Adapting multimedia-based materials

General

Multimedia, perhaps more than any other, is a highly context-sensitive medium. It is therefore difficult to lay down hard and fast accessibility rules. It is more important to understand the general principles, to recognize the ways in which accessibility can be added and to examine the context in which the multimedia will be used by learners. These themes are explored in more detail in the section, ‘Context of Use’.

Ideally, multimedia should be produced multimodally, i.e. each individual strand of picture, text and audio should self sufficiently convey the learning objectives as well as each strand supporting the other two to create an enriched communication.

The use of multimodal multimedia is a matter of good practice but there are common instances where it can be taken too far:

• People in dialogue should not be expected to describe their surroundings or 'noises off'.

• The use of text should not be limited because it requires 'voicing'; it is a legitimate stand-alone use of a technique for delivering a highly specialised form of information, e.g: credits; content of letters or historical documents etc. For these reasons, VIPs may need additional audio and/or adjustable print in multimedia production.

Rendering multimedia accessible depends critically upon identifying:

• where the audio strand does not convey the full import of the pictures and text
  
  
• where the pictures and/or text provide a difficulty for a VIP with residual vision.

In many cases – especially when working with legacy materials - describing the gaps to a learner is the most appropriate adjustment, allowing the learner to ask questions for clarification where needed. One of the characteristics of multimedia is that it contains a substantial degree of material which is redundant to the learning objectives.

Example – redundant versus relevant information

Redundant information in a multimedia presentation may occur when:

• the colour and style of clothes of participants are irrelevant to the content of their dialogue
• most background activity is incidental
• maps, diagrams and text captions simply reinforce the audio track
• the editing technique is 'manneristic' and self referential of a school.

Relevant information in a multimedia presentation may occur when:

• facial reaction is not recorded in dialogue
• images convey such messages as irony, suffering
• incut visual data provides parallels or reinforcement for dialogue.

For learners with residual vision supplementing access to multimedia is difficult as each person sees differently. Differences with visual acuity at short range are complicated by movement and the size and completeness of the visual field. Critically, a person may not know what they are not seeing.

Video description versus audio description - The purpose of verbal description is to provide the listener with additional information to that provided by the generic/standard audio track so that the learning objectives can be grasped. Such additional information takes two forms:

• 'voicing' information given in text only, e.g: name captions, locations, telephone numbers, web addresses - often referred to as ‘Video Description’
• describing integral scenes, actions and concepts - usually referred to as ‘Audio Description’, respectively e.g: the sun has just risen; he is creeping up behind her with a knife; they are exploring the idea of freedom and distance.

The last problem, conveying concepts, is by far the most necessary and the most difficult. There is evidence that VIPs value video description but there is no evidence that they particularly value audio description. However, audio description is only currently widely used for leisure and there is no research into its use in education; but to assume that it is required for some conceptual purposes is reasonable.

There is a particular problem where multimedia is used to test knowledge which would be given away by audio description. In this case an ‘equivalent’ exercise must be devised.

Audio description is highly specialised work and there are specialist providers of audio description for high stakes multimedia. In an educational institution the media studies department might bring significantly different skills to the task than the learning support practitioners/disability officers.

Range of adjustments

The appropriate reasonable adjustments will depend on the context of use. Different reasonable adjustments relate to differing contexts for example whether the materials

• form a major or minor element of a course,
• are to be used for repeated independent use or one-off supported use
• are available commercially (e.g. video of a mainstream film)
• are created by in-house experts or by modestly skilled teaching staff.

When creating multimedia materials for educational use the starting point should be to design them in such a way that each strand (audio, video, text) is as full an expression as possible of the learning objectives – and that each enriches and/or reinforces the other. There are exceptions to this general rule which might present particular problems for VIPs, e.g. when the authorial intention requires:

• silence - where audio description would damage the impact
• ambiguity between media - where a character says one thing while her face 'says' another
• bricolage - where the elements are assembled but where the different media do not and are not supposed to correspond tone - where playfulness and irony are important.

In these circumstances, 1:1 conversation, audio description or supporting text notes might be appropriate adjustments.

VIPs should be warned about the implications of courses with a high usage of multimedia where this cannot be straightforwardly handled; a distinction might be made between the use of commercial ‘audio described’ films of classic novels and the use of extensive presentations for the history of art. In some courses multimedia can produce a challenge but it rarely presents an insuperable problem.

In almost all cases, verbal description to support the use of multimedia is adequate except where:

• the textual element is so complex (e.g. clips where a narrator is interpreting data or text) that the relevant textual information should be provided in hard copy
• material is needed for repeated use where providing notes may be better than recording an audio description additional soundtrack.

Only in rare circumstances, therefore, would the provision of an audio description additional soundtrack be a reasonable adjustment. Formalised audio description is a highly skilled profession and is very expensive.

Technical and production issues

Critical to the whole process is the authorial intention - the learning objectives which are to be communicated - and the extent to which multimedia is adding value to traditional resources. Where narrative, video, text and animation are brought together with accessibility in mind there may be very few later adjustments required. Where multimedia is produced by non-specialists using entry level software and hardware the best adjustment is to ensure narrative, video and supporting text (e.g. subtitles, text summaries, etc.) mutually reinforce the key learning objectives.

