[nabs-l] Braille Vs Technology: is there room for only one intown?

[Dennis Clark]

I cannot imagine calling clearly accomplished people such as the governor of 
New York or the woman in the article "illiterate" as you did.  It is mean 
spirited, self indulgent, and most importantly indicates a misunderstanding 
of the meaning of the word illiterate.  The American Heritage dictionary 
defines illiterate as follows:



1. illiterate. adjective.

Unable to read and write.

Having little or no formal education.

2. Marked by inferiority to an expected standard of familiarity with 
language and literature.

Violating prescribed standards of speech or writing.

3. Ignorant of the fundamentals of a given art or branch of knowledge: 
musically illiterate. See Usage Note at literate.


It saddens me that it does not seem possible for us as blind people to 
discuss blindness without personal attacks.  As long as we can be induced to 
continue attacking one another we are doing the work of those who would like 
to see us excluded from all aspects of society.  All they need do is sit on 
the sidelines and watch the feathers fly.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sean Whalen" <smwhalenpsp at gmail.com>
To: <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:52 PM
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Braille Vs Technology: is there room for only one 
intown?


> Let me first acknowledge the truth of what Mark has pointed out in terms 
> of
> the anecdotal nature of much of the evidence proffered in support of 
> Braille
> literacy increasing employment opportunities for the blind. I also admit
> freely that I have never dug into the numbers we so often bandy about in
> relation to literacy rates among the blind, literacy rates among the
> employed blind and the unemployment rate for blind individuals and do not
> know how carefully designed or well executed any of the studies from which
> we glean these numbers actually were.
>
> All this being said, I absolutely believe that Braille, for persons who 
> are
> unable and have never learned to read print, is a necessity and not simply 
> a
> tool in a toolbox. I qualify this because Marc was once again, I think,
> correct in drawing the distinction between those who learn to read print 
> and
> go blind later in life and those who are blind from a young age and never
> learn to read via any medium. For somebody who read print and achieved
> literacy, Braille is an incredibly useful tool that can make some tasks
> easier and more efficient and allow one to recapture the pleasure of 
> reading
> to oneself, but for those who never learned to read print, Braille is the
> only path to literacy. So, barring any complicating factors such as
> additional disabilities, I firmly believe that all blind children and all
> non-print-reading blind adults must be expected to learn to read Braille.
> Accepting anything less is to give the stamp of approval to lower
> expectations of the blind among the general public. When Joe Sighted is
> illiterate at age 25, we all recognize this as a big problem. It is no
> different for the blind, it's a big problem.
>
> I also agree with Joe, to a degree, that it is not a simple as Braille
> literate equals employed. But I think that it is beyond dispute that being
> able to read is a crucial skill for nearly any job seeker to have. Braille
> is not "the difference", but all else being equal, it certainly puts
> somebody who can read it at a great advantage over somebody else similarly
> situated who cannot. Just assume for a moment that the numbers we so often
> cite are close to accurate. 30 in 100 blind people are employed. Of those
> 30, 24 of them are able to read Braille. WE don't really know what the
> literacy rate among the working age blind is, but if it is under 50%, 
> which
> it almost certainly is, you can do the math and see that there is 
> something
> going on here.
>
> I myself have been blind all my life. In elementary school attempts were
> made to teach me to read print with the severely limited vision that I 
> had.
> I did not learn to read. What I was doing was more akin to decoding;
> agonizing over each letter to discern what it was and then piecing it
> together to make a word. At age 25 I learned to read Braille. Braille has
> proved useful in finding employment not only because of the specific tasks
> it makes easier on the job, but more so because of the fact that it has 
> made
> me literate. Literacy means knowing how things are spelled and how
> punctuation is used. Literacy means being able to express yourself in
> writing in a manner that accurately reflects your level of intelligence.
> Sure, it is nice to use a Braille display to access and take notes in
> meetings where speech output would be distracting. Yes, it is great to be
> able to use an outline or notes when addressing people publicly. However,
> these are simply instances where Braille is a tool, and in my opinion the
> best one, to get the job done. There are other ways to perform these 
> tasks.
> Where there is no substitution for being literate is in communicating your
> ideas in writing. In college, I would hand in work of supposed high 
> academic
> quality with the most egregious spelling and punctuation errors in it. Who
> can take that seriously? Yes there is spell-check and you can arrow 
> through
> character by character to find out how words are spelled and things are
> punctuated, but this approach means you only learn when you know you don't
> know. When you read, you pick things up naturally along the way and
> assimilate them.
>
> Of course it is true that some illiterate blind people like Laura Sloate 
> and
> the Governor of New York have achieved the pinnacles of financial and
> professional success. More power to them. I could point you toward people
> who have become very successful without completing a high school education
> let alone a college degree. Will anybody stand up and argue based on this
> fact that bachelor's and advanced degrees don't lead to more and better
> employment prospects for those who hold them?
>
> Literacy is absolutely essential for professional opportunities and 
> Braille
> is the only means by which to achieve it if one does not read print. Blind
> people who don't know Braille are certainly not inferior people, but they
> are absolutely working with an inferior set of skills, and if Laura Sloate
> would like to debate the point, I would gladly do so, regardless of how 
> much
> money she makes.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/dennisgclark%40sbcglobal.net