The Braille
Monitor
Vol.
32, No. 11 November
1989
Kenneth Jernigan, Editor
Published
in inkprint, Braille, on talking-book disc,
and cassette
by
The
National Federation of the Blind
Marc Maurer, President
National Office
1800 Johnson Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21230
NFB Net BBS: (612) 696-1975
Web Page Address: http//www.nfb.org
Letters to
the president, address changes,
subscription requests, orders for NFB literature,
articles for the Monitor, and letters to the editor
should be sent to the National Office.
Monitor subscriptions
cost the Federation about twenty-five dollars per year.
Members are invited, and non-members are requested, to cover
the subscription cost. Donations should be made payable to
National Federation of the Blind and sent to:
National Federation of the Blind
1800 Johnson Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21230
THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
THE BLIND IS NOT
AN ORGANIZATION
SPEAKING FOR THE BLIND--IT IS
THE BLIND SPEAKING FOR THEMSELVES
ISSN 0006-8829
Contents
Vol. 32, No. 11 November 1989
MAKING GOOD USE OF AN MBA
by Eileen Rivera
BRAILLE LITERACY: ISSUES
FOR CONSUMERS AND PROVIDERS
by Susan Jay Spungin, Ed.D.
THE DILEMMA OF THE SHELTERED
SHOP WORKER
by Kenneth Jernigan
TEACHING MATHEMATICS: ONE
CAREER FOR THE BLIND
by Abraham Nemeth, Ph.D.
THE BLIND APPLICANT REJECTED:
WHY NOT DIPLOMACY FOR THE BLIND?
by Rami Rabby
BLIND PERSONS IN THE U.S.
FOREIGN SERVICE: A VIEW FROM CONGRESS
by Congressman Gerry Sikorski
LOUISIANA CENTER FOR THE
BLIND STUDENTS ATTEND CLASS IN THE SCHOOL
OF HARD KNOCKS
by Barbara Pierce
THE VOICE OF THE FOURTH GENERATION: BLIND KIDS EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS
THE BLIND IN ELECTIVE OFFICE: MY EXPERIENCE AS A BOULDER
COUNTY COMMISSIONER
by Homer Page
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION PROGRAMS AND THE BLIND
SOCIAL SECURITY:
PLANS FOR WORK INCENTIVES AND REHABILITATION
by James Gashel
WHAT LIES
AHEAD IN LEGISLATION FOR THE BLIND: A REPUBLICAN LEADER'S PERSPECTIVE
ON SOCIAL SECURITY, WORK INCENTIVES, AND REHABILITATION
by Congressman Hank Brown
SUPPLEMENTAL
SECURITY INCOME: THE CURRENT PROGRAM AND PLANS FOR THE FUTURE
by Rhoda Davis
REFLECTIONS ON THE PERKINS BRAILLER
BRAILLE READERS ARE LEADERS CONTEST
DISTINGUISHED EDUCATOR
OF BLIND CHILDREN AWARD FOR 1990
by Sharon Maneki
THE BLIND EDUCATOR OF THE
YEAR AWARD FOR 1990
by Patricia Munson
RECIPES
by Barbara Pierce
Copyright, National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1989
The time has come to plan for the 1990 convention of the National Federation of the Blind. Chicago in 1988 was the largest meeting we have ever had, and Denver in 1989 was certainly among the most successful. Glenn Crosby, President of next summer's host affiliate, has been making Texas-sized promises about the 1990 convention. Here is what he has to say on the subject:
As you may already have noticed, Texans are a particularly proud group of people, and the members of the National Federation of the Blind of Texas are especially proud to have the honor of hosting the Golden Anniversary convention of the organized blind movement. We know that on occasion Texans have been accused of being boastful, but we don't think it would be bragging to say that we are planning the best convention ever. As this issue of the Monitor arrives at your door, we are arranging spectacular tours, collecting fabulous door prizes, and laying plans to show you so many kinds of hospitality that you are bound to be pleased.
The Dallas-Fort Worth Hyatt Regency is the site of our 1990 convention, and a fine facility it is. Located on the premises of the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, the Hyatt boasts more than 1,300 guest rooms and a grand ballroom that should contain ample space for the record number of convention attendees we are sure will be present. As Federationists know, we registered over 2,400 people in Chicago in 1988. At the Golden Anniversary convention next year we will beat that number going away. Twenty-five hundred registered or bust. The hotel's twin towers are separated by a quarter-mile-long corridor through which one may walk. However, if walking presents a problem for you, don't worry. Electric carts are available for anyone who needs or wants to take a ride. This is a regular service offered to any hotel guest. There are four outstanding restaurants inside the hotel: an Italian trattoria, which specializes in Northern Italian cuisine and has singing waiters and waitresses; a barbecue restaurant, which serves only the finest steaks and brisket; an American restaurant, which serves a variety of seafood and steaks; and a Fifties diner, which offers homestyle dishes and even allows you to have your fill of hamburgers and shakes. For lighter dining the bar in the East Tower also has sandwiches and snacks available during much of the day. As you can see, the 1990 convention promises to be the biggest and best we have ever had, and if you make your plans to share this special celebration with us, it will be even better. So come on down and join us, and together we'll make the 1990 convention (like the Alamo) something to remember.
As you can see from what Glenn Crosby says, the NFB of Texas is planning an exciting array of tours and hospitality, and the program agenda will be vintage Federation. Make your reservations early. Also remember that we need door prizes from state affiliates, local chapters, and individuals. Please remember that prizes should be relatively small in bulk and large in value. Cash, of course, is always acceptable. In any case we try to have no prize of less than $25 value. Drawings will occur steadily throughout the meetings, and the prizes will aggregate many thousands of dollars. In Denver in 1989 the grand prize, which was drawn at the banquet, was $1,000 in cash. We are not certain what Texas will give for the grand prize in 1990, but you can be certain that it will be worthy of the affiliate and the occasion. If you have door prizes, bring them with you to the convention or send them to: Doris Henderson, 505 Heyser Drive, Dallas, Texas 75224; home telephone (214) 942-2612. The displays of new technology, the meetings of special interest groups and divisions, the hospitality and renewal of friendships, the solid program items, and the general excitement of being where the action is and where the decisions are being made all join together to call the blind of the nation to the Dallas-Fort Worth Hyatt Regency hotel in the summer of 1990. Come and be part of it.
In recent years we have sometimes taken hotel reservations through the National Office, but for the 1990 convention you should write directly to: Hyatt Regency DFW, Post Office Box 619014, International Parkway, Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Texas 75261; or call (214) 453-1234, or toll-free (800) 233- 1234. The hotel will want a deposit or a credit card number. Our hotel rates continue to be the envy of all who know about them. For the 1990 convention they are: singles, $27; doubles, $30; triples, $33; and quads, $37. In addition to the room rates there will be a tax, which at the time we made the contract was twelve percent (12%). There will be no charge for children in the room with parents.
Since the Hyatt Regency DFW is on the grounds of the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, transportation between the terminals and the hotel is free. At the time we made the contract hotel parking was also free, and we have not heard of any change. To help you in making your convention plans, remember that the Parents of Blind Children Division and other groups usually conduct seminars of general interest on the first Saturday of the convention (this year June 30) and that Sunday and Monday, July 1 and 2, will be filled with division and committee meetings, including the public meeting of the National Federation of the Blind Board of Directors, held Monday morning. The general convention sessions extend from Tuesday, July 3, through Friday, July 6; and if things go as they usually do, there will probably be a Job Opportunities for the Blind seminar on Saturday, July 7. As you can see, Texas in '90 will be the best we have ever had. Come and enjoy the Texas Gold.
In recent years the National Federation of the Blind has devoted substantial effort and resources to its scholarship program. This has been done in the belief that if the blind are to achieve first-class status in society, they must have the opportunity to compete with others on terms of equality. This is another way of saying that the blind must be able to attend institutions of higher learning. To that end we continue to strengthen our scholarship program.
In 1990 twenty-six outstanding blind students will receive scholarships from the Federation, totaling $71,000 in cash plus payment of their expenses to attend the National Federation of the Blind convention in Dallas during early July. Twelve blind scholars will receive awards of $2,000; ten will receive awards of $2,500; three will receive awards of $4,000; and one (the student judged to be the most outstanding blind scholar in the nation) will receive a $10,000 scholarship award.
The Federation's commitment to excellence and achievement is long-standing. We have made this commitment real through our many Federation programs and projects. No Federation activity spotlights excellence and achievement more than our scholarship program, through which we honor and encourage America's distinguished blind students.
The Scholarship Committee for 1990 (their terms expire December 31, 1990) consists of the following twenty-nine people: Peggy Pinder, Iowa, Chairman; Adrienne Asch, New York; Steve Benson, Illinois; Jacquilyn Billey, Connecticut; Charles Brown, Virginia; Sharon Buchan, Alaska; Norma Crosby, Texas; Joanne Fernandes, Louisiana; Priscilla Ferris, Massachusetts; Sharon Gold, California; Michael Gosse, Connecticut; John Halverson, Missouri; Allen Harris, Michigan; David Hyde, Oregon; Tami Dodd Jones, Michigan; Christopher Kuczynski, Pennsylvania; Scott LaBarre, Minnesota; Mellissa LaGroue, Alabama; Melody Lindsey, Florida; Sharon Maneki, Maryland; Homer Page, Colorado; Barbara Pierce, Ohio; Ben Prows, Washington; Eileen Rivera, Maryland; Fred Schroeder, New Mexico; Heidi Sherman, Minnesota; Zachary Shore, Pennsylvania; Ramona Walhof, Idaho; and Gary Wunder, Missouri.
The Scholarship Application Form (copy reproduced at the end of this article) consists of a single legal-sized page with printing on both sides. We are making an initial printing of 50,000 of these forms. They will be sent to every college and university in the country, every agency doing work with the blind, every congressional office, every NFB state president, and every member of the Scholarship Committee. They will also be sent to anyone requesting them. These are worthwhile scholarships, which will be of real assistance to blind students.
