Readers Services: A Model Program

Readers Services: A Model Program

Future Reflections May/June 1983, Vol. 2 No. 3
(back) (contents) (next)
READERS SERVICES:
A MODEL PROGRAM
by Mary Willows
Reprinted from the September-December, 1982
NFB Spokesman; the publication of the California
affiliate of the National Federation of the Blind.
(Editor's Note: Mary Willows, Secretary of the
Student Division of the National Federation of the
Blind, Western Division, prepared and presented
the following paper on October 21, 1982, at the meeting of the California Association of the Post- Secondary educators of the Disabled held in Los Angeles. Mary's presentation on behalf of the NFB Western Division was very well accepted by the educators present, in face she recieved numerous calls to further discuss our philiosophy on this subject.
In attempting to set forth the recommendations of the National Federation of the Blind for a model
Reader Service Program, we feel it is necessay to take a look at some of the factors in the
relationship between a blind student and his/her
reader. A reader should be an employee of the
student. In order for a student to achieve
academic success, he/she must have the freedom
to choose the place and time of reading and the
qualifications of a good reader.
Under the Department of Rehabilitation, each
blind student was responsible for the hiring,
firing, and scheduling of his/her readers. A
student used his/her own discretion in choosing a
reader. It didn't matter who the reader was. The
most important consideratons were the
availability of the reader, his/her efficiency in
being able to follow the instructions of the student
and the reader's experience with the subject
matter being studied. Sometimes the readers
were other students, but it was not unusual to find
an unemployed or retired professional, neighbor,
or friend who was most suitable as a reader.
Under the present system, blind students are
usually required to choose from a pool of preselected
students. On the Community College
campuses, this means not only having to work
with inexperienced peers, but being forced to read
on the campus where the student and reader can
be monitored. One re-entry woman we know in
Sacramento was forced to give up the idea of
going back to school because she could not afford a
baby-sitter for her two children so that she could
take day-time classes and study on campus.
Another student was severely reprimanded, like a
child, because the Enabler discovered the student
and his reader were working in his home.
The California State University and University of
California Systems have their own methods,
which are not consistent on all campuses, for
screening readers for blind students.
Qualifications for student-assistants and work
study students are determining factors in
selecting some readers. These may not be the best
qualifications for a good reader. The
inconsistencies among the Community College,
California State University, and University of
California Systems place undue hardships on blind
students.
Blind students should choose an institution
because of academic standing and expertise in the
student's field, not because the institution
provides the best reader services. It is through
experience that blind students learn what kind of
person they work with best. Blind students must
control the choosing of their own readers. If this
control over their own lives is taken away, blind
students will never learn how to function
independently. An Enabler must "enable", not do
too much for the student. There are alternatives.
The following recommendations are based on the
experience of blind college students who have
successfully and independently graduated:
1. The Enabler or Coordinator should encourage the blind student to develop skills to enable them
to function independently. The purpose of a
University or College is to prepare students for a
lifetime of independent, efficient functioning.
Enablers and coordinators do the student a
disservice by helping and protecting him/her too
much.
2. The blind student should be allowed to choose his/her readers and read when and where he/she
deems necessary. This is the only way a blind
student can compete with his/her sighted
colleagues, who can study at any time in any place.
3. Job placement offices should be utilized by the blind student in finding readers. The blind student has a wider choice of reader prospects because the
office can be used by both students and the
general public. Blind students can post job
announcements stating their specific needs.
4. Career Resource Centers should be utilized by the blind student in finding readers. These
centers should have lists of upper division and
graduate students seeking experience in their
fields. The blind student benefits when the reader
is familiar with the subject matter and vocabulary
to be read.
5. Department bulletin boards should be utilized by the blind student in finding readers. This
resource, again, provides readers familiar with
the material to be read.
We believe that the recommendations set forth in
this model program could result in a successful
program. We are concerned first and foremost
with the blind student. We believe that blind
students should be the employer of the reader,
thus maintaining control in the student/reader
relationship. Involving a third party in the
employment process (i.e., the Coordinator or
Enabler), confuses loyalities between reader and
student. Readers are going to the Coordinators
with complaints and requests for instructions
rather than working them out with and obtaining
them from the blind student. Currently, blind
students are becoming dependent upon a custodial
and paternalistic system which will not be
available after graduation; this is the exact
opposite of what college life should be providing.
(back) (contents) (next)