Barrier

Free Video 1

DREAMING OF A BARRIER-FREE VIDEO FOR

INDIANA SCHOOL FOR THE DEAF

Barrier Free Video 2

Abstract
The Deaf and hard of hearing community uses American Sign Language in order
to communicate with one another. However, because ASL is a language itself that needs
to be taught and learned, it is difficult for a hearing individual without the knowledge of
ASL to communicate with a deaf individual, and vice versa. Although translators can
help with this barrier, it is inconvenient and expensive for every conversation to be
translated back and forth. This issue can become harder for technical media, such as the
visual and aural media. Indiana School for the Deaf that needed support with visual
medium that would serve as a promotional video for recruiting students sought out for
help to solve this issue with a barrier free non-linear video. While an ordinary
promotional video can help hearing parents and students to know the content of the video
through spoken language, hard of hearing parents and students cannot. Thus, making of
an interactive non-linear video that consists of American Sign Language, narration, and
subtitles from beginning to end became an immersive learning project produced by
students of Ball State University to serve Indiana School for the Deaf. This paper
explores the nature of the project, deaf culture and communication, and the impact of the
project on the students of Ball State University, and the community partner, Indiana
School for the Deaf. Furthermore, this paper explores the benefits of creating non-linear
videos that can serve as a barrier free visual medium that satisfies both worlds.

Barrier Free Video 3

Dreaming of a Barrier-Free Video: Project Overview & Objectives
Interactive promotional video for the Indiana School for the Deaf is a project
conducted by students of Ball State University Telecommunications department TCOM
487. Eight students were enrolled in TCOM 487, Seminars in Video Production, for three
credit hours as they oversaw and produced a promotional video for the community
partner, Indiana School for the Deaf with two faculty members supervision. This project
was funded $10,810 to cover all expenses, including trips to ISD, equipment, and etc.
The primary objective of the project was creating a promotional video for Indiana School
for the Deafs DVD and website1 (see Picture 1). ISD requested a video that would serve
to showcase and disseminate information about their available resources, information,
and opportunities.
The video includes three different aspects of the school: academics, sports, and
social life. The focus of the video is to disseminate the school to families with deaf and
hard of hearing children. Throughout the video, interviews of parents, teachers and
students from kindergarten to high school are included to help the viewers understand
different aspects of the school. Indiana School for the Deaf requested the video to deliver
all content messages to both deaf and hearing audiences, which was accommodated
interactively with subtitles, narrations, and video of American Sign Language (See
Picture 2).
Moreover, the interactive feature of the project provides more options for the
viewers in which one can choose and pick a version that would best serve their needs. In
order to serve the needs of the viewers even further, the video includes features that let

1 Planned on publication at www.deafhoosiers.com. The project can be found by visiting

http://michaellee.iweb.bsu.edu/.

Barrier Free Video 4

the audience to switch for either the narrated option or the subtitled option to
accommodate their video watching. The audience can also jump around chapters of the
video instantly without going through previous chapters to reach the one they want. In
other words, the interactive video provides non-linear experience of video watching.
Students involved in this project produced the video from pre to post production
as a team. The overall objective for the students as well as ISD was to produce a visual
medium that would serve the content to both the hearing and hard of hearing audiences in
a given time. The students were given approximately five months to produce the
promotional video, and an additional three months to complete the interactive features.
The outcome of the project was evaluated by Indiana School for the Deaf.

Review of Literature
Immersive Learning is the hallmark of an education in Ball State University that
allows students to teamed up with other students from different disciplines to work/create
a unique and meaningful learning experience for their future professional careers. As
Aristotle2 stated, For the things we have to learn before we can do them, we learn by
doing them", the core of the Immersive Learning lies in experiential learning or
experiential education where learning comes from the reflection of the direct experience.
John Dewey, an education theorist in 20th century, developed the concept of
experiential education first. In his book Experience and Education, he argued that
school curriculum needs to have experience as a core part (Dewey, 2007). Later,
Wurdinger and Carlson argued that faculties should put their students more in the
learning process through discussion, group work, hands-on participation, and applying

