[nfb-talk] The Braille Literacy Crisis In America:

[David Andrews]

The list is fine.

Dave

At 08:39 PM 3/27/2009, you wrote:
>I got this and other mail twice from this list.  Could someone see if
>there's a problem with this list on the server? Thanx.
>--le
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Kenneth Chrane" <kenneth.chrane at verizon.net>
>To: "Multiple recipients of NFBnet NFB-Talk Mailing List"
><NFB-Talk at NFBnet.org>
>Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 6:18 PM
>Subject: [nfb-talk] The Braille Literacy Crisis In America:
>
>
>
>
>Cover:
>
>The Braille Literacy Crisis in America
>
>Facing the Truth, Reversing the Trend, Empowering the Blind
>
>
>
>A Report to the Nation by the National Federation of the Blind
>
>Jernigan Institute
>
>
>
>March 26, 2009
>
>
>
>***
>
>The Braille Literacy Crisis in America
>
>Facing the Truth, Reversing the Trend, Empowering the Blind
>
>
>
>Executive Summary
>
>
>
>A good education is the key to success, and every American deserves an equal
>opportunity to receive a good education. Inherent to being educated is being
>literate. The ability to read and write means access to information that, in
>turn, leads to understanding and knowledge. And knowledge is power-the power
>to achieve, function in the family, thrive in the community, succeed in a
>job, and contribute to society.
>
>
>
>Nearly 90 percent of America's blind children are not learning to read and
>write because they are not being taught Braille or given access to it. There
>is a Braille literacy crisis in America.
>
>
>
>The National Federation of the Blind (NFB), the largest and most influential
>membership organization of blind people in the United States, is taking
>swift action to reverse this trend. This year, 2009, marks the 200th
>anniversary of the birth of Louis Braille, inventor of the system that
>allows blind people to read and write independently. Coinciding with this
>anniversary, the NFB has announced specific action to address the education
>of America's blind children so that every blind child who has a need for
>Braille will have the opportunity to learn it.
>
>
>
>In this report to the nation on the state of Braille literacy in America,
>the NFB examines the history and decline of Braille education, addresses the
>crisis facing the blind today and key factors driving it, and proposes a
>number of action steps to double the Braille literacy rate by 2015 and
>eventually reverse it altogether.
>
>
>
>
>
>Key Report Findings:
>
>
>
>I. Facing the Truth
>
>
>
>·        Fewer than 10 percent of the 1.3 million people who are legally
>blind in the United States are Braille readers. Further, a mere 10 percent
>of blind children are learning it.
>
>·        Each year as many as 75,000 people lose all or part of their
>vision. As the baby-boom generation moves into retirement age and as
>diabetes (the nation's leading cause of blindness) approaches epidemic
>proportions, the NFB expects this number to increase dramatically and, if
>nothing is done, the Braille illiteracy rate as well.
>
>·        The current effects of this crisis are dire. Over 70 percent of
>blind adults are unemployed, and as many as 50 percent of blind high school
>students drop out of high school.
>
>·        Factors contributing to this low literacy among the blind include:
>
>
>
>   a.. The Teacher Crisis. There is a shortage of teachers who are qualified
>to teach Braille. In 2003 there were approximately 6,700 fulltime teachers
>of blind students serving about 93,600 students. In that same year the
>number of new professionals graduating from university programs to work with
>blind or low-vision students fluctuated between 375 and 416 per year. In
>addition there is no national consensus on what it means to be certified to
>teach Braille, and states have a patchwork of requirements for
>certification.
>   b.. The Spiral of Misunderstanding. There are many misconceptions about
>the Braille system. For example, "Braille isolates and stigmatizes students
>from peers who read print," or "Braille is always slower than reading print
>and difficult to learn." Yet studies have found that Braille is an efficient
>and effective reading medium with students demonstrating a reading speed
>exceeding 200 words per minute.
>   c.. Blind Children with Low Vision Are Deprived of Braille Instruction.
>Parents often find themselves battling with school administrators to get
>Braille instruction for their children with low vision because of the
>historical emphasis on teaching these children to read print. Many students
>with residual vision cannot read print efficiently even with magnification.
>Children with some residual vision account for around 85 percent of the
>total population of blind children.
>   d.. The Paradox of Technology. Eighty-nine percent of teachers of blind
>students agree that technology should be used as a supplement to Braille
>rather than as a replacement. Advances in technology have made Braille more
>available than ever before. Computer software can translate any document
>into literary, contracted Braille quickly and accurately. Further, hundreds
>of thousands of Braille books are available from Internet-based services.
>
>
>II. Reversing the Trend
>
>
>
>Undoubtedly the ability to read and write Braille competently and
>efficiently is the key to success for the blind. The National Federation of
>the Blind Jernigan Institute is committed to reversing this downward trend
>in Braille literacy in order to ensure that equal opportunities in education
>and employment are available to all of the nation's blind.
>
>
>
>Braille literacy can be accomplished by:
>
>
>
>·        Increasing access to Braille instruction and reading materials in
>every community nationwide.
>
>·        Expanding Braille mentoring, reading-readiness, and outreach
>programs.
>
>·        Requiring national certification in literary Braille among all
>special education teachers. By 2015 all fifty states must enact legislation
>requiring special education teachers of blind children to obtain and
>maintain the National Certification in Literary Braille.
>
>·        Requiring all Braille teachers to pass the National Certification
>in Literary Braille (NCLB) in order to assure their competency and fluency
>in the literary code.
>
>·        Advancing the use of Braille in current and emerging technologies.
>
>·        Researching new methods of teaching and learning Braille.
>
>·        Making Braille resources more available through online sharing of
>materials, enhanced production methods, and improved distribution.
>
>·        Educating the American public that blind people have a right to
>Braille literacy so they can compete and assume a productive role in
>society.
>
>
>
>III. Empowering the Blind
>
>
>
>Blind people who know Braille and use it find success, independence, and
>productivity. A recent survey of 500 respondents by the National Federation
>of the Blind Jernigan Institute revealed a correlation between the ability
>to read Braille and a higher educational level, a higher likelihood of
>employment, and a higher income.
>
>
>
>Hundreds of thousands of blind people have found Braille to be an
>indispensable tool in their education, their work, and their daily lives. In
>the hearts and minds of blind people, no alternative system or new
>technology has ever replaced Braille. For this reason the National
>Federation of the Blind is launching a national Braille literacy campaign to
>enhance the future prospects for blind children and adults in this country
>and to help make Braille literacy a reality for the 90 percent of blind
>children for whom reading is a struggle, if not an impossibility.
>
>
>
>The future of sighted children depends on a proper education; the future of
>America's blind children is no different.
>
>
>
>****
>
>The Braille Literacy Crisis in America
>
>Facing the Truth, Reversing the Trend, Empowering the Blind
>
>
>
>A Report to the Nation by the National Federation of the Blind Jernigan
>Institute
>
>
>
>Introduction
>
>
>
>Unquestionably a good education is the key to success. In national polls
>Americans routinely identified this issue as an important national priority
>(Blackorby, 2004). Education is generally understood to encompass literacy,
>defined as "the ability to read and write" (Concise Oxford Dictionary,
>2009). According to the National Institute for Literacy, literacy is "an
>individual's ability to read, write, speak in English, compute and solve
>problems at levels of proficiency necessary to function on the job, in the
>family of the individual, and in society" (http://www.nifl.gov/). Schools
>not doing a good job of teaching children to read and write are correctly
>seen as failing schools. Yet, for thousands of children across the United
>States, it is considered acceptable to fail to teach them to read and write.
>These children are blind, and they are not learning to read and write
>because they are not being taught Braille.
>
>
>
>Despite its versatility and elegance, and notwithstanding the fact that it
>is the official system of reading and writing for the blind in the United
>States, Braille is not being taught to most blind children or to adults who
>lose their vision. This has led to a literacy crisis among blind people.
>Many commentators on the Braille literacy crisis agree that one of the most
>significant contributing factors is a negative societal attitude toward
>Braille (Riccobono, 2006; Hehir, 2002). The bias against Braille is further
>evidenced by hundreds of published accounts from blind people themselves.
>The archives of the monthly publication of the National Federation of the
>Blind, the Braille Monitor, are full of personal stories detailing the
>problems blind people experience when they are not taught Braille at an
>early age. When educators and parents insist that children who are blind or
>have low vision read print to the exclusion of reading Braille, the ultimate
>result is that many of them are functionally illiterate.
>
>
>
>Braille has been controversial since its invention. At the time Louis
>Braille developed the system, most of those who were attempting to educate
>the blind were not blind themselves but sighted people with altruistic
>impulses (Lorimer, 2000; Mellor, 2006). They believed that the blind should
>be taught to read print rather than using a separate system. Many educators
>still believe this today, arguing that Braille is slow and hard to learn and
>that it isolates blind children from their peers. These arguments and their
>mistaken assumptions will be addressed in detail in the following pages.
>
>
>
>Beliefs among educators about Braille are only one reason, albeit a very
>significant one, that Braille literacy has declined in the United States to
>the point where it is estimated that only 10 percent of blind children are
>learning it. Other factors include a shortage of teachers qualified to give
>Braille instruction, the need for improved methods of producing and
>distributing Braille, and not enough certified Braille transcribers
>(Spungin, 1989, 2003). All of these issues must be addressed if the downward
>trend in literacy among the blind is to be reversed. And it must be
>reversed, for to fail to reverse it is to condemn blind children and adults
>to illiteracy and to a permanent struggle to keep up with their sighted
>peers in getting an education. By contrast, reversing the downward trend in
>Braille literacy will ensure that current and future generations of blind
>children, as well as adults who lose their vision, have access to knowledge
>and the power and opportunity that it represents.
>
>
>
>This report discusses Braille's history and effectiveness, the reasons for
>the crisis in Braille literacy, and what the National Federation of the
>Blind is doing to address this crisis. It is a call to action for all who
>are concerned about the welfare of America's blind children to join with the
>National Federation of the Blind in our effort to ensure that every blind
>child and adult who has a need for Braille will have the opportunity to
>learn it.
>
>
>
>A Brief History of Braille
>
>
>
>Braille is a system of raised dots that allows blind people to read and
>write tactilely. Named for its inventor, Louis Jean-Philippe Braille
>(1809-1852), the Braille code is the universally accepted method of reading
>and writing for the blind. It is the only system that allows blind people to
>read and write independently and to do both interactively. Because of its
>effectiveness, Braille has been adapted for almost every written language.
>Other Braille codes represent mathematical and scientific notation and
>music. Even blind computer programmers have a Braille code, computer
>Braille. All of these codes are based on Louis Braille's original system, a
>cell consisting of six dots in parallel vertical columns of three each. The
>Braille code was first introduced into the United States in 1869 but was not
>adopted until 1932 as the Standard English Grade Two Braille code.
>
>
>
>Graphic: Braille cell
>
>
>
>Graphic: Braille alphabet
>
>
>
>For most of human history no method existed allowing blind people to read
>and write independently. Some blind people did learn to read print in a
>tactile form, but usually they had no way to write tactilely; even if they
>learned to reproduce print characters accurately, they could not read what
>they had written. In addition, the difficulty and expense of producing books
>with embossed print lettering made such books rare. As a result most blind
>people were condemned to illiteracy, along with the poverty and deprivation
>accompanying it. If they earned a living at all, they did so as storytellers
>or musicians or through certain kinds of manual labor, including basketry
>and massage.
