symposium that featured experts and archival professionals. Through participatory interviews with those in disability communities, interacting with archival experts and working on their own prototype creations, students began to deeply understand the opportunities for creating a more accessible digital landscape.

Research and Project Development

Touring the Archives

The studio kicked off with a virtual tour by Robert Dirig, the Director of the ArtCenter Archives and Special Collections. Dirig showed the students the physical resources, tapes, film reels, manuscripts and other resources in this central repository; materials are arranged by collection and available for researchers to investigate in-person.

Dirig explained the different ways materials arrive at the archives along with the often complex decisions on which assets to keep. Does this item present a distinct memory of the institution, an important person, thing or event? Background context ensures that the item has continued purpose and use.

Additionally, Dirig presented an overview of the Virtual Archives that are open to the public. Both finding aids of collections and digital items are accessible through the site. Interns and students often are tasked with digitizing assets and there always seems to be backlog of newly added items to upload.

Students learned there are items with certain attributes that cannot be digitally duplicated. Often, specific elements get lost through digitization (feel, smell, etc.), but new ways of documenting imagery can express scale, movement, etc. Adding descriptions and alt-text can also add context to materials.

Typical users of ArtCenter’s Archives include students, faculty, alumni, staff and researchers. A later discussion delved deeper into the six persona behavioral patterns of online researchers that were developed in the first IMLS studio class: the promoter, explorer, scholar, archivist, fact finder and designer. Knowing who is using the information helps the archivist understand how to prioritize assets and categories.

Students were then engaged in a broad discussion on disability. Students were given a historical context on how attitudes about people with disabilities have evolved from the mathematical concept of “normal” through eugenics and up to the disability rights movement in the 1960-70s which led to the passing of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Today, disability justice spurs discussion and action on how designers can use their craft to respond to larger issues and how access issues can transcend environments both physical and digital.

At a following class, members of the Usability/Accessibility Research and Consulting (UARC) Group at Michigan State University, Director Sarah Swierenga and Senior User Experience Researcher Jennifer Ismerle presented the students an overview of the User Experience Research Guide, which they developed for this project. The Guide goes into detail on conducting participatory interview sessions with people with disabilities. In addition, they discussed the Website Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) which contains accessible design principles and responses to common issues and challenges.

The discussion provided a framework for the students to examine specific disability attributes (how does low vision and blindness really affect a user?) be introduced to current technologies that are being employed (for blindness, it could mean screen readers, Braille output, magnifying tools, speech to text software, etc.) and delve into the user experience and usability. Here the importance of human-centered design became evident to the students.

The presentation also included a guide to proper research conduct, offering ways to recruit participants, a moderator guide, script samples, task scenarios, best practices for facilitating a session and other helpful and practical tips for active listening and analyzing results.

To help them formulate their research strategies, students engaged in a thoughtful Q&A session with representatives. The rich information shared gave the students new insights of perceiving the world in different ways – as those in the disabled communities do daily. This empathetic attitude would be important as the students worked through the process.

Symposium Participation

At week four, students were given an exceptional opportunity to hear from experts in accessibility and design at a virtual symposium Reimagining Access hosted by ArtCenter Library, Interaction Design and Designmatters departments.

The symposium provided important opportunities for students to gain research insights to help inform their design directions. By engaging with experts and stakeholders, students learned firsthand how the digital accessibility landscape incorporates current and emerging technologies. The two-day symposium consisted of one day of presentations from speakers and panelists that included designers, archivists, librarians, educators, scholars and activists; these experts provided participants with multidisciplinary perspectives about inclusive design accessibility from both professional and personal experiences.

The second day brought participants in closer conservation with accessibility experts; in Zoom breakout rooms students engaged one-on-one and delved deeper into details, uncovering opportunities where design can make a difference as they conceptualized possible prototype solutions. Teams were encouraged to think beyond Universal Design and mere replication.

The symposium offered a wide range of background and practical information while inspiring the students to kick start their research and ideation. Students were divided into teams which sifted through the information and gathered insights into possible projects. The MSU Guidelines became a touchstone for teams. Additionally, students often reached out to various experts, relying on their knowledge and expertise to help guide them through their processes.

Midterm Presentation + Refinement + Participatory Design Sessions

At week seven, student teams presented their initial design concepts that addressed a specific challenge while offering possible solutions. In the audience offering feedback were project advisors, symposium experts, and other stakeholders.

Teams shared an overall goal (e.g., modularity, multi-sensory, adaptability), their research, and ways to possibly achieve their objectives. Each team focused on a different aspect of accessibility in website design, customizable interfaces and alternative forms of navigation.

After each presentation, experts enthusiastically weighed in on the merits of each teams’ approach, offered suggestions, and gave students specific questions to consider moving forward. This feedback presented concrete signposts for the teams to continue the second half of the studio where they would refine their directions as well as engage in user testing of their prototypes.

To prepare for virtual sessions with members of the disability community for user testing, student teams learned more about the process of participatory design practices.

Students learned how to frame prompts and facilitate conversations that would best inform design directions. Given the constraints of time and platform, they focused on the three most important priorities. Teams prioritized questions, considered time limitations and focused on three main elements they most needed.

Teams created an interview script and planned down to the minutes but knew they needed to allow room for clarity and insight. Teams needed to present themselves as professional and well-educated about the research and work they were engaged in. Students were reminded to invite participants to share any new ideas or opportunities that came to mind while interacting with the prototype.

Teams divided up responsibilities with each member taking on a distinct role: interface, notetaker, verbal communicator, etc. and conducted a series of virtual sessions where they witnessed how participants reacted and responded to their prototypes. Participants were asked about the experience with assistive technologies and any possible shortcuts or workarounds they have discovered during their navigations. What are their personal preferences?

Informed by these experiences, teams modified their projects in anticipation for the final presentation.