[nfbwatlk] Call for Accountability

[Chris & Judy Jones]

Hi, Joanne,

Your comments are very encouraging and your input is very much appreciated. 
I'm gratified to think that this is an isolated case that was brought to my 
attention.  I'm very thankful that this lack of understanding of the value 
of braille is not all-pervasive.  I'm sorry to see it in our region, but 
it's what we have to work with . . . and the education process goes on.

I'll look forward, too, to seeing you at convention.

Judy

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joanne Laurent" <joanne at blindcoach.com>
To: "'NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List'" <nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: [nfbwatlk] Call for Accountability


>    Wow! Thank you Mike for those very nice words about me!
> I saw these posts and was dying to jump in. But I was hesitant to speak on
> behalf of DSB since I am no longer an official employee. I am currently, 
> as
> Mike so kindly pointed out, providing services for DSB as an outside
> contractor. I am covering a wide area of west Washington as far north as
> Seattle. Unfortunately, I gave my job in Vancouver away so I don't get to
> work close to home anymore (violins please). I was an employee for several
> years previously.
>
>     Speaking as a non-employee with a close enough contact to observe the
> agency, My understanding of DSB policy is to provide the best quality
> services possible with the resources available. There is no need to 
> pressure
> DSB to "require prospective participants to go through an evaluation of
> blindness skills" because DSB policy already has such a requirement. I'm
> sure LouOma would be happy to explain the policy.
>
>    My personal opinion of the evaluation process is that it provides an
> insurance policy to ensure good service. The assessment of blindness 
> skills
> (by a non-counselor) creates an opportunity for a second opinion, from a
> skills training expert, to ensure that the counselor has not missed any
> training needs. I perform many of those assessments and I absolutely do
> encourage Braille training to anyone who cannot read print easily.
> Unfortunately it often takes considerable time to convince someone who is
> slowly losing their vision of the need to learn Braille. While my
> observation has been that DSB counselors generously provide whatever
> training is needed or desired, they don't force anyone to accept unwanted
> training (with the exception of those who choose to attend the OTC - I
> believe they must attend all classes). OTC attendance is encouraged. For
> those who cannot, or will not, attend the OTC itinerant services are
> available (which is what I provide). Basically, we make house calls. But 
> it
> is not realistic to provide the same extensive service to everyone in the
> state via house call as a teacher cannot be at everyone's house eight 
> hours
> per day, five days per week. Nevertheless, I have never been denied a
> request to provide regular, ongoing, in-home training to those who want it
> and participate responsibly. Those who attend the OTC will receive the 
> full
> meal deal and this is available to all.
>
>     I'd like to address the reference to Braille from a previous post:
> "...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." (Joanne's 
> response):
> During assessments I have occasionally encountered people who told me that
> they were informed by their counselor (or teacher or school) that they did
> not need Braille or it was "too soon to learn." Those comments disturb me
> greatly because I believe that anyone who struggles to read print or whose
> vision is deteriorating is better off learning Braille now rather than
> later. Fortunately, I've only heard of those comments coming from the 
> mouth
> of a DSB employee one time in the past nine-and-a-half-years. Many DSB
> counselors seem to have a better-than-average grasp on the need for 
> training
> and I suspect we can thank LouOma for making that happen as she truly 
> talks
> to her employees in a service-oriented manner.
>
>   I think some of the conflicting issues with counselors may stem from the
> fact that counselors have received completely different university 
> training
> to do their job than I had to do my job. Counselors coordinate the whole
> package but blind rehab counselors are not required to have the same
> extensive exposure to the capabilities of blind people as I have received
> (mostly I learned from you all). Counselors push a lot of paper and are
> required to have excellent administration skills while teachers are out
> there teaching and observing people skills. The counselor who is not
> advocating Braille training might not be a bad counselor, but rather, an
> uninformed one. The assessment that DSB requires for all new applicants
> provides an opportunity for a teacher to correct any such 
> misunderstandings.
> (and I can assure you the person who made the "it's too soon to learn
> Braille" comment to me received Braille training with the counselor's
> blessings)!
>
>   I look forward to seeing you all at convention!
>
> Joanne Laurent
> Certified Orientation and Mobility Specialist
> If you can't learn it, I'm not teaching it right!
> www.blindcoach.com
>
> Highest Expectations Travel and Adaptive Skills Instruction for the Blind
> P.O. Box 586 Ariel, WA 98603
> (360) 231-4597
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfbwatlk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Freeman
> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 1:02 PM
> To: NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfbwatlk] Call for Accountability
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbwatlk mailing list
> nfbwatlk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbwatlk
>