vb960325.htm

ELIA (TM) : A Simpler Tactile Code for Persons with Visual Impairments

E. V Chepaitis

The relationship between braille, literacy, and information access has been well documented (see, for example, Koenig, 1992; Mack, 1989; Nelson, 1994; Rex, 1989; Schroeder, 1989). For persons with visual impairments that limit their ability to read print, literacy has been defined traditionally as the ability to read and write braille. Implicit in this definition is the need for a substantial education and individual effort to learn braille. Possibly because of the complexity of the braille code, braille use and braille instruction have been declining during the past decades. However, a tactile code is vital to provide maximum personal information literacy.

Electronic information systems, using sound, vibration, raised graphics, or magnification, have vastly enhanced information access (see Kurzweil, 1992; Mates, 1993). But nonbraille readers still need a tactile code for such uses as labeling audiotapes and identifying knobs on appliances and other household items (Chepaitis, 1989).

PARALLELS: THE COMPUTER LITERACY

AND BRAILLE LITERACY DEBATES

It is difficult for educators in any field to rethink their mission, retrain, and reduce the requirements needed to master a discipline. Computer literacy used to require a knowledge of systems commands and programming in difficult code, as well as intensive study in computer languages, math, and logic. As technology changed, however, computer literacy is now obtainable without any training in computer science. The debate about computer literacy parallels and can shed light on the debate about literacy for persons with visual impairments. Both debates address similar issues, such as the need to design a means to literacy that promotes self-learning, pays attention to ergonomics, builds on preexisting skills, and does not require difficult and intensive training (Wiersba, 1991-92).

AN ALTERNATIVE TO BRAILLE

It is time to pursue a three-pronged strategy: 1) to support braille; 2) to assist in the development of seamless information architectures; and 3) to introduce an alternative to braille, such as the patented Elementary Imprint Assistance (ELIATM), which features framed alphabetlike symbols. At every size font, the ELIA(TM) symbols are easier to learn and feel than braille, although navigation may be slower. The simple code is extremely easy to learn because its symbols resemble the letters of the Roman alphabet. Also, its frames assist readers to recognize and navigate by logically defining and physically separating the characters. (Representations of the ELIA(TM) symbols are shown in Figure 1.)

Figure 1. ELIATM (Elementary Imprint Assistance) alphabetic symbols. NOTE: Figure not available at this site.

Testing of ELIATM has been restricted to university students who had no knowledge of braille. Seven different groups, a total of more than 200 persons, were able to learn the symbols by sight in less than 20 minutes. Forty-nine blindfolded students learned to read the symbols by touch after a total of three hours of training or less, self-paced over 10 days. These students recognized from 75 percent to 95 percent of the letters in tests. More research is needed, especially using sighted adults who are losing their vision as a result of advanced diabetes, macular degeneration, or similar conditions that often cause adults to lose their vision after they have already learned print.

ELIA (TM) is not intended to replace braille, but to serve as an alternative for persons who have difficulty learning braille. ELIA(TM) is also simple to produce on a computer. Because the code has a one-to-one correspondence with the Roman alphabet, all that is needed to produce the symbols is an imprinter that can produce embossed output substituted for a regular printer.

REFERENCES

Chepaitis, E. (1989). Computer imprint technology using an alternative to Braille. Society for Information Display: Eastern Display Workshop Proceedings, January 11, Philadelphia.

Koenig, A.J. (1992). A framework for understanding the literacy of individuals with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 86, 277-284.

Kurzweil, R. (1992). The end of handicaps. Libra Journal, 117,68-69.

Mack, C. (1989). The impact of technology on braille literacy. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 83,314.

Mates, B.T. (1993). Optical character reading machines: The new generation. Computers in Libraries, 13, 72-75.

Nelson, M. (1994). Accessing the superhighway. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, JVIB News Service, 88(4), 1-2.

Rex, E.J. (1989). Issues related to literacy of legally blind persons. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 83, 306-313.

Schroeder, F. (1989). Literacy: The key to opportunity. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 83,290-293.

Wiersba, R.K. (1991-92, Winter). Business information systems in transition-The challenge for academia. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 50-54.

Elia V Chepaitis, Ph.D., associate professor, Information Systems, Fairfield University, School of Business, Fairfield, CT 06430.