[gui-talk] Braille Reading

Wed Dec 10 13:30:02 UTC 2008

In Grade 3, dot 5 v stands for "love".  Dot 4 v is the contraction for 
"live".  Grade 3 has almost 600 contractions; Braille shorthand is more 
chaotic and contextual.  Grade 3 and Braille shorthand demonstrate that a 
system like Braille can have too many contractions, which can slow down 
comprehension.  Whether contracted Braille (formerly called Grade 2) or 
uncontracted Braille (formerly called Grade 1) inhibits fast reading more 
is still sometimes debated.  But we are getting quite far from the 
graphical user interface in this thread.  I am one of those people who can 
read a little faster than 200 wpm, one-handed.  I never got much help out 
of my right hand for reading speed.  I also have a time convincing people 
that if you read one-handed, it is likely to be with your non-dominant hand.

At 01:19 AM 12/10/2008, you wrote:
>Sometimes reading a little slower improves comprehension -- I mean, when I
>was a print reader I used a CCTV and read (frankly) too slow for my taste,
>but in so doing I picked up things like spelling and writing technique in
>the various things I read -- not just surface content.  This helped me in
>the long run. Rather than scan something several times to get the meaning, I
>studied it carefully once or twice and had a good understanding of it for
>future reference.
>
>BTW: Doug, is dot5v in grade 3 really equivalent to "live"?  I thought I
>knew grade3, but I obviously missed that one...
>Yes, rearranging dots can make some funny meanings.
>Happy reading.
>--le
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "albert griffith" <albertgriffith at sbcglobal.net>
>To: "'NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List'" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 4:50 PM
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
>
>
>I attended school with 25 blind students and our instructor having a blind
>child herself emphasized reading and writing skills.  Our comprehension was
>better than the sighted students we occasionally had classes with but our
>reading speed suffered by comparison. Admittedly, this is a small sample but
>it and associations with blind people over a lifetime have confirmed the
>conclusions I mentioned in an earlier post.  Will my data stand up to
>rigorous inquiry?  No.  My sample is too small just to mention one obvious
>flaw.  However, I think it's worth mentioning that many blind adults still
>do read at slower rates than their sighted counterparts and I believe
>they've had time for self improvement if that were possible.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of Doug Lee
>Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 5:21 PM
>To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
>
>Let's be careful to distinguish facts from drawn conclusions, if we
>plan to address this Braille versus print speed issue here...
>
>Fact: On average, print readers read faster than Braille readers at
>this time.
>
>Fact: On average, blind people that read Braille don't read it as fast
>as 250 words per minute.
>
>If anyone doubts those two, I'm all ears; but I acknowledge them as
>known facts.
>
>Now, as to what they mean...
>
>Those facts do not, I say with emphasis, NOT, mean that Braille is
>slow by definition, due to mechanics or anything else.  That's just
>one possible explanation of the facts, and I think the very existence
>of people that read Braille quickly rules out that explanation.  We
>have proven that Braille can be read at up to 400 words per minute by
>having people actually do it.
>
>So why so few such examples of fast Braille readers?  I think it's
>because there's little emphasis on teaching fast Braille reading
>nowadays.  That has nothing to do with Braille's effectiveness as a
>tool.
>
>The reason I am making such an effort to separate fact from conclusion
>is that not doing so has, historically, been the root of a number of
>famous misunderstandings, discriminations, and outright denials of
>individual and collective success.  Recall the many arguments waged
>over race versus level of education:  We know by now that color of
>skin does not affect ability to learn, but in our history, this
>obvious truth was not always accepted.  Recall the 70% (or greater)
>unemployment level of blind people:  We know that blindness does not
>directly stop us from working.  Even consider that reading speeds and
>even the ability to read at all is much lower in certain countries
>than here:  We know that this is not due to some mysterious
>geomagnetic interferance causing those countries' citizens to fail
>reading tests. :)
>
>I assert that the reason Braille appears slow by average example is
>that it is, by average example, not taught sufficiently to produce a
>different result.  I assert that this is the same sort of cause one
>should see for the other examples I just gave:  imbalance caused by
>lack of opportunity.  I assert these things, and I wonder, can I call
>these "facts" yet, or are they still in dispute?
>
>On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 03:56:47PM -0500, albert griffith wrote:
>While they are some real fast Braille readers here's an example to put the
>issue in perspective.  In 1980 Arkansas Enterprises For The Blind trained
>people to work for both the social Security Administration and the IRS.  To
>qualify people had to read Braille at 100 words per minute and at least a
>third of the applicants didn't meet the minimum standard.  All of the
>applicants had high school diplomas and at least half were college degreed.
>The mechanics of reading Braille are quite slow by comparison to print
>reading for most Braille users.  Of course there will be exceptions.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of Baracco, Andrew W
>Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 12:03 PM
>To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
>
>The fastest Braille reader might be able to keep up with the average
>print reader.  As was said before, it's a whole different experience.
>The Braille reader can only perceive what is under his or her fingers.
>The sighted reader can perceive the whole page at once.
>
>Andy
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>On Behalf Of Cindy Handel
>Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 6:50 PM
>To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
>
>Well, reading print may be fast for some sighted people.  But, I've
>known blind people who have been able to read Braille so quickly that
>they couldn't talk fast enough to keep up with their Braille reading.
>So, it all depends on the time you devote to it and the technique you
>use to read, either print or Braille.
>
>Cindy
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "tribble" <lauraeaves at yahoo.com>
>To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" <gui-talk at nfbnet.org>
>Sent: Monday, December 08, 2008 4:15 PM
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] Kindle books
>
>
>The nice thing about reading visually is to be able to see spellings and
>page layout and pictures, if any. Also, you can mark passages or write
>notes
>in the margins.
>But is it faster? I think it is actually -- I don't speak for myself as
>I
>never had good reading speed due to my declining vision, but I know
>people
>who polish off books in a couple of days that take me a lot longer
>reading
>either online or listening to a recording or DAISY book.
>I think DAISY is the best thing that has come along in a while. now if
>the
>volunteers at bookshare would use the features a bit more effectively,
>it
>would make navigating the book easier. I mean, sometimes an entire book
>has
>only one navigation element marking the start of the book. So all you
>really
>have is your current reading position, which lasts from session to
>session,
>and the start of the book to jump to, and that's all.  Very terse
>markup.
>oh well -- One of these days I'm going to scan and markup a book and
>submit
>it to bookshare and then I will be able to complain legitimately.
>Happy reading.
>--le
>
>
>...

Lloyd Rasmussen, Senior Project Engineer, Engineering Section
National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped
Library of Congress    (202) 707-0535   <http://www.loc.gov/nls>
HOME:  <http://lras.home.sprynet.com>
The opinions expressed here are my own and do not necessarily represent 
those of NLS.