Accessibility in higher education is a cornerstone of inclusive pedagogy, yet many institutions remain challenged in implementing universal design principles comprehensively (Centre for Universal Design, 1997).

This paper examines the User-Led Accessibility Audit Tool (ULAA-Tool), developed at Trinity College Dublin, as a case study in fostering accessibility and employability.

The ULAA-Tool enables students, particularly disabled and neurodivergent individuals, to lead accessibility assessments across campus facilities. This approach merges technical compliance with the nuanced lived experiences of students, ensuring actionable insights (Higher Education Authority, 2021).

The research situates the ULAA-Tool within broader frameworks of universal design and critical disability studies, emphasising its role in transforming both physical spaces and professional trajectories for students with disabilities (Mitchell, 2014).

Conceptual framework

The ULAA-Tool operates at the intersection of user-led innovation and universal design. Drawing from principles outlined in the Building Regulations: Technical Guidance Document M (2022) and the Autism Friendly University Design Guide (Mostafa, 2021), the tool prioritises inclusivity through participatory methodologies.

This approach reflects the ethos of 'Nothing About Us Without Us', centring disabled voices in decision-making processes. Additionally, the tool advances employability by equipping students with transferable skills in data collection, critical analysis, and reporting – essential competencies for transitioning into professional roles.

A critical challenge addressed in this study is the rigidity of built environment regulations, which often constrain innovative accessibility solutions.

For example, compliance-focused audits often prioritise meeting minimum legal requirements, such as adhering to gradient standards for ramps or the width of doorways, without considering the usability and comfort of these features for diverse users.

Traditional audits, conducted by facilities management or external consultants, may overlook essential elements like tactile paving for visually impaired users, sensory-friendly lighting, or sufficient handrails on both sides of a ramp. In contrast, user-led audits integrate these lived experiences, highlighting barriers that may not be captured by purely technical assessments.

For instance, a ramp may meet legal specifications but still be inaccessible for wheelchair users due to its slippery surface or lack of resting points. Such examples illustrate the need for participatory approaches that address the nuanced requirements of users, moving beyond regulatory compliance to achieve truly inclusive design.

Estates teams frequently focus on meeting minimum legal requirements rather than embracing inclusive, user-led designs. To effect meaningful change, this paper advocates for the adoption of participatory frameworks that align with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

By involving disabled users in the design and retrofitting processes and lobbying governments to rethink accessibility standards, institutions can transcend compliance and foster environments that truly meet diverse needs.

What is a user-led audit?

A user-led audit involves community members who experience accessibility challenges first hand. These individuals lead the evaluation of physical and sensory environments to ensure the campus meets their needs effectively. This approach provides authentic insights often overlooked in traditional audits, leading to more impactful and meaningful improvements (Shakespeare, 2013).

User-led audits provide several key benefits:

1. Authentic feedback: Direct input from community members affected by accessibility barriers ensures that changes reflect real needs.
2. Empowerment: This initiative empowers those impacted by accessibility issues to contribute actively to solutions, fostering a sense of ownership and involvement.
3. Comprehensive improvements: Beyond compliance, these audits aim to enhance usability and comfort, making the campus welcoming for everybody.

Development and evolution of the ULAA-Tool

• Initial concept and structure: The ULAA-Tool was conceptualised to address accessibility gaps in student accommodations and progressively expanded to academic buildings and shared spaces. Early iterations relied on Microsoft Excel, incorporating binary compliance measures and basic comment sections. Challenges such as limited nuance in assessments and cumbersome formatting prompted iterative refinements.
• Modular design model: A pivotal innovation in the ULAA-Tool’s evolution was the introduction of a modular design model. This framework separates standard units (eg, entrances, pathways) from modular units tailored to specific facilities like laboratories and teaching spaces. The modular approach increased flexibility, enabling targeted audits that adapted to diverse architectural contexts. Additional features, such as tiered compliance systems and issue prioritisation, enhanced the tool’s utility for facilities management and long-term planning.

The auditors behind the tool

The success of the ULAA-Tool lies in the dedication and expertise of its student auditors. Wilson Williams, Glen Wilkie, and Faolán Doecke-Launders brought unique perspectives and experiences to the project, shaping the tool’s development and implementation. Their efforts were documented and celebrated in the Trinity User-Led Accessibility Audit Blog (2024), highlighting the impact of their work and their reflections on the process.

