Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

drsarah 24 May 2007 16:39

Before we start in on this conversation, I want to say that I KNOW none of you use television regularly as an instructional tool. You ALWAYS rely on interactive, student-based hands-on learning experiences and would NEVER plop your students down in front of a video. The point of this forum is to look at technologies like Descriptive Video Service (DVS) and Closed Captioning (CC) as examples of alternative methods of presenting information. If a student cannot, for whatever reason, see or hear what you are doing in the classroom, these tools might represent ways in which they might be able to access the information or interaction that is taking place.

DVS and CC are technology that may be helpful for people with visual impairments or hearing impairments when they are "watching" a movie or television program. With these technology, the scenes and movements in the movie are described without interrupting the script or other important audio information. You can find out more about DVS and CC at http://main.wgbh.org/wgbh/pages/mag/services/.

DVS and CC are available on many television programs, and you can hear it by switching to the SAP (supplemental audio program) channel on your television. It is also available on some videotape and DVD recordings. Check out this technology. You can see an example of both these types of technologies at this website, which, by the way is a great tool for teaching evolution. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/educators/teachstuds/tvideos.html

After you have had a chance to check out DVS and CC, either online or via your own television, please comment in this space: How does DVS compare to the visual information on the screen? How accurate are CC? How might these technologies impact the learning of students who cannot see or hear well? Could you use tools like these in the classroom?

Last edited on 24 May 2007 17:21 by drsarah Show more

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

kholtschlag 06 Jul 2007 23:50

Closed captioning and dvs need not necessarily be limited to assisting students with special needs. Closed captioning, in particular, can be a powerful technology for teaching various linguistic nuances in the English language.

We used closed captioning this year when we read, acted out, and then watched Shakespeare's Hamlet. After having read the play via Perfection Learning's parallel text series, students then translated their understanding of the events in the play into mini-skits of their own. After each scene, we would watch Kenneth Branaugh's version of Hamlet. Of course, Branaugh speaks with a British accent, as do all the characters in that version of the play. My students, from Northeast and Southeast DC, had difficulty, to say the least, understanding the Shakespearean words spoken in a British accent. They constantly asked, "Why do they have to talk like that?!" We used closed captioning so that they could read and understand the words as they were spoken, but also to show how different the British sound compared with their people in DC.

I think it was empowering for my students to address code-switching in this way. Ordinarily, they are asked to translate their own dialect into standard English. There's a misconception there that implies that certain dialects of English are "more correct" than others. Explaining that each dialect of English has its slangs and nuances and is equally incorrect led us to an interesting linguistic discussion of how language changes and why.

This code-switching activity could have been enhanced if students were then asked to write their own versions of a scene from Shakespeare's play. Then, using the same closed captioning, they could apply their words to the words of Shakespeare. It could be a relevant activity that shows how language simultaneously differs and perseveres across continents and eras.

The concept of closed captioning could be extended further to interpret literature in a whole new way. Instead of hearing the words and reading the subtitle, students could read the words, for example, in a book such as "For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide When the Rainbow Isn't Enough". Here, we have an example of a highly developed slang style of writing. Students could use the idea of closed captioning by making their own "subtitles" to the various poems contained in the book, in essence, putting the poetry into their own words. This could be a fascinating study not only of slang and code-switching, but of theme, context, and author's purpose.

We all have some type of disability when it comes to hearing the dialect of other cultures, especially if we use Tom Shakespeare's definition of disability (as a social construct). Closed captioning can lead us to some powerful discussions of grammar and code-switching, as well as interpretive elements of literature such as theme, how context impacts author's perception, and diction.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

ericka 25 Jul 2007 21:53

Kristen, I agree that Closed Captioning (CC) and adaptive technology such as DVS have a lot of applications beyond its traditional usage. In my own classroom I have used my school’s multi-media equipment to access online sources to bring life to subject matter. For example, while discussing the poetry of T.S. Elliot I used the internet to access the songs and lyrics of TuPace for the students to analyze the similarities and differences between the two artist. During discussion of this analysis I easily accessed addition resource to enrich the lesson. The impact of teachable moments like these is what makes modern technology so useful for reaching all types of learners with all types of needs.
Also, I have developed a relationship with the local adaptive technology representative from the organization, Reading For the Blind and Dyslexic, with there help I have been able to get books on tape, CD and even software for reading the text off the computer. This allows students to listen to an audio version of the books they are reading.

