1 Captioning and Transcription ProjectAn Overview of Workflows, Costs, and Next Steps at George Mason University

2 Today’s Agenda Introductions About Mason The Legal LandscapeHow We Got Started ITAG What the Numbers Show Costs Using Data to Enhance Decision-Making Q & A

3 ABOUT US

4 Location and EnrollmentEnrollment (Fall 2015) ~34,000 students from 130+ countries Over Instructional and Research Faculty 10 colleges and schools Campus locations 4 locations in Northern Virginia (Fairfax/Main, Arlington, Manassas, and Sterling) International: Songdo (Korea)

5 ATI’s Mission Provide equivalent access to electronic and IT resources.  Working collaboratively with our partners Developing, coordinating, and implementing a university-wide technology accessibility plan Conformity with the technical standards outlined in WCAG 2.0 and Section 508.

6 Services Accessible Text (e-text conversion/OCR) & MediaProvision of accessible text to students, faculty, and staff with print-related disabilities (referral only). Provision of accessible media: closed captioning and audio description. Web Accessibility Section 508/Web Accessibility Training and Support for Mason employees and students. Web Accessibility Testing for all Mason websites and web-based resources used in the classroom. Assistive Technology Assessments, Support, and Training Informal assistive technology assessments and trainings for Mason students, staff, and faculty (walk-ins and referrals). Maintenance of Assistive Technology Labs on all campuses.

7 ATI Staff & Reporting StructureATI operates under Compliance, Diversity, and Ethics Office Reports up through ADA Coordinator to VP for CDE, who reports directly to University President More information about us available at Presentation: University President VP, CDE Associate Director/ADA Coordinator, CDE ATI Manager IT Accessibility Coordinator Program Support Specialist Acc Media Coordinator Accessible Media Specialist Student Worker(s) ATI Office consists of an Accessible Media Coordinator, an IT Accessibility Coordinator, an Accessible Media Specialist, a Program Support Specialist, and a student worker. Those positions report to the ATI Manager, who reports to the ADA Coordinator in the Compliance, Diversity, and Ethics office. The VP for Compliance, Diversity, and Ethics reports directly to the President.

8 Accessibility@Mason: A Collaborative PartnershipCDE DS Students w/ Disabilities Employees w/ Disabilities EIT Accessibility & Compliance

9 The Legal Landscape and TECHNOLOGY ACCESSIBILITY IN HIGHER ED

10 Accessibility Laws: 508, ADA, CVAARehabilitation Act: 508 Covers federal agencies and orgs with federal funding Assistive Technology Act ADA: Titles II, III Covers public and commercial entities Lawsuits: What is a “place of public accommodation”? CVAA Covers Internet content that aired on TV Includes video clips Copyright owner bears responsibility 1973 Section 504: anti-discrimination law that requires equal access for individuals with disabilities Section 508: introduced in 1998 to require federal communications and information technology to be accessible Closed captioning requirements are written directly into Section 508, and are often applied to Section 504 504 = federal & federally funded 508 = just federal, but any states receiving funding from the Assistive Technology Act are required to comply with Section 508, so often that law will extend to state-funded organizations like colleges and universities 1990 5 sections Title II: public entities; Title III: commercial entities "Places of public accommodation" – what constitutes this? Tested against online businesses 2010 Previously aired on television Clips

11 Accessibility Guidelines & Policies: WCAG, UP 1308WCAG (W3C) Section 508 closely aligns with WCAG 2.0 Level A Primary focus on web-based content Section 508 looks at web-based and non web-based EIT Final rule for 508 Refresh coming one of these days... Incorporates WCAG 2.0 Level AA University Policy 1308 (GMU) References both Section 508 and WCAG 2.0 1973 Section 504: anti-discrimination law that requires equal access for individuals with disabilities Section 508: introduced in 1998 to require federal communications and information technology to be accessible Closed captioning requirements are written directly into Section 508, and are often applied to Section 504 504 = federal & federally funded 508 = just federal, but any states receiving funding from the Assistive Technology Act are required to comply with Section 508, so often that law will extend to state-funded organizations like colleges and universities 1990 5 sections Title II: public entities; Title III: commercial entities "Places of public accommodation" – what constitutes this? Tested against online businesses 2010 Previously aired on television Clips

