|
The Newsletter of COTIS
The Confederation of Transcribed Information Services
To promote the provision of information in alternative formats to print
Editor - Linda Pearce, Email:
ontrack@cotis.org.uk .
Project Office, 67 High Street, Tarporley, Cheshire, CW6 ODP. Tel: 01829-733351
(Answerphone)
Reg Charity No: 299024 © Issue 49 - January 2005
What we had previously committed to do
In the October 2004 On Track, we reported that we had received £5,000 each from RNIB and the Ulverscroft Foundation. Since then, we are delighted to report that Ulverscroft has accepted COTIS’ end-of-year cash-in-hand as matching funding and has released their remaining pledged £5,000.This has enabled us to push ahead with the activities we had outlined as follows.
1) Develop appropriate assessment criteria
We reported that we needed to amend the questionnaire we had developed for the Talking Newspaper competition, and to gain a consensus from the panel on what constitutes "quality" for "commercial" recording. This we have achieved thanks to twelve very hard working panellists who gathered together in Birmingham for three days in November.
With the help of an external facilitator and three group leaders, the panel listened to recordings, answered questions, scored, and argued amongst themselves until the core issues became clear and agreement was reached.
The two issues causing most discussion were:
a) the use of music: all appreciated that a snatch of music at the start of a
recording helped create a mood, and often helped identify the tape, but all too
often the music lasted too long, and was not faded out as soon as the speakers
began, making it hard to hear the all-important opening announcements. Given
the age profile of the majority of visually impaired people, it was felt it
should be obvious that many would also have a hearing loss, thus making clarity
an absolute priority.
If well used, music could also act as an index marker between items. However, several people wondered if, in fact, those making the recordings had realised that music could be used in this way, because it was so frequently "talked over", thus making it almost impossible to identify in cue and review mode. This was especially true of male voice-overs, as their lower tones seemed to blend in and camouflage the music even more than the usually higher tones of women. The message to producers was again "Please LISTEN - and USE - your own productions. If you cannot find the start of the section using cue and review in the studio, older people in a home environment most certainly will not be able to".
b) the lack of "visual impairment (vi) specific" information and of the re-formatting necessary for tape usage. By this, the panel did not mean some sort of political correctness, such as not describing the visual appearance or using the word "see". But they did need information other than purely visual - for example "the right hand red knob" instead of just "the red knob". And useful further information such as saying if the booklets of recipes and wines mentioned were available in other formats or only in print; and reading recipes in the order in which actions needed to be taken - and repeating the quantities of the ingredients in the "method" section, to save the listener rewinding to listen again to the "ingredients" listing. Plus re-ordering information such as putting the small print of standard Consumer Rights at the end of the recording, not at the very beginning - and putting important telephone numbers where they can be easily accessed.
In other words, what was wanted was the information as needed by a person with poor or no sight - not just a recording from beginning to end of a print document designed for sighted people. This obviously requires much more effort on the part of the transcription service and of the document owner, including dialogue between them. For instance, the transcription service would need to find out from the supermarket which of the print documents mentioned were available in other formats. Hopefully, this would encourage the supermarket to think about the complete service from the blind person's perspective, rather than just thinking "we must get this document transcribed". Good transcription services already do such "prodding", which the panel wanted to reward, as well as encouraging others to do the same.
On reflection, I think all the points made were neatly encapsulated in the comment (greeted at the time by unanimous murmurs of agreement) that "it's a very good recording but of no use to me".
Thus COTIS is now making sure that any "quality accreditation" assessment takes account of such points.
Indeed, we are now looking at a very wide range of issues. As well as those around the actual recording (do you know what it is, do you know what items it includes and can you locate them, can you hear and understand the information?) we will also be asking questions to try to establish how producers achieved this - was, for example, the good recording a happy accident or are there recruitment, training and checking processes in place to ensure consistent results?
The suggested list of criteria and weighting for commercial recordings is as follows:
1) Processes and Procedures - 10%
· Customer Focus - effective collecting and use of feedback
· Quality Control - processes for recruitment, induction, training,
monitoring
· Involvement - do the producers listen to the recordings they make and
try using them in the same way as the intended recipients?
2) Office Checks - 5%
· Packaging - adequate and appropriate?
· Timeliness - did transcription service do all in its power to ensure
arrival by acceptable/agreed deadline?