Check out this site for more info.

Reading For the Blind and Dyslexic, http://www.rfbd.org

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

tbouldin 03 Aug 2007 15:45

I also try to use recorded audio books and internet sound clips as much as possible.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

decicco13 29 Jul 2007 12:45

I wish I knew about DVS and CC this past school year! I’ve have used videos in my biology & environmental science classes as ways to take “virtual field trips.” We took a virtual field trip to the Galapagos Islands with the help of the National Geographic Channel’s three part special on Charles Darwin. I designed activities that required students to take “field notes” as if we were exploring the islands and their animals. The idea was that we would make similar observations to those that Darwin made and look at how he arrived at his conclusions.

After reviewing DVS and CC, I agree with Kristen’s point that all students could benefit from these technologies. Specifically in science, were information is often communicated in an unfamiliar “code,” these technologies could help students learn relevant science vocabulary by seeing it while hearing it. CC in particular could assist student with ‘how’ to take notes by providing text and helping with spelling. DVS, however, could be extremely powerful in help students learn exactly ‘what’ notes to take. Technologies that are designed to make accurate descriptions for visually impaired individuals will provides students with examples of the details necessary for useful field notes that will allow them to ‘visualize’ what they have seen. I will certain incorporate these technologies into future activities.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

EmilyGreenlee 03 Jul 2007 18:54

After navigating the websites on DVS and Closed Captioning I found that through DVS you can provide students who are blind or visually impaired with a narration of the visual elements of a specific program, film, website, or other type of visual media. DVS has the capability to describe the costumes of characters within the program, the actions that occur throughout a program, the changing landscape, facial expressions of characters, and the many other aspects of a program that a visually impaired individual would ordinarily not be able to experience. It appears that descriptions are most often prepared for programs ahead of time however it is possible to have live descriptions or descriptions to assist with website and DVD menu navigation. Captioning is a method used to give individuals who are hearing impaired access to visual media. When captioning is used for pre-produced programs, the captions are considered to be 100% accurate however when captioning is used for live programs producers can not guarantee that the information will be portrayed at the right time and it can not be 100% accurate.

I watched the Ken Bingman video on the PBS website to determine how I could use DVS in the classroom. The first time through I shut my eyes and listened to the entire video and the second time through I simultaneously watched and listened to the video. After watching the video, I felt that I had still missed out on specific aspects of the video, including all of the physical aspects of students, classroom, and teacher. The person who was describing the program could have added more about the environment and physical features of the video during moments of silence or at the beginning of the evolution video. I believe that it would be beneficial for visually impaired individuals to know the age group of the students, which they may not be able to determine simply through listening to the students’ voices.

From my experience on the PBS website I would want to be certain that the DVS or Captioning that I provided to assist the learning of students who are visually or hearing impaired successfully provided those students with the same learning experience as all other students. If the programs were described thoroughly through DVS or Captioning I do believe that these services would greatly improve the learning experienced by visually or hearing impaired students. I also believe that it would increase the level of learning for students who are not visually or hearing impaired in my classroom. Many times students do not receive all of the information provided by a video the first time through and they are unable to observe the environment of the video while listening to the dialogue. The Description and Captioning give all students greater access to the educational content of a video. In my classroom I would use the DVS or Captioning programs as a station during the work period. Students would be in small groups where they could be close to the video screen and focus on both the content and physical aspects of the media.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

bankse 16 Jul 2007 00:47

While I agreed with many of the accuracies/inaccuracies that other people reported, I cannot help but wonder what other options those with visual and/or hearing impairments have when they wish to learn through movies. On that note, are movies really a viable way for these students to be learning? Yes, these students have the right to seek out movies as a form of entertainment, but what place should they have in a classroom?

Most good books do a wonderful job of using all sorts of literary techniques letting us see the setting, the characters, and all of their interactions. While the DVS narratives (in some cases) were very accurate and easy to follow, do they have as much to offer as well-written books? Who are the people people writing DVS narratives? I have trouble believing that many of these offer the same level of description and artistry that talented writers are able to evoke. As a result, might this group of student's time be better spent reading or being read to out of books when videos are being shown for educational purposes? I'd be interested to hear what people think.

