Part 1
A 150–200-word statement that articulates how your group’s explorations helped you to reflect on, deepen, or shape your own position as a practitioner in context of Disability Justice and accessibility (being as specific as possible).
Throughout this project, I gained a deeper understanding of Disability Justice and accessibility, realizing that many things are not truly accessible, even when they claim to be. This experience reshaped my design practice by emphasizing the importance of truly understanding an audience rather than making assumptions about their needs. In design, audience consideration is fundamental, yet designers often impose their own perceptions of what is ‘helpful’ rather than engaging directly with the people they are designing for. This project challenged me to think critically about accessibility—not just as a functional requirement but as something that can shape and enrich experiences.
Exploring accessibility through Deaf birdwatchers shifted my perspective on sound itself. I had always seen bird calls as a tool for identification, but reframing them as a source of joy made me question how Deaf individuals could experience this meaningfully. My focus on visualizing bird songs was not about replacing sound but about translating its essence into something equally engaging. Feedback was crucial in ensuring that our designs aligned with what Deaf people want, rather than what we assumed they needed.
Collaborating with my group introduced multiple layers of accessibility to birdwatching—from mapping bird activity to incorporating sign language. Despite communication barriers, this process expanded my perspective on inclusive design, showing me the power of diverse approaches in making experiences more equitable.
Part 2
An annotated bibliography consisting of 6 references that shaped your response to the brief, including: 2 texts from the reading list 2 texts that you find outside the reading list 2 design practices/projects
Drucker, J. (2014). Graphesis: Visual Forms of Knowledge Production. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Drucker challenges the idea that visualizations are neutral, emphasizing their role in shaping meaning. This was crucial in our project, as we initially approached spectrograms and maps as purely functional accessibility tools. However, Drucker’s argument pushed us to consider how our designs could go beyond information delivery and capture the emotional and sensory aspects of birdwatching for Deaf individuals. This reflection encouraged us to move away from data-heavy aesthetics and instead prioritize visual storytelling, ensuring our outputs—whether maps, movement diagrams, or sign language resources—were not just informative but engaging.
Latour, B. (1986). Visualisation and Cognition: Drawing Things Together. Knowledge and Society Studies in the Sociology of Culture at Present, 6, 1–40.
Latour explores how visual tools actively construct knowledge, rather than merely recording it. His discussion on how different knowledge systems intersect through visualization resonated with our multidisciplinary approach to accessibility in birdwatching. Our project combined mapping bird activity, illustrating movement patterns, visualizing sound, and incorporating sign language, requiring us to think critically about how these elements influence the birdwatching experience for Deaf individuals. Latour’s emphasis on balancing information and experience reinforced the importance of ensuring our visual tools felt connected to nature rather than overly analytical, making our guidebook not just accessible but immersive and intuitive.
Sinkular, E. N., Dayer, A. A., McGregor, F. A., & Karns, M. J. (2025). Accessible Birding in the United States: Constraints to and Facilitators of Birding with Disabilities. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 30(1), 77-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2024.2325157
This study highlights the physical, social, and cultural barriers that disabled birders face, reinforcing the need for multi-layered accessibility solutions. It shaped our group’s approach by validating our decision to move beyond physical accommodations and instead design interventions that enrich the birdwatching experience itself. The study’s discussion on barriers related to community engagement connected strongly to our sign language integration, ensuring that Deaf birdwatchers could communicate and share their experiences more easily. It also reinforced our choice to develop a physical, interactive guidebook rather than a digital platform, aligning with nature-based accessibility solutions rather than relying on technology.
O’Brien, D., & Kusters, A. (2017). Visual Methods in Deaf Studies: Using Photography and Filmmaking in Research with Deaf People. In A. Kusters, M. De Meulder, & D. O’Brien (Eds.), Innovations in Deaf Studies: The Role of Deaf Scholars (pp. 265–296). Oxford University Press.
O’Brien and Kusters emphasize the importance of visual methodologies in Deaf culture, arguing that Deaf individuals engage with information in highly visual and spatial ways. This deeply informed our group’s design approach, ensuring that our birdwatching guide was not just accessible but also aligned with Deaf ways of experiencing the world. Their work strengthened our commitment to prioritizing visual engagement throughout our project, from mapping bird locations to incorporating movement patterns and sign language. This reinforced our goal of designing not just an accessible guide, but one that actively serves and enhances the experiences of Deaf birdwatchers rather than simply accommodating them.
Heart n Soul. (n.d.). About. Retrieved February 26, 2025, from https://www.heartnsoul.co.uk/about
Heart n Soul’s collaborative and creative approach to accessibility was a major influence on our project. Their work highlights the importance of co-creation, where disabled individuals actively shape the design process rather than being passive users. This inspired us to move beyond static solutions and instead consider how our birdwatching guide could evolve into a shared, community-driven resource. We envisioned a system where Deaf birdwatchers could contribute over time, adding new locations to maps, sharing personal insights, and adapting sign language terms for birding. Their approach also reinforced the idea that accessibility isn’t just about removing barriers—it’s about fostering creativity, agency, and ownership over experiences.
Lupi, G., & Posavec, S. (2016). Dear Data. Princeton Architectural Press.
Dear Data influenced our approach to mapping bird activity and designing visual elements, encouraging us to move away from sterile, scientific representations and towards something more expressive and engaging. The book reinforced the power of handcrafted, analogue design, which aligned with our decision to create a physical guidebook rather than a digital tool. Inspired by Dear Data, we explored ways to make our visual language intuitive and personal, ensuring that our designs were not just functional but also emotionally resonant. This source also encouraged our group to embrace adaptability and imperfection in accessibility design, recognizing that inclusivity is not about creating a single “perfect” solution but about ensuring our project remains open and responsive to user needs over time.
Bibliography
Drucker, J. (2014). Graphesis: Visual Forms of Knowledge Production. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Heart n Soul. (n.d.). About. Retrieved February 26, 2025, from https://www.heartnsoul.co.uk/about
Latour, B. (1986). Visualisation and Cognition: Drawing Things Together. Knowledge and Society Studies in the Sociology of Culture at Present, 6, 1–40.
Lupi, G., & Posavec, S. (2016). Dear Data. Princeton Architectural Press.
O’Brien, D., & Kusters, A. (2017). Visual methods in Deaf studies: Using photography and filmmaking in research with Deaf people. In A. Kusters, M. De Meulder, & D. O’Brien (Eds.), Innovations in Deaf Studies: The Role of Deaf Scholars (pp. 265–296). Oxford University Press.
Sinkular, E. N., Dayer, A. A., McGregor, F. A., & Karns, M. J. (2025). Accessible Birding in the United States: Constraints to and Facilitators of Birding with Disabilities. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 30(1), 77-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2024.2325157
Leave a Reply