Where educational institutions create inhouse multimedia using a specialist team they should note the relevant Web Accessibility Guidelines and the practical guidance available on the Skills for Access site. The options available may depend on software used in production and the hardware used in playback but where the options for accessible production exist, sloppy production techniques which render multi-media non-adjustable should be regarded as a breach of good practice and a barrier to reasonable adjustment.

If audio description is to be provided, it must be carefully scripted so that it fits conveniently into the gaps between speech in the generic product.

Audio description can either be 'mixed' into the generic product (pre-mix) or provided as a post-production feature (post-mix). Ideally audio description should be included in generic production but as this is usually complex and messy, experience shows that post-production audio description recording is better.

Audio description is contextual. It should be kept to a minimum to convey the elements of the authorial intention not conveyed in the generic product; these are usually one or more of:

• Where - the location in which action is taking place.
• What - actions not contained in a dialogue because the objective of a character is concealment (e.g. a character performing an action out of the vision of another character) or because narrating the information would be contrived (e.g. ‘So here we are sitting in a television studio’). Simple visual devices such as maps or captions (e.g. ’10 years later’, ‘London Euston, Autumn 1945’, etc).
• Who - characters who are easily recognised or who are described in captions.
• Why - Conceptual elements which can only be gleaned from the visual (e.g. the idea of space or claustrophobia; coldness; betrayal).
• Style - e.g. heightened colour; editing techniques.
• Salience - Aspects of the visual product which draw attention to themselves but which might be incidental to the other factors (e.g. director mannerisms).

Multimodal multimedia is created from 'granular' elements so good practice will ensure the different elements (video, text, audio) are archived before the final mixing. This allows individual adjustment in such matters as:

• enlargement/contraction
• contrast
• sound volume
• adjustable text size/font.

(NB: If a copy of the sound track is archived in its original multi-track format rather than being 'bound' into mono or stereo; this enables such elements as background noise to be excluded. This can benefit hard of hearing users as well as those requiring an extra audio description track).

Supporting deaf learners - In multimedia where the focus is on visual processes (for example, filleting a fish or assembling a gearbox) the absence of sound may detract little from the learning experience. In others however (possibly the majority) the audio track carries significant additional or reinforcing information. There are a range of ways of providing the missing information. These include providing:

• in-frame sign language translation
• an onscreen transcript
• subtitles of key points
• a separate text summary of the key information.

The decision about the most appropriate adjustment depends on both the learning objectives of the material and the context of use - see next section.

Providing text alternatives to narrative is a relatively quick adjustment but it is important to realise that the literacy levels of deaf learners are likely to be similar to other non-native speakers. It is important to provide definitions of technical terms or uncommon language.

Context of use

The context of use is critical in determining the appropriate reasonable adjustment. It must be recognized that

• multimedia is in itself an accessibility solution for many disabled users (for example those with dyslexia)
• many multimedia resources are legacy collections (for example video tapes of television programmes) where accessibility options are limited or non-existent
• the extent to which the visually impaired or deaf user is disadvantaged by multimedia depends on a complex interplay between;

• the nature of disability,
• the nature of the media,
• the nature of the learning objectives,
• the primacy of the multimedia resource in delivering the learning objectives and the manner in which the multimedia will be delivered (for example with or without tutor support).

Many multimedia resources have partial accessibility – i.e. they may be wholly accessible to some disabled learners, partially accessible to others and wholly inaccessible to some.

When creating new multimedia learning resources accessibility should be maximised within the context in which they are to be used. In the case of significant course materials with a long shelflife and high production values this implies subtitling, explicit narrative and (if appropriate) video or audio description. In contrast, multimedia produced for a more transient context (for example, video clips from fieldwork for revision purposes) may be more appropriately dealt with by ensuring the narrative and the video effectively reinforce one another by conveying the same message.

Banning the use of partially accessible multimedia is potentially more discriminatory than using it.

Conclusion

• It is considerably easier to add accessibility at the start of a multimedia resource than it is to retrofit it afterwards.
• Multimedia resources, and their use, are highly context sensitive and the most appropriate reasonable adjustment will differ according to the context.
• When using legacy materials a one-to-one discussion with the learner may be the most effective reasonable adjustment from the perspective of both the learner and the institution.
• When creating new materials accessibility should be considered from the beginning in the way visual, audio and textual materials complement rather than replace one another.
  
• Materials are created by an inhouse development team subtitling should be included wherever possible and the individual multimedia elements should be produced so that they are individually adjustable (hardware and software support this) or at least the contributory elements should be archived so they can be manipulated individually if required. Audio description may be appropriate for some resources.
• Textual summaries of the key information may be required.

Further Advice and Guidance Sheets

User Needs Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 105 KB)
Audio Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 102 KB)
Drag & Drop Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 107 KB)
Multiple Choice & Gap Fill Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 105 KB)
Video Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 120 KB)
Flash Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 183 KB)
PowerPoint Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 113 KB)
Animation Advice & Guidance Sheet ( - 137 KB)