>
>
>
>This was the state of affairs when Louis Jean-Philippe Braille was born in
>the small village of Coupvray, France, just outside Paris, in 1809. At the
>age of three Braille was blinded in an accident, probably resulting from
>playing with tools in his father's harness-making shop (Lorimer, 1996, 2000;
>Mellor, 2006). Braille's family was not wealthy, but his parents were
>literate and determined that their son would obtain an education. When it
>became clear that the local school could no longer meet Braille's needs
>(though he had progressed astonishingly far given that he could not read and
>write), a local nobleman put up the funds for him to attend the Royal
>Institute for the Young Blind in Paris, the world's first school for blind
>children (Mellor, 2006; Lorimer, 1996). At this school Braille found a
>limited number of books with embossed print letters and quickly read all of
>them.
>
>
>
>In 1821 a French army captain, Charles Barbier de la Serre, came to the
>school to show the students an invention that he thought might be of use to
>them. Barbier had developed a system called "night writing" consisting of
>raised dots punched into cardboard with a stylus. A metal frame, or slate,
>was used to guide the stylus in the proper placement of the dots. This
>system was invented as a way for soldiers to transmit messages in the dark
>without striking a match, which would give away their position to enemy
>gunners. While Braille recognized the system's potential, he believed that
>it could be improved. In particular he thought that the dot formations
>should represent alphanumeric characters instead of sounds (Barbier's system
>was also called sonography because the symbols represented the sounds of
>speech rather than letters). He also thought that the number of dots making
>up each character should be reduced so that they could be read with a
>fingertip rather than having to be traced. Braille worked on improving the
>system for several years. By the age of twenty he had developed the six-dot
>Braille cell that is used today and had published a booklet on the method.
>
>
>
>Braille's fellow students adopted his new system immediately. Not only could
>they now read books, which were hand transcribed by Braille and his friends,
>but they could take their own notes in class and read them back later rather
>than learning exclusively by listening and memorizing. The instructors at
>the school were skeptical, however, and some of the administrators were
>actually hostile. The school was a political showpiece and made money from
>selling crafts produced by its blind students; if the blind became too
>independent, its prestige and revenue might be reduced (Mellor, 2006). At
>one point the school's director burned all of the books that Louis Braille
>and his friends had transcribed by hand and confiscated the students' slates
>and styluses. The result was an open rebellion among students, who began to
>steal forks from the dining room to replace their lost writing implements.
>This early struggle for the acceptance of the Braille system would be only
>the first of many battles pitting blind people against those who professed
>to know what was best for them. These struggles continue to this day.
>
>
>
>Despite these setbacks the Braille system was eventually adopted by the
>Royal Institute for the Young Blind, and two years after Braille's death it
>became the official system of reading and writing for the blind in France.
>To this day Louis Braille is considered a national hero in his native
>country; his body is interred in the Pantheon in Paris. The Braille code was
>later adopted in England because of advocacy by the founders of what is now
>the Royal National Institute of Blind People, and other blind people and
>educational institutions for the blind began to use it. Helen Keller
>reported using the system. Rosalind Perlman (2007), in her book The Blind
>Doctor: The Jacob Bolotin Story, reports that the first physician to have
>been born blind, practicing in Chicago during the early part of the
>twentieth century, learned Braille at the Illinois School for the Blind and
>used it for notes in medical school and throughout his subsequent career.
>Braille was adopted as the exclusive means of teaching blind people to read
>and write in the United States in 1932. At the height of its use in the
>United States, it is estimated that 50 to 60 percent of blind children
>learned to read and write in Braille.
>
>
>
>Attention Box on page 7:  Only about 10 percent of blind children in the
>United States are currently learning Braille. Society would never accept a
>10 percent literacy rate among sighted children; it should not accept such
>an outrageously low literacy rate among the blind.
>
>
>
>The Decline of Braille Literacy
>
>
>
>The decline in the number of Braille readers since 1963 (Miller, 2002) has
>been widely discussed by professionals and censured by consumer groups (Rex,
>1989; Schroeder, 1989; Stephens, 1989). Although there is no consensus on
>the causes of this decline, a number of factors have been cited. Among them
>are disputes on the utility of the Braille code (Thurlow, 1988), the decline
>in teachers' knowledge of Braille and methods for teaching it (Schroeder,
>1989; Stephens, 1989), negative attitudes toward Braille (Holbrook and
>Koenig, 1992; Rex, 1989), greater reliance on speech output and
>print-magnification technology, and a rise in the number of blind children
>with additional disabilities who are nonreaders (Rex, 1989). The greatest
>controversy over whether to teach a child Braille arises when a child has
>some residual vision; such children account for around 85 percent of the
>total population of blind children (Holbrook and Koenig, 1992).
>
>
>
>Pressure from consumers and advocacy groups has led thirty-three states to
>pass legislation mandating that children who are legally blind be given the
>opportunity to learn Braille. The Individuals with Disabilities Education
>Act also mandates that the teams who help to write educational plans for
>students with disabilities presume that all blind children should be taught
>Braille unless it is determined to be inappropriate. But these laws have not
>ended the controversy. Whereas professional groups have called for a renewed
>emphasis on teaching Braille (Mullen, 1990), others have opined that Braille
>is only one educational option. Braille should be viewed as one tool among
>many, a tool that allows blind people to operate at a high degree of
>proficiency when performing a multitude of functional tasks (Eldridge, 1979,
>Waechtler, 1999). But rather than seeing Braille as a tool that every blind
>child should have in his or her toolkit for dealing effectively with vision
>loss, to be used in conjunction with and not to the exclusion of techniques
>that rely on the child's remaining vision, some educators insist that a
>choice must be made between print and Braille and that only one reading
>medium must be used (Federman, 2005). These disagreements translate in the
>field into disputes among professionals in planning meetings researching how
>to deal with individual children. Parents caught in the middle of these
>disputes and often themselves confused about the best course of action find
>that they and their children become the real victims in these academic
>battles.
