Analysis of recent literature covering visual experiments with infants and young children documents a progression of visual functions in early development. Summaries of studies of individuals with seriously impaired vision suggest that principles which apply to visual development are as valid when the system is impaired as when there is no impairment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AppleL., & MayM.Distance vision and perceptual training.New York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1971.
2.
AppleL., BlaschB. B., & O'BrienR.Visual abilities—Their behavioral assessment and possible methods for their improvement in the individual with severe visual impairment.Proceedings of the Low Vision Conference.United States Office of Education Grant #0-8-071112-2995 (607), 1970.
3.
AppletonT., CliftonR., & GoldbergS.Behavioral competence in infancy. In, Review of Child Development Research, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1975.
4.
AshcroftS.C., HallidayC., & BarragaN.Study II: Effects of experimental teaching on the visual behavior of children educated as though they had no vision.Nashville, Tenn.: George Peabody College for Teachers. United States Office of Education Grant #32-52-0121-1034, 1965.
5.
BarragaN. C.Increased visual behavior in low vision children.New York: American Foundation for the Blind, 1964.
6.
BarragaN. C. (Ed.) Teacher's guide for development of visual learning abilities and utilization of low vision.Louisville, Ky.: American Printing House for the Blind, 1970.
7.
BarragaN. C.Visual handicaps and learning: A developmental approach.Belmont, Ca.: 1976.
8.
BayleyN.Bayley Scales of Infant Development.New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1969.
9.
BlaschB. B., & AppleL. E.Workshop on low vision mobility. Final Report, Washington, D. C.: Veteran's Administration, Department of Medicine and Surgery, 1976.
10.
BockJ.Reading performance of visually impaired print readers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan1971.
CarrollH. C., & HibbertF. G.The perceptual ability of a class of partially sighted children.The Visually Handicapped International Archives for Research, 1973, 3, 106–118.
13.
CarpenterP.Low vision aids: The implications of education.Yearbook of Special Education.Chicago: Marquis Who's Who Inc., 1976-77, 277–280.
FagerstromN.Administration and coordination of a training program in a low vision clinic. In RexE. J. (Ed.) Proceedings of a special study institute: Methods and procedures for training low vision.Normal, Ill.: Illinois State University, 1971.
17.
FarrarD.Classification, description, and basic design and principles of low vision aids. In RexE. J. (Ed.) Proceedings of a special study institute: Methods and procedures for training low vision.Normal, Ill.: Illinois State University, 1971.
18.
FayeE. E.The role of eye pathology in low vision evaluation.Journal of the American Optometric Association, 1976, 47, 1395–1401.
19.
FfooksO. F.Neurophysiology and assessment of visual function in children. In GardinerP. (Eds.) Aspects of developmental and paediatric ophthalmology.London: Spastics International Medical Publishers, 1969.
20.
FreidmanG. G.Distance low vision aids for primary level school children.The New Outlook for the Blind, 1976, 70, 376–379.
21.
GriffinP. M., & SanfordA. R.Learning Accomplishment Profile for Infants, Experimental Edition, Chapel Hill Training Outreach Project. Chapel Hill, N. C.: Kaplan Press, 1976.
22.
GroffP.Sight words and the disabled reader, Academic Therapy, 1974, 10, 101–108.
23.
FuthS. K.Light and lighting for the visually handicapped. In RexE. J. (Ed.) Proceedings of a special study institute: Methods and procedures for training low vision skills.Normal, Ill.: Illinois State University, 1971.
24.
HaithM. M., & CamposJ. J.Human infancy.Annual Review of Psychology, 1977, 28, 251–293.
25.
HatfieldE. F.Why are they blind?The Sight-Saving Review, 1975, 45, 3–22.
26.
HolmesR. B.Training residual vision in adolescents educated previously as non-visual. Unpublished master's thesis, Illinois State University1967.
27.
HullW. A., & McCarthyD. C.Supplementary program for preschool visually handicapped children: Utilization of vision/increased readiness.Education of the Visually Handicapped, 1973, 5, 97–104.
28.
IllingworthR. S.The development of the infant and young child, normal and abnormal.Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Co., 1966.
29.
Kraetsch-HellerG.Use of the Beery Visual-Motor Integration Test with partially-sighted students.Perceptual & Motor Skills, 1976, 43, 11–14.
30.
LangleyB., & DuBoseR. F.Functional vision screening for severely handicapped children.The New Outlook for the Blind, 1976, 70, 346–350.
31.
LillieD. L., & HarbinG. L.Carolina Development Profile.Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1975.
32.
MacKeithR. C.The eye and vision in the newborn infant. In GardinerP. (Eds.), Aspects of developmental and paediatric ophthalmology.London: Spastics International Medical Publications, 1969.
33.
O'BrienR.A developmental model for early childhood services with special definition for visually impaired children and their parents.Rockville, Md.: Montgomery County Public Schools, 1976.
34.
OppelD. J., PascuzziD. H., PikowskyR., WilliamsJ. A., & MooreM.W.Utilization of visual information functional signs.Low Vision Abstracts, 1977, 3, 4–13.
35.
SegalM. M.From birth to one year.Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.: Novall, Grant #OCD-CB-138 Children's Bureau, Office of Child Development, Department of HEW, 1974.
36.
SeidenbergB. H.Pediatric low vision. In FayeE. E., & HoodC. M. (Eds.) Low vision.Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1975.
37.
TobinM. J.A study in the improvement of visual efficiency in children registered as blind.Birmingham, England: University of Birmingham Research Centre for the Education of the Visually Handicapped, 1973.
38.
VurpillotE.The visual world of the child.London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1976.
39.
WilsonJ. D., McVeighV. M., McMahonJ. F., BauerA. M., & RichardsonP. C.Early intervention: The right to sight.Education of the Visually Handicapped, 1976, 7, 83–90.
40.
WoodruffM. E.The visually “at risk” child.Journal of the American Optometric Association, 1973, 44, 130–133.
