A Theoretical Rationale for using the Individualized Meaning-centered Approach to Braille Literacy Education with Students who have Mild to Moderate Cognitive Disabilities
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2011
A Theoretical Rationale for using the Individualized Meaning-centered Approach to Braille Literacy Education with Students who have Mild to Moderate Cognitive Disabilities
This article describes the components of the Individualized Meaning-centered Approach to Braille Literacy Education for teaching braille reading and writing to students who are blind and have additional cognitive impairments. A theoretical rationale is presented for the approach, along with some limited empirical evidence for using it with this population.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Printing House for the Blind. (2007). Distribution of eligible students based on the Federal Quota Census of January 2, 2006 (Fiscal Year 2007). In 2007 Annual report, October 1, 2006–September 30, 2007 (pp. 21–24). Retrieved from http://www.aph.org/about/ar2007.pdf
2.
AshleyC., & PollockK. (2009, March). Braille literacy: A functional approach: Overview, strategies and reflections. Paper presented at the meeting of the Vision Educators Network of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
3.
Ashton-WarnerS. (1963). Teacher.New York: Simon & Schuster.
4.
AuK. H. (2002). Multicultural factors and the effective instruction of students of diverse backgrounds. In FarstrupA. E., & SamuelsS. J. (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 392–413). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
5.
BakerL., & WigfieldA. (1999). Dimensions of children's motivation for reading and their relations to reading activity and reading achievement. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 452–477.
6.
BishopV. (1991). Preschool visually impaired children: A demographic study. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 89, 69–74.
7.
BransfordJ. D., BrownA. L., & CockingR. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
8.
BraungerJ., & LewisJ. P. (2006). Building a knowledge base in reading (2nd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
9.
BrophyJ. (1987). Synthesis of research on strategies for motivating students to learn. Educational Leadership, 45(2), 40–48.
BrowderD. M., WakemanS., SpoonerF., Ahlgrim-DelzellL., & AlgozinneB. (2006). Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392–408.
12.
CambourneB. (2002). Holistic, integrated approaches to reading and language arts instruction: The constructivist framework. In FarstrupA. E., & SamuelsS. J. (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 25–47). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
13.
Cooper-DuffyK., SzediaP., & HyerG. (2010). Teaching literacy to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(3), 30–39.
14.
CunninghamP. M. (2000). Phonics they use: Words for reading and writing (3rd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
15.
CunninghamP. M., & HallD. P. (1994). Making words: Multilevel, hands-on, developmentally appropriate spelling and phonics activities.Parsippany, NJ: Good Apple.
16.
DixonC., & NesselD. (1983). Language Experience Approach to reading (and writing). Language-experience reading for second language learners.Hayward, CA: Ale-many Press.
17.
DowningJ. (2006). Building literacy for students at the presymbolic and early symbolic levels. In BrowderD. M., & SpoonerF. (Eds.), Teaching language arts, math, and science to students with significant cognitive disabilities (pp. 39–61). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
18.
DurandoJ., & WormsleyD. P. (2009). Evaluating training and implementation of the Individualized Meaning-centered Approach to teaching braille literacy. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 103, 150–161.
19.
FerrellK. A., ShawA. R., & DeitzS. J. (1998). Project PRISM: A longitudinal study of developmental patterns of children who are visually impaired. (Final Report, CFDA 84.023C, Grant H023C10188). Greeley: University of Northern Colorado, Division of Special Education.
20.
GambrellL. B., MalloyJ. A., & MazzoniS. A. (2007). Evidence-based best practices for comprehensive literacy instruction. In Gambrell, Morrow, & Pressley (Eds.) Best practices in literacy instruction (pp. 11–29). New York: The Guilford Press.
21.
GuthrieJ. T. (2007). Foreword. In GambrellL. B., MorrowL. M., & PressleyM. (Eds.), Best practices in literacy instruction (p. xx). New York: Guilford Press.
22.
GuthrieJ. T., & WigfieldA. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In KamilM. L., MosenthalP. B., PearsonP. D., & BarrR. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 403–422). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
KamilM. L., & HiebertE. (2005). Vocabulary: Making the connections in research. In HiebertE., & KamilM. L. (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary (pp. 1–23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24.
KliewerC., & BiklenD. (2007). Enacting literacy: Local understanding, significant disability, and a new frame for educational opportunity. Teachers College Record, 109(12), 1–12. Retrieved from http://www.tcrecord.org/content.asp?contentid=14490
25.
LambG. (1996). Beginning braille: A whole-language based strategy. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 92, 184–189.
26.
LowenfeldB. (1973). The visually handicapped child in school.New York: John Day.
27.
MangoldS. S. (1989). The Mangold developmental program of tactile perception and braille letter recognition.Castro Valley, CA: Exceptional Teaching Aids.
28.
MillarS. (1997). Reading by touch.New York: Routledge.
29.
MoustafaM. (1997). Beyond traditional phonics.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
30.
MoustafaM., & Maldonado-ColonE. (1999). Whole-to-parts phonics instruction: Building on what children know to help them know more. The Reading Teacher, 52, 448–458.
31.
PearsonP. D., RaphaelT. E., BensonV. L., & MaddaC. L. (2007). Balance in comprehensive literacy instruction: Then and now. In GambrellL. B., MorrowL. M., & PressleyM. (Eds.), Best practices in literacy instruction (pp. 30–54). New York: Guilford Press.
32.
PollockK., AshleyC., & D'AurizioV. (2008, October). Braille literacy: A functional approach: Strategies and reflections for teaching pre-braille-reading students. Paper presented at the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB) Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
33.
PressleyM. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (3rd. ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
34.
SadoskiM. (2004). Conceptual foundations of teaching reading.New York: Guilford Press.
35.
SwensonA. (1999). Beginning with braille: Firsthand experiences with a balanced approach to literacy.New York: AFB Press.
36.
WormsleyD. P. (1979). The effects of a hand movement training program on the hand movements and reading rates of young braille readers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
37.
WormsleyD. P. (2004). Braille literacy: A functional approach.New York: AFB Press.
38.
WormsleyD. P., & CampbellA. (2009, December). I-M-ABLE: Using the functional approach to teaching braille reading and writing. Paper presented at the Getting in Touch with Literacy Conference, Costa Mesa, CA.