12 World Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)Different levels of conformance in WCAG 2.0 WCAG 2.0 Level A (minimum) vs. Level AA vs. Level AAA E.g., Guideline 1.2 Time-based Media: Provide alternatives for time-based media (i.e., Captioning and Audio Description) Captions, Prerecorded: (1.2.2) Captions are provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media, except when the media is a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such. (Level A) Captions, Live: (1.2.4) Captions are provided for all live audio content in synchronized media. (Level AA) Sign Language, Prerecorded: (1.2.6) Sign language interpretation is provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media. (Level AAA) 1973 Section 504: anti-discrimination law that requires equal access for individuals with disabilities Section 508: introduced in 1998 to require federal communications and information technology to be accessible Closed captioning requirements are written directly into Section 508, and are often applied to Section 504 504 = federal & federally funded 508 = just federal, but any states receiving funding from the Assistive Technology Act are required to comply with Section 508, so often that law will extend to state-funded organizations like colleges and universities 1990 5 sections Title II: public entities; Title III: commercial entities "Places of public accommodation" – what constitutes this? Tested against online businesses 2010 Previously aired on television Clips

13 Closed Captioning Lawsuits: NetflixNational Association of the Deaf (NAD), et al. v Netflix What constitutes a place of public accommodation? How did the NAD originally bring Netflix under the ADA? Settlement & implications Netflix sued by National Association of the Deaf in 2012 for failing to provide closed captions for most of its "Watch Instantly" movies and television shows streamed on the Internet. First time that Title III of the ADA (place of public accommodation) had been applied to Internet only businesses (before, it had only been applied to physical structures like wheelchair ramps) Landmark lawsuit: Netflix argued that they don't qualify as a place of public accommodation in accordance with the ADA – but the plaintiffs' lawyers (some of whom were involved in the writing of the ADA in 1990) argued that the ADA was meant to grow to expand accommodations as the world changed Court ruled in favor of the National Association of the Deaf, saying that: "The legislative history of the ADA makes clear that Congress intended the ADA to adapt to changes in technology" "Excluding businesses that sell services through the Internet from the ADA would run afoul of the purposes of the ADA" Netflix settlement: Netflix agreed to caption 100% of its streaming content. This case set a profound precedent for companies streaming video content across industries, including entertainment, education, health care, and corporate training content (FedEx was sued for this recently – not providing closed captions on training videos).

14 Closed Captioning Lawsuits: Harvard/MITNational Association of the Deaf (NAD), et al. v Netflix NAD vs. Harvard & MIT Current state of the case Implications for higher education Changing scope of the ADA Harvard and MIT were sued by the National Association of the Deaf for providing inaccessible video content that was either not captioned or was inaccurately/unintelligibly captioned The first time outside of the entertainment industry that accuracy has been considered in legal ramifications for closed captioning Crowd-sourced and automatic captions can't guarantee that accuracy Argument: that educational online videos are a public accommodation regardless of whether or not the ADA originally applied to physical structures. Arlene said: "If you are a hearing person, you are welcomed into a world of lifelong learning through access to a community offering videos on virtually any topic imaginable, from climate change to world history or the arts.  No captions is like no ramp for people in wheelchairs or signs stating ‘people with disabilities are not welcome.’” In June, the Department of Justice submitted a statement of interest supporting the Plaintiffs' position that Harvard and MIT's free online courses and lectures discriminate against deaf and hard of hearing individuals by failing to provide equal access in the form of captions. "The ADA applies to websites of public accommodations, and … the ADA regulations should be interpreted to keep pace with developing technologies." "The United States respectfully submits this Statement of Interest to correct Harvard's misapplication of the primary jurisdiction doctrine and its misunderstanding of the ADA and Section " Final argument was held in September; still waiting on a decision. Outcome will have huge implications for higher education. February 9 of 2016: Judge denied Harvard & MIT's motion to dismiss the lawsuit (barring objection from District Judge)

