Keywords

1 Introduction

China is facing with an enormous demographic shift. According to the latest statistical communiqué from the national bureau of statistics of China in 2016, the proportion of the population aged 60 and above is 16.1%, aged 65 and above is 10.1% by 2015, and the former is predicted to reach 35% by 2050 [3]. A large aging population will have a greater range of capabilities and requirements than ever before, which require us to think about how our environment and services should be shaped for those vast diverse populations in China. “With the occurrence of a rapidly aging population, the issue of universal access and inclusivity is a challenging and complex one” [4]. Inclusive design, which is defined by BS 7000-6:2005 as “a comprehensive, integrated design which encompasses all aspects of a product used by consumers of diverse age and capability in a wide range of contexts, throughout the product’s lifecycle from conception to final disposal” [5], was identified as the consequence of aging, has become a worldwide movement [6]. Early definitions of inclusive design focused on products and buildings, later was extended to services and communications. “There is no doubt that older and disabled users will benefit greatly from more inclusively designed products and accessible interfaces” [7]. The inclusive design knowledge base has likely achieved maturity in western countries, key problem is how to transfer it to the industry and it is significant to develop and nurture a generation of aware and well-equipped young designers [7]. However, it is crucial to introduce inclusivity into design education [2].

In China, there are many practices in the past ten years. A 48 h inclusive design challenge was held by Helen Hamlyn Centre of Royal College of Art (RCA) and British Council in Hong Kong in 2008. Since 2010, inclusive design approaches such as persona, scenario, etc. were embedded in the “User research” module for undergraduate design students at Tongji University [8]. At the same year, an “Inclusive design” course began to open to postgraduate students at Tongji. In 2011, “inclusive design toolkit” website developed by the Engineering Design Centre of the University of Cambridge, including a lot of useful resources and tools, extended to a Chinese version [9] whereby teachers and designers in China can utilize inclusive design methods in their teaching and projects without any difficulty. Since 2014, a biennial international symposium on inclusive design was held in Shanghai.

Although great deals of efforts are taken, there is still a gap between theories and practice in China. For undergraduate design education, though related courses such as user research, user experience, human factor, etc. are frequently embedded in curriculum, it is seldom to see inclusive design as a distinct course. The involvement of critical users with various capabilities loss is still limited by timetable or funds. In addition, it seems that inclusive design approaches such as personas, scenarios, etc. need to be translated into the Chinese context. Besides Chinese version of design toolkit website, it is hard to find resources and tools of inclusive design in Chinese version. For example, type in “inclusive design” in search window of Dangdang, the biggest online book seller in China, the result is zero. That may indicate there is no ready teaching textbook in Chinese on inclusive design for the moment. All phenomenon listed above suggest that inclusive design does not widely spread as we hoped in China. This paper tries to identify the barriers and limitations of integrating inclusive design into China’s design education. Corresponding strategies are suggested in the form of a conceptual model in the end.

The research questions are:

  • What are the barriers of integrating inclusive design into China?

  • How to integrate inclusive design into China’s design education?

2 Methodology

At first, a literature review focused on inclusive design education was carried out. Nine key books on inclusive design are picked out and five of them refer to inclusive design education, they are:

  • Inclusive Design: Design for the Whole Population [10]

  • Designing a More Inclusive World [11]

  • Designing Accessible Technology [12]

  • Design for Inclusivity [13]

  • Inclusive Designing: Joining Usability, Accessibility, and Inclusion [14]

The practices and perspectives from different countries are synthesized. Compared with the barriers of inclusive design education from the literature review, related to the author’s working experience (the first author has been a staff at Teaching Affairs Office of Tongji University for five years), preliminary barriers of integrating inclusive design into China’s design education were initiated empirically, then demonstrated to expert interview.

The purpose of expert interview is to get some perspectives and insights from interdisciplinary experts, especially from teaching administrators under the Chinese context. Limited by time and funds, only six experts were available to interview at the moment, they are from these two areas:

  • Design education (3 persons on product design, one from Tongji University and the others from Shanghai Dianji University)

  • Teaching administration (3 persons from teaching affairs office of Tongji University, covering educational theories, teaching organization, and students’ innovation projects administration)

The interview was face-to-face and open-minded, beginning with a free talk on China’s education situation and aging problem, the challenges and opportunities. Then the topics moved to in-depth discussion on how to integrate inclusive design into exiting China’s education system. Of course a brief introduction of inclusive design was given to the experts from teaching administration in advance. The preliminary barriers were brought forth and assessed. Perspectives from two-side experts were absorbed and four aspects of barriers were finally clarified.

One of the experts from teaching administration suggested a further case study of Tongji University’s strategy of integrating sustainability as a whole. It could be a trigger from different angle, that means discuss design issues out of design. Case study gave the authors some clues, and then a conceptual framework was outlined.

3 Literature Review

Critical review focused on inclusive design education was carried out among key publications on inclusive design. From literature review, many practices and cases from different countries were synthesized. Table 1 lists the results:

Table 1. Inclusive design education
Full size table

During literature review, some perspectives from western researchers like Geheerawo and Donahue [2] about strategies and barriers of introducing inclusivity into design were found, which can bring some insights for Chinese design educators. It is summarized in Table 2:

Table 2. Strategies and barriers of introducing inclusivity into design
Full size table

4 Expert Interview

Interviews provided information on the barriers from two aspects, one is from the angle of design education, and the other is from the angle of teaching administration. So the perspectives are diverse and can be sorted out in Table 3:

Table 3. Expert interview results
Full size table

Based on interview results, the barriers of integrating inclusive design into China’s education can be preliminarily cataloged into four aspects and corresponding response are initiated:

  • Barrier: Lack of awareness

    Response: Propaganda from different representatives and different levels

  • Barrier: Lack of resources

    Response: More resources and tools in Chinese

  • Barrier: Practical difficulties

    Response: More practice, training and cases

  • Barrier: Financial and cultural factors

    Response: More funds and guidelines.

