CIIP '18: Week 5

Here at the end of week five, we are officially beyond the hump and are marching towards the end of the summer with no indication of slowing down. A few highlights of my week included: participating in webinars on Inclusive Transportation and discussing what that look like in the city and state, discussing the “calling-in” versus “calling-out,” birding for the first time and learning about the growing relevance of micro-transit, wrapping up the start of a project that I won’t be here to see through, and teaching and learning about Food Access and Justice nationwide and here in Baltimore.

Here is just a little bit about one of my experiences.

My office recently won a grant to implement or further advance the need for Inclusive Transportation in our state agency. Inclusive Transportation is easily-transportation for all people regardless of ability and age. In our preparation to begin using this grant, we participated in a webinar with other agencies around the country and in doing so, I furthered my understanding of how important language is to everyone and learned how much we all struggle with it- even (more so, especially) at this level of work. The feelings and tensions created during these webinars were similar to those of students, like me, going through a training like SafeZone. These trainings address plenty of questions and point out a lot of our ignorance. So many times, I have felt like I had no idea what to say out of fear of offending anyone. So many times, I would say something without realizing how it can offend someone. In many way, this speaks about my own privilege in many ways. We discussed calling-in on someone rather than calling them out when they say something ignorant. During the webinar, we heard many other agencies use different languages, ones filled with stutters, ums, uhs, and some silence when discussing their goals with this grant. We all struggle with speaking inclusively and it is so important for agencies to partake in trainings that call-in on our ignorance. It is not something just college students should be doing.

Taking this back from a personal level to a state-wide one, when you design transportation systems, it is so easy to let ignorance take over and design for only able-bodied individuals. At the MTA, we have groups like CACAT, the Citizens Advisory Committee for Accessible Transportation, that recommend solutions to accessibility-related problems within the agency. Instead of designing, creating, implementing, and then having complaints, why not have groups like CACAT be part of the design process from the start to provide accessibility considerations. This grant ensures that participants have groups like CACAT present in these discussions.

On this experience, I feel like I am learning a lot about other design considerations besides just trying to solve the presented problem. As an engineering student, many times, the goal is just solving the problem presented to you, but I am learning that how you solve it and who else to consider is just as important because ultimately, we are designing for the public, which includes everyone. When we fail to do so, we not only risk hurting individuals physically, but we also sort of segregate them from society. Design is intentional, whether we mean it or not. Design has consequences, whether we see them or not. Our ignorance has consequences. We must be persistent and meticulous about our design consideration. Some might ask, at what point is too far? I don’t know, but we are not there yet it.

Again, if you want to discuss anything I have written about: accessibility, micro-transit (aka birding hehe), and/or more food justice, come find me and let’s chat.