As far as closed captioning, this clearly seems to be the most viable means for the hearing impaired to access movies. When I was studied abroad in Chile, I saw a number of American films in the theaters there with closed captioning in Spanish. Comparing the Spanish I was reading and the English I was hearing, I was always struck by how poorly they often aligned. There were frequently errors or phrases that did not fully communicate the actual dialogue. While the language difference naturally made closed captioning more difficult to produce, it opened my eyes to how inaccurate the English dialogue I read in other foreign films might be. While this is less of an issue when a film is being translated into the same language in which it was made, inaccuracies still exist. It seems this is a problem that is far easier to fix than that of the DVS narratives mentioned above. Translations and closed captioning need to be taken more seriously if companies are going to advertise it as a viable tool for English language learners and students with hearing impairments.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

RachaelG 19 Jul 2007 05:17

I agree that the potential for integrating multisensory/multiple modality experiences by using CC or DVS makes it an interesting choice even for students without disabilities. I also know from the times I have mistakenly gotten my tv set stuck on CC that the literal transcriptions of language are a linguistic jungle gym of errors, ironies and contradictions even when they are technically accurate. I once tried to do an exercise video with the closed captioning on and found doubled over with laughter as interrupted phrases such as: "one, two, tuck it, pull, it 3, 4, you got it, 6 alright!" marched across the screen. These were accurate transcriptions, but so disjointed and literal that they missed the point. I think of it as almost as silly as sitting with a language dictionary to literally translate every word of a tv show into a different language and hoping the resulting transliteration still makes sense. It would be an interesting study of the differences between spoken and written language we try to stress so much in student writing to compare the experience of reading something that was intended to be spoken. It also could be used to reinforce the value and necessity of communicative punctuation so that something meant to be spoken can first be written, but with a map, or set of directions of how to speak it implied by the punctuation. I think i would use this in my classroom to highlight the differences between spoken and written dialects because that's what stood out to me when I experienced closed captioning, but in terms of its utility for students with disabilities, I think I would have to ask them to think critically about whether their experience of the show was enhanced or befuddled by this extra input, because I can't imagine what it would be like to rely on it. I also assume they would have become somewhat expert at relying on it in other settings and that the idiosyncracies that bother my untrained eyes wouldn't phase them.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

kainjeri 25 Jul 2007 15:39

I just want to piggyback on what you (Emily) said about the Ken Bingman website. It was weird because I remember when I first opened it the video actually played, so when you said you closed your eyes I thought that I would do that as well the next time I reopened the link…However this time when I went back to watch the video there was not any video, just the sound. I agree that the narrator could have given more details. Bigman talks about these activities that he uses to engage the students, but he didn't actually describe what the activities entailed. Then he just goes on to introduce the lesson.

The topic of evolution as he taught it seemed so DRY to me. If I were visually impaired and had to listen to this descriptive video I think that I would have turned it off. There just weren’t enough descriptive details throughout the program.

I still don’t feel as though I understand this DVS technology. According to the explanation of DVS, “We describe key visual elements in a program that a viewer who is visually impaired would ordinarily miss. Actions, costumes, gestures and scene changes are just a few of the elements that, when described, engage the blind or visually impaired viewer with the story. A carefully written script is prepared by a trained describer, read by a professional narrator, and mixed in a professional audio production suite for broadcast-quality results.”

I have heard stories on NPR and felt as though the sounds that the audio engineers capture are far more descriptive than what I watched on the PBS web network.

On the other hand, the closed captioning (CC) that was used for Bonnie Chen and Marilyn Havlik seemed accurate. I do agree that if there is a live broadcast then it is harder for the captions to be accurate to a program.

Both technologies have the ability to help visually and hearing impaired children within the classroom. I am still a little skeptical of the DVS because I did not get the full picture of its benefits for the blind.
Although I have never had to use either forms of technology, I would like to have more access to resources that provide these services for specific classroom topics and discussions.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

Bob Jarvis 23 Jul 2007 20:41

My first impression after viewing the PBS video with Descriptive Video Service (DVS) was how difficult it must be for someone to actually glean a useful amount of information from the extra descriptive audio. It is not 100% clear to me which voice(s) were DVS but I assumed only the narrating male voice was DVS. In any case, there is simply not a lot of extra information provided in the DVS audio. For example, the DVS narrator states, "the students look at the computer screen" but the video images reveal how many students, what they look like, what the classroom looks like, and more. I was expecting the DVS track to provide more information than it did. When there is an acute shortage of information due to vision impairment, however, every additional source is helpful and should therefore be utilized.