15 Accessibility Lawsuits: Resolution Agreements cont.CU-Boulder (2015) Harvard/MIT – EdX (2015) – Settled Mar 2015* Univ. of Phoenix (2015) Univ. of Miami-Ohio (2014/2015) – Settled Jan 2016* Univ. of Cincinnati (2014)* Univ. of Montana (2014)* Youngstown State (2014)* Louisiana Tech (2013) SCTCS (2013)* Penn State (2011) Asterisk (*) refers to cases that reference inaccurate captions and/or video with no audio descriptions on websites and in online courses

16 How we got started

17 Background (Docsoft:AV unit)Prior to 2009 – No Solution August 2009 – Purchased Docsoft:AV Unit ATI paid 1/3 upfront costs, Kellar Institute for Human disAbilities (KIHd) covered rest 50/50 split of annual maintenance costs w/ KIHd ATI Managed access to service Provided Docsoft:AV and :TE applications training to faculty and staff Marketed and promoted KIHd Hosted Docsoft:AV unit on their server Set up website,

18 Docsoft:AV Unit & :TE Application:AV (Appliance) Unit is used to automatically generate text transcripts and closed captioning formats Supports number of different formats Speaker profiles Supports multiple user accounts (10GB limit/user) 60 hours/week :TE (Application) Software application allows user to edit transcripts created using Docsoft:AV unit.

19 Background (Docsoft:AV unit cont’d)After 1st year…still no captioning! Unit was not being utilized One staff member captioned videos (through small grant) for one of their departmental programs One staff member transcribed interviews from research project Received requests from grad students to transcribe research Ill-conceived planning (i.e., training) Pushback from faculty/staff Myth regarding voice transcription capability (not 100%!) Lack of time and resources on part of departments/units Lack of faculty/staff technical knowledge

20 Getting to a Pilot Project!January 2011 – Submitted proposal to provide in-house captioning services June 2011 – Proposal for FY12 was approved! Bulk went toward increased staffing (1 PT to FT, 2 grad students) Technology-related needs (laptops, Docsoft:AV/:TE licensing, etc.) Unexpected costs (Outsourcing captioning and AD) July 2011 – Training and Setup (In-house)… Aug./Sept – Launching the Pilot Project! Worked with 1 Instructional Designer Emphasis on Windows Media Files (WMV) Content came from: YouTube, GMU-TV station, iTunesU, DE courses, Mason “channels” (i.e., YouTube, Vimeo) 3-week turnaround time on jobs! Proposal Highlights Accessible Media Process/Procedures (input from several stakeholders) Increase 1 PT staff to FT 2 hourly student-wage positions 2 new computer workstations Equipment for converting VHS to DVD* Costs for outsourcing (CC and AD) Hardware licensing costs - Docsoft:AV unit Software licensing costs Training and Setup Hired/Trained 2 grad assistants – Docsoft:AV and :TE applications Developed online request form Established accessible media workflow (w/ stakeholders from library, ITU and DE) Launching the Pilot Project! Worked with 1 Instructional Designer Emphasis on Windows Media Files (WMV) Content came from: YouTube, GMU-TV station, iTunesU, DE courses, Mason “channels” (i.e., YouTube, Vimeo) 3-week turnaround time on jobs!

21 Accessible Media Pilot Workflow (Fall 2011) REQUEST Received SENT TO GA FOR FILE PREP GMU DOCSOFT Website (Automated) Transcript Downloaded and edited with DOCSOFT:TE UPLOADED TO GMU STREAMING SERVERS sent to faculty/staff with link to captioned video Accessible Media Pilot Workflow REQUEST SUBMISSION RECEIVED VIA COMMONSPOT SENT TO GA FOR FILE PREP DOCSOFT.GMU.EDU DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT EDIT WITH DOCSOFT:TE UPLOAD VIDEO TO GMU STREAMING SERVER ATI WEB SERVER (Upload ASX and SMI files) Finally, link to ASX file for faculty/staff member (from Web Hosting Server)

22 Pilot Project Results Results Host of Issues Identified!Just under 12 hours of video No AD Most submissions from ID herself, some from staff (websites) Host of Issues Identified! Delivery method (WMV, buffering issues) File Prep/Timing (3 weeks) Streaming server (unreliable, 5GB limit, used as storage) Lack of technical knowledge Marketing (Is this a pilot??)

