Hi, everybody.
Thanks for joining us.
We've got a good group of folks online.
Are you hearing too much of an echo?
A little bit.
OK.
I'm going to try and move here for a second.
We've got multiple computers in the same room,
so I'm hearing my own echo.
I just want to thank everybody for joining us.
This is going to be really awkward.
I'm going to mute that.
And I will unmute it momentarily.
We're trying to figure out how to set up.
Thanks, everybody, for joining us.
My name's Brianna Blaser.
I work at the Do It center at the University of Washington,
and we're doing this webinar as part of our ADEPT project that
is looking at ways we can talk more about accessibility,
disability, and universal design and engineering.
And so we also have a community of practice where we regularly
discuss these topics.
So if you're interested in learning more about this,
you can email doit@uw.edu to join that community,
and I'll put that in the chat momentarily.
And I'll just also put a plug.
I will be following up over email with everybody
about an evaluation, and we invite
you to complete the evaluation, because it
helps us report back to our funders
that we're doing good things.
So without further ado, I will go ahead and get started.
I'm really excited about this webinar.
Cynthia Bennett is a graduate student
here at the University of Washington
in Human Centered Design and Engineering,
and does great work in this area.
And so her research program aims to increase
the participation of people with disabilities
in technology design fields.
Specifically, she highlights various ways people
with disabilities creatively innovate in their daily lives,
while many design professional activities and tools are not
accessible.
So I'm going to let her tell you more about her work.
Let me go ahead and get the slides up for everybody.
And then we can get started.
I lost my window--
and then I will move that back.
OK.
We should be good.
I needed to unmute the computer.
So you should be unmuted now.
All right.
Sorry.
So thank you for the introduction, Brianna,
and thank you for being flexible.
I use a screen reader, and so Brianna's
been a really big help, as a lot of these sharing
capabilities and slide--
kind of presenting through meeting conference rooms online
aren't super accessible, so thank you for being flexible.
But I think we're ready.
So today, I'm going to share with you
one project as part of my greater research
program as a PhD student--
how to submit your interaction methods and approaches
and to inform those with disability studies,
and I'll explain that in a little bit.
But I know we're all kind of from various fields
in engineering and human-computer interaction.
It's probably the way that people and their technology
interact, so a lot of times, it's
considered a subdiscipline of computer science.
But I think a lot of the same things that I'll
talk about today will be relevant, no matter what sort
of engineering-- are we OK?
I'm just moving the mouse.
Fantastic.
I'm going to switch the slides.
The slide is switched.
So Brianna wanted me to share a little bit
about my professional trajectory with you all, in case
you have students with disabilities,
or may have disabilities yourself or are just curious.
So I have an undergraduate degree in psychology,
and I got that from the University of North Carolina
Wilmington.
And I thought I was going to be a psychology PhD, you know,
working with folks with different mental health
conditions, maybe doing therapy.
And I applied for grad school, and I did not
get in on the first time.
And so I was like, OK, I've got to regroup,
figure out what to do.
And in the meantime, I was looking for a job
just to make some money.
And at this time, I was living in Seattle,
and I connected with a computer science professor.
His name is Richard Ladner.
You may see his name connected with a lot of these engineering
grants.
But he actually hired me as a research assistant
to help with his human-computer interaction projects
that his grad students were running.
And so I was able to bring skills
for my psychology degree, where I learned
how to do human subjects research,
to-- instead of maybe looking at people's personalities
or behaviors-- but looking at the ways
that they interacted with technology.
So from that opportunity, I learned
that I really liked human-computer interaction,
and so I applied for the PhD program
that I'm finishing up right now in human-centered design
and engineering.
This department is kind of an interdisciplinary department
where scholars from backgrounds like mine,
in psychology and computer science, kind of work together.
And in the meantime, I've also spent some time
as an intern at Microsoft Research.
So that's just a little bit about my professional
trajectory, and just wanted to highlight that Richard Ladner
was able to use his connections with the community in his role
as a professor to bring in a researcher with disabilities--
not necessarily through the traditional routes,
I started out as a researcher and then became a student--
so I really appreciate that kind of effort.
It's a great example of ways we can
bring more students with disabilities into competing
fields.
So on the third slide, just a little fun fact about me--
I love geography.
This giant tactile globe is at Perkins School
for the Blind in Massachusetts.
And so I love, like, tactile maps
and diagrams and thinking about the politics of geography.
I also enjoy reading, trivia, chocolate, and being outside.