The news about our scholarship program should be disseminated as widely as possible. To receive forms or to obtain further information, contact: Peggy Pinder, Chairman, National Federation of the Blind Scholarship Committee, 814 - 4th Avenue, Suite 200, Grinnell, Iowa 50112; phone (515) 236-3366. Forms can also be had by writing to: Scholarships, National Federation of the Blind, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230. Here is the Scholarship Form.
National Federation Of The Blind 1990 Scholarship Program
Each year at its national convention in July the National Federation of the Blind gives to legally blind persons pursuing or planning to pursue a full-time post-secondary course of study a broad array of scholarships. The following scholarships will be given at the National Convention in 1990:
1. Ezra Davis Memorial Scholarship; $10,000; endowed by Ezra Davis and given by the American Brotherhood for the Blind, a nonprofit organization which works to assist blind persons. Applicants must be studying (or planning to study) at the post-secondary level. No restriction as to gender, graduate or undergraduate level, or field of study.
2. National Federation of the Blind Merit Scholarships; nineteen to be given; three for $4,000; seven for $2,500; and nine for $2,000. Applicants must be studying (or planning to study) at the post-secondary level. No restriction as to gender, graduate or undergraduate level, or field of study. 3. Howard Brown Rickard Scholarship; $2,500. Applicants must be studying (or planning to study) law, medicine, engineering, architecture, or the natural sciences. No restriction as to gender or graduate or undergraduate level. 4. Hermione Grant Calhoun Scholarship; $2,000. Dr. Isabelle Grant endowed this scholarship in memory of her daughter. Limited to female students. May be studying (or planning to study) at either graduate or undergraduate level. 5. Frank Walton Horn Memorial Scholarship; $2,500; given by Mr. and Mrs. Charles E. Barnum, the mother and stepfather of Catherine Horn Randall. No restriction as to gender, graduate or undergraduate level, or field of study, but preference will be given to those studying architecture or engineering. 6. Francis Urbanek Memorial Scholarship; $2,000; given by Joe Urbanek in memory of his brother Francis, who died in January, 1986, at age eighteen; limited to blind high school graduates entering their freshman year of college. 7. Ellen Setterfield Memorial Scholarship; $2,000; given in memory of Ellen Setterfield by Roy Landstrom, who says: During the course of her life, she gave of herself to defending the dignity and self-respect of those around her. Restricted to students at the graduate level in the social sciences. 8. Melva T. Owen Memorial Scholarship; $2,500; given in memory of Melva T. Owen, who was widely known and loved among the blind. She and her husband Charles Owen became acquainted with increasing numbers of blind people through their work in the Voicepondence Club. Charles Owen says: There shall be no limitation as to field of study, except that it shall be directed towards attaining financial independence and shall exclude religion and those seeking only to further general or cultural education.
Criteria: All scholarships are awarded on the basis of academic excellence, service to the community, and financial need. Membership: The National Federation of the Blind is an organization dedicated to creating opportunity for all blind persons. Recipients of Federation scholarships need not be members of the National Federation of the Blind.
Deadline: Applications for National Federation of the Blind scholarships must be received by March 31 of the year in which the scholarship is to be awarded.
Making Application: To apply for National Federation of the Blind scholarships, complete and return the application on the reverse side of this sheet. Multiple applications are unnecessary. Each applicant will be considered for all scholarships for which he or she qualifies. Please provide all the applicable information requested and attach to the application all the additional documents requested on the application. Send the application to:
Miss Peggy Pinder, Chairman, National Federation of the Blind Scholarship Committee, 814 - 4th Avenue, Suite 200, Grinnell, Iowa 50112; (515) 236-3366.
Re-Application: We have often awarded scholarships to persons applying for the second or third time. Even if previously submitted, current applications must be submitted to be considered for current scholarships. Those who have previously applied are encouraged to apply again.
Winners: The Scholarship Committee reviews all applications and selects the scholarship winners. These winners, the same number as there are scholarships to award, will be notified of their selection by June 1 and will be brought to the National Federation of the Blind convention in July at Federation expense. This is in addition to the scholarship grant. The winners are America's finest blind students. The National Federation of the Blind Convention is the largest gathering of blind persons (more than 2,000) to occur anywhere in the nation each year. You will be able to meet other blind students and exchange information and ideas. You will also be able to meet and talk with blind people who are successfully functioning in your chosen profession or occupation. Federal officials, members of Congress, and the makers and distributors of new technology attend Federation conventions. Above all, a broad cross section of the most active segment of the blind population of the United States will be present to discuss common problems and plan for concerted action. It is an interesting and exciting week.
Awards: The day before the convention banquet the Scholarship Committee will meet to determine which winners will receive which scholarships. The scholarship awards will be made during the banquet.
National Federation of the Blind Scholarship Application Form
Read reverse side of form for instructions and explanation. Form may be photocopied but only if reverse side is also included. To apply for a scholarship, complete this application form and mail completed application and attachments to: Miss Peggy Pinder, Chairman, National Federation of the Blind Scholarship Committee, 814 - 4th Avenue, Suite 200, Grinnell, Iowa 50112. Form must be received by March 31, 1990.
Name (please include any maiden or other names by which you have been known):
Date of birth:
School address:
School phone number:
Home address:
Home phone number:
Institution being attended in spring semester, 1990, with class standing (fresh man, senior, etc.):
Cumulative grade point at this institution:
Institution to be attended in fall of 1990, with class standing.
Send by separate letter if admitted to school after submitting completed application:
List all post-secondary institutions attended with highest class standing attained and cumulative grade point average:
High school attended and cumulative grade point:
Vocational goal:
State your major:
Awards and honors (attach list if necessary):
Community service (attach list if necessary):
Attach the following documents to completed application:
1. Send us a letter: What schools have you attended? What school do you plan to attend during the coming year? What honors have you achieved? What have you done to deal with situations involving your blindness? What are you like as a person? What are your goals and aspirations? How will the scholarship help you?
2. Send two letters of recommendation.
3. Provide current transcript from institution now attending and transcripts from all other post-secondary institutions attended. If you have not yet attended such an institution or have not completed one year of study, send high school transcript.
4. Send a letter from a state officer of the National Federation of the Blind evidencing the fact that you have discussed your scholarship application with that officer. We prefer that you discuss your application with the Federation state president, but a letter from any Federation state officer will suffice.
President's address provided upon request.
by Eileen Rivera
Those who have attended recent conventions of the National Federation of the Blind know that one of the highlights of the program each year has been the panel composed of members of the organization who talk about their jobs. The remarks of two of this year's participants are reprinted in this issue of the Braille Monitor. President Maurer introduced the final panelist by saying:
The last person on the panel this morning is a lady whom we in the Federation have come to know well. Eileen Rivera received a scholarship from this organization a few years ago, and she used it to complete her education. Since that time she has become the Director of the Vision Research and Rehabilitation Center at the Wilmer Eye Institute at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. She is helping to spread the word about the capacity of blind people into areas where it has previously not been well known. Here to talk with us about her work is Eileen Rivera.
Good morning. Isn't this a wonderful convention! Well, let me tell you about dinnertime at the Rivera home. We would gather around the table, and I would ask my dad questions about life. And we'd talk about careers. Dad was partial to medicine, law, and engineering. We were just beginning to learn English at the time. So at age seven I asked him this question: What does `administration' mean? He paused, and then he said, Administration is not really much of anything, and you should just forget the word. And that shows you children don't always listen to their parents.
Each of my college summers I worked in a different setting a bank, a district attorney's office, a gift shop, a hospital, then in a community health center. These jobs gave me excellent exposure to the way organizations work and, in some cases, how they shouldn't work. I was particularly intrigued by health care organizations.
Upon graduating from Harvard I entered the Masters of Business Administration program at the Wharton School in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I found my niche in health care management.
My interest in management stems from my childhood. As the oldest of seven children, I got very good at solving others' problems, at giving orders, and at getting others to do what I wanted them to, while making them think it was their own idea. Isn't that what management is all about? That's the secret. Managing money was also one of my favorite pastimes. I spent hours counting and budgeting my allowance twenty-five cents per week. About my job for the past year, at age 26, I've been the administrative director for the Vision Research Center at Johns Hopkins University. How did I end up here? Well, let me explain how I found a job that did not exist. In March of '88 my husband Jeff was assigned to Johns Hopkins for his medical residency. I was sad to leave my friends in Philadelphia, but I knew that in Baltimore I already had a number of NFB friends. My job-hunting strategy was to network like crazy. I wrote lots of letters. I wrote to every single one of the health care alumni from Wharton. I also wrote to Harvard alumni. I sent them my resume. I met with them, and they gave me the scoop on the health care market in Baltimore. Meanwhile, back in Philadelphia, a friend mentioned to me that at Johns Hopkins they were starting a low vision program. Well, nothing could interest me less. I wanted to work in primary health care management not in a hospital, not in ophthalmology, and not in blindness. But Steve Lipstein, the Vice President for Planning at Johns Hopkins, called me. He had received my resume from three different people. He figured I must be pretty good, so persistence pays off when you send out lots of letters. At the interview Mr. Lipstein asked me where I wanted to work. Then he suggested three different jobs in the Department of Medicine. My blindness didn't seem to worry him much. He seemed convinced by my employment record, by my summer jobs, that I had what it took to do the job. In passing I asked Mr. Lipstein about the low vision program at Wilmer. We discussed then my dissatisfaction with existing services. Then I described to him the ideal program one that focuses on options, independence, and good attitudes; one that responds to the consumers.
I thought I had made it clear to him that I wasn't interested in working for Wilmer in low vision. But he forwarded my resume anyway.
