Examining Highly Skilled Cane Travelers:
A Preliminary Study

By Matthew M. Maurer, Ph.D



Seven highly skilled cane travelers were studied using methods adapted from reading research methodologies. This study examined both the skilled cane travelers and the methods used to describe them. Preliminary results indicate that the adaptation of reading research methods can prove useful in describing the behaviors and practices of skilled cane travelers. Preliminary results from the subjects of the study indicate that auditory cues are considered more important than tactile cues by most expert travelers. This study suggests that expert travelers tend to shift from conscious to subconscious thinking in a fluid manner with a surprising level of conscious thought given to relatively routine matters. Little difference was found between male and female cane travelers with the exception that females tended to ask more questions of the general public.


blind, visual impairment, cane travel, orientation and mobility, reading research


Examining Highly Skilled Cane Travelers: A Preliminary Study

For individuals who are visually impaired, travel skills can be a key element of their success both professionally and personally. Moving freely about the world, choosing where to go, when to go, and how to go are important elements of an independent, self-determined life. This has given rise to strong national expectations that orientation and mobility be taught as a part of the expanded core curriculum for all youth who have visual impairments (Corn, Hatlen, Huebner, Ryan, and Siller, 1995; Hatlen, 1996). If we plan to teach all visually impaired youth to travel, it seems appropriate to teach them to be the best travelers they can be. One significant impediment to this goal is our knowledge of the intended outcome. There is a solid knowledge base on initial skills (e.g., Jacobson, 1993; Morais, Lorensen, Allen, Bell, Hill, and Woods, 1997; Pogrund, 1995) but, how much is known about the highly skilled blind traveler? A thorough review of the literature reveals little. If the wisdom of "beginning with the end in mind" For individuals who are visually impaired, travel skills can be a key element of their success both professionally and personally. Moving freely about the world, choosing where to go, when to go, and how to go are important elements of an independent, self-determined life. This has given rise to strong national expectations that orientation and mobility be taught as a part of the expanded core curriculum for all youth who have visual impairments (Corn, Hatlen, Huebner, Ryan, and Siller, 1995; Hatlen, 1996). If we plan to teach all visually impaired youth to travel, it seems appropriate to teach them to be the best travelers they can be. One significant impediment to this goal is our knowledge of the intended outcome. There is a solid knowledge base on initial skills (e.g., Jacobson, 1993; Morais, Lorensen, Allen, Bell, Hill, and Woods, 1997; Pogrund, 1995) but, how much is known about the highly skilled blind traveler? A thorough review of the literature reveals little. If the wisdom of "beginning with the end in mind."

For individuals who are visually impaired, travel skills can be a key element of their success both professionally and personally. Moving freely about the world, choosing where to go, when to go, and how to go are important elements of an independent, self-determined life. This has given rise to strong national expectations that orientation and mobility be taught as a part of the expanded core curriculum for all youth who have visual impairments (Corn, Hatlen, Huebner, Ryan, and Siller, 1995; Hatlen, 1996). If we plan to teach all visually impaired youth to travel, it seems appropriate to teach them to be the best travelers they can be. One significant impediment to this goal is our knowledge of the intended outcome. There is a solid knowledge base on initial skills (e.g., Jacobson, 1993; Morais, Lorensen, Allen, Bell, Hill, and Woods, 1997; Pogrund, 1995) but, how much is known about the highly skilled blind traveler? A thorough review of the literature reveals little. If the wisdom of "beginning with the end in mind." Given that there is little available in the research literature to describe excellent cane travelers, the first question that arises relates to methodology--how to begin. From previous work I had done with travel instructors, I had noticed a striking similarity between the language of cane travel and the language of reading instruction. The words used are often similar or even identical. As examples, both speak of speed as an important element of success, both practice skills to automaticity, both have a strong focus on errors, and both could apply the adjective "fluency" to the successful learner. I conducted this study to begin to describe the skills and habits of excellent cane travelers and to test the feasibility of adapting reading research methods to the study of cane travel. Given time and financial constraints, I focused on a small, select subject pool.

