BYOAD: Customize Content Accessibility Settings: Weekly Updates

Project Overview

Summary Week 9 (4/28/21)

Work summary

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

Using feedback from Fort Ticonderoga, whose content Caitlin used as an example in the guide, as well as feedback from the midterm update, Caitlin made significant updates to the plain language guide, including adding additional recommendations for writing and testing plain language content, integrating readability into design workflows, and clarifying what types of content this applies to and how it can be combined with other accessible content (e.g., audio transcriptions, translations). They also added annotations to the example plain language exhibit label as well as an example of how this might be displayed with other levels of readable content. 

Caitlin also made several updates to the main “Toolkit” page, including clarifying what content this applies to and adding a “something is better than nothing” guideline.

She is concerned about the length of the guide and is considering re-formatting it in on another platform, but that may be outside the scope of this project.

Caitlin migrated the content into WordPress.

Lynda revised the guide in its WordPress form. Lynda made edits to the final presentation powerpoint to integrate the translation accessibility section. She included the goal of the section as well as the process for creating the drafted documentation in the toolkit. Lynda worked on adding slides that demonstrate what is in the toolkit for the translation section and challenges she faced. Lynda also brain stormed with the team to identify the unified take-aways from this project and final feedback questions. Finally, Lynda worked on organizing the zoom meetings and took on the job of editing the closed -captions for the final presentation of the video. 

Audio descriptionS (Liz)

With the guide now in it’s final, WordPress form, Liz worked on honing the audio description presentation to assure that it is clear and concise. There are lots of audio description resources on the internet but audio description for museums and historic sites is a specific challenge. Zeroing in on essential process and pricing information, the intent is to provide the basics of audio description in a way that will prove most helpful to museum and historic site staff members who aim to make audio described videos for their institutions.

 

Next steps

• All:
  • Finalize our toolkit
  • Prepare our final presentation

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! 

Our current draft of our guide can be found here: Universal Content Design Toolkit. We would LOVE feedback! Feel free to add comments and questions to our prototype.

Summary Week 8 (4/22/21) (FEEDBACK FORM)

Work summary

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

In addition to a few revisions on the plain language guide, Caitlin created a plain language version (~4th-6th grade reading level) of the Militias exhibit content from Fort Ticonderoga. This replaced the previous example in the guide. They have sent this back to Ticonderoga for feedback, although the revision is currently freely available in the online version of the guide. They hope to further integrate feedback from stakeholders, as supplied in previous feedback forms.

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION APPROACHEs (Lynda)

Lynda continued to draft the information on the guide in preparation of final edits and submission of the guide. Lynda worked on translating a main panel text provided by Miranda Peters from Fort Ticonderoga. The process to translate the text from English to Spanish included using prior knowledge of the foreign language and google translate to provide the most accurate translation of the content piece.

Audio descriptionS (Liz)

After contacting a second group of audio description services, Liz is continuing to hear back from companies about their pricing. One area of particular concern is how making audio described videos can be a realistic goal for museums and cultural sites with limited resources. A DYI audio description app is one identified option, but Liz has been querying museum staffers about their experiences as well. Liz also begun drafting the guide, with the hope of getting feedback on the draft from museum staff and colleagues over the next week few weeks.

Next steps

• All:
  • Continue revising our toolkit
  • Identify evaluation methods
  • Finish working on deliverables for the final 

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! 

Our current draft of our guide can be found here: Universal Content Design Toolkit. We would LOVE feedback! Feel free to add comments and questions to our prototype.

Summary Week 7 (4/15/21) (Feedback FOrm)

Work summary

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

Caitlin rearranged the toolkit prototype to make each guide more clear, modular, and (hopefully) more usable. We now have an “Introduction” page that links to the three parts of our guide. The new toolkit is structured more like a website than a guidebook. Each of our guides now live in separate docs, which link back to each other and to the introduction page: Universal Content Design Toolkit

They also revised and formatted the Plain Language and Readability guide, including adding icons and descriptive text to the guidelines and incorporating a newly formatted version of the example content from Fort Ticonderoga. Caitlin also attended a webinar on “How Testing Your Documents Can Improve Plain Language Compliance,” hosted by Digital.gov, and information about content usability testing was included in the revised guide.

Caitlin has received positive feedback from students in the Museum Studies program as well as from museum experts who visited class last week, and she hopes to spend the next week creating a plain language version of the Ticonderoga exhibit content.

