2024 SEED Fellowship: Designing public accessibility

The Socially Engaged Engineering and Design team received a welcome addition when Graduate students Smriti Vamaraju and McKenna Owens joined the cohort of the 2024 SEED Summer Fellowship. 

After connecting with Charlie Michaels through his DESCI 790: Design Science Seminar, both Smriti and McKenna were interested in exploring a socially engaged design project. At Charlie’s recommendation, they became a bonus addition to the SEED Summer Fellowship! 

Driven by their shared interest in human-centered design, these two teammates entered the 2024 SEED Summer Fellowship with the goal of designing accessibility in public spaces. 

Dive into their process of creating an Accessibility Self-Assessment tool – as told in their own words. 

Part I: Selecting a focus 

What sparked your interest in accessibility design, particularly in public spaces like zoos and museums?

McKenna Owens: I was interested in exploring accessible design in public spaces because everyone should be able to explore and enjoy a space, regardless of their ability. As a disabled woman myself, I should be able to visit a space residing in this sector and view art, take pictures, touch flowers, and do other activities an able-bodied person may typically do when visiting the space. 

Smriti Vamaraju: My interest in accessibility design, particularly in public spaces like zoos and museums, was sparked by two factors. First, these spaces represent a unique intersection of various design environments, integrating spatial, physical, and digital elements. This complexity drew me in because it allows me to contribute towards inclusivity across multiple design dimensions. Second, I’ve always been fascinated by these spaces—history museums, in particular, inspired me to pursue architecture, with their grand porticos and imposing Greek columns. Now, I see an opportunity to bring that same sense of wonder and accessibility to everyone, regardless of their abilities.

How did you choose which public spaces to focus on for your accessibility project?

Smriti Vamaraju: We selected public spaces for our accessibility project based on their prominence and diversity within the sector, including zoos, museums, parks, and cultural institutions. We focused on spaces that had actively promoted their accessibility features or accommodations, ensuring a range of examples to examine. Our goal was to include institutions across Michigan ( and one in northern Ohio) to provide a broad perspective on how accessibility is addressed in different types of environments.

Part II: Diving into research 

Can you give us an overview of the project you worked on this summer? What was the main goal of your research and design efforts?

McKenna Owens: This summer, we explored how accessibility is viewed in institutions residing within the zoos, museums, parks, and cultural spaces sector. We wanted to provide a self-assessment tool for institutions to benchmark themselves and spark conversations around accessibility within their space. We also wanted to provide a design guide to help these institutions begin or continue their accessibility journey.

Can you share some key insights or findings from your research on accessibility in zoos, museums, or other similar public spaces?

Vamaraju: One key takeaway from our research was the issue of visibility. Many institutions had accessibility accommodations in place, but these features were not always visible or easily accessible to the public. This lack of visibility often rendered the accommodations less effective, as they were not readily noticed or utilized by those who needed them. If you can’t see it, is it really there? Such places also had staff who were very passionate about ensuring a positive experience for all their visitors and the different ways they approached the topic of accessibility was wonderful to hear about.

Owens: When attending these places, we noticed a disconnect between what they promote online and what exists in person. Some public spaces had limited accommodations listed on their website; however, when we visited in person we noticed a rather expansive list of features that are considered accessibility accommodations. Also, we loved learning about what accessibility means to each staff member we spoke to because everyone, regardless of their role at the institutions, was passionate about accessibility and wanted to see their space do even better with supporting individuals needing accommodations.

Part III: Creating the Accessibility Self-Assessment tool 

How did you approach the design process for creating accessible solutions? What were the key considerations you had to keep in mind?

Vamaraju: We approached the design process with the understanding that accessibility isn’t one-size-fits-all. Everyone has different needs, so we aimed to include a broad range of features. We also kept in mind that it’s a balancing act—ensuring that even if we couldn’t make a significant improvement, we wouldn’t cause any harm. Our focus was on integrating diverse accommodations into the daily operations of these institutions, making them beneficial for a broad spectrum of visitors.

Can you walk us through one of the design solutions you developed? How does it address specific accessibility challenges in public spaces?

Owens: Our design guide serves as a tool for spaces residing in the Zoos, Museums, and recreational spaces sector to outline requirements for an inclusive and accessible space, while also providing examples and other resources to implement change. This guide focused on accommodations that should be provided to create a more enjoyable experience for visitors with sensory sensitivities. Due to the nature of these public spaces, their environments can be highly overstimulating due to the various stimuli, so providing resources for visitors who may experience this can be beneficial. 

