[Blindmath] braille code changes and nemeth

Sun Mar 22 22:33:46 UTC 2015

First: I will say that the stress level and challenge of learning
braille will be more than it used to be, partly because I think any
press that will change to UEB will do so before the TVIs get a chance
to learn it, and partly because it looks a lot more challenging then
the original braille does.
More generally, what do changes to print have to do with us?
You also speak of less relevance?
I don't see Braille, even in its current form becoming less relevant.
True, there are more people using audio and such, I have met several
people who do not know braille at all but that is not because of
anything to do with relevance as much as it is to do with lack of
opportunity.
Lastly, you speak of moving forward. With all due respect, I don't
understand what updating Braille, if you can even call it an update of
sorts, has to do with moving forward?
Oh, and I'm sure a lot of people will be happy to learn a code that is
a lot more complicated then the code that was being taught a couple of
years ago, sure, why not complicate things just a little more?
And while I'm on that, I can't speak for all but I know a handful of
us who grew up with the traditional system won't care much for
learning the new UEB code, and I'm pretty sure I'm right when I say
transcribers who are well established, both self-employed and the
larger transcription companies won't particularly care to learn UEB
much either.

Jorge

On 3/22/15, Steve Jacobson via Blindmath <blindmath at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Heidi and others,
>
> First, I really do not think that you will find that your daughter's
> education or stress level will be significantly raised by this change.  I
> say that having been
> required in the 1950's and 1960's to switch from the Taylor Code for math,
> to the first version of Nemeth Code and then a second version of Nemeth and
>
> there were profound differences with each change.  I experienced some
> substantial changes to Grade Two braille as well, and there were a lot of
> texts that
> were written in
> what was called grade one-and-a-half then.  Would my life have been easier
> if that were not the case, probably, but we didn't think a lot about it.
>
> More generally, your friend who said change was not inevitable may have been
> referring specifically to changing to UEB, I don't know, but I believe
> changes to the braille code in general are inevitable.  Either braill had to
> change or it was destined to become less relevant.  I believe this is the
> case Partly
> because print has changed dramatically during the past three or four
> decades.  Also, we, as blind people, are more affected by print presentation
> now than
> was the case before computers, optical character recognition, and electronic
> texts.
>
> It has been more than twenty years now since serious discussions began as to
> how to make it possible for braille to better reflect changing print
> conventions
> and to make better use of our ability to get text electronically.  The
> debate has often been very emotional, and at times, there was considerable
> polarization.
> This means that even today, emotions run high regarding what should be done
> with braille.  Those of you who have read "War of the Dots" know this is
> nothing new.  I think it is safe to say that people tend to get emotional
> when discussing something that means a great deal to them.  What makes the
> issue
> even more complicated is that there is no perfect solution, including doing
> nothing at all.
>
> Over time, Unified English Braille has emerged as the code that most of us
> have gotten behind as a path forward, but certainly not all of us.  In
> particular,
> some of UEB's
> detractors were very upset with the UEB's code of mathematics.  Ueb
> developers did a credible job of making it possible for math symbols and
> numbers to
> be written consistently whether in text or within mathematics, but there
> seemed to be a cost.  It was demonstrated by some that many mathematical
> expressions could take as many as twice
> as many symbols to write, and this raised concerns for many of us.  In
> addition, mathematical texts are still particularly dependent upon humans to
> accurately
> transcribe them, and changing to UEB for math would have required major
> retraining, much more than in the case of literary braille.  For that
> reason, a
> reasonable compromise seemed to be to stick with our current Nemeth Code for
> math rather than changing both literary and mathematical braille.
>
> If one reads the War of the Dots one learns that in the early part of the
> twentieth century, different schools for the blind in the united states
> taught different
> versions of braille.  New York Point was nothing like the braille we read
> today, even having a differently shaped cell, but it had a good deal of
> support a
> hundred years ago.  In addition, there were multiple versions of 6-dot
> braille that used different sets of contractions.  It took some time for
> a single system to evolve and to gain widespread use.  This experience makes
> it obvious to me that we need a group to set standards, even if voluntary.
>
> This is pretty much what BANA is.  They don't have, to my knowledge, any
> legal power as your friend said, but are made up of representatives of many
>
> diverse groups.  Your friend is right, people could ignore BANA, but where
> does that leave us?  Is this approach so bad that it is worth fragmenting
> braille
> when it is already under such pressure from other forces?  The current
> approach isn't perfect, but neither is any other system that has been
> examined.
> However, it does seem to me that the current approach of using UEB and