Initial questions included:

  • Can methods used to analyze reading behavior be applied to the analysis of cane travelers?
  • Do skilled travelers have a set of travel habits that can be classified?
  • What proportion of successful cane travel is done consciously and what proportion is done subconsciously?
  • Are there discernable differences between male and female highly skilled cane travelers?
  • How much of successful cane travel is done auditorially and how much is done tactilely?
  • Can a close examination of highly skilled cane travelers reveal information that can be used to improve orientation and mobility instructional strategies and techniques?

Because this study used human subjects, it was reviewed by a local Institutional Review Board (IRB). The local IRB approved all the procedures that were use in this study.


Subject Selection

Because this study was undertaken to examine highly skilled cane travelers, I decided to seek the very best cane travelers in the country. I sought advice and nomination for these individuals from leaders of the National Federation of the Blind. A single nomination from a credible judge of skill was deemed sufficient to be included in the subject pool. I asked for nominations of both male and female travelers. My list of criteria was:

  • They travel relatively quickly
  • They walk with a normal stride
  • They travel with fluency (utilizing a smooth gait)
  • They make relatively few errors, meaning going the wrong way, tripping, falling down, or otherwise injuring themselves
  • They are highly independent and self determined, going where they wish and when they wish

I received the nomination of nine individuals, five women and four men who were willing to participate in the study. Due to various practical and scheduling difficulties, the final population included four men and three women.

Six of the subjects were either currently teaching cane travel or had done so in the past. All subjects were adults and ages ranged from the mid 20's to the early 50's. Four subjects were totally blind, and three had some vision and wore sleep shades for the study. Subjects were from around the country. All had a significant level of training through organizations affiliated with the National Federation of the Blind.

Data Collection

The specific procedures I decided to borrow from reading research were running records (Clay, 1984), think aloud protocols (Afflerbach and Johnston, 1984), and retrospective miscue analysis (Goodman and Marek, 1996). I used running records to capture the behaviors of a traveler and think aloud protocols and miscue analysis to analyze the thinking that was coupled with the behavior. All my running records, questions, and subject answers were audio recorded.

To gain a range of information, I observed subjects in both familiar and unfamiliar settings. I allowed the subjects to select a familiar setting, and I chose a nearby mall as the unfamiliar setting. I checked with each subject to insure that the mall that was chosen was indeed unfamiliar.

In the familiar setting I began by asking each subject to take a short route. While they walked, I recorded a running record of their behavior. At the end of the short route I asked open-ended questions (e.g., "What was that like?" followed by "What were you thinking about as you walked?") to explore their thinking about their travel behavior (think aloud). I decided to do intermittent think alouds rather than the more traditional continuous process to minimize the disruption of the data collection on the travel task. After the open-ended questions I asked more specific questions about any aspect of their behavior that seemed noteworthy, or any element of the environment that was unusual. Finally, I asked each subject about any errors that I observed (retrospective miscue analysis). I asked them about the thinking that accompanied the error, and any confounding circumstances that led to the error.

After the short route, I asked the subject to take a longer route following the same questioning protocol. Once the two familiar routes were complete we drove to an unfamiliar setting for the unfamiliar routes.

In the unfamiliar setting I began with a short route using the aforementioned analysis protocol. I then asked subjects to take a longer route, with a specific objective (e.g., "Go to a men's clothing store and find the neck ties"). Again, while the subject walked I recorded a running record of their behavior. During longer tasks I stopped each subject after approximately five minutes of travel to engage in think alouds and to explore any unusual circumstances. I stopped the subjects several times during these tasks so they would have the best possibility of remembering what they were thinking as they traveled. As the observation session progressed, I extended the time between debriefing sessions.

