Training easy-to-read validators for a linguistically inclusive society

1 Introduction

‘Peace, dignity and equality on a healthy planet’ reads the motto of the United Nations, an international organisation that was founded at the end of World War II in an effort to foster cooperation among governments, nations, and individuals to preserve world peace and to offer fair chances of development to all the citizens of the planet, observing the rule of law, so that the atrocities experienced by humanity during World War II would never be lived by anyone else again. Following this creed, the United Nations has been socially engaged in numerous actions that aimed at creating equal opportunities for each and every single individual, no matter how fortunate or unfortunate she/he is (e.g. United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, etc.).

A similar stance has been taken by the European Union, by creating a framework within which the rights of people with disabilities are protected, and their social inclusion is encouraged (e.g. European Disability Strategy 2010–2020, Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021–2030, etc.). “How could a person with disabilities be socially included if s/he does not have access to information, knowledge and education because of his/her illness?” is a question that has been legitimately asked by many of the disadvantaged ones.

To help people with disabilities overcome physical, sensory, cognitive, linguistic, communication, and even cultural barriers, many interdisciplinary works have been completed that, in time, have contributed to the emergence of a new field of study, called Accessibility, which provides a large range of solutions from architectural to linguistic ones (Greco 2018). In terms of linguistic accessibility, the last century played a crucial role in developing new communication solutions, resorting to intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic translation, which have been defined as the use of linguistic means to transmit meaning within the same language or between two languages, in the first two cases, and of non-verbal means to convey verbal messages, in the third case (Jakobson 1959). Among the fields that have offered, an array of accessibility tools is the field of Audiovisual Translation (Greco 2018), which encompasses “all forms of translation and interpreting between different modalities involving tertiary media of any type” (Maaß and Garrido 2020, 131). Apart from Braille translation, which is intralingual, and sign interpreting and audio description, which are intersemiotic, all the other translation and interpreting types used in the field of Audiovisual Translation have been interlingual until recently, when a new trend emerged in the field of Accessibility, namely that of translating and interpreting, both intralingually and interlingually, into the so-called accessible languages, which are “all the existing or future language varieties, be they written or spoken, that aim at supporting people with various disabilities or impairments to communicate successfully in the inclusive society we want to build” (Șimon et al. 2022, 461). Plain language, easy-to-understand, easy-to-read, and easy language plus are some examples of the most frequently spoken or written accessible languages (Maaß 2020, Șimon et al. 2022, Fărcașiu et al. 2022).

In this context, the Erasmus+ KA2 strategic partnership project, ‘Professional training for easy-to-read facilitators and validators,’ in short, Train2Validate, is designed to aid people with disabilities both directly and indirectly. Directly, it creates the prerequisite for the certification of two new professions, namely that of facilitator and that of validator, respectively. The facilitator is the person who assists the validator, i.e. the person with disabilities; in the validation process to validate or invalidate the easy-to-read materials created or translated by the easy-to-read writer or translator, the former conceives the materials from the very beginning in an accessible format, while the latter translates the materials from standard language into accessible language (Train2Validate, Dejica et al. 2022, Fărcașiu et al. 2022, Fărcașiu et al. 2023, Kilyeni et al. 2022, Șimon et al. 2022). Moreover, Train2Validate helps people with disabilities indirectly because it offers them the chance to be professionally and socially recognised, to feel appreciated and proud because their job helps the community by providing their peers with easy-to-read materials of the highest quality, proofread by people with similar disabilities.

The present article aims to present the steps taken by the Train2Validate team in order to provide the necessary materials for the certification of the two professions, on the one hand, and on the other, to describe the piloting of teaching resources designed for Romanian validators, drawing some conclusions, in the end, on the challenges and solutions for the improvement of the professional training of easy-to-read validators.

2 Train2Validate or a step closer to a linguistically inclusive society

Train2Validate is an Erasmus+ project, spanning between September 2020 and August 2023. The project partners are two non-profit organisations (Plena Inclusión Madrid, Spain, the leading partner and initiator of the project, and Zavod RISA, Slovenia), three universities (Politehnica University of Timișoara, Romania, Sprachen & Dolmetscher Institut München, Germany, and Scuola Superiore per Mediatori Linguistici di Pisa, Italy), and a company specialised in training certification (The European Certification and Qualification Association, Austria). In other words, six partners from six different European countries bring their contribution to the completion of the project, sharing and exchanging their professional expertise with the purpose of socially integrating a minority that needs the support of the majority to live a fulfilling life. The objectives of the project are the following:

1. to showcase the current status of the validation practices across Europe based on a survey carried out online by the project partners in the languages of the project: German, Italian, Romanian, Slovenian, and last but not least Spanish (IO1 Report: Common methodological framework and best practices in validation across Europe, Bernabé and Cavallo 2022, Dejica et al. 2022, 2021, 2022);