>
>
>
>The Crisis Facing the Blind Today
>
>
>
>The American Foundation for the Blind (1996) has estimated that fewer than
>10 percent of people who are legally blind in the United States and fewer
>than 40 percent of the estimated number who are functionally blind are
>Braille readers. The American Printing House for the Blind estimates the
>Braille literacy rate among children to be around 10 percent. Experts
>estimate 1.3 million blind people live in the United States, and
>approximately 75,000 people lose all or part of their vision each year.
>These numbers may increase dramatically as the baby-boom generation reaches
>retirement age. Macular degeneration, the most common form of blindness in
>older Americans, is likely to increase as this population increases,
>particularly since Americans are living longer. The nation's leading cause
>of blindness, diabetes, has reached epidemic proportions in this country, so
>a higher incidence of blindness can be expected.
>
>
>
>The Teacher Crisis
>
>
>
>U.S. education faces a chronic shortage of teachers qualified to teach
>Braille. In 2003 there were approximately 6,700 fulltime teachers of blind
>students serving approximately 93,600 students (Spungin, 2003). Far too few
>teachers of blind children have graduated from accredited programs; a 2000
>report observed that the total number of new professionals graduating from
>university programs to work with students who are blind or have low vision
>fluctuated between 375 and 416 per year during the previous seven years
>(Mason, et al., 2000). Not all of these teachers are qualified to teach
>Braille. Many teachers who are considered qualified to teach Braille have
>not necessarily learned it themselves. There is no national consensus on
>what it means to be certified to teach Braille, and states have a patchwork
>of requirements for certification. Local school districts depend upon state
>education agencies to set the certification standards for teachers. All
>states have specific certification standards for those who teach children
>who are blind or have low vision; however, these standards vary across the
>country (Vaughn, 1997).
>
>
>
>States license or certify candidates who want to teach children who are
>blind or have low vision in three ways: requiring the candidate to graduate
>from an approved bachelor's or master's program from an approved college or
>university, requiring the candidate to have a generic degree in special
>education, or requiring the candidate to have an endorsement to an existing
>certificate in early childhood, elementary, secondary, or special education,
>with certain courses needed to gain that endorsement (Frieman, 2004). In
>order to approve a program, the National Council for the Accreditation of
>Teacher Education requires performance-based criteria. The Council for
>Exceptional Children has developed performance-based standards for programs
>to train teachers of students who have a visual impairment. If a candidate
>graduates from an approved program that follows the Council for Exceptional
>Children's standards, an administrator can predict that the teaching
>candidate will have the necessary background to teach Braille. However, only
>nineteen states require candidates to have graduated from an approved
>program. Seven states require that candidates have only a generic degree in
>special education with no specific mention of Braille. Twenty-four states
>require candidates to have taken courses in order to earn an endorsement.
>These standards specify that the teacher has taken at least one course in
>Braille, but give no guarantee that the individual is actually competent in
>Braille or is able to teach it (Frieman, 2004). Teachers who are
>uncomfortable with Braille are likely to be reluctant to teach it,
>especially when they can get by without doing so for students who have low
>vision but can read some print.
>
>
>
>To act in the best interests of blind children and adults, schools must
>require that every child who is blind will have the right to be taught
>Braille and that Braille be taught by someone who is competent in its use.
>This is not what is currently happening in schools (Vaughn, 1997). Today
>there is no guarantee that a teacher, even one with formal credentials, will
>be fluent in Braille. In order to assure Braille fluency, teachers of blind
>children must be tested on their actual Braille skills by way of a
>comprehensive and validated test. States should require Braille teachers to
>pass the National Certification in Literary Braille (NCLB) in order to
>assure competency and fluency in the literary code. Passing the NCLB
>examination will not in itself ensure effective Braille teaching, but it
>will provide a measure of how well a person knows and uses Braille.
>
>
>
>Even assuming a teacher is competent in Braille, the size of the teacher's
>case load will often influence how well his or her students learn Braille.
>An itinerant teacher is essentially a consultant who is responsible for
>meeting the needs of several students. Teachers of blind students often must
>travel within or even between school districts each week to help a number of
>students. They are typically expected to teach sixteen or more students who
>are widely spread over large geographic areas (Caton, 1991). As a result
>many students are trained in Braille for only two to three hours a week, and
>some even less than that.
>
>
>
>Attention Box page 9:  There is a chronic shortage of teachers who are
>qualified to teach Braille. It was reported in 2003 that there were
>approximately 6,700 fulltime teachers of blind students serving
>approximately 93,600 students.
>
>
>
>Teachers of blind students must often teach a number of skills, including
>cane travel and the use of technology such as a computer with text-to-speech
>screen access software, and there is evidence that Braille instruction is
>not prioritized. According to one survey respondents spent an average of 35
>percent of their instructional time using assistive technology with students
>in grades 7-10 (Thurlow, et al., 2001). The primary goals most often cited
>for instructional time were "become a proficient user of assistive
>technology" (42 percent) and "read using a combination of approaches" (30
>percent), with "become fluent Braille reader" (18 percent) selected less
>often. Respondents spent an average of 27 percent of reading instruction
>time on direct instruction of how to use assistive technologies to assist in
>reading, 19 percent of time in supported reading aloud, and only 9 percent
>of time in direct instruction of phonemic strategies (Braille or print).
>Furthermore, anecdotal evidence suggests that a teacher of blind students
>spends more time tutoring than teaching blindness skills (Amato, 2002).