Closed captioning (CC), while it can be prone to errors, does serve a valuable purpose in providing a second source (visual text) for all audio information. Not only is this helpful to hearing impaired children, but also English language learners and learning disabled and other children that have tendencies towards distraction. I imagine almost every child (and most adults) hears a new word or two during a science video, and having text to reinforce the audio is particularly helpful. In one of the PBS segments, "wading birds" are discussed. I wondered how many kids, in a class of 25, might have thought they were discussing "wedding birds" until they saw "wading birds" spelled out in the caption text. More information, especially redundant or complementary information presented in a different learning style, is almost always a good thing. Of course, each individual production has to be evaluated for quality information in all its channels.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

kholtschlag 27 Jul 2007 00:13

Bob when I read your post I was reminded of a workshop I attended during the ASCD's annual conference on "Making Learning Stick." The presenter (Linda Hiller, whose really good powerpoint is here: cmsweb1.loudoun.k12.va.us/50930122132143/lib/50930122132143/Brain_VSTE_07.pdf) mentioned certain ways of retaining information, and as you mention with the example of the new words in science, presenting text with an image, and especially with animation, is one of the most effective ways to make someone remember what was presented in class.

That being said, and taking into account Emily's well taken point about the lack of artistry (and accuracy, for that matter) that goes into writing these closed captions, I will have to adapt my previous statement about CC being used in the classrooms to say that it can be used in certain contexts. Certainly it is an effective tool for reinforcing certain information. It is also useful for interpreting language for ESL, ELL, or -in our case- students whose first language is English but who don't understand Shakespeare :). This may be the extent of CC's usefulness in the classroom. As far as being a substitute for literature, CC is not. Which is why, I suppose, Sarah framed this technology as a "tool" for the classroom, rather than a primary mode of instruction.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

willrhale 27 Jul 2007 12:56

Not only did I think that the DVS provided in the Introduction to Evolution segment was limited, it made me wonder what kind of impact the creator of the service can have on influencing the "listener". It seems to me that whoever creates the DVS audio track can really dictate a lot of feeling and emotion by leaving out aspects of the action. I thought of this in regards to events with heavy loads of speaking, such as debates. A lot can be said about a person by their body language, emotion, facial expression that can dictate more meaning that than the words being spoken. Then again if you are blind, you might have a more keen and sensitive ear to reading emotion through speech and the judgments based on physical language might not ever be a factor anyways?

As a teacher, I have only used one video to help introduce a topic in class. It was a video that shows population growth across the World from 0 AD projected to 2030. What's funny is that I actually provided my own DVS track to it by simply pausing and pointing out some important spurts in the population growth and discussing some of the causes. I guess one of the fundamental differences in my approach, is that DVS offers and uninterrupted service.

In my experiences with CC, I have found it to be invaluable in my own life while watching films at home. I often turn on CC for certain movies where I just can't quite pick up the audio clearly. I can see the value of CC in the classroom for appealing to not only students that cannot hear well, but students who might respond better to the visual words. See the words can not only clarify what is being said, but can also reinforce spelling. My issue would be that physically in my classroom with my small TV, it would be impossible to have the CC be accessible to everyone. I wonder if there is any information regarding visual range and CC as a function of screen size?

In my search for visual range of CC versus screen size, I ran across this site that has some interesting information on timelines with CC and other information related to the impact the ADA act has had from the Federal Communications Commission perspective:
http://ftp.fcc.gov/cgb/dro/ada.html