Once a task was complete I asked subjects to complete another travel task. I followed the same protocol until it seemed that there was little left to be observed or to be learned from the subject. With most subjects this involved two or three routes, each in familiar and unfamiliar territory.

While audio recording subject related data, I also made side comments about the data collection process. In addition, at the conclusion of each data collection session with each subject, I recorded notes to myself on the process as a whole.

Data Analysis

All data was audio recorded. These recordings were transcribed and coded. Coding was done in two phases: open coding and refinement of coding. The data was then analyzed for emerging themes. Data was then grouped according to those themes and analyzed across gender. As mentioned earlier, the data included information of two types: data related to the travel behavior of subjects and data related to the collection of the data itself.


Effectiveness of Methods

Collecting a running record of behavior seemed fruitful. As the study progressed I was able to develop a thorough set of observable behaviors. They included the subject selection criteria of speed, stride, fluency, and errors. In addition, other behaviors that were recorded were cane grip, hand-foot coordination, width of cane arc, what was touched with the cane, head movement, street crossing behavior, and interaction with other people.

The use of think aloud strategies also seemed fruitful. The exploration of travel moves and strategies effectively revealed the thinking that undergirded the behavior that was observed. In almost all cases, subjects in this study were able to clearly and effectively articulate their thinking as they traveled. They could articulate actions or "moves" as well as grouped actions or "strategies." The conscious awareness was typically more acute with more complex situations and less so with routine matters.

The use of the think aloud and retrospective miscue analysis strategies, in practice, became much more like to a debriefing session. It was apparent early in the study that a focus on errors was problematic. When I focused on errors, subjects often became defensive or distracted from the immediate analysis of thinking and behavior. A focus on errors tended to disrupt communication rather than enhance it. Instead I found that open ended questions like, "tell me what that was like" were much more effective. Open ended questions elicited a wide variety of responses and revealed what was most important in the mind of the subject. Once communication was open, I followed up with questions relating to unusual events, decision points, and probing questions about levels of consciousness. I typically reserved questions about errors for last and kept those questions as open ended as possible. I found that what I perceived as an error was sometimes something else, either an intentional decision for a reason that was not apparent to me or a safety consideration. As an example, I observed one subject waiting at a stop light through three cycles of the light. I assumed that the subject did not catch the available cues that indicated that the light had changed. In fact, the subject informed me that there was a train passing to her back and she intentionally never crosses a busy street when there is a disrupting noise like a passing train.

How Skilled Cane Travelers Behave

In analyzing the behavior of the subjects, as would be expected, all subjects exhibited the behaviors for which they had been selected (speed, fluency, low error rates, independence, and self determination). In addition to those behaviors, they also had highly automatic cane techniques. Beyond the expected rudimentary techniques, they automatically adjusted those techniques when situations required it. For example, they automatically narrowed their arc for oncoming foot traffic and they automatically shifted grip in crowded circumstances. They each exhibited relatively frequent listening behavior (e.g., stopping and turning the head), especially in unfamiliar locations or in highly changeable or dangerous circumstances, like at a busy street crossing.

In familiar territory, subjects traveled much more quickly, and asked virtually no questions of the general public. While subjects did at times stop to gather orientation information, it was an infrequent behavior in familiar territory. Subjects had no major problems or errors while traveling in familiar territory. In unfamiliar territory, subjects all asked questions of the general public early in each route (e.g., "Can you tell me where I can find the nearest men's clothing store?"). All subjects exhibited much more exploratory behavior in unfamiliar territory, using the cane more to find things, and listening (as exhibited by stopping and turning the head) much more often.

