According to Maclean’s, Braille is a dying form of communication. Its decline is attributed to the twin force of strained public budgets and technological innovation. Braille materials are expensive to produce and schools and libraries simply don’t have the resources to convert every book into Braille format. And new technologies like audio readers are cheaper and can be used without any prior instruction. The article points out that people who learn Braille do better on reading comprehension tests and are more likely to find employment. Braille advocates also point out that to not teach Braille to blind kids is to leave them functionally illiterate.
Without learning Braille, most blind people would be living in a strictly oral culture. Is that a bad thing? I’m not sure. Technology that can scan and read printed materials will only get better. These devices will offer a versatility that Braille simply can’t match. At the same time, technology can create unnecessary dependency. Take away the technology and the person truly is illiterate. A familiarity with a written language might not make us better thinkers, but it does fundamentally alter how we perceive and describe the world around us. And it doesn’t require batteries.
I used to work in a college disability services office, and part of my job was to print braille textbooks. The paper is so thick and heavy, a book ends up looking and weighing more like a refrigerator. I don’t think it’s really practical for most textbooks, but definitely it’s a skill worth learning for the visually impaired. I can imagine that a e-reader could be made to incorporate braille, where bumps raise or lower on a moving platform. If for nothing else, braille is useful for being able to read signs and labeling things. A computer won’t tell you the difference between a can of beans and a can of corn.
As a blind student, I can attest to the importance of braille. After carrying books in this format throughout my accademic career, I know their weight and bulkiness, yet it should not be viewed as a burden. I understand that it is a serious investment to produce such material. Still, schools must be willing to give blind children opportunities to read as their sighted counterparts, even if it means higher expenses. Some argue that the blind gain knowledge as affectively by listening, though they forget that everyone has a different learning style. I heard that someone whom had never read print or braille thought that the phrase “once uppon a time” is a single word! Sometimes, educators insist that blind youth who have residual vision only need the text to be in a larger font, and the magnified coppies end up being about the same size as braille ones. Also, they are oblivious to the fact that reading with the eye for a long time strains the back and neck, and causes headache in legally blind individuals. My point: Braille is essential to the blind, but unfortunately only 1 in 10 blind children are able to read braille. We desperately need to improve this literacy rate. Thank you.