3) Identification - 10%
· Visual - what, who, multiple tapes
· Tactile - what, who, multiple tapes
· Aural - what, who, multiple tapes, how long
4) Structure - 20%
· Contents listed appropriately
· Navigation - able to get to main sections?
5) Reading Quality - 20%
· Clarity and smoothness
· Understanding and interest
· Phrasing and speed
· Tone and attitude
6) Audio Quality - 20%
· Clear signal
· No unintended background noises
· Adequate and consistent recording level
· Wise use of music and other sounds
7) Appropriateness - 5%
· General appearance
· Style and presentation
· Reading of print or audio presentation
8) Specific VI Issues - 10%
· Were important points highlighted in a way appropriate to the
format? (For example: is the emergency number to call if you smell a gas leak
still buried in the midst of a page of text as it was - even though it was in
very large and bold letters - in the print version?)
· Was specific information needed by vi people given? (For example: is the
"red knob" the one on the right or the left? Are booklets mentioned
only available in print?)
How does this feel to you?
2) Consult Producers
We also asked for your help, both to react to the criteria on which your recordings will be judged; and, most importantly, to help choose the descriptive sections into which types of recordings and materials can be divided. You responded magnificently to this - 13 transcription services came to the session, representing most of those involved in mass production. An interesting discussion developed with the panellists and the representatives of the three visual impairment (vi) organisations on music and on vi content. The transcription services present manfully recognised the validity of the comments being made about their recordings, but asked that we realise they had to conform to the demands of those commissioning the recordings, which could conflict with the needs of users. It was felt that an external quality or "usability" assessment might enable transcription services to say more forcefully "look, we've been recognised as having the expertise in this field for which you are paying, let us use our skills to do the best job for you". It was also suggested that a COTIS quality assessment might meet the requirement in some tender negotiations to demonstrate positive feedback.
3) Suggest Categories and Segmentations
COTIS has always hoped that one of the outcomes of any scheme might be to facilitate early discussions between transcription services and those commissioning transcription by providing a common means of describing the type of work which can be undertaken. We had also found when trying to gain agreement on the relative importance of the various criteria on which recordings were to be judged that we only made progress when we stopped talking about generalities and started separate discussions for different types of materials. So we are now proposing three different types of segmentation:
a) Types of material from the end user perspective: we tried to group
together materials where the various criteria (see Section 1 where they are
weighted for commercial transcriptions) carried the same relative importance
for the end user. At present we are working with the following list, which may
change if we find it necessary:
· Talking Newspapers
· Commercial transcriptions
· Academic materials
· Leisure reads.
Talking Newspaper listeners, for instance, say that labelling and navigation is less important as they know what the tape arriving every Friday in a wallet is, they listen all the way through, and are more concerned that the readers sound happy, confident and friendly and are well-recorded. Commercial transcriptions, however, arrive unexpectedly, and here it is essential to be able to establish what the material is, and whether it contains information you really do need or if you can safely bin it.
b) Transcription skills required: we found when working with commercial recordings that we needed to segment further according to the skills needed to produce a useful transcription. We did not feel, for instance, that we could accredit a transcription service for producing bank statements if we had only assessed their recording of plain text.
Thus "Commercial transcriptions" have been further segmented
according to the editorial/reader skills into:
· plain text - just read through, indicating main headings;
· catalogue/listed information - enable access to each segment of
information, which must make sense standing alone;
· tabulated material such as financial statements where the reader has to
make very clear which piece of information goes with which heading;
· technical - instructional material, technical operations manuals etc.
Where the reader needs to be able to describe usefully for a blind person;
· specialist material - where the reader needs specialist knowledge (eg of
French, mathematics, horticulture) in order to read with understanding;
· vi/media specific - where more than reading the print is needed if the
recording is to be of use to a non-sighted person listening to an audio
version. For instance, "the left hand red button is for 'on', the right
hand blue button is for 'off'" is more use than "the red button is
for 'on', the blue button is for 'off'". From the format perspective,
giving the emergency number for use if you smell a gas leak near the start of
the recording or at the beginning of the section is better than reading it
where it was printed (in large bold type) in the middle of the page of text.
c) Production capabilities: to help conversations between commissioners of
recorded information and transcription services, we saw the need to indicate
the production capabilities of the transcription service, and so have at
present divided presentation capabilities into:
· standard - the equivalent of a computer-print document, photocopied and
stapled: a reading by competent readers; identifying information perhaps
hand-written; plus braille attached by elastic band;
· glossy - the equivalent of a professionally designed and printed
document: a reading by contrasting "actors"; well-used music; colour
printed inlay cards; cases with attached braille labels.
