1960s Part 1: Prerequisites to Long Cane Safety
- Grace Ambrose-Zaken
- 1 day ago
- 18 min read
Updated: 59 minutes ago
The United States Army long cane crashed civilian life like an uninvited guest. Some of the loudest opposition came from school for the blind staff who were skeptical about their students' need for a long cane. Further, they scoffed at the new practice of blindfolding sighted adults so they could learn to teach the blind.
Warren C. Bledsoe, the son of Maryland School for the Blind's (MSB) longest serving superintendent, had grown up among its blind pupils and specialized teachers. Before they enlisted to fight in World War II, he and Richard Hoover, who would later be known as the father of long cane travel, were both trained teachers working for the MSB.
In 1945, Bledsoe himself had learned blindfolded long travel when developing the orientation and mobility (O&M) long cane skills. Blindfolded cane travel is part of graduate O&M study still in use today and culminates in the student completing a drop off exam. Sighted students wearing blindfolds are intentionally disoriented while being driven around in a car. They are let out in the training neighborhood and told a location and a time to meet. They are expected to arrive without any help from anyone or anything (no apps) - just by using the sensory information available to them. This vital part of training to become an O&M specialist is considered essential to truly understanding the ease with which one can orient non-visually (orientation), when using a long cane (mobility).
In 1952, Bledsoe believed, “the sighted individual who is blindfolded can approach problems of the newly blinded adult in a way he cannot approach problems of the congenitally blind” (Bledsoe, 1952, p. 3). His opinion was absorbed through a lifetime of experience living on the MSB campus. There Bledsoe would have met adventitiously and congenitally blind children, overhead and seen firsthand the challenges of educating congenitally blind children. It was at MSB where he formed his impression that the congenitally blind child who avoided independent walking, had a gnarled posture, and delayed social skills was not a candidate for long cane instruction.
Yet, unbeknownst to all, the reason children with congenital blindness walking was so terribly afflicted was due to them having never experienced safe mobility in their entire lives. Not one had experienced the consistent protective barrier of visual preview and it was written across their entire bodies.
Bledsoe's comment was but a simple footnote in his otherwise powerful treatise entitled "Resistance". His impassioned speech made waste to the argument that there would be serious consequences for any blind man who became dependent on a long cane. He rejected anyone who thought the invention of the long cane was the problem, not the unsafe condition of blind walking. He strongly advocated the use of the long cane by all blind adults.
No Two are Alike
In the 1960s, many of the first babies of the ROP epidemic were now teenagers. When they were just hours old, they were blinded by overexposure to the lifesaving oxygen pumped into their incubators. As doctors frantically tried to identify the cause, equally unprepared teachers worked to meet their educational needs.
On a scale never experienced before across the United States, thousands of children with an MVI/B were enrolled in their local public schools. Helen Fields, the director of the Bureau for Education of Visually Handicapped in New York City, reported that New York City alone had "...1300 blind and partially sighted students" (1961, p. 337).
Once these children were sitting next to their sighted peers in the same classroom, the stark developmental differences were keenly obvious for all to see. Even the most accomplished blind scholars were unable to walk to school without holding someone's hand (Blasch, 1968).
Yet, there existed a great solidarity in best way to treat blind children, the first and foremost rule has been to admit 'yes, blind walking is unsafe', and to insist it was 'best for blind children to make them walk anyway'. Images and articles showcasing the amazing abilities of blind teens to walk without long canes never called attention to inherent danger of this activity.
Studies suggested there were children entering public and parochial schools with significant walking delays (Hunter, 1962; Donlon, 1964; Kurzhals, 1968; Miller, 1969). By all accounts, those blind teens who did walk independently did not get a long cane until after high school.
In these two competing narratives we find the familiar pattern of finding fault with those parents whose children didn't rise to their potential and offering praise to parents, whose blind children achieved so much more. The resilience of some blind children to achieve independent walking has maintained this unhealthy obsession with the need to see all blind children walking unprotected. While the literature will have you believe that there are no two blind children alike, all children with a visual impairment or blindness were raised under the same unrealistic expectation. They were all expected to walk unprotected and uninformed by an assistive safety device.
Does the end justify the means?
Did those golden blind children who did learn to independently walk to school without depending on a long cane or a helping hand achieve their true potential? What could blind kids like Judy have accomplished had they not had to first learn how to ignore their basic need to feel safe.
Judy was born mobility visually impaired in 1952 (interviewed on January 6, 2000). Everyone responsible for Judy's health and well-being knew her eyes provided her only color and light perception. As a child she openly wished "people would carry candles so she could know where they were".
Judy was asked to describe her experiences walking independently without an assistive safety device as a child. In answer to the question, what strategies did you use to accomplish this feat? She said:
A. Ohh. I mean a lot of strategies. You know every crazy thing from you know walking along the line between the grass and the sidewalk and, and, and just hitting things. As a kid I had cuts and bruises from head to toe. People would say well how did you get—I don’t know. You know. I don’t have a clue. Q. Which one (laugh).A. Yeah exactly. I don’t. You know. It just you don’t worry about getting hit. You don’t worry about falling down. I absolutely believe that one of the greatest survival—one of the things that, that spells how well a blind person does is how well—how able they are to tolerate pain. Q. Wow. That shows you’ve earned your…A. Yeah, because you know if you just keep going and you don’t think about it. You can actually do it. Q. So, is it safe to say the attitudes that your family had were—A. Oh utterly abhorrent. Yes totally. I mean actually you know as an adult I look back on it I think they were nuts.(laugh) But I’m glad I had them as parents. Q. How would you characterize their attitudes towards you?A. Oh I think you know you talk about parents being overprotective of blind kids. My parents were under protective. Oh, utterly I mean to the point of being ridiculous. And, and that’s fine I survived it, but it would have been so easily for, for not to.A frequently asked question is, if unsafe mobility is so bad for blind children how do you explain blind adults like Judy?
Judy graduated college, had a successful career, and she and her blind husband are self-described world travelers. Yet even though Judy attributed her success to her parents childrearing practices, she expressed mixed feelings about their extreme methods. Such as their insistence on her being a completely independent traveler.
At age five, they put Judy on a Greyhound Bus without a chaperone as part of her 3-hour commute to school. Judy reflected, "I don’t think a parent should let any child do that, blind, sighted, or indifferent".
Judy would be the first to admit that no amount of successful blind adults who grew up beating these highly unfavorable odds should ever convince anyone that this risky approach to childrearing is the best and only way to raise a blind child. Yet it was these very kids, like Judy, who fueled the literature of the 1960s, urging everyone to believe that only a childhood devoid of safe mobility could result in an independent blind adult.
What about those children who didn't go to college? Those who fared far worse under these same conditions of growing up walking blind, what about their untapped potential? For as much praise heaped on those parents whose blind children beat the odds, parents of those with significant developmental delays were blamed.
The Blame Game.
The professional search for answers amplified the blame game that had long dogged families raising infants born with an MVI/B who did not develop as promised. Emma Minturn, a home visitor from the Maryland School for the Blind, in a few short paragraphs both absolved teachers while simultaneously blamed the doctors and the mothers for her student's poor outcomes.
Minturn wrote, "at this time, we knew little of what went on with these babies. They were like, yet unlike, others we had known. We were feeling our way. Doctors were puzzled and many advised, "when your baby is ready he will do that which he is supposed to do; let him alone." So the little "let alone" baby, unmotivated, unstimulated, very often became a little vegetable" (1960, p. 57).
On the other hand, since the children arrived on their first day of school unable to walk or talk; Minturn seemed certain it was the parents who were failing to understand the assignment. As Minturn explained the children were silent because, "mothers had been told, "talk to your baby." And some took that to mean talk to the child every waking hour" (1960, p. 57).
Yet, even when Minturn admitted, "something went wrong with the "teaching to walk" methods. Our babies developed a toeing-out, waddling sort of gait" (pp. 57-58); she evaluated that outcome to mean again that the mother was responsible. She was convinced that "a blind child can be taught to toe forward, to swing out from the hips with chin up" with the right teacher (p. 58).
Yet, Ms. Minturn had no proof of what she wrote. Hers, like all of the texts of that era, failed to consider the impossible task they were placing on congenitally blind children. She expected them to grow up unaffected by playing sports, navigating obstacle courses and playground equipment all while never knowing what their next step would bring. Would it be a step up or step down, flat or bumpy, grass, concrete or tile? No warning, no escape, no protection.
No warning, no escape, no protection.
The Consequence of a life of unsafe mobility was obvious for all to see. Koestler's (1976) social history of blindness reported,
"Every teacher had seen children report for school who had not yet learned to use a knife and fork or to tie their shoelaces; some were physically underdeveloped and lacking in basic motor skills; some were excessively timid; some were addicted to such "blindisms" as eye-rubbing, facial contortions, rocking and swaying of the body or other forms of self-stimulation; some were so totally self-absorbed as to be unable to relate to others."In the 1960s, Josephine Miller was among the first graduate students trained in O&M. A teacher of physical education and mobility for the Royal Victorian Institute for the Blind in Victoria, Australia; Miller observed:
“The problem presented itself to me as soon as I entered a school for the blind. Why, if blindness was their only defect, did these children present such a picture of physical abnormality, with poor posture, awkward gait…I asked Dr. Hoover*, What could be the cause of this? “…He looked sad and said, “Nothing, I guess, but tension. Imagine the strain that must build up when you have to travel like that (without safety)” (Miller, 1964, p. 305). * R.E. Hoover, originator of the Hoover cane technique.Moor, a specialized teacher, also painted a bleak picture of the children with an MVI/B entering her school in the 1960s. She described the children with an MVI/B as “frequently indifferent to the school experience, and at first may physically withdraw by curling up on the floor or even on a bookshelf” (p. 9).
Moor’s choice of the word ‘indifferent’ seems out of context with her description of children with an MVI/B physically withdrawing from an unfamiliar place. A blind child hiding inside a bookshelf seems more like a cry for help, than indifference.
The picture above is a screenshot taken of a video on teaching O&M to preschool children (Anthony & Lowry, 2004). The narrator reported that "Jasmine was age three and had very little vision, if any, due to optic nerve hypoplasia".
The purpose of including a video of Jasmine running headfirst into the wall in the O&M curriculum entitled Developmentally Appropriate Orientation and Mobility Practices was not explained (Anthony & Lowry, 2004). Yet, it is used here as a plausible reason for Moor's students hiding inside the classroom bookcase.
Blindness, the inability to see, is dangerous to walking independently. Why, then, was the highest prestige goal set for a blind child to act if they were sighted and that included demonstrating 'the ability to walk without a guide or an assistive safety device'?
ROP Epidemic in the Schools
In 1968, “one-tenth of the population of individuals with a visual impairment were under twenty years of age” and twenty-five percent were infants and toddlers who were not receiving educational services (Moor, p. 9). Many of these students were not succeeding in accomplishing basic life skills independently.
There was a great demand for solutions which caused an explosion of professional journals and textbooks written by executive directors, university graduates, faculty, and practitioners in the field. They all contributed their experiences with school-aged children with an MVI/B. Many practitioners attempted to answer the one question that seemed impossible to solve. Why most students with an MVI/B were not walking independently, most of the day, like their sighted peers.
What was worse, unlike their sighted peers, the older they got the less independent they seemed to become. Yet, few questioned or attempted to replace the archaic expectation that blind children should have no difficulty walking independently at home, in school, and in their community; despite the fact that they clearly did.
Children with an MVI/B relied on guides despite insistence they be taught walk without help from sighted people. Fields (1961) described independent travel instruction provided to New York City students as, "the teacher of the braille class helps the blind child to develop ability to get about the school freely and to travel without too much dependence on others" (p. 338).
The early education goal to have blind children walk without assistance or an assistive safety device was embraced by the most prominent experts of the day. For example, in Reverend Thomas Carroll's quintessential book "Blindness: What It Is, What It Does and How to Live with It; he proclaimed, "...don't ever let your child get dependent on us. Remember, he can make his way without undue dependence if, except for his blindness, he is normal" (1961, p. 256). He continued,
You may doubt that possibility at times -- that he can really be normal and independent. But it might help you to remember that the author of this book is completely convinced of the possibility. Your youngster can grow with this handicap, adjust to it, live normally in a sighted society, and achieve the purpose for which God put him here. But a tremendous amount will depend on you, and on your willingness to let him do it" (Carroll, 1961, p256).
Educational Textbooks and Foremost Scholars Establish Prerequisites to Long Cane Safety
Phil Hatlen, educator and innovator of schools for the blind himself, described Lowenfeld as “the twentieth century’s most prolific, scholarly, informative, thoughtful, and creative writer in education of the visually handicapped” (1981, p. 68).
Lowenfeld, educated at the Vienna Teachers’ Academy, began his career as a teacher of blind children in 1922. In 1930, he was awarded the Rockefeller Research Fellowship to go to the United States to study American work for the blind. As the story goes, this award likely saved his life when, in 1938, Lowenfeld’s contacts led to his liberation from occupied Austria and appointment as Director of Educational Research at the American Foundation for the Blind. He was also hired as an Instructor for the Programs in Blindness and Visual Impairments at the prestigious Teachers’ College, Columbia in NYC.
In 1961, Lowenfeld published his advice to parents of children with a MVI/B… He told them that their children
“must learn to walk without help of any kind in familiar territory. What is familiar territory expands as they grow older, until they learn to venture out into places that are new to them. When the time comes to do this, they should learn to use the cane. Usually this is found practical only after a youngster is fourteen years of age, more often older than that” (Lowenfeld, P. 187-188).Table 5. Modern interpretation of 1961 advice to parents.