2 http://www.quotes.net/quote/1866

Barrier Free Video 5

information outside the classroom (2009, p. 2). Experiential learning theory was
established by few education psychologists at first. Kolb (1984), for example, have
provided the fundamentals of a learning theory which focus on learning by doing. He
pinpointed the importance of experience as a central and focal point for all other events
of learning with three different models of experiential learning process. Later, Dewey
made it popular by focusing more on critical thinking and problem solving (see, Dewey,
1958).
The perspective of putting experience as a center of education in experiential
learning is fundamentally different with many other learning theories. Behavior learning
theorists (ex. John B.Watson), for example, stated that learning is essentially passive in
nature responding to external stimuli without having conscious and subjective
experience.
Regarding the experiential learning perspective in the field of video production,
all three steps of video production are closely related to participatory nature of
experiential learning. The core experiential aspect of a video production class, however,
lies in growing a confidence in their ability to solve problems in real world. Gayle (1990)
found that experiential learning methods in her video production class increased the
likelihood of retention and transference of knowledge which enhanced her students
confidence in problem solving in turn.
From the beginning of the project, students in school for the deaf project faced
numerous challenges they never would encounter in their classroom settings. Due to their
lack of understanding of American Sign Language, for example, students realized that the
knowledge about video taping an interview they learned in their classroom wouldnt

Barrier Free Video 6

work. Especially, this problem was critical since it would affect their postproduction
directly. When students faced this problem, they began to brainstorm instantly in the site
to solve it and came up with their own interview setup. It was very important moment for
students involved in the project since they retained and transferred their existing
knowledge to a new problem space. As Gayle (1990) found, students experience in the
situation became their confidence, and they continuously practiced this knowledge
retention and transference throughout the entire project. This is consistent with what
Reilly (1994) found with his study in a secondary school environment.
One of the most interesting aspects of the project lies in its interactive nature.
Interactive video may be defined as any video program in which the sequence and
selection of messages is determined by the users response to the material (Floyd, 1982,
p. 2). Jensen defined the interactivity as A measure of a medias potential ability to let
the user exert an influence on the content and/or form of the mediated
communication(1998, p. 201). Also, Lee, Heeter, and LaRose argued that watching a
video with others is more enjoyable than watching it alone, and watching interactive
version is even more enjoyable (2010). With the interactive features of the project, the
project can serve any families regardless of their mixed hearting abilities, which will
increase the enjoyment of watching it in turn. Moreover, it allows viewers to watch the
video in different orders based on their interest among three (academic, sports, and social
life) different areas of the school.

Barrier Free Video 7

Deaf Culture and Communications Overview

D/deaf culture is an ethno-linguistic minority that constitutes approximately
500,0003 hard of hearing and deaf people in the United States. While deaf culture is
viewed by the society as a group of disabled people, hard of hearing and deaf individuals
identify themselves as a minority group. The term culture4 that defines shared values,
beliefs, behaviors, and artifacts passed down through generations to function in that
groups world appropriately fit this community of deaf individuals while American Sign
Language serves as the medium that unite all deaf individuals as a culture (Hamill &
Alexis, 2011, p. 390). Furthermore, the term d/Deaf is frequently used in order to
describe both the nature of hearing loss and their identity as a Deaf culture (Monaghan &
Sanghas p.71).
Deaf culture is not bounded by a physical location. Internet blogs and websites
have recently become a place where deaf people with access to Internet can visit in order
to share their experiences and connect with deaf and hard of hearing individuals around
the world. According to Hamill and Stein (2011), posts are shared through written
English while sharing stories that only deaf and hard of hearing individuals can
empathize.

3 Hamill, Alexis C., and Catherine H. Stein. "Culture And Empowerment In The Deaf Community: An
Analysis Of Internet Weblogs." Journal Of Community & Applied Social Psychology 21.5 (2011): 388-
406. Academic Search Premier. Web. 6 Nov. 2014.
4 Avon, A. "Watching Films, Learning Language, Experiencing Culture: An Account Of Deaf Culture
Through History And Popular Films." Journal Of Popular Culture 39.2 (2006): 185-204. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 6 Nov. 2014.