>
>
>
>The Spiral of Misunderstanding
>
>
>
>Attitudes about Braille, which are often based on myths and misconceptions
>about the system, are also a barrier to proper Braille instruction. One of
>the major reasons for the increasing illiteracy of the blind and those with
>low vision is the historical emphasis on teaching children with residual
>vision to read print (Spungin, 1996). Most blind children have some residual
>vision; they are legally blind but not totally blind. But many students who
>have residual vision cannot read print efficiently even with magnification;
>attempting to read print results in eye strain, headaches, and other
>problems. Furthermore, many degenerative eye conditions are progressive,
>meaning that the student's vision will continue to decrease over time,
>making print harder and harder to read. Students with low vision are
>particularly at risk for not receiving appropriate instruction in Braille.
>These students tend to receive less direct service from teachers of blind
>students and are surrounded with more emphasis on "vision" over nonvisual
>skills and learning techniques. Additionally, if Braille is not introduced
>early, student motivation to accept Braille will greatly decrease due to
>frustration in learning Braille, emotional issues with looking and acting
>different from one's peers, and issues involving emotional acceptance of
>additional vision loss. It is important for educators to give these students
>appropriate instruction based on their needs in the long term rather than
>simply considering only their most immediate needs.
>
>
>
>Parents often find themselves battling with school administrators to get
>Braille instruction for their children with low vision. The Colton family of
>Park City, Utah, took out a second mortgage on their home in order to hire
>lawyers for litigation against the school district to get Braille
>instruction for their daughter Katie, who has a progressive eye disease
>(Lyon, 2009). "We'd had to argue a wait-to-fail model is not appropriate for
>a progressive disorder," her mother was quoted as saying in the Salt Lake
>Tribune.
>
>
>
>The Jacobs family was told that their blind daughter could read print if the
>font was 72 point or higher, so there was no need for Braille (Jacobs,
>2009). Needless to say, the child will never have access to print that large
>in the real world, except perhaps on billboards. The school system justified
>having the child read print by claiming that she was "resistant to Braille."
>But a school district would never refuse to teach a sighted child to read
>because he or she was "resistant" to reading. Furthermore, resistance to
>Braille is often a product of the way it is taught; if Braille is presented
>to a blind child as different and hard, rather than the positive way in
>which reading is presented to sighted children, then the child will
>naturally absorb the expectations of the adults doing the teaching (Craig,
>1996; Stratton, 1999).
>
>
>
>Attention box page 10:  Experts estimate that 1.3 million blind people live
>in the United States, and approximately 75,000 people lose all or part of
>their vision each year.
>
>
>
>
>
>The experiences of the Colton and Jacobs families are not uncommon; they are
>merely examples of the experiences of hundreds of families across the United
>States. On the other hand, the experiences of parents of blind children who
>have successfully introduced their young readers to Braille and fought for
>inclusion of the system in the child's education suggest that, when Braille
>is simply presented as reading and reading becomes fun for the family,
>children readily absorb the system.
>
>
>
>Others argue that Braille isolates and stigmatizes students from peers who
>read print. This has never been backed by any kind of research; it is
>without foundation. Blind children will always have to use alternative
>technologies or methods to read, ranging from holding a book close to their
>face to using a magnification device or putting on headphones to listen to
>recorded text. Their peers notice these differences as surely as they notice
>that the child reads Braille instead of print, but they do not necessarily
>treat the child differently because of reading differences.
>
>
>
>Ultimately, all of these mistaken beliefs about Braille come down to low
>expectations of blind students. Whether they will admit it or not, many of
>the sighted educators and administrators charged with providing instruction
>to blind students do not believe in the capacity of their students or in the
>effectiveness of Braille and other alternative techniques used by blind
>people to live successful, productive lives. As one commentator has put it:
>"A little honest reflection about this situation (decline in Braille
>literacy) suggests that the real culprit here is the inadequate and
>inappropriate education of the special education teachers who are not
>competent or confident themselves in using Braille and who also believe that
>their students should not be expected to compete successfully in school or
>in life" (Ianuzzi, 1999).
>
>
>
>Blind students who are not properly taught Braille and other blindness
>skills and who therefore struggle with literacy ultimately experience low
>self-confidence and a lack of belief in their own ability to live happy,
>productive lives. By contrast, those who do receive effective Braille
>instruction and use the code effectively gain a sense of hope and
>empowerment. Dr. Fredric Schroeder (1996) commented that Braille literacy
>"should be viewed more expansively than simply as a literacy issue."
>Schroeder's analysis of interviews with legally blind adults "found that
>issues of self-esteem, self-identity, and the 'stigma' of being a person
>with a disability were integrally intertwined with the subjects' reported
>feelings about using Braille.For some, Braille seems to represent
>competence, independence, and equality, so the mastery and use of Braille
>played a central role in the development of their self-identities as persons
>who are capable, competent, independent, and equal."
>
>
>
>Schroeder's work connects to other valuable work in self-efficacy and
>demonstrates that blind people who learn to value and use Braille generally
>have a higher degree of confidence and do not spend energy attempting to
>reshape themselves as "normal" individuals. Schroeder's work is reinforced
>by more recent investigations by Wells-Jensen (2003) and through the
>published first-hand experiences of hundreds of blind individuals-some who
>did and others who did not receive appropriate instruction in Braille in
>childhood.
>
>
>
>Another misconception about Braille that has contributed to the decline in
>Braille literacy is the idea that reading Braille is always slower than
>reading print and that Braille is difficult to learn. While some studies
>suggest that Braille is slower than print and difficult to learn because of
>its 189 English contractions-symbols and letter combinations that reduce the
>size of Braille books by making it possible to put more Braille on a page
>instead of spelling each word out letter-by-letter-research in this area is
>unreliable since studies tend to be anecdotal. Other studies have found that
>Braille is an efficient and effective reading medium (Foulke, 1979;
>Wormsley, 1996). Furthermore, the experience of Braille instructors shows
>that reading speed exceeding 200 words per minute is possible when students
>have learned Braille at an early age (Danielsen, 2006).