All subjects used similar cane touching behavior. They all used the standard two point arced caning technique. However, they also touched very little that was unnecessary to the travel task at hand. A common cane technique is to shore-line, or follow a known object such as a wall or a curb. In some circumstances, shore-lining is helpful or even necessary, for example to find the unknown location of a door in a wall. In most situations, however, shore-lining is not recommended for a variety of reasons. The subjects in this study rarely touched objects or features that they knew were there. When asked about this they responded with answers like, "I knew it was there, so touching it with my cane would just slow me down." A second common response was, "Why would I touch it? I knew it was there." When that object was a person their response often included a statement about disruption or rudeness ("He was talking and I didn't want to distract him."). While "low touch" behavior was common to all subjects, the level varied by subject. A few subjects automatically navigated around objects that to my observation would have required a cane touch to be aware of the object (silent, inanimate obstructions). These subjects, when asked about those situations reported that they were aware of the object auditorially. Sometimes they reported that they were aware of the object through echo location, using the sound of their cane tip. Other times the subjects reported that they were aware of an object because of the ambient sound in the environment. As an example, one subject veered around an ATM machine that stuck out into the walkway. The machine was silent and the subject did not touch it with the cane. When asked about it, the subject said, "I knew there was something there; I just didn't know what it was." When probed further, the subject reported that the sound profile around the object was different than the sound profile in the open hallway.

All subjects exhibited a focused concern for travel efficiency. Within constraints of safety, they used shortest routes. This was particularly noticeable when subjects were asked to locate specific areas or objects during the unfamiliar travel tasks. Two examples illustrate this behavior. In the first example the subject was asked to go to a specific electronics store and find the TVs. Upon entering the store the subject stopped, listened for the TVs and then headed directly in that direction. In the second example a subject was asked to go to a grocery store. The subject stopped, listened for grocery carts, and headed directly for the store entrance. In both these examples, the subjects made efficient choices about what cues were most effective to complete the task. This illustrates both effective decision making coupled with experience. Knowing that shopping carts make a characteristic noise around the entrance of a grocery store is important knowledge, and choosing to use that cue to find the store is effective decision making.

In some situations the cues that the subjects chose to use as primary were predetermined, as in the case of the grocery carts. In other situations subjects gathered all the available information and made judicious selections. As an example, a subject heard piano music and used that cue to find a music store.

Conscious Versus Subconscious Travel

One issue that was explored thoroughly with subjects was the level of consciousness they experienced in various situations. The pre-study assumption was that skills and behaviors that were practiced to automaticity would be carried out subconsciously. A further assumption was that highly skilled cane travelers would practice many behaviors to automaticity and thus shift a wide array of behaviors to the subconscious (Maurer, Bell, Woods, and Allen, 2006). An analogy would be a routine driving experience for a sighted person. I can arrive home after negotiating dozens of complex turns and intersections and have little or no recollection of doing so. Does the highly skilled cane traveler handle similar situations on a subconscious level?

A number of situations arose that appeared to be consistent with this assumption. As an example, when shifting from one kind of environment to another, say an open sidewalk to an outdoor café with tables and chairs, the subjects routinely appeared to make the necessary adjustments with no discernable disruption. Things like routine obstructions or somewhat common problems were managed with no change in travel speed or fluency. However, when questioned about those circumstances, subjects reported a level of awareness that seemed inconsistent with the behavior that was observed. The subject responses seemed to indicate a higher level of consciousness than expected. When this issue was explored further, all subjects insisted that they had some level of conscious awareness of each of these situations. There appeared to be an intentional and practiced interplay between conscious and subconscious thought. They appeared to be in a state Freud (1964) called the preconscious.

As this theme became apparent, I explored it in greater depth. One of the last subjects, when asked what was going on in her mind as she encountered tables on the sidewalk, suggested that she shifted to her "tables on the sidewalk" subroutine. If that is indeed the case, the conscious/subconscious interplay may happen something like this:

Subconsciously walking down an open sidewalk
Encounter objects
Consciously identify them as tables and chairs
Consciously shift to tables on the sidewalk subroutine
Subconsciously negotiate tables on the sidewalk