23 Retool for Spring RolloutEnd of Jan 2012 (Beginning of Spring semester) **Goal to make service available to more IDs/faculty— eventually entire university** How did we fix the issues? Delivery method (Created YouTube channel) Quality of captions (e.g., Media Access Group at WGBH Best Practices) Procedures to address video description requests & outsourcing (e.g., over 60 min, less than 3-wk) Lack of technical knowledge (Trial & Error) Marketing (DE Council, Faculty Orientation Workshops, CDE, ID, Library)

24 Improved Accessible Media Workflow (Spring 2012)REQUEST Received AccMedia Coordinator Preps file GMU Docsoft Website (Automated) Transcript Downloaded and edited with DOCSOFT:TE or MovieCaptioner UPLOAD VIDEO & SRT FILE TO YOUTUBE Improved Accessible Media Workflow for Spring 2012 REQUEST SUBMISSION RECEIVED VIA COMMONSPOT ACCMEDIA COORDINATOR PREPS FILE or Outsource to 3rd party (>60 minutes) Note: If you outsource, then skip to step #6. Upload content to DOCSOFT.GMU.EDU DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT from DOCSOFT.GMU.EDU EDIT WITH DOCSOFT:TE/MOVIECAPTIONER UPLOAD VIDEO AND SRT FILE TO YOUTUBE

25 Evolution since FY12 FY13 Highlights FY14 Highlights Good Good Bad BadYouTube was familiar 2.5x # of requests from FY12 Included in DE course reviews Reduced turnaround time to 7-10 days Bad A lot of manual hand-off Lack of predictability GA’s couldn’t handle most immediate requests Hire/Lose/Re-hire SWs Copyright issues (2 YouTube accounts) Good Inclusion! University shift (Kaltura) Growing predictability 2.8x # of requests from FY13 RFP for captioning/transcription Improved workflows Reduced turnaround time to 4 business days Bad Copyright Issues (Added 3rd YouTube account) Outsourcing costs

26 FY13-14 IT Accessibility Working Group (ITAG)

27 What was happening at Mason?National cases had Mason equivalents! MyLabs and other supplemental applications Captioning Inaccessible websites/web-based documents DE courses Communication breakdowns Purchasing/procurement issues University’s IT infrastructure was changing Shifting away from ‘siloed’ delivery model Enterprise systems overhauled/updated

28 IT Accessibility Working Group (ITAG)Established in/met throughout Spring 2013 Stakeholders from Library, UL, ITU, CTFE, DE, Legal, Academic Depts., and CDE Issues and challenges centered on addressing needs of students with sensory impairments At the time, we had 81 total students with sensory impairments Included 8 incoming blind students (grad and undergrad)

29 Issues Identified by ITAGAccessibility vs. Accommodation JIT vs. Development Time/Staffing Inconsistency E-Learning Technology Non-Inclusive Practices/Awareness Procurement Compliance/Enforcement Costs Legal Issues

30 High Priority/High Impact RecommendationsRecommendations specifically impacting the captioning/transcription process: Established Basic Design Considerations (captioning, accessible document design) Accessibility reviews for DE courses Training with Academic Units/Depts./Instructional Designers Video management platform

31 ATI Specific Updates Updated Request Form/Submission ProcessFaculty/Staff have 2 ways to submit requests Single Submission and/or Bulk Request Form Responsibility Acknowledgement Faculty/Staff Videos will be used for at least one year Transcripts/Captioned files are the property of GMU Will receive transcript (.txt) ATI Transcript will be completed to at least 98% accuracy No editing of transcripts unless egregious errors are identified RFP/IFB for new captioning vendors FY14 (RFP): Secured 2 vendors FY15 (IFB): Secured 4 vendors Disability Services (Accommodations) Deaf/HOH Coordinator populates a semester listing of D/HOH students & their enrolled classes Allows us to directly target faculty teaching those courses