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

ericka 25 Jul 2007 21:46

I think that multi-media adaptive technology has great potential to assist individuals with special needs. It was interesting to learn about Descriptive Video Service (DVS), I have known of Closed Captioning (CC) for a long time but DVS is new to me. I would be interested in conversing with someone that uses it regularly. My limited experience left me feeling a slightly frustrated because I could not find examples of the technology easily. However, when I did find an online example, I found it to have a lot of potential. For example I found one clip from the Lion King using DVS and immediately thought to myself if this surely makes watching The Lion King more enjoyable and enriching for a visually impaired child. And it should certainly be used. One issue that comes to mind however is the issue of cost. Not everyone has access to the technology required for DVS nor the technological knowledge necessary to operate it. Compared to DVS, closed captioning (CC) is everywhere and can be used with ease DVS would have to be become more wide spread to be truly accessible to all people with special needs.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

shakbates 27 Jul 2007 05:39

I agree that CC and DVS can be utilized in many ways beyond their traditional usage. I am very familiar with Closed Captioning but this is my first encounter with Descriptive Video Service. I have not used either of these in my own classroom but recall an exercise assigned to me by on of my high school Drama teacher. The assignment was simple, that night everyone would watch an episode of one of three television shows (which I don’t remember) and write a summary of what happened in the episode, paying close attention to tone. The fun part was, half would watch the ‘normal’ way and the other half would watch with CC. When we came in and shared our accounts of what happened, many students would have a general idea of the story line, but could not give details or good descriptions of emotion. There were missing pieces to the story and confusions about what a character intended to say and how the intended it to be received. Much of the storyline was generalized, leaving out key aspects of discussions between characters.

After watching and listening to the PBS videos, I am somewhat skeptical of its precision. It gave very broad descriptions and at some points was a little too ‘noisy’. In both Bingman and Chen’s videos when grouping was done, you could the hear students moving around but had no idea what they were doing. Also, when the narrator described what the beaks of the wading birds were made of, with my eyes closed I could not get a ‘visual’ of the beaks. With improved verbalization DVS and CC can certainly be used as tool in classrooms for students with and/or without visual or hearing impairments.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

torib3a 27 Jul 2007 19:02

As a reading teacher, I use the archaic methods of “closed captioning” for my kids when they are reading: I give them books on tape to follow along to while they are looking at the text in front of them. For struggling readers, this structure is an invaluable tool that immensely aids in comprehension and understanding of subject matter for my kids. The dualistic nature of the words in front of them and in their ears helps them to grasp the sentences on the page in ways that only doing one or the other can never hope to do. Closed captioning is also fantastic for ELL students, giving them something to read while they hear the words spoken, a must for those learning a second language. Closed captioning is vital for those with hearing impairments, allowing them to access shows they could not otherwise watch. In looking at the CC videos on the site, it is easy to see that, with a pre-printed script, the accuracy between spoken and written word is 100%. Later than day, after viewing the CC at the site listed, I later went home and put the CC on MSNBC. Even though the CC was not perfect, as someone was writing it real-time, it was easily 90-95% accurate, still giving me the very same meanings from the verbal interviews and relaying of stories. So, in all, this is a fantastic technology to use for those students in your class with audio impairments. As for the DVS technology, as others mentioned, still in need of work to really capture the scenes at hand. YET it is better than anything we have had before, and I am sure just a pure foundation for newer technologies currently being developed for visually impaired students. I would not hesitate to use it in my classroom, and this technology would provide a great introduction to teaching visualization as a reading strategy to my kids. When I have them read and visualize, they are acting like the creators of DVS technology, painting a picture for the audience of what they read on the page. In effect, the outcome is no different! also, when we are talking about the limits of DVS technology, that it does not give the full depth or give all the images, think about when you walk into a room, you won’t notice EVERYTHING there, but only concentrate your attention on a few specific objects and people. You won’t be able to take in everything just by passing through, but you can get most of it; DVS does the same! Also, I love the comments about CC and code-switching in the first post above. I do something similar with my kids when we read poetry, which can be so challenged to interpret. I do opening activities with my kids in our poetry unit using rap songs, as this is a medium my kid can access and understand. There are tons of metaphors, slang words, and figurative meanings in rap music, and I use it to have my kids start thinking about the way we use words in writing. I play up my “old, white lady” status and have my kids “interpret” the meanings of the phrases in the songs for me. we then transfer that practice to interpreting the language in poetry. In essence, we make subtitles to our reading of rap and poetry so that we can understand. In short, I would use both CC and DVS in my classroom to teach even general ed kids about different concepts, and I would certainly use them with visually or audio impaired children as well!

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

bettieantrim 31 Jul 2007 15:53

I thought using both closed captioning (CC) and digital video service (DVS) were practical and helpful ways to make media available to people who are blind, deaf or need help seeing or hearing.

