Assuring Quality Literacy Instruction forStudents Who are Blind

Alan J. Koenig • Texas Tech UniversityM. Cay Holbrook • The University of British Columbia

Synopsis

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to gain professional concensus on the appropriate levels of instructional services needed to address the needs of students in braille literacy programs.

Method. A Delphi approach was used to gain consensus among 40 professionals in visual impairment. The respondents received three rounds of a survey, throughout which they were able to view the ratings and comments from respondents. Consensus was reached when 85% or more of the respondents agreed on a particular level of instructional service (or range of service) in each of 12 skill areas.

Respondents. Respondents for the study were selected for their recognized expertise and experience in teaching literacy skills to students in braille literacy programs. Ten respondents were selected from each of the following program models: itinerant, resource room, and residential school. Ten other recognized experts had leadership roles in the field of visual impairment, but were not in direct teaching roles at the time of the study. Respondents had a mean of 21 years of experience in the field of visual impairment. They had taught braille literacy to a median of 23 students and print literacy to a median of 25 students. All respondents had bachelor’s degrees, 88% had master’s degrees, and 30% had doctoral degrees. All had current or past certification as a teacher of students with visual impairments.

Findings. Levels of instructional service (consistency, total time per day, time span, and duration) were determined for 12 areas of literacy needs (see the accompanying chart and description of the skill areas). On the chart, the percentage of respondents who agreed to a particular level of service is noted in parentheses following the recommended level. If a range of service was agreed upon, the individual percentages are provided along with the overall percentage. Note the definitions for the levels of service at the bottom of the page.

Two important points must be recognized in understanding and using these findings. First, these findings are intended to provide general guidelines for educational teams to follow in developing quality literacy programs for students who are blind. The levels of service must be tailored to address the individual needs of each student. Second, the findings identify the amount of direct instructional service with some time for consultation that should be provided by a

qualified teacher of students with visual impairments. The suggested levels of service do not include time for other aspects of delivering instruction, such as materials preparation and driving time.

Descriptions of Skill Areas

Emergent Braille Literacy SkillsSupporting early literacy development in early childhood settings, such as

the home, daycare, and preschool; teaching early literacy skills and modeling techniques for fostering development of those skills in the home and preschool, such as reading aloud to the child, developing book concepts, encouraging early reading and writing skills (e.g., pretend reading, scribbling); working with parents and others to expand student’s experiential base and general concepts; developing hand/finger skills; helping parents and others acquire books, labels, and other materials in accessible media; helping parents acquire knowledge of braille and resources for learning the braille code; assuring models of proficient braille readers; bridging emergent literacy to early formal braille literacy.

Early Formal Literacy Skills (“Prebraille”)Teaching hand/finger skills, tactile discrimination and perception skills, and

hand movements; fostering early letter and simple word recognition skills; increasing conceptual knowledge and vocabulary skills; increasing listening skills; expanding the student’s experiential base; fostering early reading and writing skills; fostering motivation for, and enjoyment of, reading; applying braille in authentic contexts; bridging early literacy and beginning braille literacy.

Beginning Braille Literacy SkillsTeaching formal reading skills in braille, including decoding and word

analysis skills, vocabulary development, comprehension skills, and reading for specific purposes; teaching formal writing skills with the braillewriter; providing ongoing assessment of braille literacy skills and literacy media needs; continuing to develop mechanical skills in braille reading; building reading fluency; building motivation for, and enjoyment of, reading; encouraging leisure reading; applying literacy skills throughout the day and in authentic contexts; bridging beginning braille literacy skills and intermediate braille literacy skills.

Beginning Braille Literacy Skills in Dual Media (Print and Braille)Teaching formal reading skills concurrently in both print and braille,

including decoding and word analysis skills, vocabulary development, comprehension skills, and reading for specific purposes; teaching formal writing skills in both print and braille; providing ongoing assessment of literacy skills and literacy media needs; continuing to develop mechanical skills in braille reading; building reading fluency in both media; building motivation for, and enjoyment of, reading; encouraging leisure reading; applying literacy skills in print and braille throughout the day and in authentic contexts; bridging beginning literacy skills and intermediate literacy skills.

Intermediate Braille Literacy SkillsTeaching the use of reading as a tool for learning; teaching flexibility skills

(e.g., studying, skimming); teaching and applying reading skills in content areas; teaching use of reference books (e.g., dictionaries, encyclopedias, library materials); continued teaching of editing marks in refining writing drafts; continued work on fluency, and continued work (as needed) on accurate recognition of contractions in the braille code; continued work on interpreting and reading various formats; teaching strategies for using a variety of literacy tools; incorporating technology into literacy tasks; applying literacy tasks in authentic contexts; bridging intermediate literacy skills and advanced literacy skills.