Barrier Free Video 8

The Internet has become a gathering place where D/deaf individuals, who
historically faced obstacles to communication, can connect and share information
and worldview. Most blogs consist of posts that offer a combination of news and
opinions, and include text, media such as videos and photographs, hyperlinks that
connect to other sites, and space for readers comment consistent with the
literature that identifies ASL as the basis for Deaf culture (p. 391).

Indiana School for the Deaf is a part of the Deaf culture as well as the Deaf
community in Indiana. On October 1, 1843, Indiana School for the Deaf officially opened
its doors to Deaf children under the name Indiana Asylum for the Education of the Deaf
and Dumb. In December 1843, the state of Indiana passed a law declaring the school as a
state institution, changing its name to Indiana School for the Deaf. Since the opening of
the school, the school grew in student population as well as played a major role in the
Deaf culture in the state of Indiana. The Indiana School for the Deaf has now become a
place where students feel a sense of belonging and a part of the Deaf culture.
Indiana School for the Deaf is not only a place for students, but also for parents,
alumni, and other hard of hearing individuals. The Deaf community takes value in the
schools educational program, and supports its mission of providing meaningful
learning opportunities for students that foster academic and social excellence where
language and diversity are valued (Indiana School for the Deaf, 2012). Students from
various areas in Indiana attend this school in order to be educated in a setting where
American Sign Language is the dominant communications tool. Although speech therapy

Barrier Free Video 9

and spoken language classes are offered to promote both ASL and spoken English, ASL
is the major language that all faculties and students use.
Dreaming of a Barrier-Free Video: Video Description
American Sign Language is the form of communication that is used by hard of
hearing and deaf individuals in America and Canada. Like spoken language, ASL is a
main language that helps individuals within the Deaf culture to converse without any
barriers. According to MacMillan (2004), while spoken languages are linear, and
therefore conducive to writing, sign languages are three-dimensional, which allows one
sign to express many concepts at once. Facial grammar is also very important in ASL;
the position of ones eyebrows, for example, can make all the difference between a
statement, a question, a negation, or a command. Though ASL is a manual language, its
production requires far more than just the hands (p. 46).
Although sign language is a medium that defines this group as a culture, there still
is a barrier between deaf individuals with hearing individuals. Connecting with the
hearing centered world is challenging for deaf individuals since all hearing individuals
cannot understand or practice ASL. Translators are used to help with important instances
where communication between hearing and hard of hearing parties is necessary.
However, translators can become expensive and inconvenient for mundane
conversations.
Visual and aural media is one of the barriers that come between the hearing and
the deaf world. Before 1927, all movies were silent and open to both hearing and deaf
audience. However, starting with the premiere of The Jazz Singer, the first film with
synchronized sound, movies became impenetrable to the Deaf community (Eastland,

Barrier Free Video 10

2012, p. 39). Since then, all movies and videos have become a hearing world centered
media that the Deaf culture has difficulty experiencing the movie in its most original
form. During the early silent years of film, deaf persons sat in movie house audiences
everywhere in the United States and participated, on a comparatively equal basis, with
their hearing peers, as dramas, comedies, and the news unfolded on the theater screens
(Schuchman, 1988, p.21).
Presently, movies and videos are still challenges in the Deaf community. Deaf
audience can comprehend the auditory contents and dialogues through subtitles and audio
descriptions on DVDs. However, most movies in cinemas do not provide subtitles for
deaf audiences. Although several organizations5 have executed projects to provide barrier
free movies for the visual- and hearing-impaired audiences in cinemas, the projects are
only recent and ongoing without definite solutions.
Moreover, according to the FCCs modified Twenty-First Century
Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, videos that have been broadcasted
on television must have closed captioning for the hard of hearing and deaf audience when
uploaded online. However, for the consumer-generated videos that are shown on the
Internet are not required to be captioned (FCC, 2014). Thus, majority of the online videos
are not accessible to the Deaf community.
The term barrier free comes from architectural guidelines and principles created
by Ron Mace in 1997 called Universal Design. According to Karen Stone (1998, p.12),
Universal Design that has been mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act serves a
far larger population than the 54 million Americans living with a disability. This term
that started as an architectural project is now used by projects that accommodate the