Male and Female Travelers

For the most part, there was little observed difference between male and female travelers. The only exception was the frequency of asking questions of the public. All subjects began an unfamiliar travel task by asking questions of the general public. The techniques used were similar between men and women. However, the frequency with which subjects checked their progress was different. Two of the three women asked questions frequently as a means of checking their progress (e.g., "Excuse me, is the music store down this way?"). The four men and one of the women proceeded toward their goal until they believed they needed assistance. While this could be considered a gender difference, it could also be a simple personality difference. When asked about their question asking behavior, the five low questioning subjects shared a dislike for asking for assistance when it was not needed. The two women expressed a very different attitude. They said things like, "I wanted to make sure I was still on track." The two women who asked frequent questions asked questions of the public just over three times as often as the other five subjects. As might be expected, these two subjects never got significantly off their intended path, while four of the other five subjects did. Surprisingly, all four of the male subjects wound up off track in their travel route at least once, while the woman who infrequently asked questions did not.

Auditory Versus Tactile Cues

My pre-study assumption about the relative importance of tactile and auditory cues was that the tactile (what was experienced with the cane) was more dominant than auditory cues or at best, they were equally important. Observations of subjects showed this assumption to be false with most subjects. It was common to observe a subject traveling a significant distance without touching anything but the unobstructed ground ahead. All subjects used their cane continuously to insure that what was ahead was as expected. Beyond that, however, subjects tended to use their canes only when it was necessary. If other cues were available, they relied upon them and only reinforced those other cues when issues of safety or uncertainty arose. Subjects made turns, avoided obstacles, and navigated around people, often with the cane only touching unobstructed ground. While the cane is often described as a tool find obstacles, it seemed as though these skilled travelers used the cane to find the clear path.

The feedback from subjects reinforced those observations. I asked each subject how much they relied on auditory cues as opposed to tactile cues. I specifically asked them to assign percentages. Each subject was reluctant to do so, saying that it varied according to the circumstances. However, when I pressed the point, asking them to generalize and choose percentages, only two responses were given. Two subjects said 50/50 and the other five said 80/20, with the 80% representing their reliance on auditory cues. The observation of the five subjects who reported 80/20 were consistent with these figures. The observation of one of the subjects who reported 50/50 was also consistent. The subject used the cane very heavily, much more so than any of the other subjects. The remaining subject who reported 50/50 was an exception. That subject, similar to the other five, only used the cane when it was necessary, and relied on other cues as they were available.

Unexpected Themes

Several issues arose that were not foreseen in the research questions. One of these issues related to errors. It was expected that these highly skilled travelers would make relatively few errors, if any at all. That was not the case. It was clear from observing the subjects that everyone makes errors and the errors cover the full spectrum of possibilities. Subjects made wrong turns, they veered when they intended to go straight, and subjects misinterpreted sounds and tactile clues. At times the subjects became aware of the errors quickly and other times they did not. There were two aspects to errors that were common to all subjects. The first was their general response to errors and the second was the likely consequences of those errors.

The response of the subjects to errors was highly consistent. Correction of errors was immediate, effective, and done with little or no apparent emotional response. From what was observed, it seemed apparent that errors were a natural, expected part of travel. They were just one more problem to be solved. When asked about errors, however, subjects were quite different. Some subjects talked about errors in a more routine fashion, others were defensive or at times even in denial. This seemed like a difference in personality and seemed to relate to personal pride.

The consequence of errors was also common among subjects. I never saw a subject make an error that I believed to be dangerous. For example, when a subject veered at a street crossing, they always veered away from traffic. I did not see any misinterpretation of tactile cues that put a subject in danger (e.g., missing a dangerous drop off). This is not to say that excellent travelers never make errors that put them in danger, but it did not occur during any of my observations.

