Tough but Effective: Exploring the use of Remote Participatory Design in an Inclusive Design Course Through Student Reflections
Abstract
Accessibility is a topic that is recognized as increasingly important in both industry and academia. In industry, there is a growing awareness of the importance of designing technologies that provide an optimal user experience regardless of the user's ability or impairment. At the university level, this awareness of the need for accessibility minded future technologists has encouraged the incorporation of accessibility and inclusive design content into a wide range of computer science and related courses. Despite this growing awareness, the actual process of teaching students about the needs and perspectives of persons with disabilities remains challenging. Within this paper we report on our experience teaching a graduate course on inclusive design with a specific focus on our experience incorporating a participatory design (PD) activity involving older adults as the course's concluding design activity. While students responded favorably to much of the course's content, learning was enhanced through the design activity which mirrored a real-world project and included three older adult (80+) co-designers. Despite the benefits of PD, students were at times overwhelmed by the workload and the logistical difficulties of working within a remote participatory design process. We believe that a review of our experience and student reflections may prove beneficial to those similarly teaching inclusive design and accessibility.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Six papers reported teaching students about participatory design and accessibility-focused design methods such as Ability-Based Design, and five of these required students to interact with disabled people to inform or evaluate their projects.
“Six papers reported teaching students about participatory design and accessibility-focused design methods such as Ability-Based Design (e.g., [13, 14]), and five of these required students to interact with disabled people to inform or evaluate their projects.”
From Where are the Disabled Students?: A Literature Review of Disability Inclusion in Computing Education Research (2026) · cites this paper as [14]
Cites
A survey of user-centered design practice
Vredenburg, K., Mao, J.-Y., Smith, P. W., & Carey, T. (2002) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/503376.503460 · Cited by 691 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Designing inclusively, with an awareness of human differences and diversity, is a concept that that has garnered increased attention with the general movement towards user-centered design [23, 37].”
Background(2013) · doi:10.4324/9781315059051 · Cited by 449 · see citing works
Participation at What Cost? Teaching Accessibility Using Participatory Design: An Experience Report
Brinkley, J. (2020) · Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3328778.3366931 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Figueira, I., Cisneros, J. M., Weber, J. L., Sanka, W., Phan, K., Wong-Ma, J., & Branham, S. M. (2026) · Proceedings of the 57th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V.1 · doi:10.1145/3770762.3772561 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
- Authors
- Brinkley, J., Huff, E. W., & Boateng, K.
- Affiliations
- Clemson University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2021-03-03
- Pages
- 170-176
- OpenAlex
- W3135609740
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 2.96
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1849924)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Design Education and Practice
- Keywords
- inclusive design, accessibility, participatory design, older adults, co-design, graduate courses, computer science education, students with disabilities, remote collaboration, workload, student reflection
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review