5 Cinema Connect, Sumimoto Corporation, Barrier Free Living, Korean Barrier Free Film

Barrier Free Video 11

hearing-impaired individuals. Currently, barrier free movies are supported in various
countries such as Germany where new technologies help the hearing-impaired audience
in theatres to enjoy films among the hearing audience. However, while numerous projects
for movies in cinemas are growing, there is a lack of support for barrier free videos that
are published online.
Dreaming of a Barrier-Free Video: Project Description
Immersive learning at Ball State University allows students from various
departments to form teams, guided by expert faculties, to create and produce unique
learning experiments. This program lets students work collaboratively to experience
working with a client that results in real-world solutions. Immersive learning has distinct
characteristics6 in which students take leading roles to create their projects for lasting
outcomes. The Indiana School for the Deaf promotional video was an immersive learning
project where students of telecommunications department from various backgrounds
formed a team for the experience of working with the community partner, Indiana School
for the Deaf.
Indiana School for the Deaf cherish their vision in educating the hard of hearing
and deaf students to belong, excel, and thrive academically and socially (Indiana School
for the Deaf, 2012). Thus, the importance of promoting this Deaf culture based school to
families with children who have diverse needs was immense. In addition, since the
students, and faculties, and staff all use American Sign Language, the school needed a
video that would deliver all contents to both hearing and hard of hearing viewers.

6 Ball State University. Immersive Learning Ball State University, Immersive Learning Ball State
University. Ball State University, 2014. Web. 27 Nov. 2014.

Barrier Free Video 12

However, almost all video projects are produced without taking consideration of the deaf
community unless asked specifically. Therefore, a project was formed to overcome a
barrier of typical video project, creating a deaf-friendly version for the Indiana School for
the Deaf. The project started in August 2013 and ended in March 2014.
Students arranging from juniors to seniors applied for this project to fulfill their
course requirements. Eight students were accepted; all members had no previous
experience in working with a major client, and a hearing impaired community. During
the five months of production phase, students met once a week to discuss the progress of
the project, brainstorm ideas, and amend mistakes. The immersive learning project
required the students to direct and produce the video by themselves, which meant that all
decision makings, communicating with the school, reserving times for visits and
interviews, managing budgets, and creating the project were the teams responsibilities.
This project required everyone to work as a team and to focus on their roles to finish
given tasks on time with minimal mistakes. Rather than working for a grade, this project
sought for ISDs satisfaction. The roles were not assigned, but rather picked on their own.
The team consisted of one director, two producers, one assistant director, one
manager, one director of photography, and one editor. The director and the assistant
director brainstormed and created a storyboard that became a guide to the video project,
and sought out artistic and realistic scenes for the video. The producers contacted the
school affiliates to communicate via email and phone calls in order to reserve their time
for tours, meetings, location scouts, and interviews. The manager monitored all the
equipment that was borrowed from Ball State University Telecommunications
departments Teleplex. The director of photography lighted the locations and rolled the

Barrier Free Video 13

camera to record all footages and interviews. The editor also helped with camera
operations and edited all documents into what the affiliates desired.
From the beginning, the team members came up with a budget plan, starting from
gas expenses for the numerous trips they had to take to arrive at ISD, to the different
equipment that needed to be purchased for the best quality possible. The team was
introduced to different equipment, such as the Canon EOS Mark 5D, for the project. The
members were also reminded that the school had translators, and that they needed to
make eye contacts with the person they were talking to rather than the translators.
The school affiliates requested the video to capture these special qualities of ISD
in three parts: educational opportunities, athletic program, and student life with a specific
amount of length for each section. The members of the team spent full five months for
the completion of the promotional video. There were visits to ISD every week for three
months of the production stage in order to capture footages and interviews of parents,
students, and teachers. Every meeting was used for preparations to capture scenes of
special aspects of the school. From pre- to post-production, the team communicated with
the school for the best possible outcome to constitute the content of the promotional
video. However, there were challenges along the way even though the team prepared for
possible problems that could occur on location.