So days before the 1988 convention, a Dr. Robert Massoff, Director of the center, called me for an interview. I had serious reservations, but he was enthusiastic, and I wanted to meet him. He sparked my curiosity. At the interview Dr. Massoff described four components of the Vision Research Center. One lab is researching glaucoma, retinitis pigmentosa, and age-related macular degeneration. Another lab studies vision performance: reading, mobility, and face recognition. My ears really perked up when he mentioned technology transfer. Its activities include development of new low vision products, a collaboration with NASA scientists, and the development of businesses supported by venture capital. This was real business. At the time, the clinical low vision service had yet to be established. It was to include optometrists, social workers, and rehabilitation teachers. The research program was growing fast, and Dr. Massoff needed a manager to facilitate the process. Was this for me? After all, I didn't want a career in low vision. But I recognized a rare opportunity to come in at the ground level and help develop a program that works. Last year at convention it dawned on me: Wilmer would build a program with or without me. The only way to encourage them to build a first-rate program was to become one of its architects. Well, now that I wanted the job, I had to create it. There was no existing position. My first assignment (before my first paycheck) was to write my own job description. I took my resume and wrote from there. It was very challenging, and nobody else qualified for my job. So what specifically do I do? First of all, I hold the purse strings for the Center six million dollars a year. It's a tough job, but someone has to do it. I negotiate contracts; I hire and train the staff; I write grant proposals; I prepare financial analyses; I manage the two research labs; and I work on business plans. I prepare presentations for investors and donors, and I work with the Dean to facilitate technology transfer. And I started the clinic of low vision program from scratch. I developed management systems for our clinic, directed the construction of a brand new facility, and hired a clinical coordinator. And by the way, as part of the training for my clinical coordinator, I had her read NFB literature and attend local chapter meetings. One of my most important assignments is to develop legislation that will improve reimbursement for low vision services and devices. Now what better training could I have than to work with the NFB for the Washington seminar? Through the NFB and with the help of Jim Gashel, I learned the nuts and bolts of legislative action.
Each day brings a new challenge at Wilmer, and I'm constantly learning new ways to be more effective and to make things happen. One of the hazards in working in a research setting is being classified by the researchers. Once they called me a high-functioning low-vision person. I felt sick. I cringed, and I wanted to tell them: I'm not a high-functioning low-vision person. I'm just an average Harvard and Wharton School graduate. I said: I'm not an anomaly or a quirk in the system. I'm a product of good training and good attitudes someone who has shared with my fellow people and one who has grown through the fine example of the NFB.
So how do I go about teaching these very learned professors about blindness? I hired the best blind caterer in the state when we opened our clinic: Mrs. Cobb. I invite competent blind people to participate in our research studies. I introduce the faculty to successful blind professionals totally blind people doing things deemed impossible for low-vision patients. I arrange tours of the National Center for the Blind. To those researching reading, I bring them articles about Braille. I share anecdotes about our boot camps for the blind in Louisiana, Colorado, New Mexico, and Minnesota. If the faculty has a question about technology, I refer them to our experts like Curtis Chong, and I casually leave highlighted copies of the Braille Monitor on their lunchroom table. I discuss cane travel with them. Sometime we would like to do research on mobility. We will go down to the Inner Harbor and compare the effectiveness of the long white cane with orientation and mobility lights huge flashlights which are prescribed for people with night blindness. And what do you think we're going to find when we do that study?
Impressed by the NFB members that he met, one of our scientists asked me if the NFB was a bunch of type-A congenitally blind people. That was a good one! I assured him that we were actually just a cross-section of society. But if he thought we had our act together just a little better than the rest, it was because we were a part of the most effective and responsive group of blind consumers in the world.
At times our social worker calls me about patients who want to learn Braille and cane travel. Understanding the weakness of vocational rehabilitation in Maryland, she asks me how the NFB can help our patients. She understands the importance of our blindness network.
So how specifically do I do my job? I use readers. An adaptive computer has been an important tool. I use Lotus 1- 2-3 to prepare budgets. I do a lot of writing on my word processor, and I use a long white cane. And now, finally, I am having the opportunity to learn Braille. Since May, I have learned to read and write Grade 1 Braille using a slate and stylus. Upon beginning my job at Wilmer, I discussed Braille with the faculty. They used to think that only totally blind people should learn Braille, that it was too bulky and too difficult, that visual scanning had to be faster. I diplomatically presented them with the facts. And just to show you that things do change, in May when I announced that I was learning Braille, my boss responded enthusiastically that this was a great idea. On a more personal note, I want to thank my friends in the NFB for encouraging me as I studied at school and as I sought this job that did not exist. I want to thank you for teaching me about the importance of alternative techniques, about Braille, about cane travel, and about good attitudes. I've learned that a good low vision program the best low vision program will integrate these items into its agenda. Only a program that has these components can actually help the blind to become all that they can. And as I go about developing the best low vision program in the nation at Wilmer, I know that all of you stand behind me, ready to advise and encourage me on those difficult days. And together we are changing the future for blind people who come to the Wilmer Eye Institute in Baltimore, Maryland, and for blind people throughout the nation. Thank you.
BRAILLE LITERACY: ISSUES FOR CONSUMERS AND PROVIDERS
by Susan Jay Spungin, Ed.D.
On Saturday afternoon, July 8, 1989, Dr. Susan Spungin spoke to the convention of the National Federation of the Blind in Denver. In introducing her Dr. Jernigan said:
Our next speaker is Dr. Susan Jay Spungin, Associate Executive Director of Program Services for the American Foundation for the Blind. Before I give the microphone to Dr. Spungin, I want to say a few words about the American Foundation for the Blind, our relations with the Foundation, and why we have asked Dr. Spungin to come here today and speak to us. As all of you know, we have had sharp differences with the Foundation over the years and we still have such differences. Perhaps the item which has been the subject of the greatest contention has been and is the National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC). Recently one of the highest officials at the American Foundation for the Blind told me that the Foundation was dissatisfied with NAC and that it had decided sharply to limit and decrease its support of NAC. Specifically, I was told that the Foundation's contribution to NAC last year was $235,000, that this year it is $215,000, and that next year there will be a very drastic reduction. I was informed by this official that the Foundation's Board of Trustees had voted that a maximum contribution of $100,000 would be made to NAC next year and that how much (if any) of that amount would be given would be determined by the Foundation's executive committee, based on NAC's ability to get more agencies to identify with it and on its getting its act together. Yet, in a June 12, 1989, press release the Foundation said (and these are its exact words): The Board of Trustees of the American Foundation for the Blind has unanimously approved additional financial support to the National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC), reflecting renewed confidence in the organization's work.
Now, if you take into account the language of diplomacy, the information I was earlier given and the sentence I have just read from the press release are not necessarily in conflict, but this sort of behavior on the part of the Foundation is the kind of thing that has caused us to have mistrust and misgivings. With respect to NAC, I think the Foundation is in an awkward spot, and I think we must simply accept the fact that the blind of this country and the agencies that are committed to what we regard as quality services on the one hand, and the American Foundation for the Blind and certain others on the other hand are simply going to be on opposite sides of the NAC issue until we can either kill NAC or reform it.
There are also other issues on which we differ with the Foundation. The question then arises as to why we have asked Dr. Spungin, a high official of the American Foundation for the Blind, to come here at all. Why not simply intensify the conflict, fight it out, and be done with it? The answer, I think, is clear-cut and compelling. It is in our best interest and in the best interest of the blind of the nation for us to do otherwise.
While there are issues about which we and the Foundation will continue to disagree and about which (let us say it candidly) we will continue to fight, there are other considerations. The facts of life are that today in the United States the National Federation of the Blind and the American Foundation for the Blind are the two strongest forces in the blindness field not the only ones but the strongest. If we can find areas of agreement and cooperative effort, the long-term benefits to the blind and the blindness system can be incalculable. And in recent months there have been such areas of agreement.
Let me give you just two: Not long ago the Foundation wanted to make a survey in Illinois, and we sent their material to our membership list in that state some 1,000 copies. They could not have contacted that many blind people and parents of blind children without our help. On the other hand, there may be some reciprocation.
Next year is the fiftieth anniversary of the National Federation of the Blind in short, the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the organized blind movement in the United States. In recognition of the importance of that milestone we will (among other things) ask Congress to issue a commemorative postage stamp with Dr. tenBroek's picture on it. Both Bill Gallagher, the Executive Director of the American Foundation for the Blind, and Dr. Spungin have told me that the Foundation as an organization and they personally will do everything possible to help us get this accomplished.
The fact that they have promised to do this (and I assume that regardless of other circumstances they will keep their promise) does not mean that they agree with everything Dr. tenBroek did, that they will support us on every issue, or that we will not oppose them when we feel we must. Likewise, the same can be said concerning our mailing of their literature. These acts represent gestures of good will or, if you prefer, recognition of reality. We tell anybody who cares to know (and quite a few who don't) that we are today the strongest force in the affairs of the blind of this country. If that is true (and all you have to do to test it is to look around you at this convention), we must recognize the responsibility which goes with such clout and behave accordingly. We must attempt to build positive relationships where we can and work with others to achieve positive results when that is possible.
To that end and fully realizing the significance of it, we have asked Dr. Spungin to come here today and appear on our program. I personally and we organizationally have not always agreed with Dr. Spungin, but we may find it possible to have increasing areas of joint effort and cooperative action. At least, this should be the goal. In this context Dr. Spungin's appearance on our platform is as much symbolic as substantive. Dr. Spungin is a woman of ability. In the meeting of the Committee on Joint Organizational Effort at the National Center for the Blind in Baltimore in March, she very strongly supported the proposition that there must be an increased emphasis on the teaching of Braille to blind children and that all teachers of blind children should be expert in the use of Braille. Consequently, we have asked her to talk today on the subject: Braille Literacy: Issues for Consumers and Providers.