Advanced Braille Literacy SkillsTeaching specialized codes, such as computer braille and foreign

languages braille; continuing the use of Nemeth Code in more advanced science and mathematical contexts; continuing to expand experience with textbook format; offering Grade 3 braille as an option for college-bound students; teaching strategies for balancing emphasis among literacy tools (e.g, braille, recorded material); continuing to incorporate the use of technology into literacy tasks; continuing to apply literacy tasks in authentic contexts.

Braille Literacy Skills for Students with Print Literacy SkillsTeaching tactile perception, hand movements, and letter/symbol recognition

skills in braille; introducing braille contractions and rules in meaningful contexts; teaching braille writing skills; integrating use of braille in practical activities; providing instruction in contracted and uncontracted braille to address the present and future needs of the individual student; providing ongoing assessment; applying literacy skills throughout the day and in authentic contexts; bridging beginning literacy skills and intermediate literacy skills.

Listening, Aural Reading, and Live Reader SkillsFostering development of auditory skills (e.g., auditory awareness and

attention, sound localization, auditory memory, auditory clozure); teaching and reinforcing the use of listening to gather information; teaching the mechanics of using recorded textbooks; teaching strategies for gathering information from recorded textbooks; teaching strategies for obtaining and purposefully directing the activities of, and gathering information from, live readers; applying listening, aural reader, and live reader skills in authentic contexts.

Technology SkillsTeaching technology skills to facilitate literacy tasks and to access print

information, such as use of braille notetaking devices, refreshable braille displays, synthesized speech, accessible software (e.g., database and telecommunications programs), scanners (to convert print to an accessible medium), and braille and

inkprint printers; gaining access to, and information from, the Internet; applying technology skills throughout the day and in authentic contexts.

Keyboarding and Word-Processing SkillsTeaching touch-typing techniques via a computer with speech synthesis or a

typewriter with verbal feedback from the teacher; teaching strategies for using word processing, including creating, editing, saving, and printing textfiles; building fluency and accuracy in keyboarding skills; applying keyboarding and word-processing skills in daily activities.

Slate and Stylus SkillsModeling the appropriate and effective use of the slate and stylus; teaching

use of the slate and stylus; exposing students to the various types of slates and styli and the purposes for which each may be used; building fluency in use of the slate and stylus; applying the use of slate and stylus skills in practical literacy activities.

Signature Writing SkillsTeaching skills in signature writing for legal purposes; exposing students to

a variety of writing implements and writing guides; developing fluency and consistency in signature writing; teaching strategies for knowing when and why one’s signature is required; assessing student’s need for further handwriting instruction (beyond one’s signature); applying the use of signature writing skills in authentic contexts.

Professional Consensus on Instructional Considerationsfor Students in Braille Literacy Programs

Alan J. Koenig & M. Cay Holbrook

Instructional Considerations

Skill Areas Consistency Total Time per Day

Time Span Duration

Emergent braille literacy skills

Moderate – Moderate/High (67 + 28 = 95%)

Moderate – Moderate/Short (79 + 18 = 97%)

Infancy to preschool (92%)

Long (100%)

Early formal literacy skills (“prebraille”)

High (89%) Moderate (89%) Preschool through kindergarten (97%)

Long (100%)

Beginning braille literacy skills

High (100%) Long (89%) Kindergarten through grade 3 (94%)

Long (100%)

Beginning literacy skills in dual media (print and braille)

High (100%) Long (92%) Kindergarten through grade 3 (89%)

Long (100%)

Intermediate braille literacy skills

Moderate – Moderate/high (79 + 16 = 95%)

Long – Long/moderate – Moderate (69 + 11 + 19 = 100%)

Grade 4 through 8 (85%)

Long (100%)

Advanced braille literacy skills

Moderate – Low/moderate (51 + 49 = 100%)

Long – Long/moderate (68 + 18 = 86%)

Grade 9 through 12 (91%)

Long (97%)

Braille literacy skills for student with print literacy skills

High (97%) Long (95%) Introduced at an appropriate time as determined by the educational team (95%)

Long (100%)

Listening, aural reading, and live

Moderate/periodic (87%)

Short – Moderate/short

Throughout the school years

Long overall; concentrated for

reader skills – Moderate (34 + 37 + 26 = 97%)

(100%) specific applications (100%)

Technology skills

Moderate – high (87%)

