[accessibleimage] Re: TGD vs. TTT

Kaye,

I think you are touching on a very important point, that
such devices are not used or known well enough. Why do you
suppose this is? Is it because it is a fairly new technique?
What can be done to increase the awareness of the "powers
that be"?

To our two distinguished colleagues, I hope you will excuse
me for not stepping in before but to be honest I was unsure
if I was to act as sensor to colleagues who have much
greater stature than I have. I do not mean to belittle this
issue, but feel that here is not the forum to discuss this
issue. But than this is up to you.  

All I can say is the world is waiting for both your
contributions and with great thanks.

With the greatest respect to you all,
Lisa


Kaye Travnicek wrote:
> 
> It is with much interest that I have been following the remarks of Dr. Don
> Parkes regarding TGD vs. TTT.  I have long been a proponent of TGD,
> although it is dismissed by many who prepare graphics masters for mass
> production, as they say it doesn't present enough contrast in textures and
> patterns.  It does, however, have an important place in the classroom,
> especially since the introduction of its voice output feature; and that
> has been my pitch in trying to justify purchasing it for my school
> district.  Unfortunately, at present we have no braille reading students
> in our regular education programs so it doesn't seem to be a high priority
> at this time with the "powers that be."  I have also been introduced to
> the features of the Talking Tactile Tablet.  Needless to say, it would be
> advantageous to students to resolve the concerns at hand.  Patent issues
> aside, vision impaired students need all the help they can get.
> 
> There is one thing I am truly perplexed about with reference to this
> debate.  On her web site, Ms. Rosenblum states: "The Authoring Tool
> project is being carried out under funding from the National Institute for
> Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Office of Special Education and
> Rehabilitative Services of the United States Department of Education."
> 
> If there are valid patent concerns--and it seems apparent that there
> are--then why has funding been approved for this project on such a high
> national level?
> 
>

Other related posts: