vb960309.htm

Teachers' Voices: Comments on Braille and Literacy from the Field

S.H. Wittenstein, M.L. Pardee

Abstract: This article presents the selected comments of a nationwide sample of teachers of students who are blind or visually impaired. The teachers responded to a survey that asked them to express their attitudes about braille literacy for them and for their students. Their comments, gathered incidentally to the quantitative data, reveal that teachers hold strong opinions and care deeply about the literacy skills of their students.

During the winter 1991-92, a national study was conducted of the attitudes of teachers of children with visual impairments about teachers' braille training experiences in teacher preparation programs. The items in the survey were based on recurrent themes in the literature on braille literacy that were being debated at that time. Both positive and negative statements about braille were incorporated into the survey, so the respondents would not be biased by the wording of the items and respond in what they assumed to be the expected manner.

The results of the survey indicated that teachers appear to be confident of their braille skills and that they strongly support braille instruction for their students. In addition, the data analysis revealed that preservice programs that place a greater emphasis on the methodology of teaching braille reading and writing produced teachers who were more likely to feel, competent in their own braille skills and in their ability to impart their knowledge to youngsters who are blind or visually impaired. The quantitative results of the study were reported earlier (Wittenstein, 1993, 1994).

The large sample size (N= 1,663) and the high response (49.9%) demonstrated that there was much interest in the issue of braille literacy in the field. In addition, 1,086 of the respondents (65.3%) went beyond the simple Likert-scale responses required by the survey and added written comments. These comments in response both to specific issues raised by individual items and to the broader issues in the debate on braille

literacy, took several forms. They ranged from one or two words scribbled in the margin next to the particular survey item to several sentences to essays and letters of several hundred words. A few included drawings, students' work, and class photographs.

The second author was invited to help select the comments because she is a practicing teacher of children with visual impairments and because of her varied experiences in both residential and itinerant teaching. The comments, when compiled, consisted of 604 pages of text. The authors categorized the data according to the items to which the comments corresponded. The data in each item were then subcategorized by topic, and representative comments were chosen.

Since the comments were unexpected and incidental to the quantitative data, it is impossible to generalize them to all teachers or even to the original sample. It should be noted that for some items, the quantitative data and the comments seem at odds. For instance, in response to an item about the use of the slate and stylus, a majority (1,171 respondents, 70.4%) expressed positive views, but the comments, written by only 66 teachers in the sample, present a more negative picture. Therefore, the authors believe that these comments should be viewed as representative only of each individual teacher's point of view. This led to a less formal, and it is hoped, more accessible format for the presentation of these data. Each set of comments is introduced with information about the item to which it corresponds, including the percentage of respondents indicating agreement or disagreement. The percentages of respondents indicating a neutral response are not reported in the text. Each comment from a teacher is introduced by a two-letter state abbreviation indicating the geographic origin of the data.

All of the comments are reported as precisely as possible. Some editorial changes were necessary for the sake of clarity. However, every effort was made to maintain the integrity of the original comments. The authors believe that the way teachers use language, professional jargon, and braille-specific vocabulary contributes to our understanding of their attitudes. For example, several of the teachers use "brl" to stand for braille. Since brl is a Grade 2 braille short-form word, this usage may indicate that these teachers have integrated braille usage into their daily written language. In addition, the fact that they used this short-form on this survey demonstrates that they expected the researcher to be conversant with braille contractions and they thought this usage would enhance, not hinder, communication among professionals in the field of blindness education.

The comments

TEACHING BRAILLE

The majority of the sample (1,225 respondents, 73.7%) agreed with the statement "I enjoy teaching braille," and only 4.9 percent disagreed. This item drew the most emotional responses, including exclamation points and drawings of happy faces in the margin. The first comment that follows was of particular interest to the first author because of his position as principal of the school mentioned.

NC: I LOVE IT!! It's why I became a teacher. St. Joseph's started my braille career 26 years ago. My training began as a braillist-transcribing for a St. Joseph's student. I was 12 when certified through NJ. I take any course pertaining to braille.

And, not to be pompous, have found most university instructors severely lacking in skills. I could write a book of horror stories!!

My undergrad training included NO brl training-But I was already a certified transcriber. However, I had to put together my own methodology work-digging through Hilda Caton's work and bugging APH, attending every brl seminar I could. More comprehensive training is needed. No one should have to claw and scratch as I did.

IL: I wish I had more braille readers! My caseload is primarily multiply impaired non-readers.