Part IV: Navigating Challenges 

What were some of the biggest challenges you faced during the project, both in terms of research and design?

Vamaraju: Time was definitely one of the biggest challenges we faced. We wanted to be well-prepared before speaking with institutions, which meant conducting initial research and observations first. This took time, and then reaching out to institutions for their input and feedback added another layer as people who are working in these spaces in institutions were handling these matters along with their primary roles making it difficult to find time for discussions as they were busy. In the end, one summer felt much shorter than expected for the depth of work we aimed to do.

What did you learn about the current state of accessibility in public spaces through this project? Were there any surprising discoveries?

Owens: We learned that everyone really does want to create an inclusive and accessible space. Even when we visited spaces that had little to no accessibility accommodations, we learned when speaking to staff that they really do want to see changes soon, or that some were already in the works. We also learned about the roadblocks preventing the implementation of said features and how they are navigating around them, trying anything to provide an enjoyable experience.

Part V: Moving Forward 

How do you think your design solutions could impact accessibility in public spaces like zoos and museums in the future?

Vamaraju: I think our design solutions could really make a difference in spaces like zoos and museums because of the self-guided nature of the tools. Many of these places haven’t fully addressed accessibility due to various challenges unique to each institution. By giving them the ability to self-administer an assessment, they can identify areas for improvement, and our design guide provides a broad range of features to consider. This approach allows them to move forward at their own pace, making changes that work best for their specific needs and with the resources they have in hand. It also provides them with something tangible to start any hard conversation they might need to start.

Owens: I believe our self-assessment is a great way to spark conversations around accessibility and provide a moment of reflection for staff within the space. When combined with the design guide we created, staff can discuss ways to improve accessibility within their space and begin their journey towards creating an inclusive environment.

What are the next steps for this project? Do you have plans to implement or further develop your designs?

Owens: For now, I plan on sharing this project with anyone and everyone to spark conversations around this topic. In the future, I hope to partner with public spaces to help them move forward on their accessibility journey and explore accessible design features outside of sensory and physical accommodations. 

How do you see the role of designers evolving in the context of accessibility and inclusivity in public spaces?

Vamaraju: Accessibility should be inherent in design—not just in spatial design, but also in digital and other design realms. We’re definitely seeing a shift in how designers approach their processes to include accessibility. While this is extremely important, on the other side, designers working to make existing spaces more accessible and inclusive also deserve recognition. It’s much harder to change something that’s already concrete than to design something new. All around, we’re becoming more aware of the people who inhabit our spaces, and are ensuring we do right by them, which is the right direction to be moving forward in!

Part VI: Reflecting on the SEED Fellowship 

How has this summer experience influenced your perspective on design and accessibility?

Owens: This experience has made me realize that institutions really do care about accessibility! Every single staff member we talked to shared why accessibility is important to them and features they hope to see implemented soon.

What advice would you give to other design students interested in working on accessibility projects?

Owens: I would recommend students listen to disabled content creators. Due to the popularity and ease of access to apps like TikTok and Instagram, I found listening to disabled creators on these platforms provided more insight into the challenges they may face when exploring a public space when compared to journals or research articles. Seeing from their point of view how frustrating or near impossible it was to navigate certain public spaces made me realize how pressing the issue of accessible design is when it comes to these public spaces.

Vamaraju: The internet is an invaluable resource. From articles and policies to mom and dad blogs, Instagram, and YouTube, there are countless people sharing their lived experiences. Make the most of these resources. You might discover someone halfway around the world who is working on similar projects or has gone through processes you’re currently navigating.

Thank you to McKenna Owens and Smriti Vamaraju for their time and passion in engaging with the SEED Fellowship and diving into their project with such empathy. 

Finally, it is only fitting to leave you with the words of these two incredible designers. 

McKenna Owens: Disabled people should be able to navigate, explore, and enjoy a public space to the same level an able-bodied person can. I urge public spaces to listen to their visitors and work with them towards advancing their space to an accessible environment that everyone can participate in and enjoy.

Smriti Vamaraju: Public spaces are truly public only when everyone can access them. Let’s ensure no part of our community is excluded.

Interested in tackling a local design issue with a socially-engaged approach? Reach out to C-SED’s Program Engagement Implementation Lead, Lawryn Fellwock to learn more.