However, I agree with Kai and was really surprised at the descriptive narrations in the PBS evolution videos weren’t more elaborate. As an avid listener of NPR, I am constantly entertained and informed by talk radio when I am in my car, washing dishes, or bored. One of my favorite programs, The Big Broadcast, comes on Sunday nights and plays the old radio shows from the 40’s and 50’s.

http://www.wamu.org/programs/bb/

I really get so into shows like Gunsmoke and Dragnet because they do such a great job describing what is going on around them and the expressions of the characters are so vivid. I understand that the PBS programs on evolution couldn’t possibly as entertaining, but I know that if I were blind and had to listen to the information without seeing the video, I would lose interest really quickly. I think the descriptions could have been clearer, maybe even have given a summary of what happened in the lesson at the end of the video.

The technology of the Rear Window Captioning was fascinating to me. I thought it was so cool that people who needed CC in a movie theater could have just a reflector and automatically have words transferred onto the screen without bothering anyone! MoPix, the maker of this product states, “The patented Rear Window® Captioning System displays reversed captions on a light-emitting diode (LED) text display which is mounted in the rear of a theater. Deaf and hard-of-hearing patrons use transparent acrylic panels attached to their seats to reflect the captions so that they appear superimposed on the movie screen. The reflective panels are portable and adjustable, enabling the caption user to sit anywhere in the theater.”

Researching and thinking about CC and DVS made it clear to me how important it is to use audio and visual accompaniments to lessons. Not only will using media help make lessons stick as many of you mentioned, but also using closed captioning would help younger children learn how to read. Another idea would be to have children read a book on tape to practice reading or have a child make a recording describing the important sequences and details in a video.

Last edited on 31 Jul 2007 15:55 by bettieantrim Show more

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

dgordon17 31 Jul 2007 20:05

Bettie, great connection to the old-time radio shows! The DVS narrators should surely take some tips from the Dragnet & Gunsmoke crews. (My wife loves those and has started to get me hooked…)

Everyone's critiques of the DVS videos are well taken. I wonder, though, if we viewed a "model" video for DVS if we would feel differently. The evolution clips may simply be poor examples of the technology in action. (Though I loved seeing the beak evolution experiment — Greenlee, wouldn't that be great in class?) Has anyone found a better example?

My take on DVS is simply that it helps make mainstreaming the Least Restrictive Environment for visually impaired students. The more that technology can do to help these students learn in a mainstream class, the better. The key now is to improve the quality of the narration.

As an English teacher, I'm not sure I would use DVS in my classroom unless I had a student who needed it. I do my own version of DVS by stopping video/audio clips to comment, question, critique, etc. The value in using media is in using them as teaching tools, not as time-fillers. So to the extent that I add (or, more accurately, ask my students to add) descriptions of what's going on in a particular clip, I suppose I use DVS. But I don't really see how DVS on its own is an effective teaching tool for visually un-impaired students.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

dgordon17 01 Aug 2007 16:21

I agree with the generally positive reviews of closed captioning. It is a great benefit to ELL students and is a close relative to that great friend of the struggling readers: books-on-tape.

At Bell, where I teach, the huge ELL population make closed captioning a must when showing video clips. I generally find the translations of information texts to be of high quality, but still pretty lacking in subtlety or beauty when dealing with artistic videos like films. Just ask any Chinese speaker about the CC for "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." It's very spare dialogue on the CC but apparently very rich and multi-layered in the original Chinese.

But my main point in this posting is to add a different take on using CC with ELLs. Twice during my 10th grade class's study of Latin American short stories and magical realism, I showed video clips in Spanish with English in the closed captioning. Reversing the use of it and placing the "burden" of using the CC on the native speakers was an interesting and useful exercise. The ELLs were able to be the leaders in explaining the nuance and the inside jokes of the dialogue that the CC didn't express. For some of my lowest-level speakers, this was a great opportunity to be a class leader on language issues. It also provided the native-English-speakers with a good lesson in empathy, as they experienced a taste of what ELLs live with day in and day out.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

EmilyGreenlee 01 Aug 2007 21:15

Dgordon, I think that it was a great idea to "burden" your native speakers by requiring them to read the captions of a Spanish video. Our English department did the same thing this past semester and it gave the ELL students an oppotunity to become leaders in the classroom and it also increased their level of engagement. I think it is imporant to attempt to switch roles whenever possible in the classroom. At Bell, we have a very diverse student population however the ELL students are typically overshawdowed by their native speaking peers. As dgordon pointed out, CC can be used both to enhance learning experiences for students with language expceptionalities and to encourage their role as leaders in the classroom.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

dgordon17 02 Aug 2007 03:24

Emily…I am in "our" English department. :) This is Dan Gordon. But nice work knowing what's going on in other departments in the school!!

