Intervention Summary Proposal: Creating Accessible Studio Spaces

A recent conversation with my Sculpture colleague highlighted a concern we share: our current studio spaces present real accessibility challenges for disabled students. The cluttered passageways, limited workspace, noise contamination in open-plan areas, and difficult equipment access create barriers that not only impede physical participation but undermine students’ sense of belonging, particularly students with disabilities. This situation runs counter to both our values as educators and our obligations under the Equality Act 2010 — our duty to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate disabled people and to not directly or indirectly discriminate individuals (Equality Act, 2010).

I’m proposing a two-phase approach to transform the studios into truly inclusive learning environments. The first phase involves conducting a thorough accessibility audit, collaborating with Disability Service and disabled students (first within Sculpture > other fine art departments in Camberwell > UAL) to identify existing barriers. The second phase will implement targeted modifications including clearly marked pathways using high-contrast floor tape, adjustable-height workstations, designated areas with noise-reducing elements, and reorganized tool storage systems prioritizing accessibility.

This initiative connects directly to my technical practice through my responsibilities for equipment management, studio organization, and student induction. By embedding accessibility considerations into these core functions, I can transform standard technical support practices into inclusive ones. This approach aligns with Fox and MacPherson’s principles in “Inclusive Arts Practice and Research” particularly their emphasis on enabling genuine choice and expanded access for all participants (Fox and Macpherson, 2015).

The proposal is both ambitious and feasible. The changes can be implemented incrementally, beginning with immediate low-cost modifications like pathway marking, equipment reorganization then progressing to more substantial investments like adjustable workstations. It will require collaboration amongst technical, academic, and administrative staff. This balanced approach ensures there are immediate improvements while building toward comprehensive accessibility.

By proactively anticipating reasonable adjustments rather than responding retroactively to individual accommodation requests, I think that will create a studio environment that genuinely welcomes everyone and demonstrates how inclusive design strengthens educational experiences.

---

Equality Act (2010). Equality Act 2010. [online] Legislation.gov.uk. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents.

Fox, A. and Macpherson, H. (2015). Inclusive Arts Practice and Research A Critical Manifesto. [online] Available at: http://arts.brighton.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/195717/Chapter-1-Inclusive-Arts-Practice-and-Research.pdf.

• ‌cyclical activity – holistic – setting up and making the work and cleaning it up, one thing
• offer clear guidance to encourage good practice – habit – clarity on what the responsibility is
• sustainability – communal material space: pro – reuse/ recycle; con – little student’s ownership = messy
• sustainability & inclusion overlaps – manufacturing & processing methods > materials > impact – recycle reuse reduce – carbon literacy integral part of inclusion 
• 3D print waste – UAL conference – signposting – action research PgCert Sep
• send Kwame a list of material in use in Sculpture, he will be able to offer insight on existing practice of recycling/ reusing it