32 Updated Accessible Media Workflow – FY15REQUEST Received AccMedia Coordinator preps file Download file from YouTube/ 3rd-party Website and/or Push videos from Kaltura to vendor site Send YouTube links to faculty/staff Push video from Kaltura to faculty Bb site Improved Accessible Media Workflow for Spring 2014 request submission received from website. Sent to Accessible Media Coordinator for file prep (video/audio over 15 minutes or immediate need is sent out automatically) Upload content to ATI’s Captions Channel on YouTube or directly to vendor’s website through Kaltura API. Note: if you outsource, then skip to step #5. If uploaded to YouTube, video is editing directly on YouTube using built-in editing tools. Occasionally, videos are uploaded to If this is done, the SRT files is edited with Docsoft:TE or Moviecaptioner. After editing, final video and captions file are delivered via Kaltura or YouTube (i.e., link to captioned video is ed to faculty member if it is on YouTube. If video is already hosted on Kaltura, then videos are pushed directly to faculty member’s course through Bb)

33 What the numbers show

34 Completed Accessible Media Requests, FY12-present

35 Compliance Breakdown vs. Accommodation

36 Video Breakdown per Academic Unit

37 How files are delivered

38 How files are delivered (By FY)

39 How files are delivered (FY Trendlines)

40 Costs (fy12-present)

41 FY12 Costs (Per-minute, Annual)Total Minutes (FY12): 3,453 Total Hours (FY12): Total Jobs (FY12): Total Hours (Outsourced in FY12): Total Jobs (Outsourced in FY12): Total Costs for Outsourcing in FY12: $3,297.40 Avg. Cost per video minute (Outsourced): $2.94 Total Hours (Grad Students in FY12): (2,335 minutes) Total Jobs (Grad Students in FY12): Total Costs (Grad Students in FY12): $13,707.62 Avg. Cost per video minute (Student): $5.87 Cost savings (Students): 2,335 * $2.94 = $6, $13, = ($6,842.13)

42 Drilling Down By Grad Student (In-house FY12)Grad Student #1 Total Jobs (FY12): 102 Total Hours (FY12): 21.8 Avg. Cost per video minute (GA #1): $7.93 Grad Student #2 Total Jobs (FY12): 69 Total Hours (FY12): 17.1 Avg. Cost per video minute (GA #2): $3.26 Did not set the students up for success, particularly grad student #1!

43 Cost Comparisons by FY FY12* FY13 FY14 FY15 FY 16 3,453 7,309 16,419Total Minutes 3,453 7,309 16,419 19,261 17,318 Total Hours 57.55 121.82 278.4 321 289 Total Jobs 195 371 1034 1296 979 Hours (Outsourced) 18.63 68.97 222.55 275.95 277 Jobs (Outsourced) 24 177 901 1136 909 Avg. Cost/Min (Outsourced) $2.94 $2.73 $2.35 $2.19 $1.45 Hours (In-house)* 38.92 52.85 51.1 45.05 11 Jobs (In-house)* 171 194 133 160 70 Total Costs (In-house)* $13,707.62 $0 Avg. Cost/Min (In-house)* $5.87 Cost Savings (outsourcing)** ($6,858.55)* $869.02 $5,074.14 $2,649.12 $12,298.80 *In FY12, all in-house work is attributed solely to grad students. That work is now shared amongst a number of Mason staff/faculty since FY13. **Costs savings calculated by simply, e.g., multiplying # minutes outsourced in FY14 by the avg. cost/min in FY13 and FY14. The difference is the amount saved as a result of the lower negotiated avg./min costs. FY14 Outsourced Mins = x 60 min = 13,353 minutes outsourced Avg. cost/min FY13 = $2.73 X 13,353 minutes = $36, (Total outsourcing expense in FY14 if we had to pay FY13 rate of $2.73/min) Avg. cost/min FY14 = $2.35 X 13,353 minutes = $31, (Total outsourcing expense in FY14 paying negotiated rate of $2.35/min) Cost savings = $36, $31, = $5,074.14 Though we are still saving money we’ll begin to see that number stay the same or get smaller due to our video numbers plateauing and the average cost per minute not dropping as significantly as previous years.