Another issue that was observed but not anticipated by a research question was something I called "exploring behavior." From time to time a subject would stop and "look at something." It might be the exploration of an object with the cane, with the hand, or with the foot. When questioned about these incidents, they fell into two categories. Gathering information for future reference, (e.g., where is the ATM at the mall?), or "I was just wondering" situations. An example of "just wondering" behavior was a subject who encountered a section of sidewalk that was roped off. The subject stopped, crouched and felt the situation with the hands. When asked about the incident, the subject said, "I was just wondering what was going on there." When I examined all the "I was just wondering" situations, I found that there was potential danger in each. The roped off sidewalk could contain a deep hole, or it could simply be a rough spot. It would be useful to know that a deep hole was on the other side of the rope. At times the subjects were aware of a safety aspect to the "just wondering" behavior and other times they were not. It seems likely that the subjects have practiced diligent safety habits to automaticity. In addition, they seemed to be constructing rich and holistic mental constructions of their environment.


Using research methods borrowed from literacy research seems to show promise, although some of these methods need refinement. Running records of travel behavior and think aloud protocols during travel seem very promising as a means of recording and analyzing the thinking of a cane traveler. Miscue analysis seems to need refinement if it is to be beneficial to the analysis of travel behavior. This study initiated the process of examining the use of assessment techniques developed by other fields. It is likely there is additional value in analyzing the similarities between travel and reading.

This study started the process of defining the nature of highly skilled cane travelers. It was clear that a number of common characteristics can be identified. These characteristics included: the high level of automaticity of routine travel skills, the importance of auditory information, the fact that even the best travelers make errors, and the fluidity with which skilled travelers correct and recover from errors.

This study identified a level of consciousness in cane travel between the conscious and the subconscious. While this is an important awareness, further study of the nature of preconscious travel has a potential to further inform the field.

From the observations in this study, gender differences do not seem to be worthy of significant further study. The only exception might be an examination of how men and women differ in their questioning of the public and how these differences impact the outcome of a travel event.

This study clearly indicated that auditory information is used heavily by excellent cane travelers. More finely focused studies in this area are likely to yield important information in the field.

Implications for Instruction

With further development, think aloud protocols and running records can become an important tool for recording and analyzing the progress of orientation and mobility students. These techniques could be used to examine behavior over time.

A number of behaviors that were observed and comments that were made by subjects suggest ways we might improve instruction. Follow up questions were asked of each subject about decision making behavior. For example, in the grocery store example I asked the subject, "How did you know to listen for grocery carts?" In answer to many of these questions, subjects spoke of independent experience. It is clear that good travelers have a lot of independent experience. This suggests that once skills acquisition is nearing completion, it is important for travel instructors to give their students as much independent experience as possible.

The subjects in this study frequently made good decisions about what cues to use as primary. Inclusion of decision making strategies seems critical in an effective travel program. The subjects in this study also made decisions as a routine part of their travel. That means that they practiced them to automaticity. This has powerful implications on the structure of instruction. It implies that instructors need to back away from students, allowing them to engage in independent decision making with enough frequency that it becomes routine. It means that once basic skills are acquired, teachers need to teach less to give learners the opportunity to internalize the decision making process. It implies a move from a teaching model to a coaching model, allowing learners to make independent decisions. Once they have done so, teachers need to guide those decisions toward greater efficiency and safety.

When one considers cane travel it seems logical to think of the cane and caning techniques as the focus of instruction. In fact, the subjects in this study clearly showed that the emphasis of a cane travel instructional program must be on listening skills. None of the subjects in this study believed that the cane was more important than the ears, and most believed the auditory cues were much more important than the tactile ones.

Lastly, the "looking around" behavior that was seen in subjects suggests that this may be important behavior for a skilled traveler. If that is the case, the implication for instruction is to give students time to engage in that behavior. While an instructor may wish to push learners to focus on the travel of the day, some "looking around" behavior should probably be tolerated. That behavior could allow the learner to form richer and more complete mental constructions of their environment.

Implications for Future Research

There were a number of aspects of this study that, once conducted, could have been improved. The first was in defining the criteria for subject selection. While the list was primarily behavioral, one aspect that was overlooked was more dispositional. All highly skilled cane travelers in this study had jobs that required that they travel on demand. They all did so with no hesitation and with great confidence. The criteria of being able and willing to travel on demand could be added to the definitions of highly skilled cane travelers.