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION APPROACHEs (Lynda)

Lynda continued to navigate through the resources to accumulate more research for the drafted toolkit. Lynda focused on determining best practices that are commonly seen for translation in museums in NYC, such as The MET. Lynda arranged the information into what is relevant for the guide. Once the information was organized Lynda added the information into the drafted toolkit guide to be revised by the team to ensure a flow on the total work. Lynda followed up with https://www.merrimacktranslations.com/ to find out more about obtaining a quote for a video sample but has not heard back.

Next steps

• All:
  • Continue drafting and revising our toolkit
  • Identify evaluation methods

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! 

Our current draft of our guide can be found here: Universal Content Design Toolkit. We would LOVE feedback! Feel free to add comments and questions to our prototype.

Summary Week 6 (4/7/21) (Feedback FOrm)

Work summary

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

Using the materials sent from Fort Ticonderoga, Caitlin used Hemingway Editor to continuously measure the readability of an exhibit description and revise the text to meet plain language and readability best practices. Hemingway Editor’s built-in readability measurement tool rated the initial text as 12th grade reading level. The edited version is rated at an 8th grade reading level, which is at the end of the ideal (6th-8th grade). Hemingway Editor uses the Automated Readability Index. Other readability measurement systems still rate the revised version as more challenging than grade 8 (e.g., Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level rates the text as 10.4/10th grade). 

Caitlin sent the revised materials to Ticonderoga and asked for feedback. She intends to further edit the passage with feedback from the Ticonderoga team and further plain language guidelines to meet 8th grade reading level and also create a 4th/5th grade plain language version.

Caitlin also continued research into plain language and readability using resources shared during last week’s working meeting, including resources from the Museum Access Consortium and W3C. They also revised their portion of the guide using their findings. 

 

Audio descriptionS (Liz)

Last week’s Midterm presentations resulted in a flood of offered audio description resources and feedback. Hoping to fine-tune and improve the audio description portion of the content toolkit, Liz has been reviewing this information. Her goal is to distinguish the audio description toolkit from commonly available  audio description resources, offering clear, concise guidance on how to create successful audio descriptions.

Following an in-class group discussion with Elaine Charnov of the Intrepid, Liz reached out to Charlotte and Kyle at the Intrepid to get information about their experiences creating audio described videos for Intrepid exhibitions. She also researched the work of Dirk Vander Wilt, an NYU PhD candidate whose work focuses on audio description for live theater. 

Liz’s goal for this week is to make contact with more audio description service vendors, complete the first draft of the audio descriptions toolkit and to request video footage from museum partners for the audio description sample which will accompany the toolkit.

Next steps

• All:
  • Continue drafting and revising our toolkit
• Caitlin:
  • Continue revising and creating plain language content for Ticonderoga
  • Integrate examples and visuals into toolkit

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! 

Our current draft of our guide can be found here: Guide to Accessible Content We would LOVE feedback! Feel free to add comments and questions to our document.

Please complete our feedback form to answer our questions:
Feedback Form

Summary Week 5 (4/1/21)

Please see our midterm update.

SUMMARY WEEK 4 (3/25/21) (Feedback FORM)

We began working on documentation and a guide for creating multiple, accessible versions of content for museums and historical sites. For each topic under customized content accessibility (Translations, Plain Language, Audio Descriptions), we began writing brief descriptions of the WHAT, WHY, and HOW. In other words, why the accessible content is important and best practices, recommended tools/services, and sample workflows.

Our current draft can be found here: Guide to Accessible Content. We would LOVE feedback! Feel free to add comments and questions to our document. 

Work summary

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

Caitlin drafted an outline for the guide and began writing the chapter on Readability and Plain Language, including descriptions of what it is and why it’s important. They also started drafting best practices, although they are still working on the “recommended tools” section. She also began testing her best practices by starting to re-write the “Space Shuttle Enterprise” exhibit text from the Intrepid Museum using Hemingway Editor to meet 7-8th grade readability. 

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION APPROACHES (Lynda)

Lynda googled mass translation company in search of companies that provide mass translation for museums, exhibits, projects, etc. She picked 3 that stood out the most. She contacted https://www.translated.com/ by phone to gain information about the process of acquiring translation and the process of how a quote is calculated. No answer but she left a voicemail. Have not heard back yet. 

She contacted https://www.umass.edu/translation/ by phone asking the same questions as above. She left a voicemail. Have not heard back yet.