2. to identify, based on the survey results and the additional research conducted by the project partners, the skill cards that the facilitators and validators of easy-to-read content need in order to become proficient professionals (IO2 Report: Skills cards for the two professional roles involved in validation: facilitators and validators, Kilyeni et al. 2022);

3. to create two curricula, one for validators and one for facilitators, that crayon the two new professional profiles (IO3 Report: Curricula for validators and facilitators of Easy-to-Read texts, Bleve 2021);

4. to create teaching materials for the two curricula, which might serve as a guiding line for developing other materials (Result 4. The materials for the courses);

5. to test the teaching resources with real validators in order to assess their pluses and minuses and to identify solutions for improvement (Result 5. The evaluation of the materials);

6. and, finally, to create a certified course for validators and facilitators in order to guarantee that these are properly trained for the challenges of the profession and are able to carry out their professional duties at the highest standard (Result 6. The certification of the training).

The intellectual outputs described previously have been produced in this very order because they have helped the project team to have an overview of the topic first and then to proceed with the creation of an educational framework that would help validators and facilitators of easy-to-read content to be professionally and socially recognised. All the activities that led to the certification proposal have been based on research and feedback from the people that actually work, voluntarily for the moment, as easy-to-read validators and facilitators.

3 Assessing educational resources for professional training of easy-to-read validators

3.2 Preparatory steps for piloting a lesson with Romanian trainees

For piloting a lesson with Romanian trainees, four preparatory steps have been taken. First, Gmail accounts for the trainees have been created (Figure 1). Second, a Google Classroom for the Romanian trainees has been created (Figure 2). Third, the teaching resources for piloting the lesson in Romanian have been uploaded to the Google Classroom Drive, i.e. the video lesson, its transcript and audio recording, the PowerPoint presentation of the video lesson, the lesson fact sheet, the lesson task sheet, and the reading list (Figure 3). Fourth, three emails have been sent to the trainees’ Gmail addresses, containing invitations to complete a practice test, answer some questions regarding their sociodemographic profile, and assess the educational resources that they have just used.

Figure 1

Creation of Gmail accounts for the trainees before the piloting session.

Figure 2

Train2Validate Google Classroom Homepage for the Romanian trainees.

Figure 3

Teaching resources for piloting the lesson in Romanian, uploaded to the Google Classroom Drive.

3.3 Piloting a lesson with Romanian trainees

After creating the virtual educational environment, the in-person meeting with the trainees has been scheduled, and consequently, one member of the Romanian project team went to the ‘Pentru Voi’ [‘For You’] NGO in Timișoara (Romania) on 6 April 2023, to pilot the lesson (Figure 4). Five trainees, who are able to read, write, and use the computer, have been selected to participate in the piloting session, accompanied by two facilitators they usually work with and the Romanian Train2Validate project member, who acted both as an observer and as a facilitator. In order to enable the trainees to get the most of the educational resources uploaded to Google Classroom, five laptops and five headsets were distributed to them. Then, the Train2Validate project was shortly introduced, the purpose of the piloting session was clarified, and instructions on the sequence of teaching activities were given.

Figure 4

Presentation on the Facebook page of the ‘Pentru Voi’ NGO of the piloting lesson organised within the Train2Validate project.

At the end of this introductory phase, the trainees were asked to put on their headsets, start their laptop, and access the Gmail accounts created for them and the Google Classroom where they could find all the educational resources. Although the first two directions were easy for them, the last two were difficult since none of the trainees was able to access the Gmail accounts or the Google Classroom on their own. However, in the Google Classroom, with a little bit of guidance, they were able to find the video lesson and watch it. After having watched the video lesson, they were asked whether there were aspects they did not understand, but they denied it. They were also asked whether they felt like they needed to watch the video lesson once more or listen to its audio recording or read the transcript or fact sheet. Once more they reiterated that everything was clear and that watching the video lesson once was enough for them.

The printed task sheets were then distributed in the class, and the tasks were explained to the trainees by the facilitators. Here, they had difficulties in crossing first and circling afterwards the correct answer in a list. They said it was confusing, advising to use only one option in a task sheet. As for how correct their answers were, none of the trainees was able to cross all the correct answers (Task 1), 20% of the trainees (two of the five trainees) were able to unscramble all the sentences correctly (Task 2), 80% of the trainees (four of the five trainees) were able to circle all the correct answers (Task 3), and last but not least 60% of the trainees (three of the five trainees) were able to cross all the correct answers. In other words, overall, 45% of the tasks were completed correctly on the printed task sheets (Figure 5).

Figure 5

Tasks completed on the printed task sheets after watching the video lesson.

