Skip to main content

Background concepts

This page details some examples and approaches to accessibility.

Requirements from funders

Increasingly funders are expecting applicants to provide accessibility statements with their applications.  Many applicants have never considered the accessibility of their research facilities including accessible software on dedicated equipment, what accessibility means and how often simple changes can make facilities, equipment, social environment etc more accessible to all.

What does accessibility mean?

Perhaps we should start by asking what does it mean to you. We all have different needs and encountering barriers e.g., no parking spaces, trains full, to what we want to do can be at best frustrating, time-consuming and annoying.  However, for some encountering daily barriers can be humiliating e.g., having to be carried up the stairs because there is no lift, and lonely and completely prevents engagement or completion of a task.

So accessibility is about removing the barriers to engagement.  Barriers can be grouped into different types one grouping suggests attitudinal i.e., assumptions, behaviours and prejudice; organisational and/or systemic i.e., policies, procedures and practices; physical and environmental i.e., create barriers or fail to provide for needs; information and communication i.e., failure to consider the diverse needs of all individuals; technological e.g., cannot be used with assistive technologies and equipment. 

Accessibility often refers to overcoming societal barriers (the social model of disability) to individuals with physical or medical conditions and impairments (the medical model of disability) [N.B. Models of disability reviewed and discussed in Understanding “Disability” as a Cluster of Disability Models].

However, accessibility also includes other factors for instance in the research environment e.g., considering the needs of those with caring responsibilities, gender, and other characteristics to overcome barriers to engagement and create an inclusive environment.

Barriers can inadvertently be imposed

Too often barriers are “inadvertently” imposed without thought to current or potential needs which exemplifies why equality impact assessments should be completed for all decisions. Some barriers are historical hangovers e.g., lack of accessible and non-gendered toilets; lifts suitable for wheelchairs; inclusive refreshment facilities; inclusive office environments that enable control over noise, temperature and lighting; accessibility software installed on computers attached to specialist equipment; space needs; electronic doors; quiet rooms etc.

Accessibility needs to be constantly considered. For example, facilities need to be suitable, usable, available, cleaned and maintained for all potential users at all times when they may be required.

Lifts must not be taken up by cleaners or others for temporary storage of materials, preventing use by those who need to use them.  Accessible and non-gendered toilets too often end up being used as storage or get broken or do not have access to sanitary provisions available in gendered facilities.

In addition, accessible facilities have not been designed by potential users and do not meet their needs.  Other examples include:

  • The provision of soap for those with skin conditions, when it runs out there are no refills
  • Only “medium-sized” lab coats or PPE are available, with convoluted processes for obtaining and purchasing none “standard” sizes
  • Hearing loops or microphones in seminar rooms don’t work or have disappeared entirely
  • Accessible entry to buildings are provided but wheelchair movement about the building impossible without a support worker
  • Cooling fans provided for those with menopausal symptoms are repurposed or just vanish
  • Policies in specialist research areas that fail to consider, or actively prevent the use of emergency medication or accessibility equipment in certain areas
  • Refreshment areas that fail to consider accessibility needs such as the height of work surfaces, microwaves etc and dietary needs such as allergies and faith needs.

The medical model of disability

Assumes people are disabled as a result of their condition or impairment. Under this model there is a diverse range of disabilities, differences and health needs that include but are not limited to:

  • Upper and/or lower limb impairments
  • Difficulties with stability, manual dexterity, coordination, strength, endurance, range of movements
  • Short stature
  • Athetosis
  • Ataxia
  • Prosthetics, walking sticks and wheelchair users (various)
  • Visual
  • Hearing
  • Mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety, PTSD, bi-polar
  • Neurodivergence which includes specific learning difficulties eg, dyslexia, dyspraxia, dysgraphia, dyscalculia
  • Menopause
  • Endometriosis
  • Menstrual issues
  • Chronic health conditions such as asthma, migraines, allergies, MS, CFS, anaemias, cancer, immunodeficiencies, chronic pain
  • Obesity
  • Colour blindness
  • Eczema and other skin conditions
  • Facial differences
  • Speech disorders
  • Genetic, metabolic and chromosomal changes
  • Heart condition
  • Stroke
  • Circulatory conditions. 

The medical model takes the view that there is something wrong or abnormal about someone.  The medical model is a deficit model that devalues individuals, creates low expectations and can result in negative attitudes toward individuals with “needs”. 

The social model of disability

Views disability as something experienced by individuals by the barriers imposed by a society that does not take account of their needs and their differences. Who doesn’t know someone who is affected by one or more of the above conditions? Who would expect a person who wears spectacles to remove them before entering the research environment, or to leave their inhalers at home? Yet having a building fully accessible to wheelchair users i.e. do not need to ask for help open doors, or accessibility software on all lab computers, or accessible accommodation in a field centre for some seem steps too far.

The social model of disability has been adopted by many Universities for undergraduate students, in theory of not yet fully in practice.  With inclusive curricula an expectation. The social model of disability aims to remove these socially imposed barriers – physical (e.g., environment, transport, information), attitudes (assumptions, stereotypes, discrimination, prejudice), and policies (anticipates needs).  The social model improves equality, values everyone, reduces prejudice and leads to a more diverse, inclusive and productive research environment.