Designing for Inclusion: Learning from Illiteracy-Focused Experiments
A short essay on competencies in socially engaged design research
Introduction
In a world increasingly mediated by complex information systems, those who cannot read or write are systematically excluded. As design researchers, we have the responsibility—and the tools—to design with empathy, through participation, and for transformation. This short guide draws from four experiments exploring illiteracy, to reflect on how design research can help shift perspectives and create more inclusive futures. As Manzini (2015) argues, design for social innovation begins by recognizing the capabilities of all people, not just traditional “users.”
Creative Ability — Designing with Purpose and Materials
Designers use their creativity not just for aesthetics, but to craft experiences that are authentic, inclusive, and socially relevant. In the Serious Game for Illiteracy (Experiment 4), creativity was not only about game mechanics—it was about rethinking what gameplay can feel like without text. Using audio instead of written instructions and pawns dyed with tea and coffee to represent diversity, the design emphasized embodied empathy and visual inclusion. Players were immersed in a narrative that mimicked the confusion of bureaucracy without literacy.
“I felt confused and small—like I had no control.”
—Participant feedback
In all four experiments, new media and materials (audio, icons, recipes without words, recycled visuals) were tested for their power to communicate beyond language, showing how creativity becomes a form of activism—echoing Binder et al.’s (2011) concept of design as a generative and material practice.
Researching Ability — Designing for Empathy, Not Just Insight
Design research requires more than asking questions—it demands deep, participatory methods that respect people’s lived experiences. Mattelmäki (2006) emphasizes that design for empathy calls for tools and approaches that support experiential understanding.
In Experiment 1, participants encountered a puzzle written in Esperanto to simulate the inability to read. This created a powerful emotional response, which—supported by structured reflection and peer discussion—led to meaningful insight into the frustrations and barriers of illiteracy.
In Experiment 3, participants co-created a recipe without words. This was not only a creative challenge—it was a method to reveal the silent frictions that text-based instructions cause. The choice of method (cooking + co-creation + visual prototyping) reflected a strong alignment between research question and design strategy.
Ability to Innovate and Transform — Change Through Design Practice
Innovation in design research emerges from reframing what counts as knowledge, and who holds it. Harbers (2021) argues that ethical design choices involve valuing diverse forms of knowledge and designing systems that support human dignity.
Experiment 2 began with an ambitious goal: develop a visual system to replace bureaucratic Dutch with symbols. Yet the breakthrough came not from the system itself, but from recognizing the limits of visual language and embracing the transformative power of co-creation. Volunteers and language ambassadors helped redirect the outcome toward something more feasible and impactful: training cards for language learners.
This pivot reflects the designer’s growing capacity to transform goals based on context, not in spite of failure, but because of it. Similarly, in Experiment 3, the live cooking session showed how removing literacy as a barrier can shift community dynamics—giving unexpected leadership roles to those often sidelined. This aligns with De Greef’s (2014) research on how participation and motivation among low-literate individuals can shift when the learning environment is socially and contextually relevant.
Collaborative Ability — Designing With, Not For
Collaboration is more than consultation—it’s about reconfiguring the role of the designer as a listener, facilitator, and co-learner. As Manzini (2015) points out, in design for social innovation, designers become “activators” within a system of relationships.
Across all experiments, partnerships played a vital role. From Sher Molly at SOL IJsselmonde to the Neighbourhood Dads of Hillesluis, each project prioritized respectful engagement and long-term relationships. In Experiment 2, the language ambassadors were not just participants—they were co-designers, steering both process and outcomes.
Even in smaller-scale classroom settings, as in the game testing sessions, participants were treated as critical voices in the design process—not passive test users. This reflects what Binder et al. (2011) call the shift toward “design things”—where design is not a product but an ongoing, collaborative negotiation.
Conclusion: Becoming a Designer of Social Impact
Each of these experiments demonstrates that inclusive design is not just a method, but a mindset. Whether through a puzzle, a game, a visual recipe, or a co-creation session, you as a designer can influence how others understand the world—and make it more equitable.
Design research students are uniquely positioned to develop this impact:
- Through creative experimentation with media and tools
- By deeply engaging with participants as collaborators
- By embracing failure as a source of redirection and growth
- And by designing experiences that foster understanding, not just solutions
In short: you have the power to design for empathy, for access, and for transformation.
References
- Harbers, M. (2021). Ethisch Ontwerpen: Mensgerichte Keuzes in Digitale Ontwikkeling. Kenniscentrum Creating010.
- Mattelmäki, T. (2006). Designing for Empathy: Tools for User-Centered Design. Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture.
- Manzini, E. (2015). Design, When Everybody Designs: An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation. MIT Press.
- De Greef, M. (2014). Functionele geletterdheid in context: participatie en motivatie bij laaggeletterden. Maastricht University.
- Binder, T., Brandt, E., Ehn, P., & Halse, J. (2011). Design Things. MIT Press.
Leave a Reply