There is also a need in audio transcription to be clear whether a straight reading of the print material (with some small adjustments to take account of the differing formats) is required, or whether what is wanted is an audio presentation of the information given in the print - in other words, a complete re-design to make a broadcast instead of a written article.
Does this make sense to you?
All the suggestions just outlined worked for those taking part in the three-day
conference - but how do YOU feel about this? Does it fit with what you are
doing? Will it help YOU answer queries? If not, we will need to think again, so
PLEASE get in touch and let us know.
As promised at our AGM, we are now able to launch version 1.0 of the COTIS Audio Standard. This encapsulates all the points made by our users over many years. This is a General Standard, intended to cover all types of recordings. If felt helpful, we may in future issue more specific Standards, for instance for Academic materials, which will be linked to the criteria on which quality assessments will be made. Also, dependent on feedback and technical developments, we will no doubt be issuing further versions of this general Standard.
Please use this version now to evaluate your own processes and output. And PLEASE let us know if you find it useful - irrelevant - incomprehensible - or …?
Introduction
The Audio Transcription Standard is a national quality standard for organisations recording print materials for blind and partially sighted people (and others who cannot read print in the usual way). Its purpose is to identify the essential features of successful recordings, regardless of context or sector and to provide key indicators by which organisations can measure their current activities. It will, therefore, help organisations to "raise their game" where necessary and help them to keep high standards as well as continuously improve their service.
That said, there is no set of rules, which, if observed, will automatically ensure a quality transcription. Rather, success depends on an empathy with the user permeating every action, leading to the imaginative creation of recordings which equate to the visual experience. In other words, quality transcriptions depend on all involved understanding what they are trying to achieve, rather than working to a set of rules.
However, there are key elements which blind and partially sighted users have identified as being of overriding importance. The consistent production of high quality transcription requires all of these elements and the specific issues within to have been addressed, and strategies for dealing with them to have been devised.
Thus the Standard consists of the 12 elements identified by users as the key
factors of a "quality recording". The relative importance of these
factors varies according to the type of material, which will be taken into
account when assessing recordings. In time, more specific standards may also be
issued, but meanwhile, the following basics are necessary for all good
recordings: namely, that people:
· receive the recording on time and in good condition;
· can easily identify what material/information is recorded
· can understand the structure of the material and find a desired section;
· can hear the words clearly thanks to quality recording;
· are encouraged to listen to the material, thanks to quality reading;
· are given any extra information needed to understand the information in
audio or act upon it independently as a person with little or no sight.
In addition, the Standard requires that effective training and customer
feedback systems are in place.
It may seem an obvious point but the overwhelming priority for any producer
should be to provide as far as possible the individual user with what they
require. Thus communication with the user is crucial. If an individual (or
group of individuals) requests something different to that which has been
prescribed as general "best practice", then that request should have
serious consideration, to the point of taking precedence over the Standard.
The Standard does not give advice on how best to achieve the outcomes indicated. There are a number of publications which should be read in conjunction with this Standard (ie COTIS Guidelines - list given as the last item in this issue). These will explain the complexities involved and will give you practical information on production issues.
The twelve elements:
1. Customer Focus
There should be processes and procedures in place which will ensure that end
user customer feedback is regularly proactively sought, received, digested, and
any appropriate changes made throughout the whole production system.
Additionally, for transcriptions commissioned by a third party (usually the information owner), allowance must be made for feedback from the paying customer.
2. Quality Control
Quality should not arrive by happy accident, but as a result of recruitment,
induction and continuous training in the case of the people involved; and as a
result of continuous monitoring, evaluation and development of technical and
process issues. In addition to quick sample checks, all involved in the
production system should regularly try "using" the complete recording
in the way it is expected most users will - for example, as an hour's
recreational reading; or to find out if a certain cheque has been cleared; or
to choose presents for friends.
3. Packaging
Have the cassettes or discs been wrapped well enough to ensure their
safe arrival with the end user?
Packaging should be robust enough to enable the tape or CD to arrive undamaged in normal handling processes. At the same time, it should be possible to open the package easily without good vision and very possibly with stiff and trembling fingers.
