Positon paper

Version december 8th after rewrite based on feedback from lector Maaike Harbers

Giving Voice Beyond Literacy

Introduction

My design research explores how visual and experiential communication can bridge the gap between literate and non-literate people. It is situated within the discourse of inclusive and participatory design, but expands these frameworks by focusing explicitly on those who live outside written language systems. In doing so, the research questions the dominant literacy bias in design and public communication—an assumption that understanding and participation must occur through text.

Anchoring in Inclusive and Participatory Design

Inclusive design seeks to create systems and artefacts that enable as many people as possible to participate meaningfully in society. However, as Ozkaramanli et al. (2024) reminds us in Navigating ethics-informed methods at the intersection of design and philosophy of technology, inclusivity demands more than technical accessibility; it requires continuous ethical reflection. Designers must recognise how digital and social systems embed assumptions about who counts as a user and what counts as understanding.

My research fits within the broader movement of inclusive and participatory design, which has long sought to position people not as subjects of design but as co-creators of meaning (Ehn, Sanders, Manzini). Within these traditions, however, people who struggle with reading and writing are not always the central focus. Their participation is often mediated by literate others—through forms, surveys, or official documents—shaping how and when they can contribute.

My work adds to this existing body of practice by foregrounding this underrepresented group and exploring what participation looks like when written language is not a prerequisite. To do so, I develop visual and experiential tools that enable engagement without text: word-free recipes, symbolic puzzles, and collaborative mapping sessions. These artefacts function both as research instruments and as acts of advocacy, creating space for people to participate on their own terms.

Learning from the Illiterate

The insight that “the illiterate teaches us,” articulated by Marc de Greef (2021), strongly informs this work. De Greef reframes illiteracy not as a deficit but as a source of alternative knowledge—of adaptation, resilience, and creativity. My research embraces this perspective by co-creating with people who have lived experience of illiteracy. Their ways of interpreting visual and social cues inform the design of new communicative forms. This reciprocity challenges the one-directional idea of “helping the illiterate” and replaces it with mutual learning and shared authorship.

Institutional Collaboration and Situated Ethics

My collaboration with organisations such as Stichting Lezen en Schrijven and the team Duidelijke TAAL with, among others, the Municipality of Rotterdam situates the research within an applied social context. These partnerships lend institutional grounding while also demanding ethical awareness: how can design interventions remain authentic when embedded in systems that rely on written communication? Following Ozkaramanli et al. (2024) , I treat this tension as an ongoing ethical dialogue rather than a challenge to be resolved.

My membership of the Digital Social Innovation Lab (DiSIL) community in Rotterdam secures me a seat at the table with others shaping this discourse. It connects the research to a wider network of practitioners committed to digital inclusion and social innovation.

From Discourse to Advocacy

The next phase moves from discourse to action and advocacy. Together with the illiterate community, I am developing a serious board game that enables participants to experience what it feels like to be illiterate. During play, information is shared only through audio and visuals. The aim is to reframe the problem—from the illiterate individual to the systems and policy-makers who design communication that excludes one-fifth of citizens.

Inspired by Ellis Bartholomeus’ approach in Speel het Spel (2018), I treat play not as entertainment but as a method for learning, reflection, and social dialogue. Play allows participants to experiment safely with new roles and perspectives, to feel exclusion and confusion, and to collaboratively seek understanding. By introducing playfulness and empathy, the game aims to raise awareness and inspire behavioural change without assigning blame.

In this effort, Ömar Hünkar’s “Tea Time” initiative also serves as an important inspiration. His work reframes so-called “hard-to-reach” groups—migrant seniors and low-literate housewives—not as passive or hidden, but as active citizens within their own social ecosystems. His concept Tea Time, Learning with the Neighbours shows that learning flourishes through trust, proximity, and hospitality rather than through institutional programs. Within three months, ten volunteer trainers reached 374 women in their own living rooms—showing that community is the real infrastructure of inclusion.

This focus on collective, situated learning resonates with Philémone Jaasma’s relational design practice, where care, attention, and shared time become design materials that strengthen social cohesion. Likewise, Christine Ruf and Floris Schoonderbeek’s Grassroots projects illustrate how temporary, low-threshold infrastructures—such as mobile kitchens, shelters, or field stations—can activate communities to co-learn and co-create in public space. Their “fieldwork” approach turns the environment itself into a co-designer. This aligns closely with Andreas Krüger’s concept of urban acupuncture, in which small, precise interventions catalyse larger social regeneration.

Together, these perspectives emphasise that meaningful transformation arises not from scaling up individual change, but from cultivating shared spaces of experience. My research contributes to this movement by creating participatory environments—visual games, wordless recipes, and symbolic puzzles—that make inclusion tangible and collectively negotiated rather than prescribed.

Contributions to Discourse

Rather than contributing to visual literacy, the research positions itself as an advocacy practice that challenges systemic exclusion in public communication. It calls for the recognition of illiterate people not as exceptions to be accommodated but as citizens to be represented. Through participatory design and situated ethics, the research proposes design as a form of civic translation—a means to mediate between literate and non-literate worlds, fostering inclusion and mutual understanding in public discourse.

References

• Bartholomeus, E. (2018). Speel het Spel: De kracht van spelend leren in een serieuze wereld. Amsterdam: BIS Publishers.
• Ozkaramanli, D., Smits, M., Harbers, M., Ferri, G., Nagenborg, M. Poel,I., van de Navigating ethics-informed methods at the intersection of design and philosophy of technology, Knowledge Centre Creating010, (2024).
• De Greef, M. (2021). De laaggeletterde leert het ons. Arteduc, July 2021.
• Stichting Lezen en Schrijven. (n.d.). Retrieved from  https://www.lezenenschrijven.nl
• Jaasma, P. (2023). Relational Design Practices. Retrieved from  https://philemonenjaasma.nl
• Ruf, C., & Schoonderbeek, F. (2023). Grassroots Projects. Retrieved from https://grassroots.nl
• Krüger, A. (2020). Urban Acupuncture and Transformative City Making. Berlin: Belius Stiftung.