NE: This is the best part of my job!

IL: 6! [on a scale of 1 to 5] My true love.

NY: It's what led me into this field. I wish I had more occasion to use my braille skills.

IA: My favorite subject!

MN: I love it! (drawing of a happy face]

DECISIONS ON LEARNING MEDIA

The majority of the sample (1,384 respondents, 83.2%) agreed with the statement "I am confident in my ability to make decisions concerning my students' leaning media," and only 4.9 percent disagreed. The comments stressed the importance of teamwork and continued self-training by teachers.

MN: I am not the only one that makes those decisions. It is a team decision with my input. It is not a one-person decision and should not be!

MA: [The decision] should be ultimately left to the learner.

KS: I have learned from trial and error with my students.

TN: [I] keep up with journal literature and constantly reevaluate decisions. Also if students need braille training or materials [I] would do my utmost to provide [it] to [the] best of my ability. Student needs must come first, and [the] county would have to provide or contract for services.

MO: But why? It has nothing to do with my brl training but, rather, my training in low vision, and you do not have a question or statement about our training in low vision assessment and programming. That is how you learn to make an intelligent decision regarding learning media. I am confident (and there are still going to be those few students [for whom] a decision is going to be hard to make or who will be print-braille [readers]) because of keeping abreast of new information, my experience, and my training.

Likewise, the majority of the sample (1,138 respondents, 68.4%) agreed with the statement "Decisions about students' learning media should be an IEP committee decision," and 17.6% disagreed. The comments focused on the need for knowledgeable professionals to be on IEP committees. Many of these comments describe situations in which no one on an IEP committee has expertise in visual impairment; others stressed the importance of participation by students' families in the development of students' IEPS.

IL: [I agree only] if there are people on the committee who know something about vision-most don't.

NY: [I] strongly disagree unless [the] teacher [is] included, which usually [is] not [the case].

WA: [The] IEP committee should be aware of [the] media-selection process and have input, but [the] vision teacher has the technical knowledge to make recommendations.

VA: This is a loaded question. The IEP process already provides for this discussion.

NV: [There] should be teacher and parent consultation after [the] TEP is in place.

MO: [I agree] as long as the parents are not intimidated by the "experts."

WA: Too often, it is a political decision based on the availability of trained personnel.

NE: I believe the IEP committee has a very important role and it is up to [its members] to present all the facts to the parents. I believe that the parents should be the main input on a decision that will affect them for the rest of their lives and their child's life. The IEP committee should make the decision with the parents' full backing and consent.

WA: I find that ultimately the student makes the decision.

USE OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVICES

The majority of the sample (1,486 respondents, 89.4%) agreed with the statement "Technological devices should be used to enhance braille, not to replace it," and only 2.6 percent disagreed. The teachers who commented on this item appear to believe that both technology and braille play important roles and that choices should be made on the basis of the needs and preferences of individual students.

MI: [I] strongly agree. But [decisions should] always [be] based on the needs of the students.

IL: [It] totally depends on each individual student's abilities. Some multi-handicapped kids find braille impossible.

MO: [I] disagree. Future technology may be better than braille; have to wait and see.

In addition, the majority of the sample (1,519 respondents, 91.3%) disagreed with the statement "Auditory tape and computer technology will make braille unnecessary," and only 2.7 percent agreed. The comments stressed the importance of braille.

CT: False! Braille readers should be able to read independently!

NJ: Deaf-blind students must have braille!

OR: Not unless all information worldwide is accessible in this manner.

HI: [I] disagree. Computers are great and help immensely in mainstreaming my students. The most useful equipment uses braille keyboards, and without training in braille, these would be useless.

PA: [I] strongly disagree. Both my braille students learn best by reading braille, not by listening to tapes.

MO: [I] disagree. No more so than print. As long as sighted people use print, blind people will use braille.

CA: Sitting down to quietly read a good book is a joy that should be available to everyone!

IMPORTANCE OF BRAILLE

The majority of the sample (1,610 respondents, 96.8%) disagreed with the statement "Braille is not an important leaning medium," and only 1.1 percent agreed. The comments focused on the importance of braille as a medium for literacy.

NJ: All people need to be literate!

IN: It is essential!

NJ: [I] strongly disagree-but only for people who are totally blind. I strongly object to teaching braille to people with functional vision.

WV: There will always be braille!