4. Labelling
Can the end user tell what the recording is without playing it?
The cassettes or discs should be labelled both visually and tactually (but
for discs, tactile labels should be on the cases only) to enable people with
little or no sight to:
· identify the originator of the material;
· tell which way to insert the recording;
· identify the order in the case of multiple cassettes/discs.
5. Aural Identification of Material
Can end users tell early on when listening to the recording if they want
or need to listen to it, and whether any response is required from them?
Early in the recording, the following information should be given:
· the originator of the material;
· details such as issue date, name, and/or reference number of the
recorded document;
· the approximate overall playing time;
· what response is required (eg, do you need to return the tape, respond
to the information, can you keep the recording etc)?
6. Navigation Structure & Layout
Is the listener told how the material is structured and can he/she skip to
points he/she is likely to want?
The contents should be listed in a way that is appropriate to the material, giving listeners a reasonably good idea where a particular item or section might be found.
Some system should be provided to enable listeners easily to locate sections and/or items within the recording.
Within the body of the recording, the layout of the information should be easily understandable, (eg it should be clear which telephone number goes with which name, what are headings, what are bullet points).
To make the use of the document as easy as possible, thought should also be given to the correct positioning in the recording of, for example, footnotes, key diagrams, floating text (eg boxed information), important contact details.
7. Reading Quality:
How good was the reader(s)?
To offer an enjoyable listening experience, the reader should read,
preferably in a pleasant-to-listen-to voice:
· clearly and accurately;
· smoothly and confidently;
· with apparent understanding and interest;
· with sensible phrasing;
· at appropriate speed;
· with appropriate tone and attitude;
· with no key mispronunciations.
8. Audio Quality
How good was the technical equipment and, more importantly, how well was
it maintained and used?
All the recorded signals and voices should be clear, not muffled or distorted, eg by faulty equipment or badly used microphones. The sound level should be loud enough (peaking at about 0db), and consistent throughout the recording, enabling someone of normal hearing (at a distance of 3 feet, in a quiet indoor environment, with the volume control at no more than midway setting on a portable tape player) to hear the words easily.
If any sounds or music are used, they should fade well and the volume should be correctly controlled to match the surrounding speech.
There should be no unintentional recorded background noise.
9. Appropriateness
Print comes in all kinds of styles from photocopied and stapled black
and white text to glossy designed colour brochures with pictorial background
images and illustrations. Radio has many styles of presentation, from the
up-beat commercial radio to the learned Radio Three approach. Has the right
option been chosen for the audio version?
The general appearance and packaging of the recording should be appropriate, and match any print equivalent.
The style of the recording and aural presentation should be appropriate to the material and to its likely use. For example, readers of a Christmas catalogue can present with an air of advertising unreality, which would be totally inappropriate for the recording of a legal rights document. Unusual names should be spelt in an organisation's contact list, but there is no need to spell out the customer's house name, however odd, on a bank statement.
An appropriate decision should have been taken as to whether the recording is a reading of the print document, with specific references to the page number, design etc; or whether the recording is an audio presentation of the information given in the print.
10. Timeliness
Sometimes time is of the essence and practically anything on time will
be more acceptable than a superb recording too late. Even when urgency is not
the over-riding priority, timeliness is usually of at least some importance to
the end user.
The recording should arrive in good time with the user, eg:
a) at the same time as sighted users receiving their print copy (when the document is part of a general distribution);
b) by a pre-determined deadline agreed with the user (if an individual request).
11. Specific format issues
Print uses its own techniques to highlight important information, indicate
the structure and hierarchy of headings; even the choice of font can make a
strong statement. These visual cues need to be adapted for other formats, as
well as compensation made for the eye's ability to skip and skim.
For instance, in print, a crucial telephone number can be highlighted in the middle of a page of text by size, colour, boxing it, etc. None of this is possible in audio, so the number has to be given in a more easily accessible place.
Verbal repetitions sometimes have to replace the eye's ability to skip up a column to check the heading.
12. Additional information needed by blind and partially sighted people
Sometimes additional information needs to be given if someone with
little or no sight is to act independently as a result of the recording.
For example, by saying that the "red right-hand knob" rather than just "the red knob". Or indicating if additional information listed is only available in print. Instruction manuals, in particular, need reading with empathy.