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

Dfoard 02 Aug 2007 02:03

Actually, my husband (newlywed for 4 days now-honeymoon starts this friday..yes!!!!) turned me on to CC and subtitles. CC was actually his favorite device when he first came to this country from South America. Every since I watched my first movie with him using subtitles, I have never stopped. It is an amazing feature that not only a native english learner can benefit from but more importantly can benefit an ESL or ELL student.

In another instance, I have a co-worker who is deaf that works in a D.C.P.S middle school. She is amazing and she picks up on every word that you said because she reads lips. The one accommodation that I always must remember is to face her when I am speaking to her or others that are in the room. This often can be forgotten and if you speak fast, it can be an even greater problem. Therefore, as a teacher I took this lesson from my social interaction with my colleague and tried to slow-up my speech and to always try to face my students when speaking to them.

What are CC and DVS?

CC, or closed captioning, displays spoken dialogue as printed words over television and online video. Unlike subtitles, captions are specifically designed for viewers who are deaf and hard of hearing. Captions are carefully placed to identify speakers, on- and off-screen sound effects, music, and laughter.

DVS®, or Descriptive Video Service, makes television programs, feature films, home videos, and other visual media accessible to people who are blind or visually impaired. DVS describes key visual elements in a program that a viewer who is blind or visually impaired would ordinarily miss. Actions, costumes, gestures, and scene changes are just a few of the elements that, when described, engage the viewer in the story.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

kamilah dixon 31 Jul 2007 22:25

I was suprised when I saw the DVS website. I never heard of such a thing and I guess as a visual person I wouldn't! I too at first was skeptical about the descriptions used by DVS and how effective they would be for a blind population. I then started to think that my power of visualization with my eyes closed is COMPLETELY different than a person who is visually impaired. A person who depends on such visualization daily would certainly make more of visual descriptions than someone who is using as a secondary technique. I guess what I'm trying to say here is how accurate is our perception of this technology as far as its usefulness for blind students? I would also be curious to see the reflections of the visually impaired and would obviously rate this critique much highly than those of visual adults.

I think the CC technique is great, when it is accurate. I often times find myself using it when I'm on the phone and trying to watch TV. It is interesting to see how oftne there are changes to what is said and what effect that has on the interpretation of the program. I guess if we consider a hearing impaired adult who is able to read lips, it is clear that these errors will also be detected. Educationally, I agree with most of you that there is benefit to the CC. I know I used CC in my classroom for various videos mainly because in an open-space environment, often times my students couldn't hear the videos well. Using CC enabled my students to capture all that was being said in the movies.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

nthusseini 03 Aug 2007 03:49

haha, i didnt know "dgordon" was you Dan! (This is Najla) Glad to have another Bell teacher in the forums =)

I think many of you have hit the cae and point for how CC and DVS can be used in the classroom. I know that CC was definitely helpful for my ELL students at Bell as well. I took for granted how difficult it can be to decipher different English accents. Furthermore, as a history teacher I sometimes use documentaries with my lessons. I totally took for granted that students would be able to distinguish between the narrator's voice and the voice of someone reading a primary source like a diary entry. It was very confusing for many of my students why the voice would change in the video and the speaker would be using something like Old English (although most of the students could not identify the language as old language… it was just something that sounded "weird"). Using CC helped my students track the differences in the speakers. Eventually less students had to rely on the CC (or me) to figure out what was going on.

In another AU course we spent a lot time discussing the use of technology, or "assistive technology", with special educaiton. The amount of technology out there to support student's needs is really remarkable. I strongly encourage teachers to do their own quick searches on assistive technology because you just might find something you'll want to use down the road!

