AccesArte is an accessibility project that is part of the internship programme at Kaleidoscope, a non-profit organization founded by the authors to apply audio description (AD) research to developing accessibility programmes. The project consists of ADs of a thematic selection of visual artworks, and the development of eclectic and experience-oriented AD types. It uses online, open access videos and performs a formative and summative evaluation of the resources, with the latter being online, open and ongoing. The goal of this article is to offer a detailed description and critical analysis of the project, with an emphasis on the formative evaluation process. In this regard, the formative evaluation has allowed us to include blind and partially sighted (BPS) consultants in the process, improve resource quality, and enrich the interns’ learning experience.
BurnhamR. (2011). The Barnes Foundation as a place for teaching. In BurnhamR.Kai-KeeE. (Eds.), Teaching in the art museum. Interpretation as experience (pp. 134–142). J. Paul Getty Museum.
4.
EardleyA. F.FryerL.HutchinsonR.CockM.RideP.NevesJ. (2017). Enriched audio description: Working towards an inclusive museum experience. In HalderS.AssafL. C. (Eds.), Inclusion, disability and culture. Inclusive learning and educational equity (Vol. 3, pp. 195–207). Springer.
5.
EardleyA. F.MineiroC.NevesJ.RideP. (2016). Redefining access: Embracing multimodality, memorability and shared experience in museums. Curator: The Museum Journal, 59(3), 263–286.
6.
FryerL. (2016). An introduction to audio description: A practical guide. Routledge.
HollinsH. (2010). Reciprocity, accountability, empowerment: Emancipatory principles and practices in the museum. In SandellR.DoddJ.Garland-ThomsonR. (Eds.), Re-presenting disability: Activism and agency in the museum (pp. 228–243). Routledge.
9.
HubardO. M. (2013). What counts as a theme in art museum education?Journal of Museum Education, 38(1), 90–102.
10.
HutchinsonR. S.EardleyA. F. (2019). Museum audio description: The problem of textual fidelity. Perspectives, 27(1), 42–57.
11.
JankowskaA.SzarkowskaA.KrejtzK.FidykaA.KowalskiJ.WichrowskiM. (2017). Smartphone app as a museum guide. Testing the Open Art application with blind, deaf, and sighted users. Rivista Internazionale di Tecnica della Traduzione / International Journal of Translation, 19, 113–130.
12.
KleegeG. (2018). More than meets the eye: What blindness brings to art. Oxford University Press.
13.
KriegerM. (2000). El problema de la écfrasis: Imágenes y palabras, espacio y tiempo (y la obra literaria) [The problem of ekphrasis: Image and words, space and time -and the literary work]. In MonegalA. (Ed.), Literatura y pintura (pp. 140–160). Arco Libros.
14.
LuqueM. O.SolerS. (2019). Training audio describers for art museums. Linguistica Antverpiensia, 18, 166–181.
15.
LuqueM. O.SolerS. (2020). Metaphor as creativity in audio descriptive tours for art museums: From description to practice. Journal of Audiovisual Translation, 3(1), 64–78.
16.
NevesJ. (2012). Multi-sensory approaches to (audio) describing the visual arts. MonTi, 4, 277–293.
17.
NevesJ. (2016). Enriched descriptive guides: A case for collaborative meaning-making in museums. Cultus: The Journal of Intercultural Mediation and Communication, 9(2), 137–153.
18.
PeregoE. (2019). Into the language of museum audio descriptions: A corpus-based study. Perspectives, 27(3), 333–349.
19.
RemaelA.ReviersN.VercauterenG. (2014). Pictures painted in words: ADLAB audio description guidelines. EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste.
20.
RNIB & VocalEyes. (2003). The talking images guide. Museums, galleries and heritage site: Improving access for blind and partially sighted people. Royal National Institute for the Blind.
21.
SalzhauerE.SobolN. (2003). Art beyond sight: A resource guide to art, creativity, and visual impairment. American Foundation for the Blind Press.
22.
SolerS. (2012). Traducción y accesibilidad en el museo del siglo XXI [Translation and accessibility in the 21st century museum]. Ediciones Tragacanto.
23.
SolerS. (2016). A corpus-based genre analysis of art museum audio descriptive guides. In Alonso AlmeidaF.Cruz GarcíaL.González RuizV. (Eds.), Corpus-based studies on language varieties (pp. 145–166). Peter Lang.
24.
SolerS. (2018). Audio descriptive guides in art museums: A corpus-based semantic analysis. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 13(2), 230–249.
25.
SolerS. (2019). Defining subjectivity in audio description for art museums. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 64(3), 708–733.
26.
SolerS. (2021). The minority AD: Creativity in audio descriptions of visual art. In AntonaM.StephanidisC. (Eds.), Universal access in human-computer interaction. Access to media, learning and assistive environments (pp. 308–327). Springer.
27.
SolerS. (in press). (Re)imagining the museum: Social and communicative features of verbal description in art museums. Disability Studies Quarterly, 42(1).
28.
SolerS.LuqueM. O. (2019). Multisensorialidad en la Alhambra: Visitas para personas ciegas y con baja visión a la exposición temporal de arte Bab Al-Saria [Multisensoriality in the Alhambra: Visits for blind and low-vision people to the Bab Al-Saria temporary art exhibition]. Eikon Imago, 14, 413–442.
29.
SzarkowskaA.JankowskaA.KrejtzK.KowalskiJ. (2016). Open art: Designing accessible content in a multimedia guide app for visitors with and without sensory impairments. In MatamalaA.OreroP. (Eds.), Researching audio description (pp. 301–320). Palgrave.