>
>
>
>The Paradox of Technology
>
>
>
>It is often said that technology obviates the need for Braille. The
>availability of text-to-speech technology and audio texts, for example, is
>advanced as an argument against the use of Braille. But literacy is the
>ability to read and write. While using speech output and recorded books is a
>way for students to gain information, it does not teach them reading and
>writing skills. Students who rely solely on listening as a means of learning
>find themselves deficient in areas like spelling and composition. Most
>teachers of blind students (89.4 percent [Wittenstein and Pardee, 1996])
>agree that technology should be used as a supplement to Braille rather than
>as a replacement, even though as cited above, many of them spend more
>instructional time working with technology than teaching Braille. No one
>would seriously suggest that alternate sources of information, like
>television and radio, replace the need for a sighted child to learn to read;
>the same should be true for Braille.
>
>
>
>For the sighted technology has not replaced print; it has in fact simplified
>and enhanced access to the printed word. The same is true with respect to
>Braille; advances in technology have made Braille more available than it
>ever was in the past. Computer software can translate any document into
>literary, contracted Braille quickly and accurately, although work still
>needs to be done to make other Braille codes machine-translatable. Braille
>displays and embossers can be attached to computers to generate Braille
>documents on the fly. Thousands of Braille books are available from
>Internet-based services like the Web-Braille service offered by the National
>Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the Library of
>Congress (NLS) and the online community Bookshare.org. While scarcity of
>Braille is still a problem, it is not nearly as bad as it has been in the
>past. Certainly improvements can still be made in Braille production methods
>and technology so that more Braille will be available, and this is one of
>the goals of the Braille Readers are Leaders campaign of the National
>Federation of the Blind. Assuming a commitment to Braille instruction and
>Braille literacy is renewed in America and proper steps are taken to ensure
>the production and distribution of more Braille materials, there will be no
>need to avoid teaching Braille because of a shortage of books.
>
>
>
>The Truth about Braille
>
>
>
>The crisis in Braille literacy is real. Thousands of blind children and
>adults who need adjustment to blindness training are being denied access to
>the most effective means of reading and writing for the blind ever invented.
>The effects of this crisis can be seen in the high unemployment rate (over
>70 percent) among blind adults, the high dropout rate (40 to 50 percent)
>among blind high school students, and the lives of dependence and minimal
>subsistence that many blind people lead. By contrast, blind people who know
>the Braille code and use it regularly find success, independence, and
>productivity.
>
>
>
>A recent survey of five hundred respondents by the National Federation of
>the Blind Jernigan Institute, conducted on a national random sample selected
>from a list of 10,000 people who had had contact with the NFB within the
>last two years, demonstrated that contact with the NFB increases the
>likelihood of knowing Braille. Unlike the general sample of blind
>individuals, where the AFB estimates that only 10 percent read Braille, more
>than half (59 percent) of those interviewed in the NFB Jernigan Institute
>study are Braille literate. This is probably due to the Federation's
>emphasis on Braille literacy; those who have had contact with the National
>Federation of the Blind tend to believe strongly in the efficacy of Braille
>and to be committed to learning and reading it. In this sample the ability
>to read Braille was also correlated with a higher educational level, a
>higher likelihood of employment, and a higher income level. These
>relationships were statistically significant.
>
>
>
>Attention box page 12:  Many teachers who are considered qualified to teach
>Braille have not learned it themselves.
>
>
>
>Most disciplines accept that the primary indicators of socioeconomic status
>in this society are employment and education leading to self-sufficiency. A
>study by Dr. Ruby Ryles, now the director of the orientation and mobility
>master's program at the Professional Development and Research Institute on
>Blindness at Louisiana Tech University, began to provide the objective
>information needed on the question of Braille versus print. In a comparison
>between two groups of blind people, one consisting of Braille readers and
>the other of print readers, the study revealed that those who were taught
>Braille from the beginning had higher employment rates, were better educated
>and more financially self-sufficient, and spent more time engaged in leisure
>and other reading than the print users (Ryles, 1996).
>
>
>
>Dr. Ryles's work showed a striking difference between those who had grown up
>learning Braille and those who had relied primarily on print. She found that
>44 percent of the Braille-reading group, as compared to 77 percent of the
>print-reading group, were unemployed. In other words the unemployment rate
>for the print group was actually higher than the generally reported
>unemployment rate among the blind as a whole (70 percent) (Riccobono, et
>al.), while the unemployment rate among Braille readers was much lower. The
>Braille-reading sample had significantly stronger reading habits than the
>print group, including more hours in a week spent on reading activities,
>reading more books, and subscribing to more magazines. While the overall
>educational rate between the two groups was not statistically significant, a
>dramatic difference was observed at the advanced degree level. Thirty
>percent of the Braille group had an advanced degree compared to only 13
>percent for the print group, with only the Braille group having any
>individuals with doctoral degrees.
>
>
>
>Last, the Braille group was over-represented in the higher income level and
>under-represented in the lowest income level, while the print group was
>under-represented at the high income level and over-represented at the low
>income level (the two groups were comparable at a medium income level). The
>print group contained significantly more people receiving
>non-employment-related funding from the government (such as Social Security
>Disability Income) as compared to the Braille group.
>
>
>
>Dr. Ryles's research on the education and employment outcomes for Braille
>readers, combined with the difference in confidence, self-efficacy, and
>reported independence of Braille readers, suggests that Braille is extremely
>valuable for those blind people who learn and use Braille in their lives.