In view of all that I have said, we will not take questions at the end of Dr. Spungin's remarks, and we will confine ourselves to the topic listed on the agenda. Dr. Spungin, I want to welcome you to this convention and say to you that we are glad you are here. Here is Dr. Spungin:
Good afternoon. I appreciate those warm remarks. I am also very honored to be on the same platform with Dr. Nemeth. In 1889 a person was judged literate if he could sign his name enough for the farm and buggy economy. In the machine economy of 1939 it meant completing the sixth grade. Today the information age of computers and high technology assumes for some a bare minimum of reading and writing skills at the high school graduate level. However, because changes in the workplace are so dramatic and unpredictable, many people must be ready to adapt to jobs that did not even exist when they were in school. There are twenty-five million Americans who cannot read or write at all. An additional forty-five million are functionally illiterate, without the reading and writing skills to find work, and that number is growing by more than two million a year. Unfortunately, it seems only natural that the problems of our total society are frequently the sum of the parts. Although I do not believe that the causes of Braille illiteracy are necessarily based on the causes of the illiteracy epidemic in the United States, in general I do believe our concerns over the lack of use of Braille have been sensitized by society's concerns in this area. There clearly is a growing awareness and concern about the decrease in Braille reading and writing in the United States, both from consumers using the Braille system and providers of service teaching or producing materials in Braille. This is not a new problem but a growing one that can no longer be ignored. It appears to be an issue that we all agree exists that is, both consumers and providers of teaching or producing Braille have consensus in their respective outrage or concern. Where these groups of individuals break down is in their belief as to why the situation has been allowed to develop and what to do about it. My presentation this afternoon will attempt to detail some of the common reasons offered as to lack of Braille usage, others that I believe are closer to the mark, and some final discussion as to potential solutions.
The more frequent explanations as to why we have increased numbers of illiterate blind people seem to fall in one of eight categories of reasons why.
1. The changing population of children born blind with other disabilities due to medical advances saving children has diminished the number of potential Braille users. This population of multiply handicapped children is often quoted as being fifty percent of the total population of visually handicapped children with varying degrees of disabling conditions. However, there are no documentable statistics or prevalence rates or even demographics to support this suggestion. However, it is stated that this population for the most part is made up of non-readers with retardation and learning disabilities as the most frequently cited additional impairment.
2. The work of Dr. Natalie Barraga and others in better use of residual vision, initiated and more fully implemented in the decades of the seventies and the eighties, have encouraged educators and parents to strive for visual utilization when possible as opposed to the more historically common practice of teaching Braille to all students regardless of individual need or visual acuity measures. Consequently, there are fewer Braille users.
3. Positive attitudes toward the use of Braille have diminished, and potential Braille users are given second-class status and attention.
4. University training programs for teachers of the visually handicapped have given lip service to teaching Braille and have over the years graduated less-than-proficient Braille instructors as teachers.
5. The complexity of the Braille code causes illiteracy among blind students and should be changed in one way or another.
6. Audio dependency in tapes and speech output devices has helped to minimize the perceived necessity for Braille.
7. The existing service delivery models in schools serving blind children has, through the concept of the least restrictive environment found in Public Law 94-142, favored itinerate and teaching consultant models of service, limiting time spent with students due to large case loads and geographic regions served.
8. The Individualized Education Program (the IEP of Public Law 94-142) process is not working and favors what is available in the school district where the blind child resides rather than the needs of that child. This approach is often the result of professional rather than parental concerns as well as critical shortages in teachers of the visually handicapped.
Those are the eight areas that in my opinion are the most frequently cited as explanations to the problem of lack of Braille usage. I agree on the surface with many of them but believe they are only surface and often miss the mark as to the details that make up each of the eight categories.
1. Yes, there is no doubt that the multiply handicapped population has grown tremendously since the forties with the number of RLF's as a result of high levels of oxygen in incubators (now known as ROP) and the fifties and sixties with the rubella epidemic. However, the multi-handicapped/visually handicapped population has been sold down the river. When wishing to child count and serve this population as required by Public Law 94-142, we are told that their primary handicap is other than vision and they become lost to us and unserved or underserved by others with no knowledge of the effects of visual impairment or sensory, motive, and cognitive development. Consequently, our numbers decline along with justification for funding programs and training teachers. Until we are ready to fight the growing generic model of service, this issue will grow and affect service in general to all children, whether they are multi-handicapped or visually handicapped.
2. We have for too long been a nation looking for a quick fix a country that problem solves bilaterally, yes or no, right or wrong, sighted or blind. I truly believe that Dr. Barraga and her close colleagues never intended work in vision stimulation and vision efficiency to be unilaterally applied to all visually handicapped children with some remaining sight. But that's what we did and do suggesting, of course, to the system and the child that to see is better than not to see, to encourage the visually handicapped child to use remaining vision at all cost. This bandwagon mentality for the quick fix (to be more like seeing than blind) has short-changed many visually handicapped children and adults in our country's illiterate, to be added to twenty-five million Americans who cannot read or write at all. The pendulum has swung too far. It must be brought back and centered.
3. Negative attitudes toward blind people and the communication skills they need are indeed present and truly unintended. That's what makes them so insidious. Because without perhaps realizing it, how we as educators of blind children and adults perform and interchange with our students or clients and other professionals makes a statement of attitudes toward the blind person. Depriving blind students of the right to Braille over print when clearly they read at a less-than-functional speed is to deny them equal access to life. It can't help but to suggest that perhaps Braille is inferior and therefore print, or having sight, is superior. Do we positively reinforce a blind child to learn Braille with the same enthusiasm we do to learn print? Another negative attitude I find is more of a function of human frailty. That is, one does not often support an activity about which he or she is not fully knowledgeable. Therefore, if a teacher of the visually handicapped is not comfortable in the knowledge and teaching of Braille codes, the necessity for doing such can't help but be diminished.
4. The inadequacies of teachers of the visually handicapped in knowing Braille is not all of their making. The attitudes toward Braille instruction at the university or college preparation level is uneven, to say the least. Some programs are truly strong with equal emphasis on Braille code acquisition and the teaching of reading and math intrinsic to imparting Braille instruction in these areas. Others give the whole thing lip service, some believing it should be a prerequisite to college or graduate course work needing only an independent or correspondence course type of approach to learning. This varies with the coordinator of each preparation program some excellent and some not, and some leaving the Braille instruction just to the level of a transcriber's knowledge, omitting anything specific to reading or the teaching of math in Braille.
5. There has recently been a rash of articles placing the reason for illiteracy of the blind person at the foot of the Braille code as being too complex. Moon type, Morris Code, etc. revisited, only reminds me of the waste of the War of Dots. Let's not sing that tune again. Let's not choose to believe the Braille code is archaic or too complex. In a recent article, it stated that a blind honor student couldn't read a novel or write a paper. This is, of course, inexcusable. But to say that his illiteracy is due to the complexity of the Braille code is unfounded. There is no research supporting the notion that the Braille code, in and of itself, causes illiteracy among blind students, thereby limiting the career opportunities available to them.
6. The concerns that technology of any form will diminish the need for and use of Braille goes back as early as the forties with the beginnings of the talking book program. This either-or attitude seems to permeate the field of services to the blind. Throughout the years of technological development (ranging from talking books, records, cassette players and tapes, and computer and speech technology) I have yet to meet a proficient Braille user who has put this communication skill away but rather treats this advance in print accessibility as one of several options available and, in point, complementary to each other. In fact, the ability to do word processing in Braille and edit Braille text accurately and convert to hardcopy print represents for some one of the most significant advances in communication available to blind persons in this century. The potential concern over competing technologies in terms of diminishing the need for Braille is, in my opinion, minimal when one considers the problems of location and production of titles due to multiple listings within various organizations lacking any source for acquisition information. The number of blind students waiting for Braille texts in school is unconscionable. If we believe in equal access to print (in this case, via Braille) and have now the technology to allow for this easily, why are Braille users waiting, receiving books half way through the year? How many books go undone and how many books are physically transcribed unknowingly more than once, more than twice? What type of statement does this make?
7. The issue around service delivery models and their effect on Braille instruction is crucial. We have so encouraged community educational placement for visually handicapped children that in many states we have restricted the alternative of residential school placement, which has become mostly schools serving the more multiply handicapped blind child. This would not be a problem if, at the same time, we assured families of visually handicapped children itinerant and consulting programs of reasonable case load size, permitting teachers trained in working with visually handicapped children actually the time to do so. In more cases than not, we have promoted an outward appearance of a physical setting of least restrictive alternative with an academic program representing the most restrictive environment. What we all need to do is ensure the most enabling learning environment for visually handicapped students, insuring appropriate teacher/student ratios according to individual need rather than administrative mandates. No child can learn anything from a teacher from any academic area that comes to school only once a week.
8. The IEP process of Public Law 94-142 is indeed the most important part of this historic legislation, the Education of All Handicapped Children's Act.
It is a time when experts, parents, and (where appropriate) students come together to chart the academic course of the visually handicapped student for the year. This process is so critical that its application for all school age children, handicapped or not, seems obvious. However, where it falls short is that the IEP process relies heavily on the following assumptions:
1. The IEP team is equally able and willing to assess the visually handicapped child's need and plan a program accordingly.
2. All parents are committed to the process and work hand in hand with the school district and the professionals that work with their child.
3. The school district has desire, access, and money for trained visually handicapped teachers and orientation and mobility instructors and any necessary books and equipment.
4. The IEP team and parents will work toward problem solving and use as a last resort due process.
5. Finally, they all agree on the definition of appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. Believe it or not, there are some cases where these five points are in place, and programs and children flourish. However, there are other instances where this is not the case, and limitations shape the results rather than need and expectations. To assure the efficiency of this process, consumers and providers of services must join forces to insist on trained teachers with more than two or three courses (as required by some states) for state certification be present, as well as informed parents. Together we need to recruit teachers from our respective friends and colleagues in order to insure adequate personnel. There is indeed much to be done, but I believe it is doable. In my concluding remarks let me offer some possible solutions that attempt to take into account the various positions of Braille illiteracy issues and its causes. There are no winners in this controversy nor simple answers. The real tragedy is the ones who lose the most not us here today, but the blind children themselves.
