[dewilson58]

Originally Posted by Advogado

I am not sure how you know that, and I doubt it. However, the particular CNN program I alluded to is not all that relevant. The point is that today's speech to text software works reasonably well.

Like most people, I use speech-to-text software every day on my I-phone and it works-- not perfectly, but well enough to convey the substance of what is said. There is no justification for a nonprofit, like the Charter School, in order to satisfy the predilection of a small number of people, having to bear the cost of sign-language interpreters rather than to provide, the less-expensive, speech-to-text software and equipment.

Not an I-Phone guy, but my phone does a great job speech-to-text. I think it likes my bride's voice better than mine and it even picks up the radio/tv if I have it going in the background. The technology is available.