So those are things I like to do outside of work.
And so now, I'll introduce the actual project
that I'm going to talk to you about.
It's called Biographical Prototypes:
Reimagining Recognition and Disability in Design.
And I collaborated with my advisor, Daniella Rosner,
and another student, Burren Peil.
And to introduce the mindset that we took on this project,
I want to tell a story and give a little bit of background.
So this story comes to us from OXO Good Grips,
which is now a popular brand of kitchenware that's specifically
known for selling tools that are comfortable to use.
So if you've given or attended a universal design lecture,
you may have seen a slide talking about how OXO Good
Grips makes these amazing products,
and they were kind of inspired by disability.
And so their website recounts the founding of the company,
and part of it reads, "more than 25 years ago, Sam Farber
noticed that his wife Betsy was having trouble
comfortably holding her peeler due to arthritis.
Sam saw an opportunity to create more thoughtful cooking
tools that would benefit all users,
and promised Betsy that he would create a better peeler."
So until a year ago, that's the story that I knew about OXO.
And like many other universal design lecturers,
I told this story as, like, a case of design going right.
But recently, a disabled designer
named Liz Jackson told us kind of a different version
of that story, which got me kind of thinking about approaching
my work differently.
So Liz Jackson actually located Betsy herself
and interviewed her, and Betsy is actually
retired from her career as an architect,
and during the interview she reflected.
"The general understanding was of the brilliance and kindness
of Sam who made these tools for his poor crippled wife
so she could function in the kitchen.
I will probably go down in history
as having arthritis rather than having
the conceptual idea of making this comfortable
for your hand."
And so it turned out that Betsy had actually
prototyped-- kind of made preliminary versions--
of several kitchen tools for herself,
and she's not as widely known for that kind
of innovative engineering work that she did.
Rather, she's more known as the inspiration behind the work
that Sam and other colleagues did.
So on the next slide, here we have
heard two versions of the story, and it may seem surprising
that Betsy is not featured more prominently in OXO's version.
But actually, a lot of design thinking activities--
the activities that teach the theory in practice of doing
design--
communicate that people with disabilities
are primarily users of technology,
and may not be designers of technology.
And so I just had kind of a couple of examples,
practical examples.
Like, for example, when we teach students
how to brainstorm or ideate, we often
teach them that that means they should hand sketch
their ideas very quickly.
And maybe people with vision or motor disabilities
might not be able to participate in that activity.
Also, a lot of interactive prototyping tools
that you might use to kind of show a simulation of a design--
a lot of those are actually not accessible to use.
I've written about this in other work
that I'm not going to share today,
but reading the way that disability
is written about in design, people with disabilities
are kind of cast as the users or the inspirations.
And we haven't thought as much about what would it
mean to think about people with disabilities as designers.
So I then want to introduce the theoretical framing that
underpins all of my work, which is called disability studies.
So disability studies is an interdisciplinary field
which studies the meaning, nature,
and consequences of disability.
And so it challenges a popular view
that disability is inherently negative by sharing
multiple perspectives on disability,
and they prioritize those perspectives
being written by people who actually have disabilities.
So through my reading in disabilities studies,
I learned that one approach to making design more accessible
is to make the tools and activities more accessible,
like I showed before.
But another way of thinking about increasing accessibility
is thinking differently about people with disabilities
altogether, and the contributions
that they already make to design fields.
So back to the project called Biographical Prototyping.
I'll now kind of ramp up a discussion
of that specific project.
So I'll define first what biographical prototypes are.
So biographical prototypes are material manifestations
of people's personal stories of making something work.
Prototypes take a wide variety of forms,
from representations of things that people invent,
to illustrations of rooms that people modify, to mockups
of digital applications that they repurpose or put
to a new use from their intended use.
And most importantly, they foreground people
with disabilities as the fashioners of their own stories
in design contexts.
And so you'll note that throughout this project,
we use the phrase "making things work",
just to kind of take the professional weight off
of the word "design".
So you'll noticed that throughout the presentation.
Sometimes, when we work with community members that are not
professional designers, using different language
can help you bring out those stories.
So to develop the method of biographical prototyping,
we drew on a technique called counter-storytelling,
which is practiced within disability and critical area
studies.
So counter-stories challenge deficit stories.
So for example, a deficit story is usually about someone with
disabilities-- and often disability is kind of portrayed
as a burden or primarily negative--
where the purpose of the story is
to inspire someone who doesn't have disabilities.
And so that would be a deficit story.