Furthermore, the majority of the sample (1,159 respondents, 69.7%) disagreed with the statement "Nemeth Code is too complex and should not be taught," and 5.1 percent agreed. The comments focused on the needs of individual students, the lack of teacher training in the Nemeth and music codes, and the necessity for codes to be simplified and combined.

CA: It needs to be simplified. I strongly agree that it is too complex. I strongly disagree that it should not be taught.

FL: [It] depends on the student [and the] multiplicity of impairments.

MN: My emphasis is more on the abacus. It is a more easily accessed and speedy way for [doing] calculations.

MO: I do not recall any of the scanty information I received on [the] Nemeth Code.

GA: What else is there? And besides it's very logical.

USE OF SLATE AND STYLUS

The majority of the sample (1,171, 70.4%) agreed with the statement "In most cases the slate and stylus should be taught to students who use braille," and 9.9 percent disagreed. The comments focused on the needs of individual students and on the technological alternatives.

OH: Above-average students seem to be the only ones who can learn it.

NY: It has its place, but its place is minimal, given the technology now available.

WV: I am teaching it, but I question it.

PA: We were given the idea [at the university training program] that it is not needed, but I believe it is for an academic-minded student.

IL: [I] strongly agree. Begin as young as possible-first or second grade.

SC: [I] agree-the third or fourth grade.

NY: In the fifth or sixth grade.

IN: I think that the slate and stylus is too confusing. The kids have enough different things to learn and could use a technological device instead.

OR: [I1 strongly agree, but in the itinerant model, there is no time!

NJ: There are some students whose perceptual difficulties make mastery of this skill difficult or impossible.

TX: Teachers have a duty to make ALL tools available to students. Then students can make informed decisions.

TEACHERS'BRAILLE SKILLS

Only 28.5 percent (474) of the sample agreed with the statement "Most teachers of visually impaired learners do not have satisfactory braille skills," and 25.6 percent (474) disagreed; it is significant that 45.6 percent (764) chose to remain neutral on this issue. Perhaps teachers are disinclined to judge their peers, or, as some comments indicate, they lack the data to assess the skills of their colleagues throughout the country. The comments also focused on the impact of the increase in students with multiple disabilities, the belief that teachers in one educational setting may have better skills than teachers in another setting, and the issue of untrained teachers on emergency credentials.

WV: I strongly disagree. I've never seen a vision teacher with unsatisfactory braille skills. I've taught in 3 states with about 15 different vision teachers.

NE: This is a loaded question and one that creates a misunderstanding of the need for braille instruction.

KS: Only those at state schools have great techniques and braille skills.

MA: Most itinerant teachers I know have good skills.

OK: [I] agree, particularly in schools where students are mainstreamed.

MO: [I] agree, especially in rural areas.

IL: If the teachers [of students with visual impairments] have not used braille for a year or more, the skill would be diminished in proficiency. Most often they can brush up without a formal course, if they are well grounded in methodology. The teachers I know who teach braille have excellent skills.

SD: [I1 agree, when [they are] straight out of college. After some experience, I think they do.

MN: Many teachers of VI do not have braille users and thus skills decline until [they are] needed. [There are more] students [with multiple handicaps] in caseloads.

ME: Since I know such a small percentage of teachers in the country, (and since most don't know me!), I find this question insulting!!

GA: Unfortunately, the reality is that people without vision certification and little or no training are teaching VI kids. And the states allow that!

MN: I strongly disagree. That is what most people got into this field to do.

In line with the comments on the previous statement, less than half the sample (808 respondents, 48.6%) agreed with the statement "Refresher training courses in braille should be required," and 23.4 percent disagreed. The most prevalent comments objected to the term required and suggested alternative wording, such as available, for those not proficient, and depending on the person.

IA: Refresher training courses should be required for teachers who do not have braille students on their caseload, but would be a real waste of time for someone like me who does a lot of brailling on a regular basis.

TN: [I] disagree. As in itinerant teacher, you may go for years without a braille student. When you have a braille student, you can quickly remediate yourself if you have a good foundation.

WA: They need to be accessible. My state doesn't have a teacher preparation program.

FL: [They] should be offered. How can you require what most teachers can't access even when they want to?

CT: Teachers should be professional enough to know that if they're getting a braille student and they're rusty, they better brush up!

In addition, the majority of the sample (923 respondents, 55.5%) disagreed with the statement "All teachers of blind and visually impaired learners should be certified braille transcribers," and 22.5 percent agreed. The comments focused on the different training needs of teachers and transcribers, and on the fact that many teachers did not feel the need to have transcribers' skills because of the student population they were serving.

