[nabs-l] Any thoughts on Washington Seminar

Wed Feb 23 02:31:26 UTC 2011

No George. The fedederal Department of education has a hand in some 
guidelines.
I've not looked into it and do not work for DOE so I do not know what role 
the federal government plays but it plays some role.
The No Child Left behind Act mandated standardized testing and strengthened 
the federal government role.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Jorge Paez
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 9:15 PM
To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Any thoughts on Washington Seminar

Aren't all education standards directed by the states?

On Feb 22, 2011, at 9:12 PM, Arielle Silverman wrote:

> Hi Joe and all,
>
> I don't know the answers to the questions asked about the technology
> bill, but the points raised all seem reasonable to me. If you have
> questions about the details of the legislation, perhaps a call to
> Jesse Hartle at the national center could be useful. I think Jesse
> will have the most accurate information about the NFB's positions and
> he is a very reasonable guy who won't object to debate or dissenting
> opinions.
>
> Regarding the education bill, the question I would ask is: To what
> extent is education of sighted children governed by national standards
> vs. state standards? I don't fully know the answer to that question
> either, as I am far from expert about the balances of power between
> state and federal legislatures. However, I would submit that to the
> extent teachers of sighted children are held accountable to national
> standards, blind children should be as well. We do know that sighted
> children are subjected to lots of national testing, and although blind
> children often have to take the tests, our scores aren't analyzed.
> While I have mixed feelings about the utility of national standardized
> tests, I think it's crucial that we be held to the same performance
> standards as our sighted peers, be they shaped by state or national
> mandates. The truth, which hundreds of us have demonstrated, is that
> blindness by itself has no impact on one's intelligence or academic
> potential. Unfortunately a good percentage of blind children are
> behind the curve even if they have no intellectual disabilities, but
> in the vast majority of cases, this can be attributed to a lack of
> access to materials, or a lack of opportunity to learn essential
> literacy and math skills. If clear performance standards are set and
> blind children are not meeting them, the responsibility must be put
> upon the teachers and the school to provide the needed access and
> learning opportunities. I see no reason why states' autonomy is more
> important for the education of blind children than it is for the
> education of children in general.
>
> Arielle
>
> On 2/22/11, Joe Orozco <jsorozco at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I too support the legislation.  Yet, I think it was a mistake not to join
>> the coalition surrounding the 21st Century bill.  I think we could have
>> included more of the provisions in that successful legislation had we 
>> been a
>> part of the group.  If this bill gets anywhere, I'll be a monkey's uncle,
>> but I think this is going to go the way of Social Security caps.  Net
>> neutrality, privacy and rural broadband would appear to be higher on the
>> totem pole to leave much room for this type of legislation.  It's not 
>> about
>> being anti-Federation.  It's about pointing out practical concerns, and 
>> it's
>> always bugged me that we've mostly gone onto the Hill without a concrete
>> plan or even specific proposed language to support our cases.  I also
>> support the second priority about educational standards, but come on, 
>> it's
>> as if we have the NFB world and then the rest of reality...
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their 
>> sleeves,
>> some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On 
>> Behalf
>> Of Bridgit Pollpeter
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 6:00 PM
>> To: nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> Subject: [nabs-l] Any thoughts on Washington Seminar
>>
>> Joe and others,
>>
>> I agree with your point about the Technology Bill of Rights.  In theory
>> it is great, but how practical is it?
>>
>> We certainly have rights and should have equal access to technology, but
>> shouldn't everyone then?  This legislation creates a huge mountain when
>> you begin to think about all the people who can not use current
>> technology with traditional means.  Is it fair to enforce accessibility
>> for one group, but exclude others?  Blind people are not the only group
>> who require alternative means to technology.
>>
>> Also, I understand the legislation would allow company's to create their
>> own means to alternative access, and we are not asking for the most
>> expensive route, or that everything must be audio.  But this is a huge
>> undertaking when you think about it.  Are we requesting literally
>> everything be made with accessible features out of the package?
>>
>> For instance, most microwaves are not readily accessible, but I placed
>> Braille labels on my microwave after purchasing it.  Same with the oven
>> and washing machine.  It did not require much work to do this.
>>
>> I am aware that more and more technology is developed with flat touch
>> screens replacing dials and buttons, and this includes appliances like
>> the ones mentioned above.  I recently attempted to purchase a hand
>> mixer, but the speeds were on a touch pad.  I now need to see one in
>> person to determine how difficult it may be to use.
>>
>> But even simple alternative methods may take years before all technology
>> would meet the standards.  Or are we just talking about mainstream
>> technology like airport kiosk and mobile phones and elevators, etc.
>>
>> Anyway,  I question the practicality of this Bill.  Without knowing the
>> specific language, I wonder to what extent we are looking at here.
>>
>> I have only ever been told that the bill is meant to give equal access
>> to current and future technology, and it allows groups to develop their
>> own accessibility, but what are the specifics?  What role will the
>> Federation play?  Is there a timeline?
>>
>> Before anyone accuses me of being anti-Federation, *smile* let me say
>> that I support this bill, and it would be great to have instant access
>> to technology, but I just wonder how feasible this is.
>>
>> Bridgit
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 19:31:38 -0500
>> From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
>> To: "'National Association of Blind Students mailing list'"
>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] Any thoughts on Washington seminar?
>> Message-ID: <629B16A89EE441B6B974CB1DC40C0752 at Rufus>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>>
>> A couple questions:
>>
>> 1. Is the NFB planning on doing anything to reinforce or enhance the
>> 21st Century Accessibility Act?  I would have thought much of what is
>> requested in the Technology Bill of Rights can already be covered in the
>> former.
>>
>> 2. How will the NFB battle states' rights mentality when it comes to
>> setting this national standard?  I think it's a great idea in theory,
>> but how feasible is it for states to give up their flexibility in favor
>> of a national benchmark?
>>
>> I think the third legislative priority is an excellent one.  I'm already
>> an ethnic minority and can enjoy the tax benefits of owning a business,
>> but hopefully the expansion of coverage to disabilities will motivate
>> more people to venture out and start their own operations.
>>
>> Thanks for any information on the first two points.
>>
>> Joe
>>
>> "Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their
>> sleeves, some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/jsorozco%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/nabs.president%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Arielle Silverman
> President, National Association of Blind Students
> Phone:  602-502-2255
> Email:
> nabs.president at gmail.com
> Website:
> www.nabslink.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/jorgeapaez%40mac.com

_______________________________________________
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/bookwormahb%40earthlink.net 