Of greatest concern in this issue is definition the definition of visually handicapped children we serve and many multiply handicapped/visually handicapped children we do not serve but should serve. The most tragic error we have made as a field has been to agree to primary versus secondary handicap labels to define our population. We have lost children to the generic cracks found in the system, espousing individual need for unique program development. The issues of economy of scale have sent costs of service delivery skyrocketing, compounded by allowing ourselves to lose many children to other areas of disability. These children are educationally crippled by receiving generic services. We need to define what we mean by blind and Braille users and develop appropriate reliable assessment measures that allow for decisions made on use of Braille or print or use of both. Measures such as work distance from the page, portabilities of reading skills, reading rates and accuracy, visual fatigue, and proper interpretation of assessment results are all assessments lending themselves to objective measure and could easily serve as a basis for a uniform assessment tool. Those children who do not fit neatly into Braille or print users deserve the option of learning both Braille and print until such time as the child himself can make an informed choice. Instruction in reading and writing of Braille should be based on what we know about teaching of reading and writing. Many good teachers do this. However, this approach addresses the issue of development versus adaptation of material. I believe we have faulted on the side of adaptation when we consistently adapted the Basal reading and math books from the sighted curricula for the blind. We need to bring into balance efforts in curriculum development specific to the needs of the Braille reader. To insure quality Braille instruction, national standards should be developed and applied, perhaps with the Library of Congress, to insure a minimal level of competence in the knowledge of Braille. The teaching of this skill should remain in the curriculum of teacher preparation course work as a required course. But slate and stylus must not be ignored either, and this skill also could receive national standards for excellence. To change the Braille code in any major way is pointless and only confirms the lack of understanding of the Braille system by the individuals who make such a suggestion. But we have not used the standard-setting body of the Braille Authority of North America as much as we should to insure that the Braille code is adequate for the times in which we live. BANA has many subcommittees in literary, math, music, and others. By assuring that consumers and teachers are present in each of these committees is to insure the reality of need for any proposed change. We need to re-evaluate the nation's visually handicapped service delivery models in public schools around the country and demand lower case loads as well as an appropriate trained teacher in vision and other related professionals. We can only succeed in doing this through assuring that the IEP process works not only to guarantee the proper teaching of Braille but for orientation and mobility, activities of daily living, and many other skills as well.
We have in place a potentially good system in Public Law 94-142. Let's commit ourselves to making it work for all visually handicapped students in need as well as those using Braille. To legislate or mandate by law any system of human service always creates problems problems of interpretation, problems in monitoring, problems in funding. I believe we have seen the reality of this since 1977, when Public Law 94-142 was implemented. To create new legislation state by state to address the problem of a federal law seems redundant. Let's work together to insure that the meaning and spirit of Public Law 94-142 is implemented, which can happen if we use our respective influences together as one voice demanding the individual rights for blind children demanding access to the world, through reading and writing, through independent travel, and through access to the written word.
The lack of a centralized source of information for easily locating books in special formats for blind and visually handicapped persons in this day and age is incomprehensible. Data base systems are growing like wild fire, yet the reading needs of blind or visually handicapped people for the most part rely on an informal system of literature search, usually dependent on the help of a sighted person. However, agencies that serve the recreational and educational reading needs of visually impaired children and adults have now formed the Coalition for Information Access for Print Handicapped Readers to focus on developing and implementing a computerized central listing system and to act as a conduit for networking. Hopefully, in time, with speech technology, blind persons themselves can access the system. To summarize, I would like to quote my friend and colleague, Fred Schroeder, who stated at a recent meeting: Braille has been proven time and time again to be the way to literacy for blind people. It can be produced more easily and more cheaply than ever before in history. With Braille and the other skills of blindness, we as blind people can fulfill our potential and take our true place as contributing, participating, taxpaying members of society. To achieve this goal will take concerted and collective actions. I, too, wish to achieve this goal, for Braille is an assertion of equality between blind and sighted persons with respect to written communication. With one voice, I have no doubt that equality can become a reality. Thank you.
Dr. Jernigan: Thank you very much, Dr. Spungin. As I said in my introduction, I'm glad you came. What the future holds for cooperative relations between our two organizations probably depends on whether we have so many areas of disagreement and especially an increasing number of them that the overall climate kills what is possibly a flowering growth of understanding and working together or whether we can diminish areas of disagreement and begin to find more and more areas of joint work. That is the way trust is engendered or the way it is killed depending on what we do. As you can see from being here, we have some two thousand-plus people here. This will be the largest gathering of blind people to be held anywhere in the world this year. And we are not simply speaking for ourselves but for the people back home who elected us and who sent us here as representatives of the blind of this country. Again, I say, we're glad you came. I understand you'll be with us tonight at the banquet, and we're pleased that you will.
THE DILEMMA OF THE SHELTERED SHOP WORKER
by Kenneth Jernigan
It is common knowledge that most of the workshops for the blind in the United States have substandard working conditions and pay shamefully low wages to their blind employees. They can get away with this because of a provision in the federal Fair Labor Standards Act which says that blind shop workers may be paid less than the minimum wage if they cannot produce as much as a sighted worker similarly situated in private industry. Of course, sighted workers in private industry cannot be paid less than the minimum wage regardless of their productive capacity. And then there is also the question of how productive capacity is measured and who is similarly situated.
Presumably tests are made, but we have repeatedly demonstrated that many of those tests are rigged. What would happen to the average factory worker in the United States if there were no federal labor laws, no unions, and no governmental mechanisms for inspection? All we have to do for an answer is to look at what happened during the last century. But with the blind it is even worse. Nobody believes that the average sighted person is incapable of working competitively, but the traditional wisdom is that the blind are substandard and only able to work if they are given charity and special consideration. Attitudes are changing, but the outmoded notions are still far too prevalent. In the circumstances it is not surprising that sheltered workshop managers take advantage of the situation and exploit. It would be remarkable if they did not. There are budgets to meet, administrative salaries to pay, and little likelihood that the managers will have to pay penalties (and certainly not personal penalties) if they stretch the law or cheat. Therefore, they say that their employees are not really workers at all but just trainees, that most of them are mulitply handicapped, and that the workers (no, trainees) like the conditions at the shop, and wouldn't have them otherwise.
So what do you do if you are a blind employee in a sheltered shop in the United States today? If you complain, try to help form a union, or contact government authorities, you are likely to get fired, have your wages cut, or be told that there just isn't enough work to keep you on a full-time basis. It may be done with big words and professional terminology. It may even be documented and supported by studies but it hurts just as much, and the message is just as clear. On the other hand, if you remain silent, you are likely to continue with starvation wages and substandard conditions for the rest of your life. It is not easy, and it is not pleasant; but it is the everyday experience of many blind shop workers throughout the country. Here is where the National Federation of the Blind comes in. Unlike labor unions, we are knowledgeable about the Fair Labor Standards dodge and the ways of the professionals, and we cannot be bamboozled. Moreover, we are strong enough to resist pressure, and we cannot be intimidated. Through our division for shop workers (the Blind Industrial Workers of America) and through local chapters, workshop employees are joining the Federation in growing numbers. They are beginning to have heightened expectations and to feel their strength. President Maurer recently received a letter from an NFB chapter officer concerning conditions in the local workshop. The letter and President Maurer's response are indicative of what is beginning to happen in the shops, and I want to share them with you. For obvious reasons the name and locality are being omitted. These letters should cause each of us to do soul-searching and to ask ourselves what action we can take to help the shop workers in our local areas. Regardless of our financial situation or social position, each of us has a stake in what happens to the shop workers. Their struggle is our struggle; their hope is our hope; their dream is our dream. Here is the correspondence:
Dear President Maurer:
At our last chapter meeting we discussed at length the workshop for the blind here in our city. As I am sure you know, this is a sheltered workshop that employs many handicapped persons, including a few blind, and some of our chapter members. Most of these people, including myself, are paid less than the minimum wage. Last July there was a ruling by the board of directors of the shop that they were going to pay each worker what he or she produced and no longer have any make-up pay. In the past each person was guaranteed a base rate and also received more than that if his piece rate was above this rate. Since only about fifteen percent are blind, it is next to impossible to get a union in there. Many of the workers are slow learners and would not understand the benefits of the union. Often we are put on jobs where we do not make close to the minimum wage, and the shop management assures us that soon new time studies will be made but they never are. The employees are hesitant to file a complaint with the Labor Board because we are fearful that if a hearing were held, we would still not get the higher wages.
It was mentioned at our last chapter meeting that the Federationists who are working at the shop should sign a petition, stating the complaints, and circulating it to the suppliers of contracts for the shop, thus making them aware of the problem. Our chapter is wanting to help in any way it can, but we do not want to do the wrong thing. We have thought of going to the press or the news media, but the local stations have been doing advertising for the workshop. Any advice you can give is appreciated by all of us.
Sincerely yours,
Baltimore, Maryland
Dear :
I have your recent letter describing problems of blind workers at your local workshop. In 1986 a law was adopted by Congress at the urging of the National Federation of the Blind. This law said that any person working in a sheltered workshop for the blind who was being paid less than the minimum wage had the right to file an appeal with the Department of Labor. The Department of Labor is responsible for conducting a hearing to determine whether the wages paid to the blind employee are proper. The employer must demonstrate that the wages are fair. If the employer fails to do this, the blind worker is entitled to receive at least the minimum wage. The burden of proof is on the employer. The employee does not have to show that the wages paid are unfair. Subminimum wages are presumed to be unfair unless the sheltered shop administrator can show that they are reasonable. It is not necessary to establish a union before the complaints are filed with the Department of Labor. The complaints may be filed whether there is a union established or not. If workers want to file such a complaint, the National Office of the Federation is ready to help. If a workshop is to receive contracts from the federal government through National Industries for the Blind, seventy-five percent (75%) of its direct labor hours must be performed by blind employees. If your local workshop is using very many sighted laborers, it may be in violation of those standards. A complaint may be in order on these grounds as well.