> Nemeth Code for math gives us the best approach to open up braille to
> accommodate changes in the future with the least disruption to braille
> readers, teachers and transcribers.  Work needs to be completed as to how to
>
> integrate Nemeth Code with UEB but a lot has already been accomplished.
> There is now a symbol that indicates that Nemeth Code is starting, for
> example,
> that was not part of UEB even a few years ago.  The challenge of how to
> handle short mathematical passages has not been completely resolve yet but
> there is awareness of difficulties that can arise if there are a lot of
> indicators switching in and out of Nemeth code.  Interestingly, the math
> books I used some
> years ago used the literary braille numbers for page numbers and within the
> table of contents, and even to number word problems.  Some of these
> conventions changed over time, I understand that, but math books simply have
> not necessarily been all Nemeth Code as was suggested.  Science texts
> that are less mathematical have had to bounce between literary braille and
> Nemeth Code all along and some of this will remain and it isn't really new.
>
>
> Perhaps it is too strong a statement to say that the changes are a "done
> deal."  However, there does come a time when we need to move forward and
> think about the path that is ahead of us, how to make it better, how to make
> the transition as smooth as possible, and how to increase our rate of
> literacy.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Steve Jacobson
>
> On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 18:51:39 -0400, HPS via Blindmath wrote:
>
>>Yes to all Susan states, I'm a parent and my daughter is in 9th grade. I
>> don't know how this will affect her right at a critical point in high
>> school, and I'm not
> looking forward to dealing with all the extra stress this will bring. These
> are not simple changes as some have mentioned.
>
>
>>I like to know what to expect, and what to prepare her for. This is not
>> just the job of her VI Teacher, who is still not sure what all the changes
>> are either.
>
>
>>So, it seems that a lot was done and I had no idea about it til about 1
>> year ago. Seems that if you don't belong to some organization you are out.
>> There
> was not a lot of talk about this in any list, that seems weird to me.
>
>
>>I also since discovering this list have been interested in what all of your
>> points of view are, specifically how these changes will impact any math
>> and
> science students and professionals.
>
>
>>As with any change there are good things and bad things that come with it.
>> In this case I do not care for the bad that this will bring, and these are
>> my
> daughters feelings, she is not happy with any of the changes with Nemeth.
>
>
>>I apologize for any grammar mistakes as English is not my first language.
>
>
>>Thank you,
>
>
>>Heidi
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Susan Jolly via Blindmath <blindmath at nfbnet.org>
>>To: blindmath <blindmath at nfbnet.org>
>>Sent: Sat, Mar 21, 2015 6:31 pm
>>Subject: [Blindmath] braille code changes and nemeth
>
>
>>I can't speak for others but here's why I'm still discussing it.
>
>>1. A done
>>deal doesn't always stay done.  I thought UEB was done with in the
>>US back
>>when NFB passed Resolutions 2002-04 and 2002-05.
>>2. I assume BANA is taking
>>into consideration how the transition was and is
>>going to be implemented in
>>other countries, especially in Australia and New
>>Zealand where the
>>implementations are pretty much complete.  These two
>>countries took a phased
>>approach so that older students weren't confronted
>>with a code change at
>>critical points in their educational careers.
>>Hopefully the more that parents,
>>teachers, and braille learners themselves
>>understand about the details, the
>>better the individual decisions they can
>>make as to timing.
>>3. To my
>>knowledge no country other than the US has combined Nemeth math
>>with UEB text
>>so my guess is that the exact rules for how this is going to
>>be implemented
>>are still evolving and this is where the expertise of the
>>Blindmath community
>>will be helpful.  For example, the person who started
>>this thread pointed out
>>that there are questions about how best to integrate
>>the use of Nemeth for
>>displayed math with associated inline math references
>>to that displayed
>>math.
>
>>Sincerely,
>>Susan Jolly
>
>
>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Blindmath mailing
>>list
>>Blindmath at nfbnet.org
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
>>To
>>unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>Blindmath:
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/hpscheffer%40aol.com
>>BlindMath
>>Gems can be found at <http://www.blindscience.org/blindmath-gems-home>
>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Blindmath mailing list
>>Blindmath at nfbnet.org
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
>>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> Blindmath:
>>http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
>>BlindMath Gems can be found at
>> <http://www.blindscience.org/blindmath-gems-home>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Blindmath mailing list
> Blindmath at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindmath_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Blindmath:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindmath_nfbnet.org/jorgeapaez1994%40gmail.com
> BlindMath Gems can be found at
> <http://www.blindscience.org/blindmath-gems-home>
>

-- 
Thank you.

Jorge A. Paez

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jorgeapaez

Elance page: http://jorgeapaez1994.elance.com