In order to offer the trainees the opportunity to use different educational tools to find out which is best for them (Burgstahler 2020), a three-part practice test in Google Forms was created. To do the practice test, the trainees had to open the email in their Gmail account Inbox that contained the link to the practice test. Nevertheless, none of the trainees was able to do it by himself/herself. Even after the link had been accessed and the instructions had been given on how to take the test, they were not able to navigate through the online test by themselves, and they needed constant technical support. As for their performance on the online practice test, the results were more than satisfactory. In the first part of the practice test, they had to name the topic of the educational resources used in class; 80% of the trainees (four of the five trainees) named the topic correctly. Then, they had to specify why the topic is important for the professional development of the easy-to-read validators; 60% of the trainees (three of the five trainees) were able to mention a reason, 20% (one of the five trainees) gave an ambiguous answer, while 20% (one of the five trainees) did not answer the question at all. In the second part of the practice test, the correct answers had to be crossed first. This assignment was carried out correctly by all the trainees (100%). Then, correct sentences had to be built from scrambled words. In this case, 80% of the trainees (four of the five trainees) were able to build all the sentences correctly. To sum up, the first and the second part of the practice test aimed at making the trainees use the knowledge gained during the class, and their overall performance was quite impressive, because 80% of the tasks were completed correctly (Figure 6). In order not to put too much pressure on the trainees, the third part of the practice test was meant to make them self-assess their performance. All the five trainees considered that they did well on the practice test. The next questions tried to identify the reasons for their performance, by giving the trainees options to cross. Two validators stated that they were able to find the information in the training materials, two considered that they were just smart, and one trainee emphasised that she/he had already known some aspects covered in the lesson.

Figure 6

Tasks completed in the online practice test.

Finally, the two online questionnaires had to be filled in by the trainees. Although they learned how to use Google Forms while doing the online practice test, they still needed constant technical support from the facilitators. The completion of the first questionnaire revealed the sociodemographic profile of the trainees. According to their answers, they all live in Romania, their mother tongue is Romanian, two trainees are men, and three are women, and in terms of age, one trainee is under 20 years old, one between 20 and 30 years old, two between 31 and 40 years old, and one between 41 and 50 years old.

In the second questionnaire, the answers given by the trainees on several topics were quite useful for the final steps of the project. In the accessibility and usability section, all the trainees said that it was easy to find the training material they had to use first in a sequence, but also the ones that they had to use afterwards. Four of the five trainees emphasised that they did not have any problems using the training materials. Furthermore, three trainees stated that they would not like to change anything about how to access, find, and use the training materials in the course, while two would change some things, but they did not mention which ones.

In the comprehension and legibility section of the second questionnaire, the answers highlighted that the training materials were easy to read, listen, watch, and understand. Moreover, they stressed that the layout of the course helped them to understand the training materials. Finally, all five trainees concluded that they would not change anything in the training materials since they are easy to read and understand.

In the sustainability section, four of the five trainees said that the training materials were useful to train them to become validators and that they would recommend the course to other people. All the trainees stressed that they had learned new things in class and that the training materials included in the course were enough for them to become validators. Additionally, all five trainees mentioned that, in the future, they would like to learn more about some topics related to the easy-to-read method, but none of the respondents gave examples of the topics they would like to be approached.

4 Concluding remarks

Train-to-Validate is a community-oriented Erasmus+ project, striving to create a linguistically inclusive society. As such, the project aims to contribute to the social inclusion of people with disabilities both directly and indirectly. Directly, by creating the educational and certification framework within which, in a European context, two new professions are proposed, those of facilitators and validators of easy-to-read content. As certified professions, these will offer anyone interested the chance to officially work as easy-to-read facilitators or validators, to provide professional services as a result of the education received. Furthermore, the official certification of the professions contributes to their social recognition and to a better acceptance of the accessible languages. Indirectly, the project aims to help all the validators to feel that their work is important for the community, being highly qualitative because of their professional education, and that they could live their life with dignity because they can be as autonomous as possible.

The last but one step taken in the project and detailed in this article was the piloting of a lesson with a group of people with disabilities in order to check whether the educational resources created within the project meet their needs. The trainees enjoyed participating in the piloting session. They liked watching the video lesson and listening to it through headsets, because this helped them to concentrate better. The Word document containing the tasks could not be edited online, so, it had to be printed and used in class as such. The online practice test was taken afterwards, and an increase in the accuracy of their answers from 45 to 80% was observed. Although they performed much better on the online test, they opined that it was easier to use paper and pencils to solve the exercises than to do them online. Their results are rather linked to practising on the topic and receiving professional explanations after having completed the first set of tasks on paper.

During the piloting session, it was noticed that all the trainees experienced difficulties in using the technology. For example, they did not know how to sign in to the Gmail accounts created for them, how to open the emails, or to use Google Classroom. However, once the facilitator had signed in to the Gmail accounts, accessed the links to the practice test and the questionnaires, and guided them through the Google classroom activities, the trainees were able to carry out the tasks as instructed. Therefore, the role of the facilitators was essential in supporting them with the technology during the lesson and in making the trainees understand the assignments they had to complete.

All in all, the project was perceived as being useful because it might offer them some professional opportunities after having completed an officially certified, and, as such, socially recognised training programme. Furthermore, the work of the facilitators and validators of easy-to-read content would contribute to the emergence of the linguistically inclusive society towards which Europe is striving (Inclusion Europe).