Dreaming of a Barrier-Free Video: Project Challenges

One of the challenges the team encountered was communication. A translator had
to help the team for all interviews and meetings with the school affiliates. During
interviews, a translator was present to translate all questions and statements to the

Barrier Free Video 14

interviewees by using American Sign Language. The team also had to wait for the
translator to translate the interviewees answers back by using her voice. There was a
delay in every conversation because all questions and answers had to be delivered and
delivered by the translator. Because of sign language used by students and teachers, the
producers and the editor had to transcribe the answers delivered by the translator for
subtitles and narration. Narration had to be recorded by every member of the team as well
as other talents who were willing to help the project. Signs had to match the subtitles, as
well as the narration.
During production, time management was a challenge that the team had to
overcome. It was difficult to have every team member for each trip to ISD because of
conflicting schedule, especially those who had classes during the day. Thus, some
members had to miss class, or had to miss the trip to ISD. Also, one of the major
challenges the students encountered was working on a project with clients who had no
knowledge of video production. The team was required to keep the school affiliates
satisfied with the overall project. The specific length of each section of the project, and
the content of the video had to be approved by the affiliates. Because the students had no
previous experience with working with a real client, they had to revise the project every
meeting in order to meet the clients expectations.
In the postproduction phase of the project, students realized a problem that they
have not encountered before. In any piece of interview video, the most common
technique is adding B-roll, cutaway, on top of the interview to either hide video splice or
add visual diversity. The problem with this technique turned out that people with hearing

Barrier Free Video 15

disability cannot follow the story of the interview due to the fact that main story telling
will be led by audio during the video section where B-roll technique is applied.
Student production team realized that B-roll technique would not work for the
deaf, and decided to make a version for an American Sign Language version. In this
version, supplementary visual information was added to all video sections where B-roll
technique is applied. Whenever the video cuts to B-roll, another layer of video of the
interviewee is added on top of B-roll image in a small frame with subtitles. This enables
the audience with hearing disability to understand and follow the storyline by American
Sign Language video frame or subtitles while maintaining flow of the interview with Broll video.
The last obstacle for students was how to deliver two different versions in one
medium. For this, they decided to stream the two videos at the same time allowing instant
jump into a different version. Two different interfaces were designed for interactive
features: one for chapter navigation and one for jumping into a different version.
Throughout the overall video, two iconic menus appear and disappear in the right
bottom corner of the video. By selecting one of menu icons, viewers can switch the mode
of the video into a different one among three different modes (American Sign Language
version, normal hearing version, and version for both groups). For this, the entire project
was edited and exported into three different versions based on the viewers hearing
capability. In order for the viewers to switch the mode of watching, these three videos
were streamed at the same time from a server enabling instant switch.
The icon menu on the up left corner of the video allows viewers to navigate
different chapters of the video instantly. The project covers three different aspects of the

Barrier Free Video 16

school with three different chapters, and the interactive navigation menu provides a nonlinear experience of watching the video (see picture 3). Especially with a version for both
groups, a normal hearing family with a hearing disability child will be able to watch the
video altogether without leaving anyone behind.

Impacts on Students of TCOM 487

The team had to face challenges of working with a client with different method of
communications as well as producing a promotional video that would best serve the
audience. However, with the efforts of all members, the students were able to finish the
project on time with satisfaction of the affiliates. The team had control over their own
roles, and focus on the project. This project helped the team members to grow
professionally in regards to respecting each decisions made from pre- to post-production
as well as team work.
According to interviews with the team members, one of the biggest impacts
during production of the video was acknowledging the importance of different
communication. Although all conversations needed the help of translators, all interviews
and meetings were successful because of American Sign Language. Throughout the
months of working with ISD, the team learned that ASL is not only a way of
communication, but also an important part of the Deaf culture. As hearing individuals
living in a hearing centered world, the team members firstly confronted exclusion from
the Deaf community. Without the ability to understand or practice the language, it was a
challenge to blend into the culture. Thus, from the beginning of production, the team had

