COURT REPORTING TRAINING                                                  
Court Reporting Schools for Court Reporting-Broadcast Closed Captioning-CART Providing




Court Reporting and Captioning at Home has partnered with Auburn University to offer Professional Development Programs in Court Reporting, Closed Captioning, and CART Providing, for new students as well as current court reporters. For details contact CRAH.
877 253 0200

Court Reporting and Captioning at Home has partner
Court Reporting and Captioning at Home announces NCRA approval for PDCs (CEUs) for its Realtime Court Reporting, Captioning, and CART Providing Programs for Current Court Reporters.  For detailed information CLICK HERE.

June 4,  2012 - Forbes lists court reporting as number 6 in the top 10 jobs that do not require a degree.

June 22, 2012-Court Reporting and Captioning at Home is proud to announce completion of the 1st round of training for the first stenographic machine court reporters in Africa.  10 realtime court reporters are now working in the Zambian judiciary, after approximately 18 months training with the Court Reporting and Captioning at Home training program.  For more details CLICK HERE.


The Court Reporting and Captioning at Home, home study program is announcing the introduction of its Realtime Writing Program for transitioning Court reporters.
The program is designed specifically for court reporters wishing to transition to Broadcast Closed Captioning, CART Providing, or Realtime Court Reporting. The Program will be comprehensive including the latest captioning techniques, as well as extensive television programming practice and tests. Real Time accuracy is one of the main goals of the closed captioning training program. FOR DETAILS
 VISIT or call 877 253 0200

Digital Audio Recording and Digital Audio Court Reporting News

06-22-12  NCRA White Paper Summary on Digital Audio Reporting
Some Findings.
The most important attributes of stenographic court reporters for judges, are accuracy and timeliness, two of the major weaknesses of digital audio recording.

   82% of judges surveyed prefer stenographic reporters over digital.  The remainder cited budget considerations for using digital.

72% of courts use stenographic court reporters “always” in criminal cases, according to judges surveyed, and 92% indicated they use stenographic court reporters “most of the time” in criminal cases.  As the stakes get higher such as first degree felonies, complex civil litigation, and capital cases most courts even in states with digital recording they still turn to the stenographic reporter to capture the record.

Relevant to the above points was the verbatim response by one judge who said, “I review digital records transcribed by court clerks, and they are at times, horrible, mostly because of INFIRMITIES in the recording system.

.  Despite any advancements that might have taken place with digital audio recording, the technology simply in not there to emulate a keyword search function.
-" imagine a judge looking for a single 30-second passage of testimony from a full court day’s proceedings who must fast forward/rewind ad nauseam until finding that single passage, which can be like looking for a needle in a haystack.  Compare this with the keyword searching afforded to a judge with a court reporter’s electronic transcript, which takes mere seconds." 

Courts must provide an unbiased, accurate, and verbatim record of proceedings.  “There is nothing on the tape” or “ we can’t find the recording for that day” are unacceptable excuses in any court system/

The maelstrom of overlapping high-speed speech, ambient noise. Paper shuffling, coughing, voices with foreign accents, and variance of pitch of voices that surface in an electronic recording comint to render an electronic recording a poor substitute for a stenographic court reporter.  Combine that with the  ever present challenge of identifying who is speaking on a recording after the fact, and the inevitable end result is a degradation in the accuracy of the official record.  Advances have been made in recording, but these challenges cannot be overcome.  Only a skilled stenographic court reporter can guarantee a reliable, verbatim record.  Guesswork is the unavoidable result of an off-site transcriptionist trying to piece together a transcript from an audio recording.

The risks and consequences of electronic recording to make the record are well established.  A recording brings with it every bit of ambient noise in a courtroom-coughing, sneezing, sirens, doors slamming, paper rustling, and people talking over one another.  The recordingcreates the need for someone to type every word on a word processor to create a transcript for review by the appellate court.  PICTURE A 1960’S TYPING POOL WITH DOZENS OF PEOPLE TYPING AWAY ON TYPEWRITERS INSTEAD OF WORD PROCESSORS.  RELYING ON AN ELECTRONIC RECORDING IS AKIN TO COURT SYSTEMS STEPPING BACK INTO THE 1960’S.

Only realtime court reporters are able to make legal proceedings available to the 36 million hearing impaired Americans, allowing full participation as jurors, litigants, spectators, or counsel.  It is a necessity for the deaf and hearing-challenged , whose access to the judicial system is guaranteed under the Americans with Disabilities Act.