5 Case Study

According to the suggestion from the expert on teaching administration, a case study of Tongji University’s strategy of integrating sustainability was conducted.

In 2013, Tongji University proposed its vision of “a sustainability-oriented, world-class university”. It was through six stages’ work to realize this mission:

  • Stage 1: Education aim redefined

    The education aim was modified from “high-level specialist and top-notch innovative personnel” to “sustainability-oriented professional elite and pillars of society”.

  • Stage 2: Educational standards modified

    Sustainability was integrated into standards matrix which consists of three levels (standards/ways to realize the standards/methods to evaluate the outcomes) and three aspects (knowledge/abilities/personalities).

  • Stage 3: Course systems reorganized

    The course systems were reorganized according to the new educational standards.

  • Stage 4: Teaching syllabuses revised

    The teaching syllabuses were revised to reflect sustainable concept.

  • Stage 5: Teaching methods training

    The university provided a lot of training opportunities by means of competition, workshops, lunch discussion, etc.

  • Stage 6: Core courses building

    Based on UNEP-Tongji Institute of Environment for Sustainable Development, 10 course packs towards all the students have been developed.

Six key elements were filtered out within China’s talents cultivation system, namely education aim, educational standards, course system, syllabus, teaching method, and core courses. These elements are hierarchical and successional. The case study gives some inspirations for design education. It may suggest looking inclusive design’s integration into China’s design education as a whole. Based on this, a conceptual framework was triggered.

6 A Conceptual Framework

This “Christmas Tree” conceptual framework (Fig. 1) manages to accommodate all the key elements of China’s education system (identified in case study) accompany with the barriers (focused through expert interview), and actions (enlightened from literature review) to a hierarchical and successional “tree”. From top to bottom of the “tree”, the key education elements are arranged hierarchically. Education aim locates at the top and core courses take root.

Fig. 1.
figure 1

“Christmas Tree” framework.

Full size image

Education aim is the flag and headquarters. It plays a significant role in China’s education system. Because of the aging problem of China, to make our buildings, environment, products, services and communications more inclusive for those people with diverse capabilities loss is vital for not only policymakers but also design educators. From this standpoint, widely discussion should be taken within design colleges or departments in order to raise awareness. The design education aim should be transferred from design solution centered to human-centered. Our future younger designers should not think from themselves but have a holistic understanding of people. The inclusive design concept and thinking should be merged into design education aim. For example, we can state “to cultivate future designers more concern about diverse human capabilities and various human needs”.

Educational standards usually determine the graduates’ qualities requirements. They are directed by educational aim and meanwhile guide the course system organization. They can be demonstrated as a matrix. One side is three levels: the standards, ways to realize and how to assess, the other side is at each stage what knowledge should be taught, what abilities students should master, and what personalities should be cultivated. Education standards are important to translate inclusivity thinking into detailed qualifications. For instance, at the knowledge level, basic inclusive design theories and approaches should be introduced to design students; at the abilities level, students are required to master inclusive design approaches and put into use; at the personality level, the empathy to different users should be cultivated.

When educational standards matrix is determined, all the knowledge, abilities, personalities required to support our education aim are sorted out. According to them, it is clear to organize the course system accommodating all the stuffs.

Syllabus is basic guideline for teachers. From the authors’ point of view, if inclusive design is ready to be integrated into exiting design curriculum, it is not merely to open a distinct course, but should be merged into the syllabuses of relative design courses. For example, Tongji University’s syllabus consists of course aim, course requirements, course contents, abilities and personalities cultivation, prerequisites and subsequent courses, teaching methods, etc., some of them can integrate inclusive design thinking and approaches, ex: add “empathy to different users” to “abilities and personalities cultivation”.

Teaching methods of design education would be largely widened if inclusive design approaches can be utilized. But it still has many difficulties as referred in the barriers. Teachers’ awareness should be raised, resources and tools in Chinese should be developed, appropriate cases should be provided, and the most important thing is to train the teachers. Workshops might be a good way for short-time training.

Core courses are the root of the “tree” whereby inclusive design course and relative courses like user research, human factor, user experience, etc. should be constructed. The practices of Helen Hamlyn Centre [13], Brunel University [1] and Tongji University [8] can be good examples, but should be followed appropriately according to different colleges’ conditions.

7 Conclusion and Future Work

The study focuses on inclusive design education, literature review were conducted mainly among key publications on inclusive design. Relative papers or chapters were gathered out to be intensively read. Practice and perspectives were synthesized and barriers of integrating inclusive design into China’s design education were initiated and judged through expert interview. A case study was carried out to understand the structure and mechanism of China’s education system. Based on these, a preliminary “Christmas Tree” framework was generated.

The framework suggests the likely route of integrating inclusive design into China’s design education. It shows the possibility of potential application for design educators and teaching administrators.

However, the framework is primarily based on empirical study. More literature review and practice may take place in the future to improve this framework.