Captions Are On—but Are They Right? A Deaf Teacher’s Classroom Checklist

Seeing the “CC” button is a start. It is not the finish line.

I’m a deaf public-school educator, and I use bilateral cochlear implants. My implants help me hear, but they do not make visual access optional. When a classroom video depends on spoken words, I want captions I can trust—not a rough transcript that leaves me solving a puzzle while everyone else follows the lesson.

That is why my standard for classroom video is simple: every video should have accurate, reviewed captions. Turning captions on matters. Checking them matters just as much.

I can teach. That does not mean I hear everything.

What frustrates me is how often school administrators overlook captions when choosing videos, including adding them when they are missing and correcting them when they are wrong. The assumption seems to be: if I can teach, I can hear. My ability to do my job should not be mistaken for having no communication needs.

I want administrators to consider the deaf adults in the room, too. Whether a video is for a lesson, a staff meeting, or professional learning, accessibility should be part of planning—not something I have to bring up after it begins.

Captions are part of the lesson

The World Wide Web Consortium’s Web Accessibility Initiative explains that captions provide the speech and non-speech audio information needed to understand content, synchronized with the audio. They can include more than dialogue. A useful caption track may identify a speaker or communicate an important sound.

In a classroom, that information is not extra decoration. It may carry the directions, the vocabulary, the explanation, or the moment that connects one idea to the next.

If the caption changes a number, drops the word “not,” or turns a subject-specific term into an unrelated word, the meaning can change. A student—or a teacher—should not have to notice the mistake, listen around it, and repair the sentence at the same time.

Automatic captions are a draft

Automatic captioning can be a helpful starting point. It can also make errors because of background noise, overlapping speakers, accents, dialects, or mispronunciations. YouTube’s own guidance tells creators to review automatic captions and edit anything that was not transcribed correctly.

W3C is equally direct: automatically generated captions are not sufficient unless they have been confirmed to be fully accurate. That does not mean every teacher must become a professional captioner. It means “captions available” and “captions ready for instruction” are two different checks.

I would rather catch a problem before pressing play than pause a lesson because the captions have introduced a second, incorrect version of the content.

My practical review checklist

Before using a video, I would review the caption track with five questions:

1. Are the essential words correct? Check names, numbers, dates, academic vocabulary, and any word that changes the meaning of a direction or explanation.
2. Do the captions keep pace? Captions should appear close enough to the speech that the viewer can connect the words with what is happening on screen.
3. Can I tell who is speaking? Speaker identification matters when the person is off screen or when several voices are part of the video.
4. Are meaningful sounds included? A sound effect, alarm, musical cue, or change in tone may be part of the message.
5. Can the words be read without hiding the lesson? Captions should remain visible long enough to read and should not cover important visual information.

These questions reflect the Described and Captioned Media Program’s quality guidance: captions should be accurate, consistent, clear, readable, and equal in meaning. That is a useful standard for evaluating educational media, even when I am not the person who created the video.

Fix what you can—and choose differently when needed

If I own the video, I can correct the caption text and timing. For example, YouTube Studio allows creators to edit caption text and timestamps.

If I do not own the video, the options are different. I can look for a properly captioned version, ask the creator or publisher whether a corrected track is available, provide an accurate accessible alternative when appropriate, or choose another resource. The best choice will depend on the lesson, the platform, and the school’s procedures.

What I would not do is assume that a visible “CC” symbol has settled the question.

Respect does not stop when the video ends

The same concern comes up without a screen. People do not always face me when speaking. Facing me helps me follow the conversation. To me, it is also a sign of respect: you are making the effort to include me.

RNID recommends getting a person’s attention, facing them, and asking about their communication preferences. That does not mean requiring eye contact or assuming every deaf person lipreads. It means taking the person’s needs seriously.

Build the review into planning

A caption check belongs beside the other questions teachers already ask: Is this video accurate? Is it age-appropriate? Does it support the learning goal? Can everyone access the information?

I would review the entire video with its captions on the platform where it will be shown. A quick spot-check cannot confirm that the full caption track is accurate.

This is not about perfection for its own sake. It is about making sure the lesson says what we intend it to say. Good captions let viewers spend their attention learning instead of correcting the access tool.

When you preview a classroom video, what do you check first: key words, timing, or speaker names? Tell me directly on Facebook or Instagram. A one-word answer is welcome.

Teachers looking for classroom materials are also welcome to visit my Teacher A.I. Coach store on Teachers Pay Teachers.

—Professor Jeff