A statement on online course content and accessibility

#1

Post by wfunction » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 9:00 AM UTC

A statement on online course content and accessibility
news.berkeley.edu

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#2

Post by malloryerik » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 9:45 AM UTC

U.C. Berkeley has some fantastic classes online. It would truly be a shame to lose them. Many were clearly produced on shoestring budgets.

The Department of Justice seems to have received complaints mainly regarding absence of transcripts for audio or video content. Can't speech-to-text tech help?

Other complaints include poor formatting of pdf's. If the courses are indeed taken down, I can only hope that at least this starts a conversation about how to create smarter regulations -- regulations that cause less collateral damage.

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#3

Post by daenney » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 10:18 AM UTC

malloryerik wrote: post #2

U.C. Berkeley has some fantastic classes online. It would truly be a shame to lose them. Many were clearly produced on shoestring budgets. The Department of Justice seems to have received complaints mainly regarding absence of transcripts for audio or video content. Can't speech-to-text tech help? Other complaints include poor formatting of pdf's. If the courses are indeed taken down, I can only hope that at least th…

Agreed. I've had access to a few of their courses, they're pretty awesome.

I know it sucks for people with disabilities and Berkeley should invest into making it accessible to everyone, but it would be a loss for everyone if the consequence of this is that their courses become entirely unavailable :(.

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#4

Post by reustle » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 10:28 AM UTC

Sorry for sounding naive but isn't UCB a private company? I hate to say but "this is why we can't have nice things". We are trying to move into an age of more digital education, but if there are a bunch of hoops to jump through in order to even attempt it, won't the barrier to trying be too high for some institutions?

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#5

Post by DanielBMarkham » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 10:43 AM UTC

"...the Department of Justice has recently asserted that the University is in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act because, in its view, not all of the free course and lecture content UC Berkeley makes available on certain online platforms is fully accessible to individuals with hearing, visual or manual disabilities..."

Wow. Talk about harming hundreds of people for no reason at all.

IANAL, but I believe the ADA would be applicable for students of the college, not necessarily online content consumers viewing the college's courses.

Of course, the problem here is that you have to start playing expensive lawyer games to get that clarified -- and it might take years. So even if Berkeley has done nothing wrong, they still might end up having to pull the courses.

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#6

Post by Mao_Zedang » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 10:48 AM UTC

Berkeley should just incorporate a non profit in another country, transfer the IP and serve it via there. Outside the jurisdiction of the DOJ.

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#7

Post by jasode » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 10:52 AM UTC

Fyi ... a related (not duplicate) HN discussion from Feb 2015:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9039798

In both this case about UC Berkeley and the lawsuit against Harvard & MIT, the legal attacks seem very wrong.

What I see is:

- Scenario A: spend $X to release free courses that benefits most of humanity

- Scenario B: spend $X+$Y to release free courses that also benefits the disabled population

(The $Y is extra costs to close-caption, transcribe to braille, etc.)

That these lawsuits are obstinate in that you must spend that extra $Y to fulfill Scenario B or humanity can't have the knowledge at all is nonsensical to me.

E.g. The school budget has finite money. Let's say It can release 15 free courses by spending just $X but to avoid a lawsuits, it can only release 10 courses by spending $X+$Y ... or release none at all because it's not worth the legal minefield. Why is the 2nd scenario more optimized for humanity?

Sure, we should encourage the universal accessibility of the video courses but to formalize it into the nastiness of lawsuits? It doesn't seem right.

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#8

Post by hacker314159 » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 10:59 AM UTC

Thanks DOJ for the Kafka-esque move that will most likely deprive everyone of free educational materials. Glad to know justice was served.

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#9

Post by jimiz » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 11:05 AM UTC

Unfortunate to see this free content be lost. In the same line of thinking it is also sad that in this day and age there are not easy tools / systems to help transcode and make content ADA approved. (At least cost effective)

Re: A statement on online course content and accessibility

#10

Post by blackoil » Sat, Sep 17, 2016, 11:16 AM UTC

malloryerik wrote: post #2

U.C. Berkeley has some fantastic classes online. It would truly be a shame to lose them. Many were clearly produced on shoestring budgets. The Department of Justice seems to have received complaints mainly regarding absence of transcripts for audio or video content. Can't speech-to-text tech help? Other complaints include poor formatting of pdf's. If the courses are indeed taken down, I can only hope that at least th…

Would it be legal to have community created transcripts for all courses? Would not mind to spend some time doing so in lieu of free content.