Points out the increasing need for systematic studies on the effectiveness and utility of products for the visually handicapped. Reviews formal evaluations of the Optacon to identify exemplary procedures and common methodological problems. Suggests directions for the design of future evaluations of innovative products for the visually handicapped.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Foundation for the Blind.Final report on the Richard King Mellon Foundation Optacon training and purchase subsidy program (Pittsburgh City Area).New York: Author, 1976.
2.
AndersonS.B., BallS., MurphyR.T.Encyclopedia of educational evaluation.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976.
3.
BlissJ.C.Comments on the Tobin and James paper, Evaluating the Optacon: Some general reflections on reading machines for the blind.AFB Research Bulletin, 1974, 28, 159–164.
4.
CooperF.S.Review and summary of reading machines.AFB Research Bulletin, 1963, 3, 84–93.
5.
FreibergerH.Reading machines for the blind, the Veterans Administration, and the non-veteran blind.AFB Research Bulletin, 1972, 24, 29–35.
6.
GadbawP.D., DolanM.T., & De l'AuneW.R.Optacon skill acquisition by blinded veterans.Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 1977, 71, 23–28.
7.
GoldishL.H., and TaylorH.E.The Optacon: A valuable device for blind persons.New Outlook for the Blind, 1974, 68, 49–56.
8.
GreenJ., and StoneJ.Program evaluation: Theory and practice.New York: Springer, 1977.
9.
MarmolinH., and NilssonL.G.Project PUSS: XV: Optacon reading aid: An evaluation of instructional method and applicability.Uppsala, Sweden: Pedagogical Institution, 1973.
10.
McLaughlinL.A machine that can read aloud … to the blind and visually handicapped. “New England Magazine,”Boston Sunday Globe, August 7, 1977, 8-10, and 38.
11.
LauerH.Kurzweil reading machine project. First quarter report, June 1–August 31, 1977.Hines, Ill.: Veterans Administration Hospital, 1977.
SchoofL.T.An analysis of Optacon usage.AFB Research Bulletin, 1975, 29, 33–50.
14.
ScrivenM.The methodology of evaluation. In StakeR.E. (Ed.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (American Educational Research Association, Monograph series on evaluation, No. 1). Chicago: Rand McNally, 1967.
15.
ScrivenM.Evaluation workbook. Unpublished manuscript, University of CaliforniaBerkeley, 1977.
16.
ScrivenM., and RothR.Evaluation glossary. In ScrivenM., Evaluation workbook. Unpublished manuscript, University of CaliforniaBerkeley, 1977.
17.
StakeR.E.The countenance of educational evaluation.Teachers College Record68, 1967, 523–540.
Telesensory Systems.Xmas poem read aloud by TSI system.TSI Newsletter, 1978, 17.
20.
TobinM.J., JamesW.R.K., McVeighA., and IrvingR.M.Print reading by the blind: An evaluation of the Optacon and an investigation of some learner variables and teaching methods.Birmingham, England: Research Centre for the Education of the Visually Handicapped, School of Education, University of Birmingham, 1973.
21.
WebbE.J., CampbellD.T., SchwartzR.D., and SechrestL.Unobtrusive measures: Non-reactive research in the social sciences.Chicago: Rand-McNally, 1966.
22.
WeisgerberR.A., CrawfordJ.J., EverettB.E., LalushS.E., and RodabaughB.J.Educational evaluation of the Optacon (Optical-to-Tactile Converter) as a reading aid to blind elementary and secondary students (Interim technical report, Phase I). Palo Alto, Calif.: American Institutes for Research, 1973.
23.
WeisgerberR.A., EverettB.E., RodabaughB.J., ShannerW.M., and CrawfordJ.J.Educational evaluation of the Optacon (Optical-to-Tactile Converter) as a reading aid to blind elementary and secondary students (Final report). Palo Alto, Calif.: American Institutes for Research, 1974.