Copyright: COTIS January 2005.
Charity No: 299024
Website: www.cotis.org.uk
E-mail: administrator@cotis.org.uk
President: Sir John A. Wall CBE
Project Office, 67 High Street, Tarporley, Cheshire CW6 0DP.
Tel: 01829 733351 (24 hours Answerphone)
Held 2.10 pm on 24 November 2004 at Apollo Hotel, Birmingham.
1. Present:
COTIS Members:
Ann Ruddick, AIRS
David Inness, Monument (via Teleconference) (committee member)
Lesley Kelly, Individual (committee member)
Linda Pearce, RNIB (committee member)
Lisa Bhogal, ABAPSTAS (committee member)
Mandy Thompson, RNIB Peterborough
Marian Davis, Vision Support Trading (committee member)
Paul Wood, Torch Trust (committee member)
Sheila Armstrong, Torch Trust
Richard Harrington, National Federation of the Blind (committee member)
Ruth Frampton, RNIB SW (committee member)
Tricia Williams & Sue Stedman, Audio Exchange
Viv Timbrell & Sue Allard, Modern-Eyes
Wendy Davies, Individual (committee member)
Non-COTIS members:
Joan Parker, panel member
Andrew Millar, panel member
Graham Hodge, panel member
Janet Robinson, panel member
Kim Brown, Kirklees Council
Mike Wood, Talking Newspapers
Sarah Arnell, panel member
Theresa Hodge, Equal Access Consultancy
Yetunde Oyediran, panel member
Mandy White, RNIB
Apologies:
Sir John Wall, President
Glenn Critchley, Individual
Linda Downey, Calibre
Colin Antwis, Fieldsman Trails
Peter Howell, Dog Rose Trust
Deane Houston, NI Blind Centre
2. President's Opening Remarks
Sir John Wall sent his good wishes and apologies. As a user, he applauds our accreditation plans, as he wants to be sure of quality recordings.
3. Minutes of Previous AGM and Matters Arising
The minutes of the previous AGM held on 24 November 2003 were approved. There were no matters arising.
4. Chairman's Report from Wendy Davies
At last year's AGM, the committee had been tasked to achieve the following
within the year:
· an audio standard - if not BSI, then COTIS;
· quality assessment for the "commercial" standard;
· ABAPSTAS should be contacted with details of what we needed from them to
establish an educational standard;
· an email discussion forum should be set up if possible.
The committee was extremely pleased to report substantial success on three out
of these four objectives - the fourth, the email discussion group had been
considered, but since it had not materialised, there was obviously no real
interest.
Considerable progress had however been made on developing an audio standard and an accreditation system for commercial materials. COTIS had made contact with British Business Association Charitable Trust (BBACT) with a view to offering the possible business opportunity to a blind person, and had been put in touch with Theresa Hodge, a braillist and now self-employed disability consultant. Over the last year, Theresa has demonstrated both commitment and organisational skills by running the Talking Newspaper tape competition (presenting her findings at a workshop session at their AGM), and by spending many hours informing and organising twelve panel members to attend the workshop which has been running over the last three days.
At this workshop, ably facilitated by Keith Gladstone, currently a freelance consultant, test evaluations proved that the redesigned questionnaire and answer system worked well. In depth discussions finally led to a suggested weighting for all the various elements, which would provide a percentage score rather than a pass or fail. The basis of the assessment was then fed back to representatives from most of the major commercial tape producers, including some heated comments on, for instance, the use of music! Both producers and users were enthusiastic in their welcome for an assessment scheme which they hoped will be in place soon. The plan is to circulate a draft standard in the New Year and to have a scheme for commercial audio in place as soon as possible after that.
We have been delighted to welcome to our sessions over the last three days Sheila Armstrong of Torch Trust as the official UKABP (United Kingdom Association of Braille Producers) "spy". Sheila is drafting a braille version of our questionnaire to put to the UKABP committee and we hope this will lead to similar progress being made soon on the braille front.
As for work on educational and academic materials and contact with ABAPSTAS (Association of Blind and Partially Sighted Teachers and Students), the committee has been in discussion and has accepted an invitation to run a short workshop at their AGM in April 2005.
COTIS has also kept in touch throughout the year with copyright issues and with the work of the Copyright Round Table, of which it is a member.