Moderate (95%) Throughout the school years (97%)

Long overall; short or concen-trated for specific devices (100%)

Keyboarding and word-processing skills

High/moderate (84%)

Moderate/short – moderate (71 + 29 = 100%)

Begin in grade 1, 2, or 3 (19 + 46 + 32 = 97%)

Long (87%)

Slate and stylus skills

Moderate/high – moderate (76 + 21 = 97%)

Moderate – short (87%)

Begin in grade 3 or 4 (61 + 32 = 93%)

Long/short – Long (39 + 58 = 97%)

Signature writing skills

Moderate (89%) Moderate/short (87%)

Begin in grades 5-7, grade 3, or grade 4 (63 + 16 + 11 = 90%)

Long – short (97%)

Consistency: High = Daily contact; Moderate = One to three days per week; Low = Semimonthly or monthly contact; Periodic = Several contacts throughout school year

Session Length: Long = 1–2 hours per session; Moderate = 1/2–1 hour per session; Short = Less than 1/2 hour per session

Duration: Long = Throughout at least one school year; Short = Throughout one quarter or semester; Concentrated = One to a few days with high/moderate intensity

Assuring Quality Literacy Instruction forStudents Who are Blind

Alan J. Koenig & M. Cay Holbrook

Survey Respondents

Itinerant TeachersKim Brown, Great River Area Education Agency #16, Burlington, IowaJo Ellen Croft, Pulaski county Special School District, Little Rock, ArkansasJane Farber, Wicomico County Board of Education, Ocean Pines, MarylandCarol Farrenkopf, Toronto District School Board, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaBill McIver, Special Educational Service Agency, Anchorage, AlaskaDonna McNear, Rum River Special Education Cooperative, Cambridge, MinnesotaBonnie Simons, San Antonio Independent School District, San Antonio, TexasSusan Stokes, Lincoln Public Schools, Lincoln, NebraskaLois Wencil, New Jersey Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Millburn, New JerseyDoris Willoughby, Adams 14 School District, Arvada, Colorado

Resource Room TeachersFrances Dibble, Oakland Unified School District, Oakland, CaliforniaAlva Hawkins, Los Angeles Unified School District, Los Angeles, CaliforniaJan Jasko, Parma City Schools, Parma Heights, OhioLouise Johnson, Utah School for the Deaf and Blind, Westmore Extension Elementary School, Orem, UtahSusan Mangis, San Juan Unified School District, Carmichael, CaliforniaDeborah B. Mullarkey, Columbus Public Schools, Columbus, OhioSusan Pattillo, Gwinnett County Schools, Lillburn, GeorgiaKaren Rhodes Stitely, Houston Independent School District, Houston, TexasAnna Swenson, Fairfax County Public Schools, Fairfax, Virginia

Residential School TeachersChris Baugh (retired), Maryland School for the Blind, Baltimore, MarylandTevan Fischback, South Dakota School for the Visually Handicapped, Aberdeen, South DakotaNancy Getten, Montana School for the Deaf and the Blind, Great Falls, MontanaLinda Havlik, Missouri School for the Blind, St. Louis, MissouriDonna J. Iszler, North Dakota School for the Blind, Grand Forks, North DakotaPatricia Love, Michigan School for the Blind, Flint, MichiganCarla McMillin, Kentucky School for the Blind, Louisville, KentuckyMila Truan, Tennessee School for the Blind, Nashville, Tennessee

Mary Wilmeth, Utah School for the Blind, Ogden, UtahMitch Wood, Governor Morehead School, Raleigh, North Carolina

Other ExpertsCarol Allman, State Vision Consultant, Florida Department of Education, Tallahassee, FloridaAnne Corn, Professor, Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TennesseeChristopher J. Craig, Assistant Professor, Southwest Missouri State University, Springfield, MissouriFrances Mary D’Andrea, Manager, National Literacy Program, American Foundation for the Blind, Atlanta, GeorgiaJane Erin, Associate Professor, University of Arizona, Tucson, ArizonaPhil Hatlen, Superintendent, Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired, Austin, TexasSally Mangold, Braille Curriculum Specialist, Exceptional Teaching Aids, Castro Valley, CaliforniaJosephine M. Stratton, Independent Consultant, Norwich, New YorkStuart Wittenstein, Superintendent, California School for the Blind, Fremont, CaliforniaDiane P. Wormsley, Assistant Professor, Pennsylvania College of Optometry, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

________________________From: Koenig, A.J., & Holbrook, M.C. (2000). Ensuring high-quality instruction for students in braille literacy programs. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 94, 677-694