If there are workers who want to raise these questions or others before the Department of Labor, please let me know. Part of the reason for the National Federation of the Blind is to help with problems like these.
Cordially,
Marc Maurer, President
National Federation of
the Blind
This is the letter from the local chapter and President Maurer's response. Is it any wonder that the managers of the sheltered shops resent the Federation and call us names? Is it any wonder that they have voted to give up to $200,000 a year to NAC (the National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped)? Is it any wonder that NAC is willing to take the money and to accredit these organizations? The answers are obvious, and they speak for themselves.
TEACHING MATHEMATICS: ONE CAREER FOR THE BLIND
by Abraham Nemeth
One of the most lively and charming presentations on the 1989 convention agenda was an address by Dr. Abraham Nemeth, the creator of the Nemeth code of mathematical Braille notation and an active member of the Federation's Research and Development Committee. Dr. Nemeth wrote the code for the new scientific calculator program, which is now available exclusively from the Materials Center of the National Federation of the Blind at a cost of $40. He has been sharing his expertise in mathematics for more than forty years now, and the blind, as well as the sighted, have been the beneficiaries. As Dr. Jernigan said in introducing him: I know that Dr. Nemeth is the most eminent blind mathematician alive, that he is an all round good fellow, and that he is a Federationist. What more does one need? Here are Abraham Nemeth's remarks as he delivered them to the convention in Denver:
Good afternoon, fellow Federationists. I remember the days when I was teaching. If I walked into a classroom, sometimes I said good afternoon, and I noticed that the students wrote it down in their notebooks. That was a graduate class.
I want you to know that the other day my wife and I were walking outside the hotel on the street. We stopped at a street corner waiting for a light. And like all good Federationists, we were wearing our badges. A lady was standing alongside us waiting to cross the street, and she said, I see that you are attending a convention. I said, Yes, we are.
She said, What convention are you attending? I said, We are attending the NFB convention.
She said, NFB, please tell me what does that stand for?
I said, Well, NFB stands for National Federation of the Blind. Oh, she said, that's wonderful, and I would like you to know that I, too, am attending a convention. I said, That's lovely. What convention are you attending? She said, Well, I am attending the DAM convention. I said, DAM, could you please tell me what that stands for? She said, DAM, that stands for Mothers Against Dyslexia. I came here with a message, to tell you a little bit of what love and care and commitment and attitude and the vagaries of fortune can do to a person. The best way I can tell you about it is by highlighting some aspects of my life, and then you will see what forces came to influence and forge me into the person that I am. I was born congenitally blind, on the Lower East Side of Manhattan in New York City. And I want you to know that my parents raised me in a very close and loving family. I had a brother and a sister and two sets of grandparents and lots of aunts and uncles and cousins.
We led a very happy life. And although my parents were both immigrants and lacking in any kind of formal education, they instinctively knew not to over-protect me on account of my blindness. So I became street-wise in a tough neighborhood on the Lower East Side of Manhattan at a very early age.
Without knowing it, my father taught me what today would be called mobility and orientation. Whenever we walked to a familiar destination, he would take me there by a different route. As we talked, he would tell me such things as We are now walking west, and in a moment we will be making a left turn, and then we will be walking south. We are passing a luncheonette, and after that we will be passing a bakery. Now the traffic on this street is one way going west. On the next street the traffic is one way going east, and there is a fire hydrant at the corner. Across the street there is a mailbox. So he instilled in me a very good sense of direction.
He also taught me the formation of printed letters by letting me touch the raised letters on mailboxes and on police and fire call boxes. He bought me wooden blocks with raised printed letters to play with, and he got me large rubber stamps on which I could feel the printed letters.
My elementary education began at Public School 110. Now you know that New York is such a big city that we run out of eminent people's names, so we just put numbers to the schools. The one I went to was Public School 110, which happened to be within walking distance of my home. One of my aunts walked with me every day to and from school. PS 110 had a resource room staffed by a blindness resource teacher. There were five elementary schools in the city of New York operated in the same format, one in each of the five boroughs. The fact that my school happened to be close to home was fortuitous. Other blind students who came to the school required transportation to and from home. In my daily activity, I attended regular classrooms with all the sighted students for general curriculum subjects like arithmetic, spelling, and reading. But when the sighted students were engaged in activities like art, penmanship, and things of that kind, I returned to the resource room for training in specific blindness skills like Braille, typing, and even geography. There was a very large globe of the world with raised land masses and even more highly raised mountain ranges. Braille reading and writing skills were very strongly emphasized by the resource teacher for all students, even for those who had some useful vision and who could read large print. I functioned in what today could be called a least restrictive environment.
Because of family circumstances, I went to live and continue my education at the New York Jewish Guild for the Blind in Yonkers, New York. In September of the year that I went there, I transferred to PS 16. This was the Bronx school of the New York City Public School System with a resource room and a blindness resource teacher, just like the ones in Manhattan. I was bussed back and forth to school every day. I entered the fourth grade in that year and again functioned in the least restrictive environment, going to class with all the sighted students. Braille skills continued to be emphasized. At the Yonkers Home children were encouraged (although not required) to engage in activities like music, handcrafts, light sports and athletics, and religious education after school. While I was there, my father came to visit me almost every Sunday, no matter how severe the weather was. My mother would come whenever her busy household chores would allow about every other week, I would say. They would bring me my favorite foods, and they were refrigerated and dispensed to me during the week by kindly kitchen staff.
In the spring and summer months many of my uncles and aunts would also come to visit me. We would all go to a picnic area in a nearby park and enjoy the food they brought as well as such activity as the park provided. My father's favorite was rowing. On many weekends and holidays I returned for a visit to my parents' home, and even during the summer, I spent extended periods of time with my family at a vacation setting in the Catskill Mountains near New York City.
One of my grandfathers was particularly attentive to me, and he gave me the religious training that I now possess. He would try to find messages that would be encouraging to me and that would serve as a guide for me as a blind person. One of those messages, which has stayed with me and which has had particular impact on me during all the years that I was growing up and by which I am still guided, is: It is better to light a candle than to curse the dark.
Now you may not believe this, but at school I experienced particular difficulty with arithmetic. When I reflect on that circumstance now in later years, I conclude the reasons were two-fold. First, I was taught to use the Tailor Code, which was then in use. But it was inadequate to the task of representing mathematical concepts in Braille. Second, I had to use what I now guess is a museum piece: the Tailor Arithmetic Slate. Someone once saw me operating that thing, and he wanted to know if I was taking an aptitude test. I was required to do my computations on that slate, and it was very slow. I didn't realize that a Tailor slate was intended to simulate print practice because I was never informed what print practice was to begin with. I graduated from the eighth grade of PS 16 deficient in mathematics, but with my father's earnest and sincere promise to the school that he would see to it that the situation was remedied.
So I enrolled in the fall at Evanderchild's High School in the Bronx, to which I was also bussed back and forth from the Yonkers Home. This school, too, had a resource room and a very good resource teacher, who also taught some of the regular math classes at the high school. He took a particular interest in me, and as soon as he discovered that I had this deficiency in arithmetic, he made sure to remedy it. He insisted that all my computational work must be done on a Braille writer so that I would not be using one notational system while reading (Braille) and another notational system while writing (the Tailor Code). In one year's time, I not only caught up with all the arithmetic skills I should have had in elementary school, but I also received top grades in a first year algebra course in which I was enrolled.
I continued to do well in all my high school courses, and during this period I became keenly aware of an ambition to be a teacher particularly, believe it or not, to teach mathematics. One of the boys at the Yonkers Home was a good friend, but he was one grade behind me in school.
As I learned algebra, I shared with him my knowledge and my enthusiasm on that subject. When he entered high school a year later, he was able to pass an algebra exam with honors and was thus exempted from first year algebra. This was an instance of what today would be called advanced placement, which had occurred before its time.
In due course I graduated from high school and returned to live at home with my parents and my brother and my sister, who by now had moved to Brownsville, Brooklyn.
Then it was time for me to go to college. By that time I had already acquired independent travel skills. I knew the routes of all the New York City subways and most of the Brooklyn bus lines. Equipped with this skill and with a high proficiency in Braille, I entered Brooklyn College. In those days there was still no formal campus. The administrative and classroom buildings were converted factory lofts and warehouses, and they were scattered about a wide area in the traffic-filled downtown Brooklyn area. In two years we moved to a beautiful campus, although it was by no means finished when we took occupancy there. I knew that I wanted to major in mathematics, but my guidance counselors were not at all supportive of this goal. They insisted that mathematics was too technical a subject for a blind person, that notation was specialized, that there was no material available in Braille, that volunteer or even paid readers would be difficult to recruit, and that no employer would be likely to consider a blind person for a position related to mathematics. Counselor after counselor told this to me. You know, my wife told me that her mother said if three people tell you that you are drunk, you better lie down. So after several counselors told me this, I obediently declared psychology to be my major a subject more amenable to the abilities of blind people, my counselors told me.
