[nfbwatlk] Call for Accountability

[Mike Freeman]

Judy:

In fact, although I was not there, I understand that the rehabilitation 
advisory council was rather exercised over what was perceived to be a 
lack of enthusiasm for braille and Louoma has written me privately 
expressing a willingness to work on ways to increase emphasis upon the 
usefulness of braille as well as other alternative techniques.

In fact, there is an initial assessment that all prospective DSB clients 
are suposed to take to determine what skills might be useful (we haven't 
gotten to the point yet where DSB says if you're a client, you *must* 
take the following courses ...). Perhaps Alco can help me out here as 
she was a DSB counselor and RT at one time.

Lisa is, I suspect, correct in her opinion that your best bet if you 
need skills training (most especially training in braille) is to attend 
the OTC in Seattle (assuming you can't persuade your counselor to okay 
training at a NFB-operated center). My impression is that skills 
training is hit-or-miss at best if you do not live in Seattle. Here in 
Vancouver, at least, O&M training is excellent in that Joanne Laurent 
contracts with DSB to do some O&M; she is excellent; she is a member of 
our chapter and will be at the convention. Elsewhere, I cannot say.

But even assuming that there is good skills training available, we still 
have the problem of differences in philosophy between the two major 
organizations of the blind as to the extent that *all* blind and 
visually impaired clients should learn all the alternative techniques of 
blindness. Those in ACB/WCB tend to be a little more lenient or less 
doctrinaire than are we in that regard. This works itself out in DSB 
policies in having excellent-sounding directives that are, in practice, 
often honored more in the breach than in fact. (I'm specifically 
thinking of sleepshade policy here but one can say much the same about 
other aspects of blindness skills training.)

But even if skills training were always to be emphasized, I think it's a 
fair question to ask whether such training is easily available around 
the state. I presume that the answer should be obvious. What to do about 
it in an age when the legislature won't even fund WTBBL up to par is a 
great puzzle, if I do say so myself!

Mike

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Chris & Judy Jones
  To: Unknown
  Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 11:43 AM
  Subject: [nfbwatlk] Call for Accountability


  Greetings to all,

  I'd like some perspective on the following.

  As I wrote earlier on the list, I was dismayed at how one of the 
counselors from our office views braille, and my concern on how that 
negative attitude is being passed on to participants.  Is this attitude 
indicative of an agency-wide attitude in other service areas?

  There are agencies serving the blind that require prospective 
participants to go through an evaluation of blindness skills.  If they 
test out, -- fine.  If not, they need to go through braille, cane 
travel, etc. before receiving services.

  The Texas Commission For The Blind apparently has a program like this.

  Is there a way we can pressure this agency to step up their game?  Are 
these issues being worked on through the advisory council?  Remind me if 
we have any resolutions on the books to this effect.

  In a perfect world, it would be great to have an agency promoting a 
can-do philosophy across the board and mandate that employees do the 
same.

  Am looking forward to the feedback.

  Thanks.

  Judy



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  nfbwatlk mailing list
  nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk
-------------- next part --------------
Judy:
 
In fact, although I was not there, I understand that the rehabilitation advisory council was rather exercised over what was perceived to be a lack of enthusiasm for braille and Louoma has written me privately expressing a willingness to work on ways to increase emphasis upon the usefulness of braille as well as other alternative techniques.
 
In fact, there is an initial assessment that all prospective DSB clients are suposed to take to determine what skills might be useful (we haven't gotten to the point yet where DSB says if you're a client, you *must* take the following courses ...). Perhaps Alco can help me out here as she was a DSB counselor and RT at one time.
 
Lisa is, I suspect, correct in her opinion that your best bet if you need skills training (most especially training in braille) is to attend the OTC in Seattle (assuming you can't persuade your counselor to okay training at a NFB-operated center). My impression is that skills training is hit-or-miss at best if you do not live in Seattle. Here in Vancouver, at least, O&M training is excellent in that Joanne Laurent contracts with DSB to do some O&M; she is excellent; she is a member of our chapter and will be at the convention. Elsewhere, I cannot say.
 
But even assuming that there is good skills training available, we still have the problem of differences in philosophy between the two major organizations of the blind as to the extent that *all* blind and visually impaired clients should learn all the alternative techniques of blindness. Those in ACB/WCB tend to be a little more lenient or less doctrinaire than are we in that regard. This works itself out in DSB policies in having excellent-sounding directives that are, in practice, often honored more in the breach than in fact. (I'm specifically thinking of sleepshade policy here but one can say much the same about other aspects of blindness skills training.)
 
But even if skills training were always to be emphasized, I think it's a fair question to ask whether such training is easily available around the state. I presume that the answer should be obvious. What to do about it in an age when the legislature won't even fund WTBBL up to par is a great puzzle, if I do say so myself!
 
Mike
 
----- Original Message -----
From:
mailto:nfbwatac at earthlink.net Chris & Judy Jones
To:
mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org Unknown
Sent:
Saturday, October 06, 2007 11:43 AM
Subject:
[nfbwatlk] Call for Accountability
Greetings to all,
I'd like some perspective on the following.
As I wrote earlier on the list, I was dismayed at how one of the counselors from our office views braille, and my concern on how that negative attitude is being passed on to participants.  Is this attitude indicative of an agency-wide attitude in other service areas?
There are agencies serving the blind that require prospective participants to go through an evaluation of blindness skills.  If they test out, -- fine.  If not, they need to go through braille, cane travel, etc. before receiving services.
The Texas Commission For The Blind apparently has a program like this.
Is there a way we can pressure this agency to step up their game?  Are these issues being worked on through the advisory council?  Remind me if we have any resolutions on the books to this effect. 
In a perfect world, it would be great to have an agency promoting a can-do philosophy across the board and mandate that employees do the same. 
Am looking forward to the feedback.
Thanks.
Judy
_______________________________________________
nfbwatlk mailing list
mailto:nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk