Math image description project
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 10

Math Image Description project PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 83 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Math Image Description project. Who we are. Rob Wall Emerson, Dawn Anderson Western Michigan University Yue-Ting Siu, doctoral student at UC, Berkeley Under contract from MeTRC (Mathematics eText Research Center) at University of Oregon Mark Horney In partnership with DIAGRAM.

Download Presentation

Math Image Description project

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Math image description project

Math Image Description project


Who we are

Who we are

  • Rob Wall Emerson, Dawn Anderson

  • Western Michigan University

  • Yue-Ting Siu, doctoral student at UC, Berkeley

  • Under contract from MeTRC (Mathematics eText Research Center) at University of Oregon

    • Mark Horney

  • In partnership with DIAGRAM


  • What we are looking at

    What we are looking at

    • How best to describe the image components found in typical math textbooks (not the math equations)

      • What types of images require what level of description?

      • Are there types of images whose content cannot be adequately conveyed by any description?

    • We are not looking technological solutions but try to present material in a way as close as possible to a common student experience


    Our approach

    Our approach

    • Play audio files of portions of math texts, containing images, to students who are blind from grades 5, 8, and 11.

    • Files have varying levels of description.

      • None (“image”)

      • Little (“image of a graph”)

      • Standard

      • Extended

    • Students are assessed on capture of content and ease of capture of audible material.


    Some specifics

    Some specifics

    • We categorized images in representative math texts from grades 5, 8, and 11.

    • Identified 21 exhaustive and mutually exclusive image categories

    • 4 “meta categories” represent context for the images

      • introducing concepts

      • guided example

      • short question

      • real world manipulative


    More specifics

    More specifics

    • Word documents were created that mirrored the physical page in layout and coloring.

    • Each file contains images and ancillary text to provide context.

    • Math content that was not image related was translated into MathML and the entire file spoken using JAWS.


    Initial data

    Initial data

    • Chicago: sample of grade 5 and grade 11 students

    • Texas: 21 grade 8 and grade 11 students

    • Some images need no description (icons, borders)

    • Some image categories need limited description (cartoon characters, question specific images)

    • For some images more description is counter productive (tables, line graphs)

    • A major trend seems to be that many image categories would benefit from a multi-modal presentation of content

    • Have an audio version with description and for image related content, also have a braille version of the “description” and a tactile image.


    Data collection

    Data collection

    • Data trips being planned for Tennessee, Arizona, New Mexico, and Space Camp in Georgia

    • Data collection will continue through next school year with a target of 100 students being enrolled

    • We welcome any schools wanting to talk about their students being involved


    Category frequency

    Category frequency

    • First tier categories appear either on nearly every page of a text or several times on a page within certain areas of a text. Second tier images are more specific and appear occasionally, usually to serve a specific purpose. Third tier images appear infrequently.

    • The most commonly occurring image categories (from most to least) in the first tier were:

    • 1. Side images (background picture, graphic unrelated to question, organizational banners, headers, icons, extra features notation)

    • 2. balloon/sidebar

    • 3. question specific image

    • 4. shapes/2D or 3D representation

    • 5. table

    • 6. scatterplot/line graph

    • 7. number line

    • 8. ray/line diagram


    Category frequency continued

    Category frequency continued

    • The most commonly occurring image categories (from most to least) in the second tier were:

    • 1. screen shot

    • 2. flow chart

    • 3. equation

    • 4. pattern/series

    • 5. bar graph

    • 6. directions/illustrations of a physical task

    • 7. models (used to indicate similarity)

    • 8. calculator stuff

    • 9. maps

    • The most commonly occurring image categories (from most to least) in the third tier were:

    • 1. picture in a picture

    • 2. procedural aid

    • 3. organizational chart

    • 4. pie chart


  • Login