Radical Accessibility In Museum Spaces: Beyond Compliance

Literature and research on accessibility in museums, zoos, aquariums, botanical gardens, and other similar educational institutions has grown exponentially over the last two decades. Particularly notable are the 2008 revisions to the Americans with Disabilities Act that have taken effect and civil rights movements that have pushed for intersectional approaches to design. Despite this growth, accessibility research remains scattered, with institutions largely determining for themselves if, when, and how they will extend their practices beyond minimum compliance. A new movement—Radical Accessibility—seeks to address this fragmentation by proposing ways for cultural organizations to adopt more standardized, expansive, and visitor-centered definitions of access. Radical Access advances design frameworks that respond to the full spectrum of visitor experiences, including cognitive and physical disabilities, educational variability, socioeconomic inequity, and linguistic and cultural diversity. The purpose of this Capstone is to analyze practical implementations of accessibility through existing museum case studies and strategic visitor surveys culminating in proposed solutions for institutions that have not yet embraced Radical Accessibility. While numerous scholars and institutions have defined aspects of accessibility, these definitions remain fragmented and lack a unified or measurable framework for Radical Accessibility. This project addresses that gap by articulating the current state of access needs from the perspective of diverse visitors and proposing criteria that can guide more consistent practice. This research is increasingly vital to the museum field, as evidenced by the growing number of accessibility toolkits published by leading institutions. In a time of financial instability, Radical Accessibility has the opportunity to enhance visitor experience, strengthen attendance, diversify audiences, and expand donor bases by ensuring that more people feel safe, welcomed, and supported. Moreover, museum educators carry an ethical responsibility to create inclusive spaces during a period of unprecedented dismantling of protections for marginalized communities in the United States. Although this project incorporates global perspectives, its framework is grounded primarily in U.S. legal requirements and U.S.-based institutional practices. As such, the accompanying accessibility guide is designed with U.S. contexts in mind. Accessibility in other countries may differ significantly. Future research could expand this approach internationally, acknowledging variations in law, culture, design norms, and community needs. Finally, the conclusions drawn from this study are limited by the demographics and experiences of the survey respondents.