So, a successful year, achieved thanks to the financial support of the Ulverscroft Foundation and RNIB, and to the unremitting support of the committee. As Chair, Wendy expressed her thanks to all of them, with special mention of Linda Pearce and Marian Davis, and to Sheila Jones for keeping the COTIS office and committee running.
5. Treasurer's Report
The end-of-year financial report was circulated within On Track Issue 48 in October 2004.
The year saw an income of £1,571 and an expenditure of £2,061, leaving us with an end of year balance of £5,364.
Membership stood at 91, comprising 71 organisations, 19 individuals, and the President. Thanks were expressed to Sheila Jones for invaluable day to day assistance and support, and to Lisa Wilson, FCCA, for checking the accounts.
The Accounts were then accepted, with many thanks to Linda Pearce.
6. Motions
The Chair introduced two motions: firstly, she explained that when widening our terms of reference in our 2000 AGM, one clause in the Constitution was missed.
Thus the committee now asked for support for the motion: "that the words 'recording service' in clause 4a be amended to 'transcription service'". The motion was proposed by Lesley Kelly, seconded by Lisa Bhogal, and carried unanimously, including three postal votes.
Secondly, a rise in subscriptions, the first since 1994, was proposed. After discussion, Lesley Kelly put forward as an alternative motion "that individual membership should increase from £6 to £8", but there was no seconder.
The original motion "that individual membership should increase from £6 to £10" was proposed by Marian Davis and seconded by Ruth Frampton. It was carried with one against and no abstentions, with four postal votes in favour.
The motion "that organisational membership should increase from £12 to £20" was proposed by Paul Wood and seconded by Ruth Frampton. It was carried unanimously, including four postal votes.
7. The Year Ahead
The meeting was asked for guidance on priority activities for the year ahead. After animated and interesting discussion, the following issues emerged for the committee to consider, in addition to the priority work to establish a Standard for audio and assessment schemes for commercial and other types of recordings:
· New audio formats: the demise of the comfortable compact cassette is
throwing new formats at vi people. Lesley Kelly feels strongly that COTIS
should be keeping an eye on the challenges these present - Lesley to head a
sub-group watching emerging formats, with particular regard to systems by which
individual blind people can make their own recordings.
· Marian Davis feels equally strongly that COTIS should look at large
print assessment very soon, as it is the format used by large numbers of
people. Marian to head a sub-group, aided by Lisa Bhogal.
· Braille: Sheila Armstrong offered to draft a braille version of the
commercial audio questionnaire to put to the UKABP committee, Mandy Thompson
saying some work has already been done but needs to be moved forward.
· Sue Allard to give contacts for a group already looking at e-text.
8. Nominations for committee
It was noted that John Murphy had been replaced by Richard Harrington as the official representative of the National Federation of the Blind. An offer was still outstanding for UKABP to nominate an official representative onto the committee.
The third of the committee due to stand down under the terms of the Constitution were: Glenn Critchley, Marian Davis and Lesley Kelly. All three were willing to re-stand, and were proposed by Linda Pearce, and seconded by Richard Harrington. No other nominations were forthcoming, so these three were duly re-elected.
9. Any other business
The AGM closed at 3:15 pm.
The Right to Read (R2R) Campaign was established and is still largely funded by RNIB. Now, though, the Right to Read Consortium is playing an increasingly large role in its direction - which also means taking an increasing role in funding activities! As the Campaign's objective of increasing the amount of information available in alternative formats is so fundamental to the activities of all of you, COTIS was pleased and proud to be one of the founder members of the Consortium. However, as an umbrella organisation, funded by subscriptions and specific project funding, we were only able to contribute a token £100 on your behalf. PLEASE therefore take a moment to read the following letter from John Palmer, Director of Calibre, who is acting as unpaid fundraiser. If each of our organisational members contributed just £10 each, that would amount to a very helpful contribution of around £700. There could hardly be a campaign more in line with your objectives. See the Right to Read links on our website for further details.
PS: … and PLEASE, if you haven't done so already, sign the Charter NOW - it will soon be closed.
From John Palmer, Director, Calibre Cassette Library, New Road, Weston Turville, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP22 5XQ
Dear Colleagues
The Right to Read Campaign
You will know that this campaign is aiming to persuade government and the publishing industry to improve the current highly unsatisfactory situation in which less than 5% of printed material is ever made available in an alternative reading format suitable for VIPs. COTIS is one of the seventeen different organisations which has joined the R2R Consortium, and the cause is gaining momentum.