She contacted https://www.merrimacktranslations.com/ by phone asking the same questions as above. She left a voicemail and someone called her back. She got in contact with Muneeb (no last name) who is a representative that handles quotes for their company. She told Muneeb about our project and how we are interested in learning about how museums and historical sites can become more accessible through the translation of their information into different languages. She asked if they have ever worked with museums or historical sites before and he explained that they have done projected for the Museum of Science in Boston in relation to translating maps, for different projects for the city of Boston, and other projects (https://blossom-project.org/) that dealt with translating videos on their websites. Muneeb explained that for videos, the company can provide subtitles, translation of audio, or voice over. Quotes for this depend on the length of the video, how many voices are in the video, and how many videos in total need to be translated. She asked Mubeeb how much these translation services usually cost, in the thousands or tens of thousands and Muneeb could not give  an answer. He instead asked her to email him at Info@merrimacktranslations.com with an example of what She was looking to have translated and he can provide a quote. She emailed him with a few video links owned by the Intrepid.

Next steps

• All:
  • Coordinate our midterm report
• Caitlin:
  • Identify museums, organizations, etc. who already provide Plain Language versions of content to learn more about their workflows. 
  • Write “recommended tools” section, and write guidelines for incorporating these tools into workflows. 
  • Finish example content for 7-8th grade readability and a plain language (4th-5th grade) version.
•  

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! 

Our current draft of our guide can be found here: Guide to Accessible Content We would LOVE feedback! Feel free to add comments and questions to our document.

Please complete our feedback form to answer our questions:
Feedback Form

 

SUMMARY WEEK 3 (3/18/21) (Feedback FORM)

This week, our group researched and identified tools for integrating content translation and readability assessments into content creation/remediation workflows and worked towards finding recommendations. 

Work summary

ALL

We met outside of class to discuss our progress, review stakeholder feedback from our feedback forms, and reassess our final deliverable. Based on discussions with museum workers and the findings from our feedback forms, we have decided to focus on the third deliverable: Documentation and guide for creating multiple, accessible versions of content for museums and historical sites. For each topic under customized content accessibility (Translations, Plain Language, Audio Descriptions) the guide will include:

1. WHAT – What is it?
2. WHY? – What is this accessible content important?
3. HOW? – Best practices (summarized), recommended tools/services, sample workflows that integrate the recommended practices and tools/services

The guide will also integrate deliverable 1, examples of best practice models of multiple versions of exhibit content designed for accompanying text-based descriptions, audio tours, and videos to meet the needs of multiple audiences.

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

Caitlin investigated three online tools for assessing readability and supporting the writing of plain language: Hemingway Editor (which was mentioned as one tool used by staff in the feedback), Readable, and Grammarly — they all have their pros and cons. They are still researching additional tools. 

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION APPROACHES (Lynda)

Lynda investigated recommended tools and services for translating museum content. She called several services to discuss scope and pricing, and found that some services have experience with translating all content in a museum.

AUDIO DESCRIPTIONS (Liz)

Following the suggestions of Jessica Williams at the Intrepid, Liz has been engaged in intensive research into audio description best practices and audio description services and apps which could be utilized in an audio content creation workflow. Of particular note is the You Describe app/service, which offers a low cost means of adding audio description to YouTube videos and could be an excellent resource for our stakeholders. To test the functionality of this app, Liz will create an audio described sample of one of the Intrepid’s BYOAD videos for next class. She will also begin researching best practices and designing a workflow for the creation of tactile interpretations of artifacts, as suggested by Lauren Race.

After reviewing the feedback supplied by Lauren Race, Liz reached out to her with additional questions & concerns. Liz also contacted 6 different Audio Description services for pricing information. So far 2 companies have responded.

Next steps

Create an outline for the Content Accessibility Guide and begin filling in first drafts of the contents. Continue researching existing workflows, recommended tools and practices.

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! Please complete our feedback form to answer our questions:
Feedback Form

• What do you want to know about translating exhibit descriptions into other languages?
• What do you want to know about creating alternative, simple or plain language exhibit content?
• What do you want to know about creating and inserting audio descriptions into video content? 
• What are your biggest concerns about creating or remediating content for accessibility?

SUMMARY WEEK 2 (3/10/21) (Feedback FORM)

This week our group researched best practices and existing tools for each of our content accessibility interests. We also reviewed current exhibit content from the Intrepid BYOAD Mobile Site to understand the context in which we might be working as well as to identify content we might use for our design prototype. Our findings were posted in a shared Google Doc. 

Work summary

ALL

On Wednesday, we reached out to Charlotte Martin, head of accessibility at the Intrepid, to set up a time to discuss their current practices around content creation and accessibility. Meeting is TBD.

We also reviewed the responses to our Week 1 Feedback Form. Based on responses, we have concluded that the guidelines and templates we create should focus on processes, workflows, and tools that automate and streamline the work as much as possible (“The more work you can do to help the staff do LESS work, the better!”). The content we cover should also include verbal descriptions for tactile objects, closed captioning and transcripts (with visual descriptions). We also received validation that our goal of providing content options to visitors will give them more agency within museum spaces.

PLAIN LANGUAGE AND READABILITY (Caitlin)

Caitlin conducted an audit of the Exhibit Description and More Information content for each exhibit in the mobile Intrepid website (see Intrepid Mobile Site Exhibit Text Readability Audit). Using automated tools Readability Analyzer and Hemingway Editor, they recorded and graded the readability of this content using multiple readability score tests (Flesch Reading Ease; Gunning Fog Scale Level; Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level; SMOG Grade; Dale-Chall Score; Fry Readability Grade Level; and Automated Readability Index. Depending on which test is used, the “readability score” of content varies, and so it will be important to determine WHICH test(s) are prioritized in future processes. However, most content was found to be at or more difficult than an 8th grade reading level across multiple tests. Three exhibits in particular, (640. Space Shuttle Enterprise, 440. On the Line Exhibition, 410. Grumman/Eastern Aircraft TBM-3E Avenger) were identified as the most difficult to read, and they may be good samples to use.

Caitlin also reviewed the plain language workflow at the National Archives, who use tools and checklists, assign owners of plain language projects, train staff in plain language writing, and consult with customers to meet the required standard of plain language for their content. 

She also researched the average reading levels for U.S. adults as a benchmark for readability. Based on the 2002 publication, Adult Literacy in America: A First Look at the Findings of the National Adult Literacy Survey, they concluded that it is important to provide content at BELOW an 8th grade reading level, as up to an estimated 51% of U.S. adults can read at or below that grade level. In addition, adults within marginalized groups are more likely to read at or below that level. Providing access to lower levels of reading proficiency (< 8th grade) supports access and agency with museum spaces for many marginalized groups, not just people with disabilities.

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION APPROACHES (Lynda)

This week Lynda worked on translating a video on the Intrepid Website. She chose the video called “March 10 – Craft Restoration Live” which was a stored live stream of staff members cleaning the outside of the Enterprise Space Shuttle Orbiter. The video has was streamed on youtube and had the option of auto-generated closed captioning in English and auto-translation for other languages. It is unclear to know if these options are available during the live steam or added once the live stream was over. The auto-translation option for Spanish did not pick up the words very well because the sound was not clear. The sound was better picked up in English and the auto-generated captions in English were very accurate. Lynda used her own Spanish fluency and google translate to translate the video into a word document. Most videos on the Intrepid website are videos that are from an uploaded youtube video which all have the same settings for either auto-generated English captions or auto-translation for other languages. This does not seem like the best option for accessing the information in a different language. Next week, Lynda will review other possible website settings and that do not have their videos linked to youtube. Lynda will also look into Mass translation companies to inquire about the different projects they’ve worked within the past and their process of quoting.

AUDIO DESCRIPTIONS (Liz)

This week Liz met with Jessica Williams, Curator of History and Collections at the intrepid. Jessica provided background on the videos currently in use on the BYOAD site.

It would be challenging to add interstitial audio descriptions to the videos now in use because they’re very densely edited and have few, if any, pauses. Jessica suggested that since these videos were originally created for other purposes, it may be better to consider re-recording some content for the audio description addition.

Jessica suggested that the greatest contribution to this audio description effort would be to come up with a list of best practices and recommendations that the Intrepid and other museums can use when they begin creating audio descriptions for video. To that end, Liz’s next steps will include prototyping an all-in-one version of an existing video as a sample, researching best practices for creating audio descriptions and compiling a list of potential vendors that create multi-track videos for visitors with differing needs.

Next steps

Identify best tools and services.

Feedback and Questions

We value your feedback! Please complete our feedback form to answer our questions:
Feedback Form

• What level of readability/grade level do you currently write your exhibit descriptions for?
• What is your current process for writing, reviewing, and assessing exhibit text? What tools do you use?

---

Summary Week 1 (3/4/21) (Feedback Form)

This week our group researched best practices and existing tools for each of our content accessibility interests. Our findings were posted in a shared Google Doc. Next week, all three of us will brainstorm using the information we gathered to implement a new feature that can combine parts of all three categories to improve customizable accessibility settings.