[laptop-accessibility] needs of blind users versus deaf users

[ashettle at patriot.net]

Albert Calahan said: "For a long time now, I've thought that accessibility
adaptations are kind of the wrong approach. That means trying to use audio
to describe video, when the video is trying to describe some abstract
internal state. Ideally one would skip the middle-man, going straight from
the internal abstract state to the audio."

When making adaptations or modifications to make the standard XO more
usable by students with one disability (in this case, blind children), it
is important to make sure we don't then make it less usable for students
with another disability.  Deaf students would obviously be unable to
access material offered purely in audio format.

It does make sense to have a way to turn off the screen for a student who
will never be looking at the screen anyway (e.g., because they're blind). 
And maybe a way to shut off audio for students who will never be using
that.  And it also does make sense to look at more innovative, creative
ways of presenting information that is more inclusive of a wider number of
students who have very different learning strengths and weaknesses from
each other: if audio genuinely works better for a particular content, sure
go with that, then put in captions or a transcript or a video in whatever
local signed language is used in a given country to make it accessible to
deaf students.  I'm just raising this general point because sometimes I've
seen people get so focused on making something accessible to one
disability group who happens to be more visible to them (maybe they're the
group who spoke out more, for instance) that they end up introducing
features that exclude others.

A somewhat separate point re, video versus audio etc.:  Do bear in mind
that even non-disabled children will have a wide diversity in how their
brains are wired to process new information and ideas.  Some students just
naturally learn better when they HEAR new information: show it to them
visually and they just won't absorb it even if nothing's wrong with their
vision.  But other students just naturally learn better if they SEE new
information: hearing it just isn't enough, even if they can hear
perfectly.  Still other students need to be physically moving and learning
things through the motion of their body.  And so forth.  So it's never a
good idea to assume that all educational material should be converted to
serve a single modality of learning because there would then be many
students who are left behind wheter or not they're disabled.

Or if I've misinterpreted or misunderstood please elucidate.

Do we have any educational/pedalogy specialists on this list?  This is not
really my field--just stuff I've read a bit here and there.  Would be a
nice complement for this list I would think.

Thanks,

Andrea Shettle, MSW
ashettle at patriot.net
http://wecando.wordpress.com  (Blogging disability and international
development)