Barrier Free Video 17

to fully understand the target audience and the importance of the viewers culture as well
as the significance of their form of communication.
Furthermore, this project impacted the students in way that a regular class project
could not. Rather than working for a grade, the students had to understand what the
community partner needed and who the viewers were in order to see definite outcomes.
For example, instead of making a decision as a team that the promotional video would
only last for three minutes with a minute of each section, the team served ISD and their
request of making a lengthy video that would showcase all of the schools features. Also,
the team had to understand that the viewers were parents of potential students. Thus, the
students of TCOM 487 had to contact the school affiliates continuously in order to
produce a video that would serve their needs and what the parents need to see.
In addition, the team had to find solutions to small challenges while working with
ISD. Some of the challenges include audio for the project, such as delivering emotional
aspect of the video without music for the Deaf viewers. Since all Deaf viewers
understand the content through visual medium, it was a challenge to provide strong
emotional aspect without the music bed. While music can influence the hearing viewers
ethos, the team had to find a solution to providing ethos to the Deaf viewer who could not
hear the music that supports the visual content. As MacMillan (2004) states, one of the
most important elements to sign language is facial expression. Thus, the team agreed that
adding a layer of the original interviews on top of B-roll would provide the viewers with
all original expressions of the interviewees and help with delivering ethos to the Deaf
viewers. Adding the original interviews on B-roll also helped with preventing confusion
of who the dominant speaker is. For a regular video project, switching from interviews to

Barrier Free Video 18

B-roll is natural since the voice of the interviewee is still present. However, without the
voice, only subtitles are present while people on B-roll are signing. Even though subtitles
shown at the bottom of the screen can help with continuation of the interviews, there still
is confusion following the story. Hence, an additional layer of interviews solved these
two problems that the team had during post-production.
This opportunity of working with ISD was rare and valuable for the students of
TCOM 487. Deaf culture is not easily approached by hearing individual. However,
because of this immersive learning project, the students had a chance to be involved in a
different culture and think creatively for real world solutions. The key to this project was
interactive work, leadership, and seeking and overcoming unforeseen challenges. This
project did not only serve the client, but it also helped the students to understand the
process of storytelling through media with special attention to details, and aesthetics. The
project helped with providing experience in producing a professional quality standard
storytelling, and gave the team a chance to work on an interactive non-linear barrier free
video that would serve as a communication tool for both the hearing and the deaf worlds.
Moreover, the experience gave the team an opportunity to take full responsibilities of the
entire project, as well as experience working with a role within the team that provided the
students with great growth towards their professional goals.
After delivering the promotional video to Indiana School for the Deaf, the school
affiliates assessed the project and the team members. The assessment was in two
categories assessment of the promotional video and assessment of the interactive
features according to an assessment rubric (see Appendix A).

Barrier Free Video 19

Conclusion
D/deaf culture that consists of hard of hearing and deaf individuals take pride in
their identity as an ethno minority group that communicate through a common medium,
American Sign Language. However, deaf individuals face the challenge of
communication with the hearing world, especially with the visual and aural media. Thus,
a project conducted by eight students of TCOM 487 at Ball State University overcame
this issue by helping the community partner, Indiana School for the Deaf, with a nonlinear interactive barrier free video. This promotional video serves to showcase ISDs
resources, information, and opportunities to families with deaf and hard of hearing
children. The video not only helped ISD with delivering the contents to both the hearing
and hard of hearing parents and children, but also to the team members by providing
them with an opportunity to work for a client and understand how a barrier free video can
serve two distinct audiences simultaneously. It is hoped that this promotional video not
only serves to attract families with hard of hearing children, but also raise awareness for
the schools features. It is also hoped that with the start of this video, future videos both
online and cinemas serve all audience as barrier free videos, and raise awareness to the
Deaf culture and its challenge to with video watching.