I took as many psychology courses as I could fit into my schedule. Nevertheless, whenever there was an opening for an elective course, I always chose one from the Math Department. In taking these courses, there were two things that I did which were, I would say, decisive in my later career. When I found that there was no way of putting mathematical notation down in Braille, just as my counselors warned me, I began to improvise Braille symbols and methods which were both effective for my needs and consistent from one course to the next. So this was the beginning of the Nemeth Code. The other important skill I developed was the ability to write both on paper and on the blackboard. Acquiring this skill was made much easier for me because of my father's earlier attention to this matter in my formative years. Sometimes it was the only method I had of communicating with my math professors. And although I was certainly no calligrapher, my handwriting was perfectly adequate for these purposes, and it was surely far superior to the alternative of shouting and arm waving. In this way I graduated from Brooklyn College in 1940 with a B.A. degree and a major in psychology. Nevertheless, I succeeded in having completed courses in analytic geometry, differential and integral calculus, some modern geometry courses, and even a course in statistics. I knew that a B.A. degree in psychology was not a sufficient credential for anyone intending to enter that field professionally. So accordingly, I applied for graduate admission to Columbia University. My grades were adequate to ensure my acceptance at that prestigious institution, so in 1942 I graduated from Columbia University with an M.A. degree in psychology.
Meanwhile, it was time to begin looking for a job. The only work I could find was of an unskilled nature. At one time I worked at a sewing machine, where I did seaming and hemming on pillowcases at piece-work rates. I worked for seven years at the American Foundation for the Blind, and there I counted needles for Talking Book phonograph records. I collated Talking Book records. I loaded and unloaded trucks in the shipping department. I typed letters in Braille to deaf-blind clients of AFB, transcribing incoming Braille letters from these and other clients on the typewriter. I also designed and organized itineraries in Braille so that they could be read by Helen Keller. After graduating from Columbia University with a Master's degree in hand, I began to look earnestly for work more suited to my training. The employment environment for the blind is never too hospitable, as you well know. But in those days, it was more inhospitable than it is today. In 1944 I was already married to my first wife Florence, and as time went on, she perceived my growing frustration. After working all day at AFB, I would find relaxation in taking an evening course in mathematics. By 1946 I had already taken all the undergraduate math courses offered by Brooklyn College, and my wife perceived that I was much happier in mathematics than in psychology. So one day she asked me if I wouldn't rather be an unemployed mathematician than an unemployed psychologist.
Well, I began to wonder how we would support ourselves if I quit my job and went to school full-time, working toward a graduate degree in mathematics. Florence suggested that I give up my job and do just that. She would go to work while I went to school. If I couldn't find work as a mathematician even after completing my training, I could always get an unskilled job like the one I was currently holding at that same skill level, she pointed out. By 1946 the war was over. Men were returning to civilian life. At Brooklyn College there was a large contingent of men who had taken a first semester course in calculus, and now (a war later) they were returning to enroll for a second semester course in calculus. I leave it to your imagination how much of the first semester they remembered. So I offered to be one of the volunteers in a corps that was organized to assist those men. I offered to be one of their volunteers after classes were over in the evening. Each student was stationed at one panel of a blackboard which ran clear around the room. Each wrote on the board as much of the problem as he could do, and the volunteers circulated helping the students to complete their work. I would ask the student to read me the problem from his textbook and then read as much of the solution as he was able to put on the blackboard. You know, many times the blackboard panel was blank. I would do my best to show the student how to proceed. Unknown to me, I was being observed by the chairman of the Math Department. One Friday night I received a telegram from him. He informed me that one of his regular faculty members had taken ill and would be disabled for the remainder of the semester. He asked me to report on the following Monday evening to assume that professor's teaching load. Over the weekend I got the textbooks, boned up to know just enough to teach the following Monday evening, and launched my teaching career. My ability to write on the blackboard, I believe, was the difference between continuing as a mathematics teacher and finding some other work to do. I continued this way, doing part-time teaching at Brooklyn College. In 1951 I again applied to Columbia University and was admitted as a doctoral student toward the Ph.D. degree in Mathematics. My wife went to work.
In the summer of 1953 I registered with an employment agency for teachers. I received a call from that agency to report to Manhattan College the following Monday, there to conduct a course in the mathematics of finance a course I had neither taken nor known anything about. But anyway, I made sure I knew what to do. Manhattan College is a school run by the Christian Brothers. Brother Alfred was a little dubious when a blind man showed up, but he really had no choice. Classes began in an hour. However, when the summer course was over, Brother Alfred naturally assumed that I would return to teach in the fall, and he handed me my teaching schedule for the semester, beginning in September. When January came, I received another call this time from Manhattanville College to fill in for a professor who was on sabbatical. Now Manhattanville College is a very elite girls' school run by the Order of the Sacred Heart. As a matter of fact, Jacqueline Kennedy attended that school, although not in the time that I was there.
Dean Mother Brady received a glowing letter of reference from Brother Alfred, and so I had no difficulty securing the position at Manhattanville College. Commuting to Manhattanville College was an entirely different matter, however. To do that commuting, I had to walk six blocks from home to the local BMT subway station, take the train to Fourteenth Street in Manhattan, and change at Fourteenth Street from the BMT to the IRT line through an intricate maze of stairs and tunnels which, however, I was already familiar with. Then I had to take the IRT to Grand Central Station. I had to negotiate a complicated route through the New York Central Railroad, and that took me to White Plains, New York, where finally I was picked up by the school bus for the final fifteen-minute ride to the school in Purchase, New York. And of course I had to do this in reverse at the end of the day.
The Sunday before reporting to work, I went alone to Grand Central Station; and there, all day long, I practiced negotiating the route between the IRT subway station at 42nd street and the Grand Central Railroad Station. The most important landmark on that route was the New York Central Railroad Station Information Booth. Every morning I would stop at that booth and inquire on what track the 8:02 for White Plains would be leaving. It was a two-hour commute each day, and I was surely glad when the semester ended.
It was time to begin to search for permanent employment. By 1954 I was becoming tired of part-time work. The search for employment is stressful for anyone, particularly for a blind person. So I embarked on a campaign of letter-writing with a view to securing permanent employment. I consulted hundreds of college and university catalogs in the local library to determine which ones offered a math curriculum in which my teaching skills would be valuable. I arranged my choices in the order of geographical preference you know, by section of the country. I composed a master letter, tailoring it from time to time as circumstances dictated, and I sent out about 250 letters and resumes. I felt it necessary to inform a potential employer in advance about my blindness. Most replies were negative. They went something like:
At present we have no opening for a person with your training and experience. Many of them were noncommittal: Thank you for inquiring about a position at our institution. We will keep your letter on file and will contact you if any opening should materialize in the future. Sound familiar? Some were downright hostile: We do not feel that a person with a visual impairment can effectively discharge the duties required of professors at our institution. Nevertheless, I did receive two letters inviting me to appear for an interview: one from the University of Detroit and one from the university right here in Boulder, Colorado. Since, however, the University of Detroit offered a position leading to eventual permanence and tenure, I responded positively to the invitation from that institution first. My wife and I both appeared at the university's request. I was interviewed for a full day, and at the end of the interview we were told to return home and that we would be informed of the outcome within a week. So I mentioned in passing that we were going on to Boulder, Colorado, for another interview. The University of Detroit is a Jesuit university. The following day, early in the morning, I received a call from Father Dwier. He told me that the position was mine if I wanted it. He was calling early so that I could cancel the trip to Colorado if I so desired. I accepted on the spot.
I went to work at the University of Detroit as an instructor in 1955. And in due course I progressed through the ranks to become an assistant professor, an associate professor, and finally a full professor. Along the way I was awarded tenure, and I also completed the requirements for the Ph.D. degree in mathematics and got it from Wayne State University. I received that degree in 1964. For fifteen years I taught all kinds of courses in mathematics at the University of Detroit. But it was becoming increasingly evident to me that my training and skills would soon become obsolete unless I acquired knowledge and skill in computer science. Accordingly, I applied for, and was fortunate to receive, a grant from the National Science Foundation to spend two summers at Pennsylvania State University in State College to train in computer science. Each session was nine weeks long, and all the students in this program were also college teachers. The pace of instruction was, to say the least, quite lively. My wife and I gave up the comfort of a nice home in Detroit to live in a dorm room for nine weeks of a hot summer during two consecutive years. These were 1968 and 1969.
When I returned to the University of Detroit in the fall of 1969, I designed and implemented a graduate curriculum in computer science, and I taught most of the courses. They included elementary courses like FORTRAN and ALGOL and more advanced courses like data structures, artificial intelligence, non-arithmetic programming, automata theory, systems programming, and so on.
In 1970 my wife Florence died.
In 1971, however, I was married to my present wife Edna, and she is here with us today.
So although I taught mathematics almost exclusively during the first fifteen years in my career, I taught computer science almost exclusively during the last fifteen years. Meanwhile, the neighborhood which surrounded the University of Detroit campus was deteriorating. In the course of my work it was necessary for me to have expensive and specialized computer equipment. In the time of my residence near the university, we had several break-ins, and finally, in 1985 I decided it was time to take early retirement even though I was neither emotionally nor physically in need of retirement at that time, nor do I feel I am ready even now.
So we moved to our present residence in Southfield, Michigan, and I have been retired ever since September of 1985. I tell my friends that looking back on my working days, I reflect that work wasn't that hard. But it took a whole day. Now as I told you, during the time that I spent in the early years of studying and teaching mathematics, I perfected the private system that I had devised until it became a very efficient tool. There was a Doctor Clifford Wichert, now deceased, who was a friend of mine. He was blind, and he was studying theoretical physics at Columbia University. He was also on the Mathematics Sub-Committee of the Joint Uniform Braille Committee, which is the grandparent of today's BANA. One day, he asked me if I knew of a good table of integrals in Braille. I told him that I had one, but it was a private Braille code which he would be unable to read unless he was instructed. Would I show him the code so that he could borrow my table of integrals? I agreed.
He was so impressed that, at the next meeting of the Mathematics Sub-Committee, he proposed the study of my code with a view to eventual adoption. He asked me to write a short report, setting forth the principles and symbols of my code, and I complied although the report turned out not to be as short as he wanted. I was asked to present it first to the Sub-Committee and then to the Joint Uniform Braille Committee, and in 1952 I did so. With hardly any debate or any discussion, the code was adopted. It was named the Nemeth Code for Braille Mathematics, 1952. Before I knew it, it was published with all of its rough spots and bugs and printed by the American Printing House for the Blind, and it became the official code.
