This study explored the effects of orientation and mobility (O&M) training and O&M instructors on the lives of 15 participants in New Zealand. The participants thought that O&M was essential and a professional domain and that their instructors were both effective and ineffective. They also thought that the white cane and dependence are stigmatizing and that restrictions on movement and the lack of O&M instruction are disabling.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllanJ. (1996). Foucault and special educational needs: A “box of tools” for analysing children's experiences of mainstreaming. Disability & Society, 11, 219–233.
2.
BallardK., & MacDonaldT. (1998). New Zealand: Inclusive school, inclusive philosophy? In BoothT. & AinscowM. (Eds.), From them to us: An international study of inclusion in education (pp. 68–94). London: Routledge.
3.
BartonL. (1988). The politics of special educational needs.East Sussex, England: Falmer Press.
4.
BishopR. (1994). Initiating empowering research? New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 29, 175–188.
5.
BishopV. E. (1986). Identifying the components of success in mainstreaming. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 80, 939–945.
6.
BogdanR. C., & BiklenS. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
7.
CatranK., & HansenP. (1992). Pioneering a vision: A history of the Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind 1890–1990.Auckland: Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind.
8.
CrowL. (1996). Including all of our lives: Renewing the social model of disability. In MorrisJ. (Ed.), Encounters with strangers: Feminism and disability (pp. 206–226). London: Women's Press.
9.
DonmoyerR. (1990). Generalizability and the single-case study. In EisnerE. W. & PeshkinA. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp. 175–200). New York: Teachers College Press.
10.
EisnerE. W. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice.New York: Macmillan.
11.
FrenchS. (1993). Disability, impairment or something in between? In SwainJ., FinkelsteinV., FrenchS., & OliverM. (Eds.), Disabling barriers—Enabling environments (pp. 17–25). London: Sage.
12.
FulcherG. (1989). Disabling policies? A comparative approach to education policy and disability.London: Falmer Press.
13.
GallagherW. (1988). Categorical services in the age of integration: Paradox or contradiction? Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 82, 226–228.
14.
GerberD. A. (1990). Listening to disabled people: The problem of voice and authority in R. B. Edgarton's The Cloak of Competence. Disability, Handicap & Society, 5, 3–23.
15.
HatlenP. H., & CurryS. A. (1987). In support of specialized programs for blind and visually impaired children: The impact of vision on learning. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 81, 7–13.
16.
HavillS. J. (1972). Visually handicapped children. In HavillS. J. & MitchellD. (Eds.), Issues in New Zealand special education (pp. 86–95). Auckland, New Zealand: Hodder & Stoughton.
17.
HillE. W. (1986). Orientation and mobility. In SchollG. T. (Ed.), Foundations of Education for blind and visually handicapped children and youth: Theory and practice (pp. 315–340). New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
18.
HughesB., & PattersonK. (1997). The social model of disability and the disappearing body: Towards a sociology of impairment. Disability and Society, 12, 325–340.
19.
KimY., & CornA. L. (1998). The effects of teachers’ characteristics on placement recommendations for students with visual impairments. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 92, 491–502.
20.
LaGrowS. (1989). University training in New Zealand: An experience in distance education. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 83, 81–83.
21.
LaGrowS., & WeessiesM. (1994). Orientation and mobility: Techniques for independence.Palmerston North, New Zealand: Dunmore Press.
22.
LowenfeldB. (1975). The changing status of the blind: From separation to integration.Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
23.
MaturanaH. R. (1988). Reality: The search for objectivity or the quest for a compelling argument. Irish Journal of Psychology, 9, 25–82.
24.
MettlerR. (1995). Cognitive learning theory and cane travel instruction: A new paradigm.Lincoln: Nebraska Department of Public Institutions, Division of Rehabilitation Services for the Visually Impaired.
25.
MonbeckM. E. (1973). The meaning of blindness: Attitudes toward blindness and blind people.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
26.
New Zealand Department of Education. (1987). Draft review of special education.Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
27.
New Zealand Ministry of Education. (1995). Special education policy guidelines.Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
28.
New Zealand Ministry of Education. (1998). Special education 2000.Wellington, New Zealand: Author.
29.
NormanH., SritheranE., & RiddingC. (1984). Teachers’ perceptions of children with special needs: A national survey on primary school teachers concerning children with special needs in regular classes.Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Education.
30.
O'BrienP. (1989). Mainstreaming of secondary school students with visual impairments.Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
31.
OliverM. (1990). The politics of disablement.London: Macmillan.
32.
OliverM. (1992). Changing the social relations of research production? Disability, Handicap and Society, 7, 115–124.
33.
PattonM. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
34.
PetersS. (1996). The politics of disability identity. In BartonL. (Ed.), Disability and society: Emerging issues and insights (pp. 215–234). London: Longman.
35.
PinderR. (1996). Sick-but-fit or fit-but-sick? Ambiguity and identity at the workplace. In BarnesC. & MercerG. (Eds.), Exploring the divide: Illness and disability (pp. 135–156). Leeds, England: Disability Press.
36.
ReinharzS. (1992). Feminist methods in research.New York: Oxford University Press.
37.
Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind (1998, May). Orientation and mobility training essential to secure way for blind children. Outlook, pp. 13–14.
38.
SchwandtT. A. (1994). Constructivisit, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 118–137). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
ScottR. (1969). The making of blind men: A study of adult socialization.New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
40.
SigelmanC. K., & SingletonL. C. (1986). Stigmatization in childhood: A survey of developmental trends and issues. In AinlayS. C., BeckerG., & ColemanL. M. (Eds.), The dilemma of difference: A multidisciplinary view of stigma (pp. 185–208). New York: Plenum Press.
41.
TomlinsonS. (1982). A sociology of special education.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
42.
WelshR. L., & BlaschB. B. (1980). Introduction. In WelshR. L. & BlaschB. B. (Eds.), Foundations of orientation and mobility (pp. 1–7). New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
43.
WilliamsG. (1996). Representing disability: Some questions of phenomenology and politics. In BarnesC. & MercerG. (Eds.), Exploring the divide: Illness and disability (pp. 194–212). Leeds, England: Disability Press.
44.
YsseldykeJ. E., & AlgozzineB. (1995). Special education: A practical approach for teachers.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