1. Glen Wilkie contributed a deep understanding of mobility-related challenges, using his lived experiences to highlight barriers often overlooked by traditional audits. 
2. Wilson Williams, with visual-impairment insights, emphasised the importance of sensory considerations, ensuring that the tool addressed wayfinding, noise, lighting, and other environmental factors impacting accessibility. 
3. Faolán Doecke-Launders with his neurodivergent expertise, played a pivotal role in refining the tool’s modular design and usability, advocating for user-friendly data collection methods that empowered all participants.

Their collaborative efforts ensured that the ULAA-Tool not only met technical standards but also reflected the authentic needs of the disabled community at Trinity College Dublin.

Implementation and findings

• Scope of the audit: The audits began with a focus on residential accommodations, assessing 36 enabled rooms across the campus. Following this, the efforts extended to academic buildings, including the Lloyd, Hamilton, TBSI, and James’ buildings. Systematic evaluations identified obstacles that may not be evident without the perspective of those directly impacted by accessibility challenges.
• Engagement with estates and facilities: Collaboration with the estates and facilities team throughout the audits proved transformative. This engagement heightened awareness of accessibility challenges and catalysed the development of a five-year accessibility enhancement plan. This strategic initiative, supported by secured funding, commits to addressing infrastructure gaps and embedding accessibility improvements over the next five years. Early successes include commitments to repair lifts, improve signage, and address physical barriers in residential and academic spaces.

Engineering collaboration: A future pathway

Building on this collaboration, the Disability Service seeks to expand partnerships with the School of Engineering to advance automation and technological innovations in accessibility. Key focus areas include:

• Automation of the ULAA-Tool: Developing real-time reporting systems, automated progress tracking, and seamless integration with databases to enhance data accuracy and responsiveness. Automation could streamline real-time issue reporting, allowing users to upload geotagged photos or videos directly into the audit database.
• Assistive technology: Designing accessible real-time communication tools, tracking systems for course material accessibility, and assistive device recommendations.
• Interdisciplinary projects: Engaging engineering students in capstone projects, internships, and coursework aimed at addressing accessibility challenges.

These projects align with the broader mission of fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, leveraging engineering expertise to create scalable, sustainable solutions for the disabled community at TCD.

Key findings

• Physical accessibility: Common barriers included steep ramps, non-automated doors, and insufficiently equipped WC facilities. Adjustments such as retrofitting entrances with automatic doors and adding tactile strips significantly improved access.
• Sensory accessibility: High noise levels and poor lighting contrasts were identified as significant challenges for neurodivergent students. Recommendations included installing acoustic panels and creating quiet zones within high-traffic areas.
• Regulatory limitations: The focus on meeting minimum accessibility requirements often resulted in solutions that failed to address user needs comprehensively. For example, ramps may meet gradient standards but lack accompanying handrails or tactile guides for visually impaired users. A shift towards user-driven audits highlights the necessity of challenging these regulatory constraints.
• Student employability: Beyond campus improvements, the audits provided interns with hands-on experience in data management, problem-solving, and advocacy. Feedback from participants highlighted increased confidence and a deeper understanding of universal design principles.

Discussion

The ULAA-Tool exemplifies the potential of user-led approaches in higher education. By leveraging the lived experiences of disabled students, the tool offers practical insights into accessibility gaps that traditional audits often overlook.

Moreover, the integration of employability skills into the auditing process underscores the dual benefits of such initiatives: enhancing campus inclusivity while preparing students for professional success (Meyer, Rose & Gordon, 2014).

The active engagement of non-disabled stakeholders, such as policymakers, facilities managers, and academic staff, is also critical to the tool's long-term success.

Policymakers can drive systemic change by mandating user-led audits as part of national accessibility standards, while facilities managers can provide the technical expertise and resources necessary for implementing proposed solutions.

Additionally, engaging academic staff through workshops on universal design and accessibility fosters a culture of inclusivity, ensuring that changes extend beyond physical infrastructure to include teaching practices and curriculum design. Such collaboration can amplify the impact of the ULAA-Tool, embedding its principles into all facets of institutional operations.