>The results of this study suggest that teaching Braille as an original
>primary reading medium to children with low vision may encourage them to
>develop the positive lifelong habit of reading as adults, enhance their
>later employment opportunities, and increase the possibility of financial
>independence.
>
>
>
>The Future Is in Our Hands
>
>
>
>There can be no doubt that the ability to read and write Braille competently
>and efficiently is the key to education, employment, and success for the
>blind. Despite the undisputed value of Braille, however, only about 10
>percent of blind children in the United States are currently learning it.
>Society would never accept a 10 percent literacy rate among sighted
>children; it should not accept such an outrageously low literacy rate among
>the blind. The National Federation of the Blind Jernigan Institute is
>committed to the reversal of this downward trend in Braille literacy in
>order to ensure that equal opportunities in education and employment are
>available to all of the nation's blind.
>
>
>
>The overall goals of this effort are that:
>
>
>
>   a.. The number of school-age children reading Braille will double by 2015.
>   b.. All fifty states will enact legislation requiring special education
>teachers of blind children to obtain and maintain the National Certification
>in Literary Braille by 2015.
>   c.. Braille resources will be made more available through online sharing
>of materials, enhanced production methods, and improved distribution.
>   d.. Courses in Braille instruction will be added to the curricula in high
>schools and colleges and offered to all students to ensure that this reading
>medium becomes an established, recognized method of achieving literacy in
>our nation.
>   e.. The American public will learn that blind people have a right to
>Braille literacy so they can compete and assume a productive role in
>society.
>
>
>For over 150 years Braille has been recognized as the most effective means
>of reading and writing for the blind. Hundreds of thousands of blind people
>have found Braille an indispensable tool in their education, their work, and
>their daily lives, even as professionals in the field of blindness continued
>to debate the merits of the system. Certainly more empirical research is
>needed to break down the wall of misunderstanding that still stands between
>all too many blind people and proper Braille instruction. The Braille codes
>and the technology to reproduce them can and will continue to improve. But
>the lives of successful blind people testify to the usefulness of Braille,
>and in the face of that testimony the only truly professional and moral
>course of action is to ensure that all blind people have access to competent
>Braille instruction. In the hearts and minds of blind people, no alternative
>system or new technology has ever replaced Braille where the rubber meets
>the road-in the living of happy, successful, productive lives. That is why
>the National Federation of the Blind is asking all who are concerned about
>the future prospects for blind children and adults in this country to help
>us make Braille literacy a reality for the 90 percent of blind children for
>whom reading is a struggle, if not an impossibility. The future of sighted
>children depends on a proper education, and the future of blind children is
>no different. Let us make the commitment that no blind child or adult who
>needs Braille as a tool in his or her arsenal of blindness techniques will
>be left without it.
>
>
>
>
>
>References:
>
>
>
>Amato, Sheila. "Standards for Competence in Braille Literacy Skills in
>Teacher Preparation Programs." Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 96,
>no. 3 (2002): 143-153.
>
>
>
>American Foundation for the Blind. "Estimated Number of Adult Braille
>Readers in the United States." Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 90,
>no. 3 (May/June 1996): 287.
>
>
>
>Blackorby, Jose, et al. "SEELS: Wave 1 Wave 2 Over view." A report prepared
>for the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education. (SRI
>Project P10656), August 2004.
>
>
>
>Caton, Hilda, ed. Print and Braille Literacy: Selecting Appropriate Learning
>Media. Louisville: American Printing House for the Blind, 1991.
>
>
>
>Council for Exceptional Children. "Accreditation & Licensure." Professional
>Development. http://www.cec.sped.org/Content/
>NavigationMenu/ProfessionalDevelopment/ CareerCenter/AccreditationLicensure/
>default.htm?from=tlcHome. (accessed March 13, 2009).
>
>
>
>Concise Oxford Dictionary Online, s.v. "Literacy." http://www.askoxford.com
>(accessed February 3, 2009).
>
>
>
>Craig, C. J. "Family Support of the Emergent Literacy of Children with
>Visual Impairments." Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 90, no. 3
>(1996): 194-200.
>
>
>
>Danielsen, Chris. "Who Says You Can't Go Home Again?: Reflections on the
>Twentieth Anniversary of the Louisiana Center for the Blind." Braille
>Monitor 49, no. 7 (July 2006): 459-464.
>
>
>
>Eldridge, Carlton. "Braille Literacy: The Best Route to Equal Education."
>Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 73, no. 8 (Oct 1979): 331-333.
>
>
>
>Federman, Mark. "Why Johnny and Janey Can't Read, and Why Mr. and Ms. Smith
>Can't Teach: The Challenge of Multiple Media Literacies in a Tumultuous
>Time." Talk delivered, University of Toronto Senior Alumni Association,
>Toronto, Canada, November 2005.
>
>
>
>"Freedom to Learn: Basic Skills for Learners with Learning Difficulties
>and/or Disabilities." A report addressing the basic needs of adults with
>learning disabilities, May 2000.
>
>
>
>Frieman, Barry B. "State Braille Standards for Teachers of Students Who Are
>Blind or Visually Impaired: A National Survey." Braille Monitor 47, no. 1
>(January 2004): 12-16.
>
>
>
>Foulke, Emerson. "Increasing the Braille Reading Rate." Journal of Visual
>Impairment & Blindness 73, no. 8 (Oct 1979): 318-323.
>
>
>
>Hehir, Thomas. "Eliminating Ableism in Education." Harvard Educational
>Review 72, no. 1 (Spring 2002): 1-32.
>
>
>
>Holbrook, M. C. and A. J. Koenig. "Teaching Braille Reading to Students with
>Low Vision." Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 86, no. 1 (Jan 1992):
>44-48.