By Bob Moulesong Times Correspondent | Posted: Sunday, November 28
The Great Recession has shown no favoritism, taking its toll on almost every career field. But one field that is still thriving, with jobs in high demand, is the legal field. In particular, court reporters and paralegals are still in high demand, locally as well as nationally.
Court reporting is an interesting, challenging profession that offers a wide-open job market, flexible work schedule, and excellent income potential. Sophisticated technology has created exciting work in broadcast captioning and realtime court reporting. Some of the areas in which court reporters may work, besides a courtroom, include judicial reporting, broadcast captioning, stenointerpreting, and webcasting.
"Reporting is a profession which offers independence, flexibility, mobility, excellent income, and challenging, exciting work environments.
Court reporting students who complete a court reporting training program can make $70,000 or more annually."
The Department of Labor projects that job opportunities for court reporters will grow as fast as the average for all occupations. A recent ruling by the FCC requiring that all television programs be captioned is creating a huge demand for broadcast captioners. The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act has created a tremendous need for stenointerpreters on college campuses.
The job market for traditional reporters, those who write trials, depositions, village board meetings, etc., remains wide open. The average reported income for court reporters around the country was over $64,000, with many realtime reporters earning in the six figures.

  •  Court Reporting News taken from the National Court Reporters Association Tech Tracker email 07/2010..... WHY ELECTRONIC RECORDING IS NOT A VIABLE METHOD FOR THE COURT SYSTEM

    Various court systems in some states have tried electronic recording for several years in difficult economic times. Invariably, the cost ends up being substantially more than machine court reporters, and the results of failed equipment and poor
    quality transcription services bog down the entire legal system. The following story is only one of many examples of the flawed logic in using Electronic Recording to produce a legal transcript.

    Inaudibles and Indiscernibles Stall Third District Case.. FROM NCRA'S TECH TRACKER NEWSLETTER......07/2010

    In the Third District, appellant Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Company filed a motion to correct the record due to the approximately 10,000 inaudible and indiscernibles that riddle the trial and sidebar transcripts. The errors were not spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors, but substantive mistakes. According to the motion, no court reporter was present during the trial, and the audio discs taken of the proceedings were sent to a transcription service. The District Court pursued its own review of the transcripts and learned that several audio discs were missing from the trial. According to the motion, "Despite the District Court's best efforts, the record is not certifiable at this point." The appellants requested an extension to review the transcript once the District Court has produced a certified record.
    GA Board No Longer Offers State Certification Testing

    Posted From

    Effective January 1, 2009, the Georgia Board of Court Reporting will no longer offer certification testing.  Those desiring to test must take the NCRA or NVRA exam. Applicants must then apply to the Board of Court Reporting to acquire a Georgia certification.  Both the NCRA and NVRA tests will be held in Georgia, but you may take the exam in any state you wish. 


    You may check the GCCRA calendar for testing dates in Georgia or you may visit the websites of NCRA and NVRA for testing schedules. 

    Eligibility for Certification
    Any person who meets the following criteria is eligible for certification as a Georgia court reporter:

    1. Has attained the age of 18 years of age;
    2. Is of good moral character;
    3. Is a graduate of a high school or has had an equivalent education.


    Certification Instructions:

    1. Complete and submit to the Board of Court Reporting the Application for Certification and the Georgia Test;
    2. Attain a passing score on the Georgia Test;
    3. Attach the certification fee of $125.00 for processing;
    4. Mail the Exam Passage Verification form directly to the licensing agency, NCRA or NVRA.  The Board only accepts the Exam Passage Verification form from the licensing agency.

    From CRAH Student News; 02/03/2010


    Chris.... News on my Court Reporting Career
    I'm getting married soon, and I'm excited but busy planning and paying for everything.  At the same time, I am in the early stages of starting my own court reporting business.  I am continuing to work for the same court reporting firm as before, but I will be operating this as a side business which I hope will become very profitable.
    My father, who believes very strongly in this court reporting course, purchased the Court Reporting at Home program for me my junior year of high school.

    I was amazed how simplistic the lessons were and how quickly I was learning and progressing.  I completed theory in roughly four months and passed the first four speed levels (60-120 wpm) in the next four months.

    I passed the National Court Reporters Association's Written Knowledge Test while I was still in high school, and then I completed my 225s.  At 18 years old I went from being a court reporting student to a professional court reporter.  I was employed by a court reporting firm after interning with them for only two weeks.

    I've even appeared on the local news on two occasions while reporting a hearing in court.

    I would not have been able to get where I am today without the Court Reporting at Home program and
    Support Department.