The decision to do intermittent think alouds with subjects produced useful information. However, a more traditional approach of a continuous record of thinking could produce other kinds of information that should be examined.

While the idea of examining subjects in both familiar and unfamiliar settings produced useful information, it could have been extended further. The malls that were used in the study were unfamiliar to each subject, but they were highly predictable. Malls have rules and patterns to their structure and layout. Another kind of information could have been elicited by using unfamiliar locations that were less predictable like parks or open fields.

The impact of visual acuity was not specifically examined in this study. Subjects were either totally blind or agreed to wear sleep shades. From the observations that were made, I have some suspicion that vision has an impact on the development of travel skills and habits. A study designed to specifically focus in that area would be helpful in understanding excellent cane travelers.

While my thoughts on visual acuity are far from conclusive, they may be useful in designing future studies. It seemed that totally blind travelers tended to use their hearing more frequently and more extensively than travelers with some vision. In some cases it seemed that vision itself was not the primary issue, but instead how much the subject used that vision. As an example, two subjects could have the same visual acuity, but one could use that vision more than the other in their daily life. It appeared that the subjects who used their vision more also used their cane more extensively, and those who used their vision very little used their hearing more extensively. This seems logical because the person who uses their vision more heavily would have a lesser need for non-visual skills and thus would spend less time practicing those non-visual skills. Although this seems logical, it requires further examination.

An examination of issues relating to low-vision travelers and unique techniques they employ could significantly benefit the field of orientation and mobility. There are currently two competing philosophies. Philosophy 1: a person with visual impairment should maximize the use of any residual vision. Philosophy 2: a person with visual impairment should maximize their non-visual skills. These philosophies are, for the most part, opposed to one another. From the observations in this study, I believe that the reliance on low vision likely has a negative impact on the development of non-visual skills, particularly how effectively a blind person can process auditory information. It also seems reasonable and logical that the best use of some vision can be of significant benefit to a person with visual impairment. It therefore seems important to discover the middle ground between these opposing philosophies. Further study is necessary to find that middle ground.

Reference List

Afflerbach, P. and Johnston, P. (1984). Research methodology on the use of verbal reports in reading research. Journal of Reading Behavior, 16, 307-321.

Clay, M.M. (1984). Observing the young reader. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.

Corn, A. L., Hatlen, P., Huebner, K. M., Ryan, F., and Siller, M. A. (1995). The national agenda for the education of children and youths with visual impairments, including those with multiple disabilities. NY: American Foundation for the Blind.

Freud, S. (1964). The unconscious. In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 14, pp. 166-215). London: HogarthPress. (Original work published 1915) doi.10.1097/00005053-192209000-00046 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097%2F00005053-192209000-00046

Goodman, Y. and Marek, A. (1996). Retrospective miscues analysis: Revaluing readers and reading. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.

Hatlen, P. (1996). The core curriculum for blind and visually impaired students, including those with additional disabilities. RE:view 28, 25-32.

Jacobson, W. H. (1993). The art and science of teaching orientation and mobility to persons with visual impairments. AFB Press: New York.

Maurer, M. M., Bell, E. C., Woods E., and Allen. R. (2006). Structured discovery in cane travel: Constructivism in action. The Kappan, 88(4) 449-455.

Morais, M., Lorensen, P., Allen, R., Bell, E. C., Hill, A., and Woods, E. (1997). Techniques used by blind cane travel instructors. National Federation of the Blind: Baltimore, Maryland.

Pogrund, R. (1995). Teaching age-appropriate purposeful skills: An orientation & mobility curriculum for students with visual impairments. Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired: Austin, Texas.

The Journal of Blindness Innovation and Research is copyright (c) 2014 to the National Federation of the Blind.