[bookshare-discuss] Re: Another look at recorded books
- From: "J.M." <inlovewithchrist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookshare-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2004 14:45:02 -0700
Hi, Allison. I agree with you here, for sure. I'm not totally blind, but I
can't even read large print comfortably, unless it's somewhat larger than
standard large print. I have used a CCTV, but my reading speed is
considerably reduced while using it and it's just not practical, but yet, I
do have some usable vision for other things...just not reading, aside from
the occasional reading the label on a package...not the preparation
directions or anything like that, but I can usually read enough to tell what
it is, but that's the extent of it. Take care.
Julie Morales
Email and Windows/MSN Messenger:
inlovewithchrist@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
When God puts a tear in your eye, it is because He wants to put a rainbow in
your heart.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Allison" <alwaysallie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookshare-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2004 8:57 PM
Subject: [bookshare-discuss] Re: Another look at recorded books
Hi Jim,
Am just back on this list and jumping in on this one. Have been no mail all
summer.
Just to pick slightly, Jim I notice you say the below.
"I am a very strong advocate for any totally blind person, especially
students, learning Braille.
Why do you specify totally blind here? Just curious. Don't tons and tons
of partially blind kids need Braille too? Why only advocate for one group?
Do you know that very very few of the kids starting out in preschool or
kindergarten are classified in that, "totally blind," category? Dunno the
exact stats, but it is the truth. One would be advocating for a very very
small group here if working in education. But could many more blind
kids benefit from learning Braille? Sure thing!
I know that the complete reverse isn't true either, anyone who is at all
blind in any way should learn Braille. Some blind individuals read print
very efficiently. Yet, where is the cut-off? When do we as
Braille-supporters advocate learning Braille, learning print, both? Do we
just separate into totally blind and, other? Is that where it ends? What
about individuals who can read print, but their eyes fatigue rather quickly?
What about those with degenerative eye conditions? Or those who must
enlarge print so much that it becomes impractical? When is Braille best,
when is a CCTV best, when tapes, when speech, when magnifiers? How enlarged
is too enlarged? What is an efficient reading speed? What about
individuals with other physical difficulties that impede Braille-usage? Can
a child successfully learn both print and Braille in school? What if one
reads differently in different lighting types? What about the availability
of print burses Braille?
We are limiting ourselves when we subdivide into totals verses non-totals.
We lose strength when we advocate with qualifiers such as, totally. We want
literate blind people so that we can have employed blind people. I doubt it
needs more qualifiers than that.
Okay, that's all. This topic always gets to me a bit. Am really trying to
understand the correlation here between levels of sight and Braille usage.
Someone explain this to me, please!
Smiles,
Allison
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Denham" <jdenham@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookshare-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, August 28, 2004 9:16 AM
Subject: [bookshare-discuss] Re: Another look at recorded books
>I guess, in my mind, recorded books are the same as books read with
> synthetic speech. Yes, it is possible to examine electronic text using
> synthetic speech, but how many of us actually do this when reading a long
> novel. I do consider both recorded books and electronic books reading
> because it is gaining access to information. However, with that being
> said,
> I am a very strong advocate for any totally blind person, especially
> students, learning Braille. Yes, reading with Braille may be slower as
> compared to reading with the ears, but you pick up things like spelling
> and
> proper punctuation that you just don't get when listening to either a
> recording or synthetic voice. Whenever the parent of a blind student asks
> me why their student needs to learn Braille when all they will ever need
> is
> on tape or in electronic format, I have a standard response. I tell them
> that their are no talking elevator buttons or restroom signs and being
> able
> to access these two types of information is critical if a visually
> impaired
> individual wants to live independently.
> Shelly, I don't want to pick on you and I apologize in advance if I come
> across that way, but for people on list who are like you, have access to
> refreshable Braille but only use it occasionally, may I suggest the
> following. Find a relatively short book and read it using only Braille.
> Yes, if your Braille skills are slow, this may take a while, but the only
> way you will get faster is by practice. I think that you will find that
> reading with refreshable Braille is a really rewarding experience as you
> will pick up so much more from the book. Not saying you can never read a
> book with speech again, because we all do this. But, once in a while,
> pick
> up that refreshable Braille display (Or God forbid a hard copy Braille
> book)
> and read it cover to cover in Braille. I think you will be glad you did.
> I'll get off my soap box now.
>
> Jim
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cindy Lou Ray [mailto:cindy.l.ray@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 11:35 PM
> To: bookshare-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bookshare-discuss] Re: Another look at recorded books
>
>
> I don't think how many read the book or whether it is more interesting
> than
> the movie makes much difference. But I do think that if someone finds
> "reading" the book with recording easier than seeing with the eyes, then
> you
> don't want to discount what they are doing. I do think that people who
> read
> from tape and refuse to learn alternative techniques like braille, unless,
> of course, there are circumstances which make this necessary, are at least
> shortchanging themselves. Also, if listening to a recorded book is not
> reading, then is listening to one with computer speech not reading either?
>
> I think these are rather interesting philosophical questions kind of like
> if
> a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it does it
> still make a sound? Oh, dear, I should get the laundry taken care of and
> get
> off of these questions.
>
> Sorry for all this.
> Cindy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
