© RNIB 2011
RNIB Braille Development Unit
Research report #14
Implementation of UEB (Unified English braille code) in Australia and New Zealand- the experiences of a small sample of native braille users
Published by:
RNIB Braille Development Unit, PO Box 173, Peterborough, PE2 6WS.
Commissioned by:
Peter Osborne, Chair UKAAF (United Kingdom Association for Accessible Formats).
Author:
Mandy White
For correspondence:
Tel: 01829 261853
Email:
Date: 19 July 2011
Sensitivity:Internal and full public access
Copyright: RNIB 2011
Citation guidance:
White, M. (2011). The experiences of Australia and New Zealand in implementing UEB (Unified English Braille Code. RNIB Braille Development Unit, Peterborough.
Acknowledgements:
Many thanks to all our antipodean colleagues who helped and took part in this project.
Thanks also to SarahHome and Heather Cryer for editorial input.
1
© RNIB 2011
Implementation of UEB (Unified English braille code) in Australia and New Zealand - the experiences of a small sample of native braille users
RNIB Braille Development Unit
Prepared by:
Mandy White (Project Manager - Braille)
Draft version
21 July 2011
Table of Contents
A. Executive Summary
Introduction
Method
Design
Participants
Demographic information
Materials
Procedure
Results
1. Views and thoughts prior to implementation of UEB
1.1 Consultation
1.2 Views prior to implementation
2. Views and thoughts during the transition period
2.1 Participants using UEB in a work environment
2.2 Transition and the general user
2.3 Difficulty with transition
3. Views and thoughts on UEB, 5 years after implementation
3.1 Positive views on UEB
3.2 Undecided and negative views on UEB
4. Advice to the UK on Adoption of UEB
4.1 UEB, a braille code for the future
4.2 Specific aspects of the UEB code
4.3 Writing braille
4.4 UEB and the English speaking world
4.5 Advice on Marketing UEB
Conclusion
Appendix 1 Interview questions
1. Set up and Thanks
2. Context and Introduction
3. Personal experience with braille (for braille users)
4. Personal experience with UEB
5. UEB in the future
6. Sum Up
7. Thanks
Appendix 2 - Interview Transcripts
Interview 1
Interview 2
Interview 3
Interview 4
Interview 5
Interview 6
Interview 7
Interview 8
Interview 9
Interview 10
A.Executive Summary
UEB (The unified English Braille code) has been in development for 20 years. Australia and New Zealand adopted the code in 2005. Australia started a 5 year implementation period immediately. New Zealand implemented the code in 2008. The UK is currently considering adopting the code. This piece of research aims to inform that decision by collating the views of a number of Australian and New Zealand braille users.
Ten braille users were interviewed. A number of users were also teachers, transcribers and producers.
- In general the Australians and New Zealanders felt that they were consulted about the implementation of UEB. Their views on whether the code should be adopted were split equally between those that were pro UEB, those that were against UEB and those that were undecided.
- During transition, the experience of people who used UEB professionally (teachers, transcribers etc) tended to be good. General braille users experienced mild irritation at worst and many continued to write in the same code that they always had. There was one person who found the change difficult and unnecessary.
- Six years after adoption 8 of the 10 respondents are glad that their country switched to UEB and 9 out of the 10 recommended that the UK do the same. They urged UK braille users to think of the children and the future of braille and to act without delay. They stressed the global aspect and benefits and also offered advice on marketing the code.
Although the sample size of the research group was relatively small there was a deal of consistency across a number of areas and some interesting themes emerged. The information will prove very useful in informing the UK decision on UEB adoption.
Introduction
UEB is a code that sets out to unify all the different braille codes used across the English speaking world. UKAAF (the UK Association of Accessible Formats) is currently considering the possible adoption and implementation of the code in the UK. In order to better understand the issues surrounding adoption and implementation they commissioned a number of pieces of research. One important part of the picture was to look at the experiences of countries that had already adopted and implemented the code to see if there was anything that could be learnt.
Method
Design
A qualitative approach was chosen to enable in-depth discussion on all the aspects of UEB implementation. Individual interviews were carried out to collect rich data about individual's experiences and views on UEB.
Participants
Participants were recruited from people attending the ABA (Australian Braille Authority) AGM held in Melbourne in May 2011 and the 3 day Round table Conference that followed it. It is important to note that this meant that participants were more engaged with the process surrounding UEB evaluation, adoption and implementation in Australia and New Zealand than general braille users in those countries. Participants were volunteers. Approximately 20 people volunteered to take part in the project. Due to time/resource constraints only 10 could be interviewed.
Demographic information
- Three males and seven females
- 8 From Australia, 2 from New Zealand
- 6 were aged between 17 and 49 and 4 were aged between 50 and 64
- All participants were blind or partially sighted. 9 out of the 10 were experienced braille users. 8 reported learning braille during childhood, with 2 learning to read braille as adults.
- In addition to being braille users, three taught braille, 2 produced braille and 2 transcribed braille.
Materials
Interviews followed a structured topic guide which can be found in Appendix 1.
Procedure
A request was made during the AGM and conference proceedings for volunteers. Mutually convenient interview slots were arranged and face to face interviews were conducted. Interviews lasted about 20 minutes.
Results
1. Views and thoughts prior to implementation of UEB
1.1 Consultation
Prior to implementation of UEB the majority of interviewees felt that they had been consulted. There were meetings, workshops and focus groups (although see the note above regarding participants being more actively involved with the braille process than general users). Samples were provided and feedback was recorded. Government funding had been provided for the process.
'I was consulted at least 3 or 4 times through workshops prior to adoption. Samples were presented and active discussion took place. I felt involved and that people's ideas were being taken in to account.'
Some felt that the consultation was not really of any value.
'No matter what any of us did or said, they were going to do what they did anyhow'
'There was a lot of negativity around, I could understand this. There was a lot of adverse reaction around the lack of consultation. Even though people were being asked, they felt they were not really consulted.'
In the event both Australia and New Zealand voted to adopt UEB.
1.2 Views prior to implementation
Interviewees thoughts on the code at this point were mixed. A third were against the change:-
'I was very against the code as a user. I said I agree with your concept, I agree with unification of maths and science but don't touch literary Braille.'
'I found the examples clumsy and long winded. There seemed to be two cells used where previously one would have been used. I felt the introduction of the code was just a lazy solution for not having enough proper braille teachers. It was billed as easier to teach and was therefore just for the convenience of the sighted teachers'
A third were undecided:-
'I was probably fairly ambivalent towards UEB. I could see that there was not radical change, so it did not worry me that much.'
'I felt that maybe education wise, if I could teach someone from the word go, it doesn't matter which code you use from scratch…but personally it was going to be a bit of a pain'
And a third were quite positive:-
''At the time, I was enthusiastic about it. There were little things that are a pity, like the ble sign, but nothing really that bothered me that much. I thought it was a good idea. I thought it would make it easier to produce Braille so I would get more of it to read, it would be easier to interchange Braille around the world and that's important for a small country like mine.'
'I have always thought it was a good thing. The main reasons are that it is important for Braille to have a code that can extend to include maths and other concepts even if they are not used that often, this includes characters you might come across in a variety of ways. The idea that you write in Braille in a precise way that can be back translated is very important for me.'
2. Views and thoughts during the transition period
Again the general view of the participants divided into 3 broad categories. There were those who used UEB for their job and were necessarily forced to learn and adapt to the new code quickly. There were those who just muddled along and adapted to the new code gradually and there was one person who found the change difficult and unnecessary.
2.1 Participants using UEB in a work environment
The transition period for those using UEB in a work environment was generally good
'Because I teach the code I had to go into it in a lot of depth. There were a lot of perceived problems which were not real, it is not a huge deal particularly with electronic devices.
'We were in an organisation where we had to change. We had to be the peak of the change, if we didn't change, no one else would change. I didn't use many of the other codes, so I hardly noticed the difference really.
'I did not encounter any problems with UEB, it did not worry me that much. It made Braille less contracted. I didn't really need to know whether something was bold or not, but, for me it didn't bother me that much'.
One participant, a transcriber was unhappy with the way in which the new code was taught to experienced braille users
'The teacher was quite patronising and so was the manual - there is a difference between people learning for the first time and those converting'.
2.2 Transition and the general user
Most general users reported that the transition period was inconsequential or an irritation at most. A recurring theme was that they continued to write braille in the same way that they always had and that UEB was a code for reading generally available documents.
'I ignored a lot of dots at first! As long as I could get the gist of what I was reading it was fine.'
'It hasn't impacted my life much. I usually make my own notes so I do what I want. It's only when I read that I notice it. It slowed me down a little bit as I got used to more contractions and some things seemed strange. I can understand it but I do read slower than I did with older codes.'