>
>
>
>Ianuzzi, Jody. W. "Braille Literacy in America: A Student's View."
>TravelVision. http://www. travelvision.org/ov/ov0599.htm. (accessed March
>11, 2009).
>
>
>
>Jacobs, William (parent of blind child) interview by Chris Danielsen,
>January 15, 2009, National Federation of the Blind, Baltimore, MD.
>
>
>
>Lorimer, Pamela. "A Critical Evaluation of the Historical Development of
>Tactile Modes of Writing and an Analysis and Evaluation of Researches
>Carried out in Endeavours to Make the Braille Code Easier to Read and
>  Write." PhD diss., University of Birmingham, 1996.
>
>
>
>---. Reading by Touch: Trials, Battles, and Discoveries. Baltimore: National
>Federation of the Blind, 2000.
>
>
>
>Lyon, Julia. "Teen's Blindness Revealing a New World," News, Salt Lake
>Tribune, February 1, 2009.
>
>
>
>Mason, Christine, Colleen McNerney, and Donna McNear. "Shortages of
>Personnel in the Low Incidence Area of Blindness: Working and Planning
>Together." Teaching Exceptional Children 32, no. 5 (May/June 2000): 91.
>
>
>
>Mellor, Michael. Louis Braille: A Touch of Genius. Boston: National Braille
>Press, 2006.
>
>
>
>Miller, Sally. "Practice Makes Perfect." Future Reflections 21, no. 2
>(Summer/Fall 2002): 39-40.
>
>
>
>Mullen, Edward A. "Decreased Braille Literacy: A Symptom of a System in Need
>of Reassessment." RE:view 23, no.3 (Fall 1990): 164-169.
>
>
>
>National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education. "Board of
>Examiners Update, Fall 2003." http://www.ncate.org/documents/
>boeUpdates/boe_updates_fall2003.pdf (accessed March 11, 2009).
>
>
>
>Perlman, Rosalind. The Blind Doctor: The Jacob Bolotin Story. Santa Barbara:
>Blue Point Books, 2007.
>
>
>
>Rex, E. J. "Issues Related to Literacy of Legally Blind Learners." Journal
>of Visual Impairment & Blindness 83, no. 6 (June 1989): 306-307, 310-313.
>
>
>
>Riccobono, Mark A. "The Significance of Braille on the Blind: A Review and
>Analysis of Research Based Literature." Unpublished paper, Johns Hopkins
>University, 2006.
>
>
>
>Riccobono, Mark A., L. Blake, and A. J. Chwalow. "Help America Vote Act: A
>Grant Funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
>Administration on Children and Families." Braille Monitor (forthcoming).
>
>
>
>Ryles, R. "The Impact of Braille Reading Skills on Employment, Income,
>Education, and Reading Habits." Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 90,
>no. 3 (May/ June 1996): 219-226.
>
>
>
>Schroeder, F. K. "Literacy: The Key to Opportunity." Journal of Visual
>Impairment & Blindness 83, no. 6 (June 1989): 290-293.
>
>
>
>---. "Perceptions of Braille Usage by Legally Blind Adults." Journal of
>Visual Impairment & Blindness 90, no. 3 (May/June 1996): 210-218.
>
>
>
>Spungin, S. J. "Cannibalism is Alive and Well in the Blindness Field."
>Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 97, no. 2 (Feb 2003): 69-71.
>
>
>
>---. "Braille and Beyond: Braille Literacy in a Larger Context." Journal of
>Visual Impairment & Blindness 90, no. 3 (May/June 1996): 271-274.
>
>
>
>---. Braille Literacy: Issues for Blind Persons, Families, Professionals,
>and Producers of Braille. New York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1989.
>
>
>
>Stephens, O. "Braille-Implications for Living." Journal of Visual Impairment
>& Blindness 83, no. 6 (June 1989): 288-289. 17
>
>
>
>Stratton, J. M. "Emergent Literacy: A New Perspective." Journal of Visual
>Impairment & Blindness 90, no. 3 (May/June 1996): 90,
>http://www.Braille.org/papers/jvib0696/ jvib9603.htm.
>
>
>
>Thurlow, Martha L., Sandra J. Thompson, Lynn Walz, and Hyeonsook Shin.
>"Student Perspectives on Using Accommodations during Statewide Testing."
>Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
>Association, Seattle, WA, April 10-14, 2001.
>
>
>
>Thurlow, W. R. "An Alternative to Braille." Journal of Visual Impairment &
>Blindness 82 (November 1988): 378.
>
>
>
>Waechtler, Ellen. "101 Ways to Use Braille." Braille Monitor 42, no. 2
>(March 1999): 177-181.
>
>
>
>Wells-Jensen, Sheri. "Just Say No to Reading Braille, Part II." Braille
>Monitor 46, no. 3 (March 2003): 192-199.
>
>
>
>Wormsley, D. P. "Reading Rates of Young Braille- Reading Children." Journal
>of Visual Impairment & Blindness 90, no. 3 (May/June 1996): 278-282.
>
>
>
>Wittenstein, S. H., and M. L. Pardee. "Teachers' Voices: Comments on Braille
>and Literacy from the Field." Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness 90,
>no. 3 (May/June 1996): 201-210.
>
>
>
>Vaughan, C. Edwin. "Why Accreditation Failed Agencies Serving the Blind and
>Visually Impaired." Journal of Rehabilitation (January/February/March 1997):
>7-14.
>
>
>
>****
>
>1800 Johnson Street
>
>Baltimore, MD 21230
>
>(410) 659-9314
>
>www.nfb.org
>
>LBB88P
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>nfb-talk mailing list
>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>nfb-talk mailing list
>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>
>__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, 
>version of virus signature database 3832 (20090206) __________
>
>The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
>http://www.eset.com