And so then a counter-story is written by someone
with disabilities, and they often
offer more nuanced portrayals.
Like often, maybe people with disabilities--
disability may impact their creative expression,
along with disability also being burdensome because
of structural societal barriers.
So we combine this practice of counter storytelling
with rapid prototyping that we do a lot in design process use.
And I want to form biographical prototypes,
so I want to give an example of what we mean
by a biographical prototype.
So this one comes to us from someone
named Diana, who I met during an interview study,
and I learned that Diana loves to make crafts.
And so Diana uses a wheelchair as well,
and one day, Diana spilled a lot of beads on the floor
that she was using in a craft.
And she wasn't sure how she was going to pick them up,
because she was going to have to lean
pretty far over her chair, which would be impossible for her.
And so she ended up spotting a spatula in her kitchen,
and thought to wrap it in double sided sticky tape.
And after she did that, she had this new sticky sweeping tool
that she was able to sweep her on the floor
and collect her beads.
And in another instance Diana was
using rhinestones in a craft piece,
and she has difficulty pinching her fingers to collect
one rhinestone at a time.
And so over time, she's learned that she
can wrap the end of a pen-- like an ink pen-- in wax,
and stick the wax end of a pin down on a pile of rhinestones,
pick up one at a time, and place it intricately on her craft.
And so in this case, we have a biographical prototype.
I'm retelling it in this case, and we have photos
of representative materials.
And they foreground Diana as a person
with disabilities who has done some creative things to make
things work, to make her art craft cleanup
and jewelry construction more accessible for her.
So I did an interview study where I asked people
with disabilities individually about their creative practices.
But I wanted to create an activity that was scalable so
that other researchers and designers could maybe
use this method to help us get to know people
with disabilities, maybe in a little bit of a different way.
And so to kind of refine this method,
I ran a series of design workshops
where people with disabilities were invited--
I was pretty broad with definitions of disabilities--
and they came and first engaged with a bunch of example
biographical prototypes.
So in doing this project, having these example story cards,
or story cards with printed Braille and representative
objects, and giving time to pass those around helped
set the tone of the stories that we
were going to then ask the participants to tell.
So having these examples was pretty important.
And so once we pass these prototypes around,
participants got a chance to share what resonated,
like something that stuck out to them about these prototypes.
And we noticed the discussions began around like, oh,
this was so cool, and then ended up transferring
to their personal stories.
Like, oh, I've used something similar,
or that's a great idea-- maybe I'll
incorporate that technique or item into my daily practice.
So after they reflected on engaging with those example
biographical prototypes, we partnered participants
where they started to tell stories
from their own life of making things work.
And then they worked together to make a representative prototype
that would serve as kind of a significant object
to help them tell that story.
And so in the end, participants introduced their story
with their biographical prototype to the entire group.
And we were able to open up a discussion that
wasn't just about individual stories,
but uses individual stories as a launchpad
to think about like, well, how often do you
get to tell stories like this?
How often do people ask you questions
about how you make things work?
And how has your encounters been in design situations, working
with designers or engineers, and how they have
treated your contributions.
So at the workshop, participants told many, many stories
of inventing, modifying, and repurposing
things in their own life.
And a couple more examples are a participant
named Denise loves to paint but has tremors,
and so she's learned to use a bunch of different objects,
from foam to clay, to wrap around
store-bought paintbrushes to make
them easier for her to grip and steady her hands.
And Shay has difficulty falling asleep at night
due to their anxiety and mental health conditions,
and so they've created a specific schedule that they
follow.
And they kind of check things off
with a physical artifact in order
to help them wind down at the end of the day.
So we learned that making things work kind of
took a variety of forms, from objects
people invented and also processes,
like mental and emotional processes that people
engaged in, as well.
But the stories also helped us not
just to learn individual things, but to connect experiences
a disability with greater societal trends that
are participants noticed.
So they told us that they were rarely
asked to tell these stories outside of the workshop,
and as a consequence, they felt a lot of pressure
to share only positive things, to try
to convince people that having disabilities wasn't so bad.
But they really did kind of want space
to share these more vulnerable stories without feeling
pressure to solve what people might think of as our problems.
So I'll go into these in a little bit more detail.
So I learned that participants were rarely
asked to tell their stories.
One of our participants, Catherine, told us,
I don't think I've ever-- and I have
been injured for 30 years-- asked
to share things around making things
work with your disabilities.