We all know that campaigning costs money, and so far the great burden of the costs of the R2R Campaign has fallen on the RNIB. The purpose of this letter is to ask if you can make a contribution - however small - to these costs for the current 2004/5 financial year.
For example, the very well attended Reception in Portcullis House last month cost RNIB £5,250 (plus substantial staff costs), and the research project from LISU, on which the information for the campaign is based, £9,400. In all, the campaign will cost some £25,000 over the year. The aims and objectives of all members of the consortium have been advanced by the progress of the campaign, so it does seem only reasonable to ask everyone to make a contribution to the costs of running it.
It would be appreciated if you would send your contribution to Calibre, New Road, Weston Turville, Aylesbury, Bucks, HP22 5XQ. I will then co-ordinate the replies and forward the total sum to RNIB, which will ensure that the money is credited to the right account at their end. Please make cheques payable to Calibre Cassette Library.
Let me thank you in advance for your contribution, and end by wishing you all a very successful 2005.
Yours sincerely
J.R. Palmer
Director
Don't be "deleted" because you have forgotten to pay your subscription! The cut off date is the end of February 2005. To maintain your membership for the year to 31 August 2005, send in your cheque … NOW! Although the motion put at the AGM to increase the subscription was passed, the new rates do not come into effect until 1 September 2005 for current members, so the subscription remains at £6 for an individual and £12 for an organisation for the time being.
As you have seen from the Standards and Quality Strategy earlier in this issue, COTIS has made great strides with its work on Quality Assessment and we are much closer to launching the scheme. Keep your membership up to date, hear the latest developments and be one of the first to have your recordings assessed.
by Linda Pearce, Editor
On Track brings to your attention details about equipment, materials and services that COTIS feels will be of interest to you. Please note that this is for your information only. COTIS is not endorsing them or making any recommendations. Equally, reviews are personal comments by the writers of the articles.
Please remember - if you would like to submit an article or send details of any forthcoming events which may be of interest to COTIS members, the latest dates by which material should reach the editor are:
3 May for May's issue,
5 October for October's issue and
6 January for January's issue.
© Written permission to use any On Track article or other COTIS
material to be obtained from
The COTIS Secretary, Project Office, 67 High Street, Tarporley,
Cheshire, CW6 0DP, tel: 01829-733351 (answerphone), or Email:
ontrack@cotis.org.uk .
or from the On Track editor.
COTIS Guidelines available
No 1 General Recording Technique
Tips on positioning and using the equipment.
No 2 General Presentation
Tips on presenting text verbally.
No 3 Reading Skills
Tips on enhancing the sound of your voice on tape.
No 4 Publicity
Tips on publicising your service.
No 5 Reading Computer Material
(Not available at present as it is under revision.)
No 6 Recording Illustrations
Tips on recording all types of illustrative material.
No 7 Labelling and Packaging Audio Cassettes
Tips on all aspects of labelling and packaging cassettes for producers and
users.
No 8 How to Create a DIY Studio Environment
Tips on setting up a simple studio
COTIS Tapes available
Technical Hints
(No 1 put into practice.) Hear how to improve the quality of your recordings.
Reading Masterclass
(No 3 put into practice). A 70 minute practical workshop led by Edward Kelsey
who plays Joe Grundy in 'The Archers'.
Describing Illustrations
(No 6 put into practice) takes you through 5 different types of illustrative
material.
Cost of Guidelines: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 & 8 are £5.00 each. Postage and Packaging: 1 - 75p; 2 or 3 - £1.50; 4 or more £3.00.
Cost of Tapes: Reading Masterclass, Technical Hints and Describing
Illustrations - £8.00 each.
Postage and Packaging: 1 - 75p; 2 or 3 - £1.50.
10% discount plus FREE postage & packaging to COTIS members.
Contact COTIS Administrator:
Project Office, 67 High Street, Tarporley, Cheshire, CW6 ODP
COTIS, Project Office, 67 High Street, Tarporley, Cheshire, CW6 0DP, United Kingdom.
Telephone: +44 (0)1829 733351
Email: administrator@cotis.org.uk
COTIS President: Sir John A. Wall - Charity Number 299024
COTIS Web Site last updated 24th June 2005