UDL... and You!

...And Captions For All? A Case Study of the Relevance of Using Captions in a College Classroom

Contributed by

Introduction

Americans still talk about captions as if they are for the learning disabled or foreign film, something most Americans will never need to use unless they decide to go to independent movie theatres. The problem with such assumptions is that they do not account for the growing number of reports by scholars and instructors that not only describe how many students struggle before they are diagnosed with a learning ability, but also suggest that the use of captions can help both those with learning disabilities and those without (Bowe, 2000, Rose and Meyer 2002, National Institute for Literacy). This article addresses the infrequently recognized phenomenon that captions can assist all students—those with and without diagnosed learning disabilities— improve their recollection of information. The larger issue of this article addresses the importance of examining those learning needs shared by both the learning disabled and learning enabled, so that barriers to education can be reduced for all students. (Adelman and Taylor 2005, Bowe 2000).

The significance of these points becomes apparent when we examine the extent to which captions can enable all students to improve their recollection of course materials ... and why students seems to perform better when captions are used regularly with video materials in the class rooms than when not. In a time before Wikipedia and cell phones — when the attention spans of students were imagined to be greater than fruit flies — professors could at least imagine that information from video materials was given undivided attention by all students in the classroom. Such expectations, however, may have conjured the false illusion that all students receive information in the same way, and that the learning disabled are the exception (Bender 2007, Rose and Meyer 2002).

In the SF State classroom, we need to recognize the significant benefit of caption use with video materials. As suggested by David Rose and Anne Meyers, this practice can give one great insight about students who do not seem to "fit the mold" and enable the instructor to develop a more flexible curriculum. Although American cultural practices tell us that the problems of others can never help our own, I disagree, and would like to encourage thought about and beyond the binaries of ability and disability and toward the reduction — through practice — of official and unofficial learning disabilities. Presented with this suggestion are some preliminary findings from observations of student performance in my Americans Indians Studies 150 class when captions are used and when they are not (Adelman and Taylor 2005).

Sample and Methods

The observations presented here come from a recent case study begun in the spring of 2007 as a result of my participation with the Ensuring Access through Collaboration and Technology (EnACT) group. The challenge given was to find ways to integrate Universal Design for Learning (UDL) into one or more of my classes. The fruit of this challenge was a case study of the affects of captions on student performance. The sample was a group of forty-nine students in my American Indian Studies 150— from all ethnic groups, abilities, social and economic backgrounds, and majors from across the colleges. These students, consequently, represented individuals of diverse capabilities and reflected a potentially accessible view of multiple learning modes.

The students in the class watched several videos — alternating between captioned and uncaptioned - of varying content and excitement (e.g., In Search of the First Americans, and Savagery and the American Indians, Parts I and Part II). By excitement, I mean entertainment value. Although all of these videos were produced through the collaborative efforts of Native Americans and anthropologists, they vary in the whimsical manner in which some of the scholars present the information. Segments include everything from stories of local community members ricocheting bullets over the heads of archaeologists at Meadowcroft in Pennsylvania — a site used to support the Land Bridge Theory — to young Arapaho children laughing at the fact that they can make bull's-eyes with an atlathl. To aid in the excerption of material from the video, students are given a list of events and names of scholars to note down. Examples of the alternation between captioned and uncaptioned videos are as follows: in the first video, In Search of the First Americans captions were used. With Savagery and the American Indian, Part I no captions were used. Captions were used for the showing of Savagery and the American Indian, Part II.

Observations

When I begin this case study, I was a little skeptical about whether or not something as simple as captions would actually impact the way that students interacted with the course material or each another, or exert any affect on their over all achievement. To my surprise, two trends emerged: when captions were not used, students were quite passive and silent during class discussions — with the usual "usual speakers" dominating the conversation - and generalizations were pervasive. However, when captions were used the complete opposite occurred: students were more engaged and responsive to the questions asked about the film. In a similar vein, students made interesting analogies to their everyday lives and reference to specific information and events from the video was much more abundant. The most exciting of all was the correlation between this usage of captions and the students' grades. Where the use of captions was low, as it was before exam I, there was an abundance of C grades on the exam; however, during exam II — when the use of captions was more abundant — there was an increase in B and A grades, with an average B grade as opposed to the average C grade of exam I.

Now, some of you might be saying, "Maybe the second half of the class is easier." I am quite sure that if one were to ask any of my students, they would tell you about the high standards that I keep — perhaps too high. While this bar may be hard to reach, it is positioned to make them competent—definitely more so than the average American—in their knowledge of Americans Indians in U.S. History. Standards aside, the performance was not a reflection of a relaxed standard or anything but the fruits of genuine interest in the class, which I found to be enhanced by a small effort to make the deliverance of the information to them more efficient. In fact, throughout the semester students frequently commented on what a pleasure it was to have the captions to the videos, which helped with the spelling of difficult Native American names and nations, anthropological and archaeological terminology, and catching what people said in the videos in general. The same students seemed to use their notes more frequently during discussions. These intriguing results have caused me to seek Human Subjects approval and continue this study by tracking such trends over time in tandem with student feedback on their learning experience.

Summary and Conclusion

When David Rose and Anne Meyer (2002) wrote, "Teaching Every Student in the Digital Ages: Universal Design for Learning", it seems that their goal was to stress the point that students that "do not fit the mold" still have strengths that can be cultivated by a flexible curriculum that enables all to learn effectively. Rose and Meyer allude to a very important point that my observations corroborated: there is much that a professor at a teaching institution can do for students to reduce the barriers they face during the education process. Sometimes — as in this case — it is something as simple as adding captions to videos for all students. This minor implementation of a UDL technique into a curriculum is an easy practice that enables students to become more specific in their usage and discussion of course material and events covered, better note takers and thus better achievers on exams, and to succeed in an environment that does not emphasize the binary of abilities, but addresses the barriers—and implements the enabling components necessary to make academic success a possibility for all (Adelman and Taylor 2005, Bowe 2000).

References

Books

Adelman, Howard and Linda Taylor. 2005. The Implementation Guide to Student Learning Supports in the Classroom and Schoolwide: New Directions for Addressing Barriers to Learning. Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Bender, William Neil. 2007 Differentiating Instruction for Students With Learning Disabilities: Best Teaching Practices for General and Special Educators. Corwin Press: Thousand Oaks, CA.
Bowe, Frank G. 2000. Universal Design in Education: Teaching Non-Traditional Students. Bergen and Garvey: Westport, CT.
Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). 2005. Universal Design for Learning. Prentice Hall: Princeton, NJ.
Dean, Stacey Pellechia. 2007. Lesson Plan Book for the Diverse Classroom: Planning for Accessibility Through University Design For Learning. Dude Publishing/National Public Resources: Port Chester, NY.

Web Sites

National Institute for Literacy. "Learning Disabilities Facts," http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/facts/Learning_disabilities.html. (accessed April 15, 2008). Rose, D. & Meyer, A. 2002. Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved July 28, 2003, from http://www.cast.org/teachingeverystudent

This article originally appeared in The Garden Volume II, Issue 4: May 2008