44 Using Data to Enhance decision-making

45 Strategic Partnerships (AccMedia)Getting Started Kellar Institute for Human disAbilities Ongoing Disability Services Information Technology Unit Online Learning Services Instructional Design Team University Libraries Distance Education Communications & Marketing Disability Services – Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services Coordinator meets with faculty who have a student who is deaf or hard or hearing enrolled in their courses at the start of each semester. They are encouraged to have all videos used in their courses captioned. ITU Online Learning Systems oversees Bb and administration of Kaltura ID Team assists faculty with development of their online courses UL – Media Services Librarian, DE Librarian, and Copyright Services have worked with our office on establishing guidelines for the delivery of streaming media content for online courses. KIHd – They were instrumental in the purchase of DocSoft and the start of captioning at the University. DE – Have incorporated accessible course development practices in the portfolio review process for all new DE courses under their umbrella.

46 Who’s Using the Service?Over 180 faculty/staff members have made requests Top 3 Schools/Colleges/Units making requests Volgenau School of Engineering College of Humanities and Social Sciences College of Science Reasons for Request Compliance for DE Course – 74% Compliance for F2F Course – 0.7% Compliance for Websites – 4.3% Disability Accommodation – 21% Volgenau School of Engineering and College of Science are both large DE programs.

47 Website and Videos University Web Audit (FY14)Provided accessibility reviews, which were included in University’s web audit, number of documents were included but number of videos were impossible. Reviewed Priority 1 and Priority 2 websites (over 110 websites) P1: Academics, Admissions, Financial Aid, Student Health, Housing, Visitors, HR P2: Individual College and School websites Page scans 5 levels deep, up to 100 pages Reports provided to Web Developer University Web Overhaul (FY15) Phase 1 websites redesigned. Raise in captioning requests for websites ASRB, Online request process really opened the door…

48 Improved Access to Library ResourcesHow does this effect captioning? Library purchases subscriptions to media databases Library collections contain large number of VHS/DVDs that are loaned out. Significant resource for Faculty and Students Staff Changes: Library established an Accessibility Coordinator/Instruction Designer position (FY14) Policy/Procedure Changes: Improved hand-off when captioning library resources Improved coordination with Copyright Office Informal process for review of library technology purchases E.g., helping procurement to ensure responsibility of captioning isn’t solely on Mason if a media database is inaccessible. Established library Streaming Media Policy…

49 Library’s Streaming Media PolicyAt the request of the ATI, the library will create a streaming version of any media items that already incorporate open- or closed-captions. Access vs. Copyright – The library will defer to the ATI’s request for equivalent access to library resources. Library will seek the incorporation of captions, subtitles, etc. during procurement process. For titles already in library’s collection, library will reach out to vendor to make their resources accessible. When requested to do so by the Assistive Technology Initiative or another unit, the library will check its holdings for the presence of captions. If existing library catalog records do not accurately reflect the availability of captions, the library will attempt to update these records.

50 Next Steps Assess Workflow Continue to improve campus buy-inContinue working with stakeholders (DE, Library) Continue tracking media, finding new areas for tracking All options on table! Continue to improve campus buy-in MARKETING, MARKETING, MARKETING! Targeted marketing (Semi-annual mailings) Faculty/Staff Trainings (monthly) DE Course Reviews Department Champions to help spread the word Everything located in one place Improve costs/timelines RFP for captioning was used to reduce per minute costs Outsource ALL requests. Doing this allows more time for the Accessible Media Coordinator to work hands on with various faculty and departments to make the process easier which builds more overall business.

51 Things to Consider for your Institution…Budget/Prioritization Build infrastructure first Involve stakeholders early In-house (i.e., students, staff/faculty) vs. Outsourcing Develop policies and procedures Training, Training, Training!!

52 Vendor specific considerationsVideo Management Platform Integration i.e. Kaltura, YouTube, Vimeo Creating tags & tagging videos vs. direct integration 3rd party tools i.e. Interactive Transcript Plugins Web Interface Uploading videos Downloading .srt and .txt Cancelling jobs Language Options Customer Service Billing Bulk Purchases Negotiate pricing based on delivery timelines i.e. Compliance vs. immediate Disability Accommodation

53 Questions

54 Contacting Us Assistive Technology Initiative (ATI)4400 University Drive, MSN 6A11 Aquia Building, Rm. 238 Fairfax, VA 22030 Phone: Fax: Web: