Buzzword Decoder: User-Centered Design and Universal Design

Both user-centered and universal approaches to eLearningdesign focus on the end user—the learner—in that they aim to improve theusability of the end product. The approaches differ, though, in that universaldesign is more conceptual and philosophical, while user-centered design is moreprocess-focused.

User-centered design

User-centered design includes end users in every aspect ofthe design and development process. At its heart is a focus on understandingwho will be using the eLearning and what the needs of those learners are.User-centered design follows a process, listed on the Usability.gov website:

1. Specifythe context of use. Identify thepeople who will use the product, what they will use it for, and under whatconditions they will use it.
2. Specifyrequirements. Identify anybusiness requirements or user goals that must be met for the product to besuccessful.
3. Createdesign solutions. This part ofthe process may be done in stages, building from a rough concept to a completedesign.
4. Evaluatedesigns. Evaluation—ideallythrough usability testing with actual users—is as integral as quality testingis to good software development.

User testing is a key element of user-centered design;creation of personasand use cases can also aid tremendously in the design and development processes.User-centered design is compatible with many instructional development (ID)models, including agile, which is popular among eLearning developers.

Universal design

Universal design takes more of a big-picture approach basedon embracing the variations among individual humans. Rather than home in onspecific learners or groups of learners, universal design aims to createproducts, including eLearning, that are “usable by the widest range of peopleoperating in the widest range of situations without special or separatedesign,” according to the Institute for Human Centered Design. That means designing eLearning that is easy to use by a broadspectrum of learners, regardless of their age, disability, or technical savvy.The universal design approach follows these seven principles:

1. Equitable use. The design does not disadvantage orstigmatize any group of users.
2. Flexibilityin use. The designaccommodates a wide range of individual preferences and abilities.
3. Simple,intuitive use. Use of thedesign is easy to understand, regardless of the user’s experience, knowledge,language skills, or current concentration level.
4. Perceptibleinformation. The designcommunicates necessary information effectively to the user, regardless ofambient conditions or the user’s sensory abilities.
5. Tolerancefor error. The designminimizes hazards and the adverse consequences of accidental or unintendedactions.
6. Low physicaleffort. The design can beused efficiently and comfortably, and with a minimum of fatigue.
7. Size andspace for approach and use. Appropriatesize and space is provided for approach, reach, manipulation, and use,regardless of the user’s body size, posture, or mobility.

Similarities and differences

Both approaches consider the learner. Universal designinherently assumes a broadly heterogeneous learner pool, including individualswith varying skills, limitations, and abilities. When done well, user-centereddesign also serves a broad pool of learners. You can accomplish this throughthe development of personas or use cases that incorporate learners of differentages and abilities, by comprehensive user testing with a representative groupof learners, or by using a combination of personas, use cases, and usertesting.

The two concepts are not interchangeable, though. Universaldesign is more philosophical; the principles can apply to any design anddevelopment process. Applying universal design principles to a user-centeredprocess would result in what might be termed the best of both: a broadly usableeLearning product designed and tested with its specific population of learnersin mind. Embracing a user-centered development process makes it easier to applythe principles of universal design, as well as to avoid costly mistakes thatcould result in eLearning that many learners simply cannot use.

References

Astbrink, Gunela, and Jenine Beekhuyzen. “The synergiesbetween universal design and user-centred design.” In 10th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Mahwah,NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jenine_Beekhuyzen/publication/228588245_The_synergies_between_universal_design_and_user-centred_design/links/09e41512c1cae051de000000.pdf

Hogle, Pamela. “Personas Place Developer Focus on Learners’Needs.” Learning Solutions Magazine. 19October 2016.
/articles/2091/?utm_campaign=lsmag&utm_medium=link&utm_source=lsmag

Holzinger, Andreas, and Renate Motschig-Pitrik. “Consideringthe Human in Multimedia: Learner-Centered Design (LCD) & Person-Centered e-Learning(PCeL).” In Innovative Concepts forTeaching Informatics. Vienna, Austria: Carl Ueberreuter, 2005. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.531.5121&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Institute for Human Centered Design. “Principles ofUniversal Design.”
https://www.humancentereddesign.org/universal-design/principles-universal-design

Institute for Human Centered Design. “Universal Design.”
https://www.humancentereddesign.org/universal-design