'I didn't encounter any problems really. Sometimes I got a bit stuck with punctuation, but it was fine. I welcomed it and I was pleased to see that it was happening. I didn't go out of my way to learn it, but I can read it. I don't write Braille for other people so what I write for myself is in any code I like.'
'I am more likely not to write in UEB as I haven't developed the skills to do this, and my device doesn't have the code in any case.'
'I am a casual kind of reader so I don't really think about the detail of signs as such. I just skip over the things I don't really need to know, the change didn't irritate me.'
2.3 Difficulty with transition
One respondent was not happy during the transition period and reported,
'I guess I could read it, but what I felt was that it was too cluttered. It was like limping after I had been running. It was fractured. You would have a nice smooth read but now there was all this junk at the beginning, middle and end, especially type form indication. Two cell brackets! For heavens sake, why do we need that?'
3. Views and thoughts on UEB, 5 years after implementation
5 years down the line, 8 of the 10 respondents are glad that Australia and New Zealand have switched to the use of UEB, one is still undecided and one remains vehemently opposed to the code. All said that the transition to UEB had not affected their level of braille use.
3.1 Positive views on UEB
'I am happy with the code I am using. I understand type forms and like their representation in Braille. The root part tells you how long it is used for, and once you have learned both parts it is very logical; students understand it.'
'In principle I am glad they made the switch as it gives more flexibility. In our situation it's the only way they could have gone. I have overcome being pissed off with it, I am happy with the flexibility it has given me'.
'It doesn't worry me personally. Me as an educator, I think it's great. There is less confusion about double meanings for signs, it's good for younger ones as they don't have to change between codes. I think back translation is really important. From my perspective as a teacher, it's really beneficial'.
'Talking to people who are not happy about UEB, a lot of it is that we are not really good with change, it's what you are most comfortable with. For students, people who want to pull apart what they are reading, it is a faster code and gives you more information the same sort of information a sighted person gets from that text. It gives us the dignity to have something that is the same as everyone else and I think that it a good thing'.
'I am quite happy with the code I am using. Whenever you have standardisation you have some compromise in terms of optimising.
'I am very pleased we made the switch. If you don't start it will never happen.'
'and the good thing is that it doesn't slow down reading speed…the way it was marketed you had the impression that it would. I couldn't go back now.'
3.2 Undecided and negative views on UEB
One participant remained passionately opposed to UEB despite having used it for 5 years.
'If you wish to comment about it, you are better off learning it so that you have more authority and a better stand point from which to write. So I allowed myself to learn the filthy stuff. There wasn't much choice really, the god of print had to be worshipped. I am not glad that Australia made the switch at all.'
Another participant was less resolute but was still unhappy about implementation
''I think it was quite an emotional decision [to choose] and that we should have stayed with what we had. I would have preferred it if it had stayed the same in my personal life, but I can do this of course. I realise that it is not a bad idea to move to something that is unified in the long run. New learners will get it from the word go. Those of us who use codes can do what we like personally, I have two hats really'.
4. Advice to the UK on Adoption of UEB
9 out of 10 people recommended that the UK adopt UEB. They urged UKbraille users to think of the children and the future of braille and to act without delay. There was advice on specific aspects of the code. Writing braille was again mentioned. They stressed the global aspect and benefits. They also offered advice on marketing the code.
4.1 UEB, a braille code for the future
Participants urged UK users to try and be objective.
'I would ask them not to be negative about what it means for them personally. Of course you will resent changes that have a personal impact but it would be good if you could operate for the Braille users of the future.'
'[My advice to the UK would be] 'Think about the children. The details of the code are most important for students. The Braille we use as adults, details are maybe not as important. A plebiscite of Braille readers is not the right way to make a decision on this, we have to think about the children.'
'It's not about what current Braille users want, it's about everyone who is going to be using Braille in the future. I would like people to understand that Braille is for all, including the people of tomorrow, I shouldn't have such a strong sentimental attachment that I will never change. This should be a strong justification, people need to see that. They are not giving up something, it's just something new I guess.'
'The people who say it's been good enough for me are doing Braille a dis-service because we need Braille to be relevant in the years ahead. Just because it has been relevant to date, it does not mean it will be relevant by default in the future. If Louis Braille was alive, he would certainly want it to develop, he would want it to be relevant in the years ahead.'