And a different participant named Tali kind of reflected
on their personal experiences, and connected them
with the perception that they think
is an assumption in society that people with disabilities just
simply don't have such stories.
So Tali speculated who is credited with design
depends on who is given the most agency.
And when people see that you're disabled,
they don't think of that person as possibly coming up
with that design for themselves.
And so this is definitely something
our participants noticed in their daily lives,
and were able to kind of reflect on, with their stories at hand,
as significant objects to think with.
And as a consequence of this just
being silenced around having agency in design,
participants felt really pressured to tell all only
positive stories that they wanted
more space for vulnerability.
So one participant, Trinh, who has multiple disabilities,
kind of articulated how this plays out in her life.
She shared an expectation to tell stories of recovery,
and so when I tell stories about something making things work,
I tell people that I used to be in a wheelchair,
but now I've learned to use crutches.
But then problems such as chronic illness
I don't talk about.
It opens up vulnerability, because it
isn't an inspirational story.
So many participants were really proud to share stories
of making things work.
They also wanted to share kind of messier stories
without feeling pressure that, you know,
that a designer just wanted to solve these problems.
They just wanted to talk about, and have space,
to think with these things, as well as think
about kind of the more structural barriers that
created those negative experiences in the first place.
So most prototyping, as you think about it
for designers and engineers, is used to refine a future design.
But this project kind of took prototyping
in a new direction as a way of, like, how
we can share existing stories, and get to know people.
So prototyping could foster recognition
of contributions to design by disabled people,
and reflections on how, in our field, if we don't think
about these stories, or don't collect these stories,
we might reinforce kind of negative narratives
about disability as just a design problem to solve.
And really, it is more of rich life experience
with a lot of creative expression involved.
So just kind of some takeaways-- we kind of propose
that biographical prototypes can help people with disabilities
get an opportunity to introduce themselves
to designers and engineers in a way that they choose.
So often, we go in with a pre-set
of questions or our own agenda, like what we want to know,
but this helps people with disabilities kind of share
a story of their own creative expression
and have more agency in how the design workshop,
or how things play out, maybe during a research study.
Also, it helps kind of reorient disability from just
a simple problem to solve in design, but actually
as a kind of new way of thinking about design
in a creative, expressive way that can contribute to design.
It helped us-- biographical prototypes-- connect not just
collect individual stories, but connect
these individual stories of making things work, thinking
about, like, why does someone have to have
their own stuff at home?
And while it's creative, it kind of
indicates that there is a lot of structural barriers in thinking
about design as a way to work at more structural levels, rather
than individual levels.
But the stories themselves kind of served as a conduit
to bring those more structural, abstract, societal-level things
up, and have discussions about them.
And finally, biographical prototypes,
what we would do in future, is kind
of have more examples of how some stories might
be about making things work.
Other stories might be a way of sharing
like an ongoing challenge or frustration,
again, in order to get at things to do to solve things
at more of a structural level.
And so that's kind of what I had regarding
this specific project.
Feel free-- I tweet occasionally, mostly
about kind of academic or design things that I'm doing.
You can follow me up clb5590, and I've also
got my web url are up on this slide.
And just a couple of other areas that I've
done research on that you might be interested in checking out--
I ran a workshop on accessible brainstorming actually
with the folks here at DO-IT.
So thought about some different strategies
for making that activity more accessible.
I've written about some pitfalls of empathy building.
Empathy building is super popular in design,
and I have a paper just kind of about how
we can think through that, and make
sure we don't throw that term around,
or assume that it's always good.
I've done some work on designing to support interdependence,
so how we can support accessibility
done kind of collaboratively.
And also, a lot of my earlier work
is on increasing information access
for blind and low-vision people through smartphones.
So I'm happy to take any questions that you have,
and elaborate further on this project that I introduced,
or any of my other works.
Thank you.
Thank you, Cindy, that was great.
Somebody has already asked a question on the chat,
and I'm going to encourage folks to go ahead and type
questions into the chat, and we'll take them from there.
So that question we have is, is "Invent, modify, and repurpose"
part of a design process that was used?
Yeah, thank you for the question.
So in this case, we were asking people
to tell stories of inventing, modifying, and repurposing
objects from their own lives.
So in this specific case, this wasn't
part of the design process in the workshops that we ran.
We were seeking for them to come up with representative objects
to help tell a story from their own life.
But I think that brings up an interesting point of how
we can maybe think about the work
that people with disabilities do in their everyday life--
that inventive, that adaptation or repurpose work-- as design,
and I think in some cases, like the work of designers
and engineers could be helping to amplify or refine something
that someone with disabilities has already done,
and how we can help them kind of make it work better for them.
Great.
Do you have any other questions that folks
want to ask in the chat?
There's another one.
What is the added benefit of creating
a biographical prototype as opposed to prompting people
to tell their stories as through a life story interview?
Thanks for that question I have a lot
of experience doing interviews, and I
think that getting people to tell stories
takes a lot of time and practice.
And so thinking about the design workshop
is kind of a quintessential activity
leveraged in design and engineering fields
where there's a limited amount of time.
So I think that you can interview people,
and you can ask them to tell stories.
But if you kind of incorporate it into a workshop,
it can help set the stage of like,
we actually want to hear your stories
and here's a multi-modal way-- like,
yes, you can tell your story with words.
We can also create representative objects.
So it kind of operates at multiple levels,
so kind of practically speaking, it's
a way to get out those stories, maybe a little bit more
quickly, and in a multi-modal fashion.
Number one and number two, I think
it kind of helps to establish a stance in the workshop
that you want to take people with disability seriously
as designers.
And so I would love to do more research on this.
I guess I don't have like quantitative data to spell out
the benefits.
But just in my experience doing a lot of interviews,
it usually takes a lot of time to get at those rich stories
that designers or engineers may not have allocated.
Our next question-- I haven't found a good clearinghouse
for connecting people who might need a design
solution, collaborative or not, and people
who are interested in helping.
I know a little about the Neil Squire society in Canada,
and AT Makers on Facebook.
This seems like a flood waiting to happen.
So I guess our general advice about making connections--
and this is hard in a class setting,
where you have limited time and it might be
students' or professors' or anybody's first exposure--
but I always recommend that I hope that a design encounter is
not the only way that you're experiencing people
with disabilities.
And so I encourage people to join activist organizations,
or make friends with people with disabilities.
But I think at the very least, a really important thing
to do is to make connections with people before you've
decided what design problem you're going to solve.
Because often, if you don't do that,
the problem you're looking at working on
is not relevant for people who actually have disabilities.
And so again, yeah, connecting with organizations where
people with disabilities are prominent and have positions
of leadership, and making those connections
as early as possible.
And if possible, not just for the purposes of design,
but also building relationships and friendships in a community.
How do you do universal design when
there are so many different ability
levels with different needs?
Is it difficult to do?
Yeah, thanks for your question.
And that's helping me realize I forgot
to talk about something that I think is really, really
important to this project.
So I'll talk about it now.
Well first of all, I don't like to make claims
that anything I do will be accessible for everyone.
I know that it won't.
I also say that carefully to say that that
shouldn't be an excuse to try.
But something that really helped--
so before the workshops, I put out
recruitment information, and folks
submitted a screener survey.
And in that survey, I asked them to write
about their disabilities, and what sort of access
needs they anticipated.
That spawned an email thread where
I would clarify what I understood their access needs
to be, and they could let me know whether I was interpreting
that correctly.
Also, as a workshops junior, I gave them
more detailed information about exactly what we would be doing.
And so then they could kind of refine their access needs.
And in some cases, that meant them being like, oh, well
actually, now that I know you're using PowerPoint slides,
I need them in an alternative format.
Or now that I know that we'll be able to get up and move around,
I don't think I need that thing I said I needed,
because I know that I can just get up and move around
when I need to, or something like that.
So establishing this communication ahead of time
is really important.
And then what I did--
so a lot of social justice activism
is starting to do this, and I highly recommend--
but they're called commitments.
And I call mine access commitments.
And so what we did at the beginning of the workshop was
I had a slide that had a list of most of the access
needs that people had.
And I didn't say who needed what,
but I just said that these are some things
that we talked about we need to do for each other.
And I established that accessibility
is a collective responsibility.
And also, you can think about this intersectionally, too.
We talked about how we use each other's pronouns,
speak directly to someone and not their interpreters,
let's give each other time to express ourselves in the way
that we want to express ourselves.
And then a second slide was called Communication
Considerations, and I taught something at I
hear a lot in education research is stepping up and stepping
back.
And so we talked about that in this workshop,
we want to hear from everyone in whatever way
that they communicate.
And so this is an opportunity for you
to reflect personally, that if you're generally
an outgoing person, you can think about how you're
going to give an opportunity for someone else
to express themselves.
And if you're a more quiet person,
you get the opportunity to kind of step up.
So I taught just some basic communication considerations,
and gave reminders of that throughout the workshop.
Also key was training volunteers, first of all,
in providing consensual assistance-- so asking people
if they needed help before intervening.
And also, being thoughtful and noticing if a participant
wasn't engaging with materials.
Being like, hey, there's some markers
at the end of the table, would you
like me to grab them for you?
Or, you know, can I fold this paper for you, or whatever.
But kind of noticing and creating
openings and conversations, as well as in activities.
So with that, I think that set a really important
access-centered culture.
And no, not everyone could do everything.
So some people drew 2D drawings of their designs,
and there were blind to participants at the workshop.
And so then, what we did was set an expectation that you're
going to have to share this representation,
we're going to pass it around and take time
to make sure that everyone's understanding it.
So even if it's not accessible for everyone,
kind of allocating that time for comprehension,
and establishing a common understanding
is really important.
Passing things around was really important,
making sure people could touch or engage or look
at the artifacts close to them.
And so in that way, you know, not
every activity is going to be accessible-- you should always
try.
But by building in access as a collective commitment,
you can bring things up if they come up in this workshop,
and also building communication expectations really, I think,
helped.
And then I was going to say something else--
I guess I would say, so although folks at the workshop
might be making things that aren't accessible for everyone,
we made a commitment as organizers
that anything we made, as workshop organizers,
was supposed to be accessible for everyone.
So we did-- all of our slides had all text in the images.
I downloaded a blue light filter for someone
who couldn't look at that type of light.
I sent slides around, made sure questionnaires were accessible,
and made sure that I had materials that everyone
could use some materials.
So I think there is different things-- like at the organizer
level, I was making sure that the materials I was putting out
to the workshop were accessible to everyone.
And then by establishing the extra time
to engage with artifacts, and the expectations
that they would need to be communicated in multiple ways
helped to create a culture that made up
for moments when something was not universally accessible.
So that was a really long explanation,
but I hope maybe that contextualized
some of the work.
That was great.
And I think it gets at this real struggle
of trying to make everything accessible as well as possible.
How much guidance was provided to the students
as they moved through the design process?
A lot, or a little?
So as participants moved through the process,
it was really individual.
So we selectively additional guidance
if we perceived that someone wasn't engaging with artifacts,
or was having a difficult time thinking of a story.
So when we were passing around the example biographical
prototypes, organizers made sure to move prototypes
around the table if folks were not moving to them.
Sometimes we would point something out like, oh,
did you see this one?
Here's the story card, you can take a second to read it.
And then during the part where folks were thinking
of their own stories to prototype,
a few people did have difficulty thinking of stories.
And in those moments, I or one of the organizers
had a one on one conversation where
I brought out some of the interview questions
I asked people.
Like, oh, talk about a time recently
where something wasn't really working for you,
and talk about what you did to work through that.
So in most cases, those one on one conversations
helped to solve things.
In a few cases, I brought back out the examples, and was like,
oh, this reminds me, have you ever done anything like this.
So it was just kind of selectively intervening
when we noticed folks weren't doing the activity.
But a lot of people--
like I said, those examples were really important--
because they all showed up and thought that I just
wanted to solve a problem.
And so we had to reframe, like, no-- actually,
we want to hear your stories.
So those examples were really important to kind
of reframe the activity.
Can you point to some successful design solutions that
have emerged from your process?
So this is a research project I did last year.
And so I think, honestly, the most successful things
that have come out of it are I've
learned how to be a better facilitator of workshops
with people with disabilities, and I
work on sharing that information with other people.
So a lot of my work is around changing the culture of design,
not necessarily designing new products, and so I'm not sure--
I guess I would hope the most successful product
or whatever to come out is putting more things out
in the world that show how to facilitate engagements
with people with disabilities.
Someone asked in the chat how they
can share their own comments, but I
think we can also open this up to a wider discussion,
if there's anybody that wants to unmute
themselves and contribute to the conversation,
you're welcome to do that.
Or you can put them in the chat, or if you want to email me,
I put my email in the chat.
It's blaser@uw.edu.
I'm happy to share with folks that registered today.
And you're welcome to yourself if you want to chat.
OK, does anybody have any other questions?
Thank you, everybody, for joining us.
This was a great conversation.
And thank you, Cindy, for taking the time to do this,
share this information with everybody,
and put this presentation together.
I will be following up with a link to an evaluation,
more information about our project.
So thank you, everybody else, for joining us Bye.
Thank you.