TN: My teaching position does not require such knowledge.

MA: It's more important to know how to teach braille.

IL: This requirement would most likely drive many teachers away. A teacher with a working knowledge of braille with a handy reference book would make a very good braille instructor.

KS: Not if universities have good, strong classes with required proficiency.

IN: I'm not a certified braillist, but my skills are very good and do not negatively affect my teaching ability.

MN: This will result in an even greater shortage of teachers.

MO: [I] strongly disagree-just as braille transcribers should not teach braille to school-age children. It is a mode of reading, and teachers who teach reading must teach it.

ME: Course work at the university is better than braille transcription for teaching (I've done both).

LEGISLATION

The majority of the sample (977 respondents, 58.7%) disagreed with the statement "Legislation requiring the teaching of braille to all legally blind children whose parents request it is a good idea," and 21.9 percent agreed. The comments focused on the need to base decisions regarding learning media on the needs of individual children. Others pointed out that existing federal legislation and the IEP process provide for a discussion of a child's needs to learn braille.

TX: Legally blind is a legal term that does not reflect functional abilities. Many legally blind persons are visual and print readers by choice, and [print] is their most efficient learning medium.

OH: [It] should be a professional and parental decision, assuming that the professional is trained in educating the blind.

MO: If parents request braille, it should be taught-whether legislated or not.

KY: You are assuming that the parent always knows best. I have had parents who have had legally blind, severely profoundly handicapped children. They want them to learn braille. Tactual communication is important for some of these students, but braille is too abstract for them.

MA: Whatever happened to the "I" in IEP?

CA: Many legally blind students are efficient (with good ease and speed) regular print readers. Such a law would be arbitrary and inconsistent with good assessment practice!

IL: If this legislation were passed, I would refuse to follow it.

IL: Ninety percent of the students I have taught for 17 years have been legally blind, and only about 10 percent needed braille, without sacrificing achievement.

KY: I teach severely disabled children. All legally blind children? What do they mean by all?

AZ: I'm not sure legislation should occur, but listening to parents is a must!

NH: I strongly disagree. Is this [question] here to see if we're paying attention?

IL: All students are different. It depends on the individual's vision, strengths, and needs. How do you legislate for them?

DECLINE IN BRAILLE LITERACY

The respondents selected the "possible causes" at the following rates, in response to the statement "The most likely cause of the decline in braille literacy is . . . " (Since some respondents selected more than one cause, the total exceeds 100%): increase in multi-handicapped population (54.1 %), reliance on technology (40.1 %), itinerant model-large caseloads (27.7%), emphasis on vision utilization (21.0%), adequate teacher preparation (18.5%), teachers' attitudes (14.4%), teachers' incompetence (8.6%), complexity of the braille code (8.3%).

PA: I hope you don't think you'll find one answer. I've seen much published literature concerning the poor job done teaching braille-teachers not ambitious enough to teach anymore, all legally blind students must be taught braille, etc. The student's teacher should have the best idea of the most efficient leaning medium for that student. An uninvolved advocate or wellintentioned but unrealistic legislation cannot pass judgment on all situations. Teachers should be well trained to teach braille and trusted when it needs to be taught.

MA: [next to the "teachers' attitudes"] I hear lots of NFB horror stories about vision teachers and braille, but all the teachers I know have a positive attitude about braille, teach braille to students as indicated by their visual status, and regularly update their braille teaching skills.

[Next to itinerant model-large caseloads] In some cases, not enough time is available. There are simply not enough vision teachers-not inherent in itinerant model, but when only one teacher is available to cover the territory of two to three vision teachers, children don't receive optimal service.

WI: Is there a decline in braille literacy?

VA: I don't believe there has been a decline if you are comparing groups monitored for acuity, IQ, other handicapping conditions. Maybe you need to ask teachers if they believe there has truly been a decline in brl literacy. This issue is focusing too many resources on an area which might not be a problem at all. I feel more resources should be directed toward the development of curricula for low vision, print-reading students, and multihandicapped [students]. That's where the greatest needs are.

CT: [next to "increase in multihandicapped population"]. Many of [these students] are and would be nonreaders, blind or not.

NY: [next to "emphasis on vision utilization"]. [Emphasis on vision utilization] resulted in less emphasis on braille skills in teacher prep and less positive attitudes towards braille.

MD: [next to "increase in multihandicapped population"]. Absolutely! It's a matter of ability to read-not just to use braille!!

