Frances Mary D’Andrea, Ph.D.
October 2014







Brief introduction to BANA and braille
Why change the braille code?
Current status of UEB implementation
Brief overview of UEB and how it’s different
from current codes
Implications of UEB adoption on state
assessments
CCSSO and BANA collaborative project
Discussion




International non-profit, 501c3 organization
The mission of BANA is to assure literacy for
tactile readers through the standardization of
braille and/or tactile graphics.
The BANA Board consists of representatives
from organizations of blind people,
educators, and transcribers
International: 17 member organizations, plus
3 associate members




Braille is not a language but a tactile code used in
many languages to express written materials.
Because braille takes up more room on a page,
contractions are used to make braille materials
more compact.
Current codes in the US are English Braille
American Edition (EBAE), Nemeth Code for
Mathematics and Scientific Notation, Computer
Braille Code, Music Braille Code, IPA
Transcribers also use BANA Formatting Guidelines
(2011), and Guidelines for Tactile Graphics (2010)



Drastic changes in the appearance and
production methods of print: new characters,
icons, layouts, and fonts.
Print is increasingly read from screens;
schools are increasingly providing textbooks
digitally rather than on paper.
The boundaries between "technical" materials
and everyday materials increasingly blurred
(e.g. web sites and email addresses in general
literature).


Digital text provides the capability for braille
users to read the material in braille instantly,
via refreshable braille.
Braille is more widely available than ever
before in history because of braille
embossers, translation software, and
refreshable braille.



Because of ambiguities in current codes,
accurate translation of text into braille
remains far from perfect.
While technology enables braille users to type
their material in braille and have it converted
to print instantly, (backtranslation), the
current code introduces many errors.
Even the most basic mathematics material is
not displayed correctly in braille generated by
computers and mobile devices, and therefore
the material is not reliable in this medium.

Concern about braille complexity since CBC
was introduced in late 1980s.
• multiple braille symbols for same print symbol
• increased contextuality of braille


Increasing difficulty in constructing new code
symbols to reflect changes in print.
In 1991, Drs. Abraham Nemeth and Tim
Cranmer presented a paper to BANA stating
the urgent need to unify the various braille
codes used in North America.



UEB started as BANA research project;
became international in early 1990s.
International Council on English Braille
endorsed UEB in 2004.
All ICEB members have now adopted it:
Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Nigeria,
Canada, United Kingdom, the United States, then
Ireland

BANA monitored adoption and
implementation around the world for years
before voting to adopt it in the United States.





BANA voted on code change at fall meeting,
November, 2012, in Los Angeles.
Implementation date set for January 4, 2016.
Motion passed to adopt UEB replacing English
Braille American Edition and adding UEB to Nemeth,
Music, and IPA as official codes.
BANA has been working with its member
organizations and others toward implementation. A
UEB Task Force is in place.
Braille Formats and Tactile Graphics Guidelines will
remain in place with appropriate updates.



UEB Rulebook and a number of training
materials are available on the BANA web site.
Translation software for UEB already exists in
Duxbury which is accessible. Beta version in
Braille2000.
UEB is compatible with many existing braille
devices, such as the BrailleNote, and is
supported by Apple products.




UEB is a revision and extension of the current
literary code. In that way, it unifies existing
codes, except music.
UEB eliminates some contractions from the
current literary code to reduce ambiguity; it adds
some symbols and changes a few others.
UEB is designed to be extensible (easy to add
new symbols as needed), consistent, and
unambiguous. Therefore, UEB is more
computable and better for backtranslation.
In UEB, numbers are written in the upper part of
the cell as they are currently in literary materials.




UEB is a complete, general purpose code;
symbols for math are part of the code. It is
completely different from Nemeth code.
The US voted to keep Nemeth code as an
official code along with UEB.
Some states plan to use UEB solely for
“nontechnical” materials and continue use
Nemeth code for math and science.
Some states investigating possibility of using
both UEB and Nemeth for math.





States are in various stages of readiness to
make the transition.
Some states are starting with youngest
grades first, others are not sure.
Braille transcribers will need training in UEB
as well as educators.
Many technology devices are equipped for
UEB; some are not.
May mean multiple braille forms of same test.

Contracted with the Council of Chief State
School Officers (CCSSO) to:
◦ develop a national survey to collect information
from each state as to UEB transition plans
◦ present a series of webinars about UEB and its
implementation
◦ development of a UEB Implementation Guide for
use by states to provide guidance and
suggestions for a successful transition


Sent to all state assessment directors from
CCSSO.
Collects information in four areas:
◦
◦
◦
◦

basic demographic information
plans for UEB instruction
plans for UEB assessment
plans for UEB training of personnel
Please encourage assessment staff to
complete online survey by November 5.



First webinar gives an overview of project to
testing consortia and others involved with
assessment.
Second webinar in December with preliminary
results of national survey.
Third webinar in February 2015 with overview
of UEB Implementation Guide.

This resource will:
◦ include survey results
◦ provide information about accessibility and
transition steps
◦ help identify key stakeholders in each state and
nationally
◦ identify useful resources
◦ provide a planning tool for states to help with
implementation of UEB







All 17 BANA organizations, plus BANA
Research committee
CEC-DVI, State Vision Consultants, State
Outreach, NASDSE, National Agenda,
Personnel Preparation division of AER
VisionServe Alliance
AIRCBVI, National Prison Braille Network
National Braille Competency Test
BookShare, HIMS, HumanWare
Duxbury, Braille2000




Encouraging the development of state plans
Working with systems within individual states
Cutting across all categories
Schools for the blind, state departments of
education, state testing coordinators, state
rehabilitation systems, libraries, consumer
organizations, state materials production
centers, school administrator organizations,
parents, students . . .

Braille Authority of North America
 www.brailleauthority.org

Frances Mary D’Andrea, Chair
 [email protected]
BANA welcomes your comments and feedback!