KTH is strongly promoting inclusion of the UN’s 17 sustainable development goals, and to a lesser degree the UNESCO key competencies for sustainable development. In Sweden, gender equality gets a special boost because of it’s long-standing policy prioritization. This means that in order to prepare students to meet the big global challenges, teachers are encouraged to incorporate these topics into courses. There is some grumbling about this, because many teachers feel that the courses are already jam-packed without room for more things. The best solution is to find examples and case studies that serve both the main course topic and related sustainability issues (there are always related sustainability issues). However, this can be tricky. I’ve benefited a lot from reading USask colleague Aditi Garg‘s writing on the Gwenna Moss blog and elsewhere, but it can be challenging to come up with good examples that hit all the checkmarks in an efficient way. Here I have two examples of seminars for two different courses that I hope will fit the bill. Feel free to do the seminar prep – though you’d need to travel to Stockholm to do the seminars!
Considering Marginalized Users: Kitchens as an Example
This one is for HN2024, ‘Planning and Design of Physical Work Environments’. In this seminar we will discuss why it is important to include users in the design process, and also why some types of work and work environments have been historically ignored and under-served. The goal is to widen our perspectives to consider the impacts of work environment design, even on ‘invisible work’ or ‘invisible workers’.
To prepare:
Listen to this 34 min episode from the podcast 99 percent invisible called ‘The Frankfurt Kitchen‘. There is a transcript on the podcast webpage, and there is also a 3:41 YouTube video which shows the Frankfurt Kitchen exhibit at the Design Museum in London.
As you listen and watch, consider the following questions:
- What are some of the hazards and risks related to poor kitchen design (historically and today)?
- What were some of the methods that Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky used when designing the Frankfurt kitchen? How can Fordism, Taylorism, and work analysis be applied in kitchen design?
- Why was there historically reluctance and resistance to designing good kitchens? What does this say about the way we view some kinds of work, and some kinds of workplaces?
- How did kitchens change when women became involved in the design?
- Can you think of other (maybe more current) examples of workplaces (or work) which is marginalized, under-served, or ignored? What would it take to ‘shine a light’ on that and create the kind of revolutionary improvement that Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky created with the Frankfurt kitchen?
Considering Personal Protective Equipment: Unequal Protection at the Bottom of the Hierarchy
This one is for CH2013 ‘Introduction to Technology, Work and Health’. In this seminar we will consider the limitations and disadvantages of PPE (Personal Protective Equipment), and especially how some workers are systematically under-protected due to non-inclusive design. The goal is to deepen our understanding of why PPE is at the bottom of the hierarchy of controls, and also the types of inequalities that can be perpetuated when PPE is relied upon as the only (or main) way of controlling exposure.
To prepare:
Listen to this 45min episode of the podcast Visible Women with Caroline Criado Perez titled ‘Morally Indefensible PPE’. If you have spotify, you can also listen to the episode there without ads. As supplementary material, you can look at the report by Women in Global Health delivered during the covid pandemic called: #FitForWomen: Improving Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for women health & care workers. You may also be interested in this 3min YouTube video on respirator fit testing.
As you listen, watch, and read, consider the following questions:
- What are some of the risks associated with poorly-fitting PPE?
- How is the burden of poorly-fitting PPE unequally spread among workers? Who could be under-served by current PPE designs?
- Where did the current challenges and limitations of PPE come from? What is the role of Standards, and what is the ‘Sheffield Head’?
- Considering that sometimes controls that are higher on the hierarchy are not immediately feasible and PPE must still be used… How can the current challenges with PPE be solved?
- Considering your own practice as a professional: What do you feel is a ‘morally defensible’ way forward regarding PPE?