Barrier Free Video 20

References

Avon, A. (2006). Watching Films, Learning Language, Experiencing Culture: An

Account of Deaf Culture through History and Popular Films.Journal Of Popular
Culture, 39(2), 185-204. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5931.2006.00228.
Barca, L., Pezzulo, G., Castrataro, M., Rinaldi, P., & Caselli, M. C. (2013). Visual Word
Recognition in Deaf Readers: Lexicality Is Modulated by Communication
Mode. Plos ONE, 8(3), 1-7. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0059080.
Dewey, John. (1958). Experience and nature (Vol. 1): Courier Dover Publications.
Dewey, John. (2007). Experience and education: Simon and Schuster.
du Feu, M., & Niven, M. (2007). Sign language misconceptions. Community Care,
(1670), 16.
Eastland, K. (2012). Deaf Meets Wonderstruck. Humanities, 33(1), 38-42.
Federal Communications Commission. (2014, October 29). Captioning of Internet Video
Programming. Retrieved November 16, 2014, from
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/captioning-internet-video-programming
Fletcher-Carter, R., & Paez, D. (2010). Exploring the Personal Cultures of Rural
Deaf/Hard of Hearing Students. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 29(2), 18-24.
Floyd, S. (1982). Thinking interactively. Handbook of interactive video, 1-14.
Gayle, Barbara. (1990). A Participatory Learning Approach to Teaching Organizational
Video.
Hamill, A. C., & Stein, C. H. (2011). Culture and empowerment in the Deaf community:
An analysis of internet weblogs. Journal Of Community & Applied Social
Psychology, 21(5), 388-406. doi:10.1002/casp.1081
Jensen, Jens F. (1998). Interactivity. Nordicom Review, Nordic research on media and
comunication review, 19(2).
Kolb, David A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development (Vol. 1): Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Lee, Sangyeob, Heeter, Carrie, & LaRose, Robert. (2010). A modern Cinderella story: a
comparison of viewer responses to interactive vs linear narrative in solitary and
co-viewing settings. New Media & Society.

Barrier Free Video 21

MacMillan, K. (2004). Hands-On Collection Building. School Library Journal, 50(3), 4647.
Reilly, Brian. (1994). Composing with Images: A Study of High School Video Producers.
Schuchman, John. Hollywood Speaks. Urbana: U of Illinois P,1988.
Senghas, R. J., & Monaghan, L. (2002). SIGNS OF THEIR TIMES: Deaf Communities
and the Culture of Language. Annual Review Of Anthropology, 31(1), 69-97.
doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.31.020402.101302
Stone, K. (1998). Practical, beautiful, humane. Inside MS, 16(3), 12.
Woolley, H. (2013). Now Being Social: The Barrier of Designing Outdoor Play Space
for Disabled Children. Children & Society, 27(6), 448-458. doi:10.1111/j.1099
0860.2012.00464.x
Wurdinger, Scott D, & Carlson, Julie A. (2009). Teaching for experiential learning: Five
approaches that work: R&L Education.

Barrier Free Video 22

(Picture 1, Snapshot of Indiana School for the Deaf Immersive Learning Project)

Barrier Free Video 23

(Picture 2, Snapshot of Interactive Video Menu)

Barrier Free Video 24

(Picture 3, Snapshot of Interactive Chapter Menu)

Barrier Free Video 25

Appendix A: Sample Assessment Rubric
250 Points: Affiliates assess promotional
video.
Emphasis on a strong visual narrative and
fulfilment of all aesthetical requirements.
- 50 Points: Accurately builds a strong
visual narrative that meets project
objectives and fulfills all aesthetical
requirements.
- 40 Points: Mostly builds a strong
narrative and mostly fulfills aesthetical
requirements.
- 30 Points: Visual narrative requires work
and misses aspect of aesthetical
requirements.
- 20 Points: Lacking a strong visual
narrative and lacking aesthetical
requirements.
- 10 Points: Major flaws in the visual
narrative and disturbance in aesthetical
requirements.
- 0 Points: Project does not contain a
cohesive visual narrative.