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

tbouldin 03 Aug 2007 14:33

As many other students posted, I had no idea what DVS was, though I do recall seeing the acronym in the lower right hand corner of my television before various shows began. DVS is used to provide a narrative description of what is transpiring on screen, which is excellent for visually impaired students. Taking this one-step further, it can also be used for students with short attention spans, or as a supplement to aid in comprehension. Most times, the descriptions are pre-recorded, which can provide a slight drawback for live programs or programs where DVS is not available.
I have used CC before. I began using it in fifth grade. My parents finally put a small television in my bedroom, but I was only allowed to watch it during the day. I soon figured out that I could mute the television, so my parents could not hear, and turn on captions. This worked wonderfully. In addition, sometimes I would turn on the captions when watching action movies so I would not miss conversations taking place during an explosion or any other loud event. Still, from this experience I found out that the captions are not always 100% correct, and some times words were omitted, or the word order was flawed
Though CC and DVS are not perfect, they are very strong resources for students with visual and hearing impairments. I do believe each offer enough to aid in overall comprehension. I will definitely use both in my classroom in the upcoming school year.

Re: Group Two Discussion on Technology in Special Education

torib3a 03 Aug 2007 15:53

So, with all this talk about closed captioning and then our other class on technology and the use of the Internet for instruction, I started wondering about how hearing impaired children would listen to videos/programs on the web, given that it is one of the most accessed technological tool for young people today. And, I found a great article on it from Wired: I had never heard of this technology before, but it sounds great!

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2000/03/35074

Web Closed Captioning Simplified
Karen Solomon 03.31.00 | 3:00 AM
A new freeware tool allows creators of streaming audio and video to make their websites more accessible to the sight- and hearing-impaired by adding captions and subtitles, as well as voice-over descriptions of images, to Web-based multimedia and CD-ROMs.
The Media Access Generator, nicknamed MAGpie, was released last week by the National Center for Accessible Media at WGBH-TV in Boston.
"There's no other utility available that allows users to automate the [captioning] process," said MAGpie project manager Geoff Freed. "Before MAGpie, if you wanted to add captions, you had to type in formatting codes and timecodes. To caption a 10-minute clip, it took two to three hours. With MAGpie's automation, it takes about 30 to 40 minutes."
MAGpie, a PC-only application, supports the most popular media streaming technologies, including RealNetworks, Windows Media, and QuickTime.
Developers import the text to be captioned into MAGpie, and have the option of changing fonts or adding color. MAGpie drops in the text or voiceover and automatically assigns the timecodes to the captions. It then saves the merged files in the popular streaming formats.
"I tried to code before MAGpie, but it was way too difficult," said Jeff Pledger, president and CEO of AbleTV.net, a network of programming for the disabled.
Pledger, a blind Web developer, said that while entering the text to create the captioned video streams may be time-consuming, it "provides access where there was none before."
"We know how difficult it is to get people to pay attention to accessibility on the Web, and part of that difficulty is [that] making websites accessible takes a lot of time," said Chuck Hitchcock, chief technology officer at the Center for Applied Special Technology. "Every tool that makes it easier for developers to make media accessible is of a great benefit to disabled persons."
Twenty-two million people in the United States are deaf or hearing-impaired, but NCAM believes the audience for MAGpie may be even greater.
Freed said that educators can use captions as teaching tools, and that video subtitles help teach vocabulary to children and people learning foreign languages.
To enjoy captioned video or audio broadcasts, Web users don't need additional hardware or software, but they may need to change settings on the RealNetworks, Windows Media, or QuickTime players to turn on captioning. The RealNetworks G2 is the only player that allows users to hear audio descriptions of images.
Web viewers without a soundcard, or those whose working environment isn't conducive to sound, can also enjoy "hearing" captioned audio or video.
Freed said the text captions are searchable, which adds more functionality to websites.
NCAM has been dispensing information to developers who tried to make their website more accessible for years, and it hopes that simplifying the captioning process will make the practice more common.
"I'm hoping all developers will take advantage of this program that makes it so much easier," Freed said. "We've removed the excuses [for not making content accessible]. It's just part of good design that your website and all its components are accessible to everybody, and now it's much easier to do."
Hitchcock said that in the same way closed-captioned television is used in bars, everyone would benefit from MAGpie, not just the hard of hearing or deaf. But the software is crucial for people who are deaf and hard of hearing to gain access to information, he said.