In 1956 APH undertook to rearrange the code by putting all the rules and all the symbols pertaining to elementary and secondary mathematics at the beginning of the Code, and all the arcane and esoteric symbols at the back of the book. This rearrangement was then published in 1956.
As the Code began to be more widely used, all of its bugs and flaws began to surface. In 1965 a more extensive and complete code was published. I am often asked when the Code will be complete. To this question I ask questions in return. When will the encyclopedia be complete? When will a dictionary be complete? As long as mathematicians invent new signs and insist that those new signs be used to facilitate precise formulation of newly discovered mathematical phenomena, so long will the Nemeth Code continue to evolve and change. The changes when they are made, however, are not capricious. They are in response to a need which was not previously present.
Accordingly, another update was published in 1972, also by APH; and this is the one in current use. It is used in the United States, in Canada, in New Zealand, and possibly in other countries of which I am not aware.
Along the way (in 1954) I also wrote a dictionary of Braille musical symbols, which was also published by APH; and two years later, a committee was convened to get a new music code. That was the shortest time in which any book became obsolete. When my code was published in 1972, the Soviet Union became aware that such a code existed and invited me and my wife (at their expense) to attend a conference which they conducted in an endeavor to achieve a worldwide uniform mathematics code. I want you to know that at that time, another well-known Federationist was also invited: Chuck Hallenbeck. Although their effort to achieve a worldwide uniform code was not realized, the experience was extremely instructive. There were representatives from seventeen countries, and in each case it became abundantly apparent how a Braille code reflects the expectations a society has of its blind citizens. In 1976 my wife and I were again invited by the Soviet government (under the same conditions) to attend a conference dealing this time with computer access by the blind.
The Nemeth Code features very close simulation of the printed text, and it is that feature which has made it possible for me to communicate with my students just as if I were holding the printed text in my hand. Very complicated formulas I put on cards which I arranged in a small card file in my left jacket pocket in the order in which I planned to present them. At the right moment, I casually walked up to the board and put my left hand into my pocket, read the formula from the top card, and copied it with my right hand onto the blackboard. I gave the students the impression of what a big genius I was and also what mental acumen I possessed, and I tried not to disillusion them. After completing that formula, I transferred the card from the front of the pile to the back in preparation for the next one. Exam papers, projects, and other assignments were corrected for me with the help of a graduate assistant. The University provides this assistance not just to me but to all their senior professors. They feel that a professor should not be required to do clerical tasks at professorial salaries.
In conclusion I would like to say the following: I hope that the experience that I have had in my lifetime and that I have described here demonstrates how important are the early acquisitions of Braille skills, facility in mobility, a knowledge of print practice, and good attitudes. Equipped with these skills, a blind person can progress as far as his motivation, his ingenuity, and his talent will permit. Without them, a blind person is restricted to semi-literacy and lack of independence. I thank you all very much.
THE BLIND APPLICANT REJECTED: WHY NOT DIPLOMACY FOR THE BLIND?
by Rami Rabby
Saturday afternoon, July 8, delegates to the 1989 convention of the National Federation of the Blind were privileged to hear two stirring speeches addressing the U.S. State Department's absolute refusal to consider the candidacy of blind applicants to the Foreign Service. The first of these speakers was Avraham (Rami) Rabby, a long-time leader in the Federation. Here are his remarks as he delivered them to an enthusiastic audience:
President Maurer, Dr. Jernigan, and fellow Federationists: As you heard in President Maurer's first-class Presidential report on Thursday, for the past three and a half years I have been engaged in the process of applying for a position as a Foreign Service Officer (FSO) in the U.S. Foreign Service. Prior to November, 1988, it was the State Department's practice to assist blind candidates for the Foreign Service with the written examination by providing them with examination papers in Braille, and with the oral assessment by providing them with the necessary readers/notetakers. At the same time, the State Department would automatically disqualify blind candidates in the medical examination. Under this set of policies and procedures I had passed the written examination three times and the oral assessment twice, had received the necessary security clearance, and of course, been disqualified because of my blindness at the medical examination. Since the recruitment process for FSO's is so lengthy, all candidates sighted and blind are encouraged to continue taking the examinations each year, in an effort to improve their scores, until such time as their names are selected from the Foreign Service candidate register and they are actually hired. This was my situation when, on November 10, 1988, as I was about to take the oral assessment for the third time, I was notified by the State Department that: It has been decided that, henceforth, the Foreign Service selection process will serve not only to test a candidate's knowledge and intellectual skills, but, as well, to test a candidate's ability to work effectively and independently with original source documents. As a consequence the Board of Examiners will not offer the written examination in Braille nor will it provide the services of a reader for visually impaired candidates at any stage of the selection process, including the oral assessment. This letter, however, did not reveal the amazing complex of prejudicial attitudes and negative assumptions about blindness and the blind which actually led to this change of policy regarding examination logistics. These only came to light in the November 30, 1988, broadcast of Good Morning America, during an exchange between John Lunden, the show's co-host, and George Vest, the Director-General of the Foreign Service, as follows:
Lunden: Ambassador, what you and the Department are really saying, of course now, is that blind people are not suitable for Foreign Service. Why do you say that?
Vest: Because people who serve in the Foreign Service must be prepared to serve overseas, do a diversity of jobs which we think are either incompatible with being blind or dangerous to the blind person him- or herself.
Lunden: And what would constitute incompatible or unsuitable or dangerous?
Vest: A person who is blind is asked to move into a foreign community in an area where he or she is not familiar with the locality, will have to deal with people who may be very hostile (because there are many parts of the world that are hostile to us), and will have to, as well, deal (among other things) with classified documents and have no way on his or her own to know what classification that is. And it's similar in this country. You don't ask a blind person to drive a bus or be a bank teller. There are jobs which are dangerous or unsuitable for them. And in the Foreign Service, we are full of jobs like that. Rarely have so much ignorance, prejudice, and twisted logic been packed into so little air time! Is it any wonder that, as Vest says, many parts of the world...are hostile to us? These parts of the world may soon include the National Federation of the Blind!
A little later during that Good Morning America confrontation, George Vest touched on one of the main rationales for the State Department's opposition to blind Foreign Service Officers: The fundamental rule which is in the Foreign Service Act is anyone joining our Foreign Service must be worldwide available not just with extraordinary qualifications to serve in one country or another country be worldwide available and that is in the law. Vest implies that, while sighted FSO's can be expected to serve worldwide, blind FSO's can't be expected to do so. The National Federation of the Blind totally rejects this lowered expectation of blind candidates for the Foreign Service. By consistently regurgitating its principle of worldwide availability, the State Department would like us to believe that, with no more than a moment's notice, all Foreign Service Officers are typically and routinely uprooted from their present locations and flown, willy-nilly, from Brussels to Beijing or from Ouagadougou to Ottawa. In reality, however, Foreign Service Officers are not inanimate objects manufactured on some mythical State Department assembly line according to some fixed scientific formula, and are not perfectly interchangeable with one another. Each FSO has unique strengths and weaknesses and highly individualized assets and liabilities. One may have a degree in East European Political History, while another may not; one may have years of on-the-job experience in Saudi Arabia, while another may be a complete novice in Riyadh; one may be fluent in Hebrew, while another may be fluent in Japanese; one may be married and the mother of three children, each with his/her individual educational needs, while another may be single and much more flexible in his/her assignability; one may have a life-long passion for the culture and mores of the Far East, while another may not be so wedded to any one region of the world. Does the State Department really pay no attention to any of these individual characteristics? Does it really switch its Foreign Service Officers like so many identical pawns, from one embassy or consulate to another, across the world's diplomatic chessboard? Of course it pays attention to these and other individual FSO characteristics! Although it theorizes glibly about worldwide availability, in reality it behaves it must behave like any intelligent manager of people who recognizes that not all jobs are the same, not all work environments are identical, and most importantly, that every Foreign Service Officer, blind or sighted, is an individual in the fullest sense of that term. How do we know that this is, in fact, how the State Department behaves? We know it, believe it or not, from the State Department's own admission which it is happy to publicize, whenever it is not engaged in flim-flamming blind candidates about worldwide availability.
In a profile of George Vest yes, that same George Vest of Good Morning America fame published in the February 10, 1988, issue of the New York Times, we read the following:
His daily tasks are more likely to involve matching the needs of ordinary diplomats with available postings: `I have to reconcile an enormous variety of preferences with service needs,' he said.... 'They come to me and say: The wife is ill and they have a difficult kid in high school, or I don't like hot weather, or I did Africa, now I want Paris.' The unhappy diplomat can air his problems confidentially with his career development officer who either deals with them directly or, in grave cases, takes them up with Mr. Vest.
Well, well, well! Worldwide availability, indeed ! Given this more than realistic and accurate process of assigning Foreign Service Officers to locations and circumstances around the world, a Foreign Service Officer's blindness and his/her individual handling of it would naturally become just one more characteristic in the mix of characteristics some of them advantages or limitations in some situations, others assets or limitations in other situations which the FSO brings to the diplomatic task and which determines his/her assignment. So, in the real-world Foreign Service, blind FSO's could be as world-wide available as any sighted FSO and could function perfectly happily within the strictures of the Foreign Service Act.
As a matter of fact, unfortunately for us but fortunately for Dr. Euclid Herie, the Canadian Foreign Service does employ a full-fledged blind Foreign Service Officer who, so far in his career, has served in Japan a modern industrial state of the first order and in India perhaps the best example of a still-developing nation. An experienced U.S. Foreign Service Officer who had an opportunity to work with this Canadian in Tokyo has attested to the fact that he is extremely effective and successful in his work.
The second main rationale used by the State Department to support its opposition to blind Foreign Service Officers