250 Points: Affiliates assess interactive

features of the video.
**Understanding of distinct ways of
communication and provision of interactive
features.
-50 Points: Students completely and
accurately understand the importance of
interactive features for deaf audience and
provide strong interactive features.
-40 Points: Students mostly understand
importance of interactive features for deaf
audience and provide satisfactory
interactive features.
-30 Points: Students respectably understand
the importance of interactive features of
deaf audience and provide adequate
interactive features.
-20 Points: Students inaccurately
understand the importance of interactive
features for deaf audience and provide
confusing interactive features.
-10 Points: Students do not understand the
importance of interactive features for deaf
Strong component composition: academics, audience and provide fragmented
social life, and athletics.
interactive features.
- 50 Points: Accurately captures three
-0 Points: Students do not provide
different aspects of the school with strong
interactive features of the video.
composition.
- 40 Points: Mostly captures three different Production of a barrier-free video for those
aspects of the school with good
who are diverse and have a range of needs.
composition.
- 50 Points: Final production accurately
- 30 Points: Respectably captures three
matches the definition of a barrier-free
different aspects of the school with
video for those who are diverse and have a
passable composition.
range of needs.
- 20 Points: Inaccurately captures three
- 40 Points: Final production mostly
different aspects of the school with
matches the definition of a barrier-free
misleading composition.
video for those who are diverse and have a
- 10 Points: Did not capture three different range of needs.
aspects of the school with inadequate
- 30 Points: Final production respectably
composition.
matches the definition of a barrier-free
- 0 Points: Did not capture three different
video for those who are diverse and have a
aspects of the school without any
range of needs.
composition.
- 20 Points: Final production inadequately
matches the definition of a barrier-free

Barrier Free Video 26

Completion of project in given time.
- 50 Points: Completion of Indiana School
for the Deaf promotional video in given
and expected time.
- 40 Points: Completion of Indiana School
for the Deaf promotional video around
given and expected time.
- 30 Points: Completion of Indiana School
for the Deaf promotional video later than
given and expected time.
- 20 Points: Partial completion of Indiana
School for the Deaf promotional video.
- 10 Points: Completion of fragments for
Indiana School for the Deaf promotional
video.
-0 Points: Did not start Indiana School for
the Deaf promotional video.

video and needs more attentions in

accommodating those who are diverse and
have a range of needs.
- 10 Points: Final production shows major
flaws in matching the definition of a
barrier-free video that needs major work in
accommodating those who are diverse and
have a range of needs.
- 0 Points: Final production does not match
the definition of a barrier-free video and
does not accommodate those who are
diverse and have a range of needs.

Students performance of picked roles.

- 50 Points: Showed professional
performance of picked roles.
- 40 Points: Showed college level
performance of picked roles.
- 30 Points: Showed moderate performance
of picked roles.
- 20 Points: Showed inadequate
performance of picked roles.
- 10 Points: Showed mediocre performance
of picked roles.
- 0 Points: Did not show any performance
of picked roles.

Correction of content subtitles and

narrations.
-50 Points: All interviews and content
messages are accurately subtitled and
narrated.
-40 Points: Most interviews and content
messages are accurately subtitled and
narrated.
-30 Points: Interviews and content
messages are relatively accurately subtitled
and narrated.
-20 Points: Partial interviews and content
messages are subtitled and narrated.
-10 Points: Subtitles and narrations are not
consistently on screen to accommodate
those who have a range of needs.
-0 Points: Interviews and content messages
are not subtitled or narrated.

Production of a qualified professional

standards.
- 50 Points: Final production is of qualified
professional standards.
- 40 Points: Final production is of college
level standards.
- 30 Points: Final production is of moderate
standards.
- 20 Points: Final production is of
inadequate standards.
- 10 Points: Final production is of poor
standards.
-0 Points: Final production does not qualify

Interactive features provide easy access

with all desired contents.
- 50 Points: Interactive features are easily
accessible to all viewers.
- 40 Points: Interactive features are mostly
easily accessible to all viewers.
- 30 Points: Interactive features moderately
easily accessible to all viewers.
- 20 Points: Interactive features are
accessible with some difficulties.
- 10 Points: Interactive features are not
easily accessible without all desired
contents.
- 0 Points: Interactive features are not

Barrier Free Video 27

for publication.

accessible at all.