Broader implications

1. Policy and practice: The ULAA-Tool aligns with global trends advocating for participatory design in educational settings. However, to fully realise its potential, institutions must challenge the status quo of built environment regulations. This includes lobbying for government policies that emphasise universal design and incorporating UNCRPD principles to ensure user-led involvement in all stages of design and retrofitting.
2. Future directions: Collaborations with academic schools, such as engineering, present an opportunity to integrate cutting-edge technologies and foster interdisciplinary research. These partnerships can drive innovations that make accessibility solutions more efficient and impactful.

Conclusion

The User-Led Accessibility Audit Tool (ULAA-Tool) represents a significant paradigm shift in how institutions approach accessibility and inclusivity within higher education.

By centring the lived experiences of disabled students, the ULAA-Tool goes beyond the limitations of traditional audits, uncovering nuanced accessibility barriers that may otherwise be overlooked (Ellis and Kent, 2016). This approach not only fosters a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by disabled students but also empowers them to become active agents of change within their educational environments.

The dual impact of the ULAA-Tool, combining campus accessibility improvements with employability skill development, demonstrates its holistic value.

Students involved in the auditing process gain practical skills such as problem-solving, critical analysis, and effective communication – skills that are highly transferable to professional settings. This integration of accessibility and employability highlights the broader role of higher education institutions in equipping students for meaningful contributions to society.

However, the transformative potential of the ULAA-Tool extends beyond individual campuses. It aligns with global trends advocating for participatory design and universal accessibility.

To fully harness this potential, institutions must commit to systemic change, advocating for government policies that prioritise universal design and adhering to principles outlined in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD). This requires a shift in the built environment regulations and a move towards inclusive practices that incorporate user feedback at every stage of design and retrofitting.

The future of the ULAA-Tool lies in interdisciplinary collaborations and technological innovation. Partnering with academic disciplines such as engineering and computer science offers opportunities to integrate emerging technologies like AI, virtual reality, and smart systems into accessibility solutions. These advancements can make accessibility audits more efficient and solutions more impactful, driving forward a culture of inclusivity that is proactive rather than reactive.

In conclusion, the ULAA-Tool embodies a progressive approach to accessibility in higher education, demonstrating the power of user-led initiatives in creating transformative change.

By fostering inclusivity, empowering disabled students, and preparing them for professional success, this tool sets a benchmark for institutions worldwide.

As it continues to evolve, the ULAA-Tool has the potential to become a cornerstone in the global effort to achieve truly inclusive educational environments, ensuring that all students, regardless of their abilities, can thrive. 

References

1) Trinity College Dublin disAbility Service (2024). Trinity User-Led Accessibility Audit Blog. Available at: [insert link] (Accessed: [insert date]).

2) Centre for Universal Design (1997). The Principles of Universal Design. Raleigh: North Carolina State University.

3) Ellis, K. and Kent, M. (2016). Disability and Social Media: Global Perspectives. Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2017.: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315577357

4) Irish Government (2022). Building Regulations: Technical Guidance Document M. Available at: [insert link] (Accessed: [insert date]).

5) Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Professional Publishing.

6) Mitchell, D. (2014). What Really Works in Special and Inclusive Education: Using Evidence-Based Teaching Strategies. 2nd edn. Routledge.

7) Mostafa, M. (2021). The Autism Friendly University Design Guide. [online] Issuu. Available at: https://issuu.com/magdamostafa/docs/the_autism_friendly_design_guide.

Authors: Declan Treanor and Faolán Doecke-Launders. Declan Treanor: dtreanor@tcd.ie director of the Trinity Disability Service, Trinity College Dublin. He is the director of the Trinity disAbility Service at Trinity College Dublin, with more than 20 years of experience in accessible education, policy development, and fostering inclusivity in higher education. He has spearheaded numerous initiatives at university and national level to enhance campus environments and empower disabled students. Faolán Doecke-Launders: doeckelf@tcd.ieMSc Environmental Sciences Student and graduate intern at the Trinity Disability Service, Trinity College Dublin. He is a postgraduate student at Trinity College Dublin pursuing an MSc in Environmental Science. As a neurodivergent advocate, he has contributed to developing the ULAA-Tool, focusing on its modular design and practical implementation. His academic interests include universal design, disability advocacy, and GIS technologies.”