KY: I don't think there is a decline; we just have more identified VI and multiply handicapped [students. The] percentage of braille users would naturally be lower.

TX: [We] lack a sufficient number of certified teachers-Not [a fault of] the itinerant model.

KY: [There are] lower expectations required of VI students and a de-emphasis on residential schools [added options].

IL: [The] trend toward inclusion and generic special education programs has decreased the available time for specialized instruction. Many generic special educators do not understand braille and its importance. [The] lack of certified vision teachers is also an issue.

PA: Mainstreaming across the board without proper support is not OK.

IL: I have heard of the decline of braille literacy but have not witnessed it.

MN: [The] emphasis on the least restrictive environment has resulted in fully mainstreamed students not getting enough braille instruction.

MI: Most teachers teach what they are taught. If university staff tell teachers that braille is unnecessary, too many students buy into the concept and don't teach it, or they ignore the student's right to literacy for expediency's sake.

TN: My students are braille literate.

ME: Braille students are learning braille and have always. There is more capability for partially sighted students to have materials that meet their visual ability-and that is also true for braille students because technology is making braille and print to braille far easier and quicker to get.

AZ: I have never worked with a blind student who was successful with schoolwork who was not also proficient in braille. [Braille] is essential.

MT: The increasing number of multihandicapped visually impaired students requires that the medium used be decided on an individual basis. Throughout the years, the number of my students who are able to read and/or write braille has significantly decreased.

MI: Braille training means literacy for the blind and is a very important medium. It is ongoing and continuous lifelong learning and practice for both students and teachers.

Conclusion

Barraga (1993, p. 12) said, "If you don't want teachers to tell you what they want and need, don't ask them." The survey asked for their opinions, and the response was overwhelming. It is evident from the comments that these teachers care deeply about the literacy skills of their students. In addition, their comments and quantitative responses to the items in the survey questionnaire have definite implications for personnel preparation and in-service staff development. Teacher training programs must do more than just turn out proficient braillists. The study of literacy skills, in general, and of braille reading methodology, in particular, is crucial to preparing teachers who can teach braille to their students. Training teachers only in the braille code is analogous to training teachers of print reading by only teaching them the alphabet and expecting that this minimum competence will prepare them for the complex task of fostering literacy in their students. Furthermore, refresher courses in the braille code, braille reading methodology, and tactual perception need to be available to practicing teachers. Responses to this survey indicate that in-service training in these subjects is frequently unavailable and that teachers who need to refresh their skills get little or no support for doing so.

The major implication for policy makers is the need to reevaluate the causes of the perceived decline in braille literacy. It has been stated many times, and without much rebuttal, that the primary cause of this decline is that teachers avoid teaching braille because of their poor attitudes toward and their lack of skill in braille. This opinion has become a given, without any hard evidence on which to base it. The comments presented here show that many teachers of students with visual impairments believe strongly in the use of braille for their students and consider braille the most important skill they teach.

The decline in literacy among children who are blind or visually impaired is a complex issue with no simple solutions. It is time to expand the dialogue between professionals, consumers, and the producers of braille materials-a dialogue that has been one sided and one dimensional for too long-and for all parties to work together to ensure the literacy of students who are blind or visually impaired. It is hoped that the comments presented here will be the first step toward doing so.

To conclude, here are the words of a teacher from Minnesota, who reminds the field of the overriding principle of special education: meeting the needs of each unique, individual child.

MN: I think the issues are more complex than this. There needs to be a focus on each child individually and what meets the needs of child and family also-family attitudes are critical. Let's retreat from this as a political issue and focus on each individual child.

References

Barraga, N.C. (1993). Reflections of the past. In J.N. Erin, A.L. Corn, & V.E. Bishop (Eds.), Low vision: Reflections of the past, issues for the future (pp. 6-17). New York: American Foundation for the Blind.

Wittenstein, S.H. (1993). Braille literacy. Pre-service training and teacher attitudes. Report of a national study. Dissertation Abstracts Intemational, 5403A, 0893.

Wittenstein, S.H. (1994). Braille literacy. Pre-service training and teachers' attitudes. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 88, 516-524

Stuart H. Wittenstein, Ed.D., principal, St. Joseph's School for the Blind, 253 Baldwin Avenue, Jersey City, NJ 07306-1388; E-mail: SWittens@aol.com. Maurine L. Pardee, B.S., teacher of blind and visually impaired students, Bowie High School, 2101 Highbank, Arlington, TX 76018.