Table 5 demonstrates how Lowenfeld's advice published in the sixties were based on theories first published in the 1700s (Ambrose-Zaken, 2024a). For example, his use of the phrase “permit the child to become oriented himself” derives from a theory that adults prevent blind infants from walking, to keep them safe. This theory would have us believe adults leading the blind child caused the harm, not the blind child exhibiting a fear of walking independently.
Lowenfeld also placed walking independently as a pre-requisite to learning the long cane. He suggested blind children who needed long canes for safety should walk their first fourteen years without one. There was never any reason given for the delay, except that most people understood the average blind child wasn't in danger of walking, because he mostly sat quietly.
Lowenfeld’s teachings were incredibly influential. His adroit assessment that the long cane was too challenging for infants to learn to use correctly for safe mobility, holds true to this day. Yet, his spurious conclusion that blind children could learn to walk without any safety does not.
At the core of his teaching is the unshakable belief that blind children should be able to walk freely without concern for their own safety.
Lowenfeld's recommended teachers insist their blind students walk without a helping hand or long cane and that strategy, he believed, would one day counteract these early delays. Lowenfeld wrote:
"Reading will come more easily to a child who can relate the words he reads to realities he has experienced. It is the responsibility of his teacher to see that he continues to enjoy many experiences and has opportunities to learn what is going on in the real world around him, first in the school, its grounds, and then the world outside" (1956, p. 126).
The unattainable prerequisite skill.
Lowenfeld advised parents that the only assistive safety tool available, the long cane, could wait until their children were age fourteen. Thus, his writings further supported the theory that children with an MVI/B's motor delays due lack of safe mobility could be overcome through sheer adult willpower.
Lowenfeld's belief that children could wait fourteen years for a white cane was absolute and became another barrier to improving blind toddler safety in well into the 1990s. His many publications told families and professionals that the long cane would be waiting for the child when that child could walk and talk well enough to learn how to use it.
Teachers, parents, and doctors of the late 1960s were so stymied by the difficulty congenitally blind high school children had learning to use the long cane they continued to do more of the same, expecting different results.
My next blog will explore the literature of the 1960s that describes the outcomes once they began teaching long canes to school children.
References
Ambrose-Zaken, G. (Accessed 7/10/24a) Safe Toddles Talks Orientation and
Mobility, safetoddles.org/podcast.
Ambrose-Zaken G. (April, 28, 2024b). History of Early Intervention O&M: The
True Origin Story of the Long Cane, O&M and Pre-cane Skills.
Ambrose-Zaken, G. (March 23, 2024c). History of Early Intervention O&M: The
First Half of the Twentieth Century.
Ambrose-Zaken, G. (March 5, 2024d) History of Early Intervention for Children
Born with a Mobility Visual Impairment: 18th to the 20th Century.
Ambrose-Zaken, G. (2023) Beyond Hand’s Reach: Haptic Feedback is Essential
to Toddlers with Visual Impairment Achieving Independent Walking. The
Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 117(4), 278-
Ambrose-Zaken, G. (2022). A Study of Improving Independent Walking
Outcomes in Children Who Are Blind or Have Low Vision Aged 5 Years and
Younger. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 116(4), 533–545.
Anthony, T. & Lowry, S. (2004). Sensory development. In T.L. Anthony, S.S.
Lowry, C.J. Brown, & D. D. Hatton (Eds.), Developmentally appropriate
orientation & mobility (pp. 123.240). Chapel Hill: FPG Child Development
Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Blasch, D. (1971) Orientation and mobility fans out. Reprinted from
Blindness 1971, AAIB Annual. Washington D.C.
Bledsoe, C.W. (2010). Originators of orientation and mobility training. In W.
Wiener, R. Welsh, & B. Blasch, (Eds). Foundations of Orientation and Mobility:
Volume II Instructional Strategies and Practical Applications (3rd Ed) (pp.434-
485). AFB Press.
Bledsoe, C. W. (1963). For parents looking ahead to future mobility needs of
their blind children. The International Journal for the Education of the Blind,
XIII(1) October, 13-16.
Bledsoe, C.W. (1952). Resistance. C. Warren Bledsoe Manuscript Collection, AER
O&M Division C. Warren Bledsoe Archives, museum of the American Printing
House for the Blind, Louisville, KY.
Buell, C.E. (1962). Recreational and leisure-time activities of blind children. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XI(3) March, 65-69.
Carroll, T.J. (1961). Blindness: What It Is, What It Does and How to Live with It.
Little, Brown and Co., Boston.
Chester, John, (1977). “Dialogue Today” C. Warren Bledsoe Manuscript
Collection, AER O&M Division C. Warren Bledsoe Archives, museum of the
American Printing House for the Blind, Louisville, KY.
Cutsforth, T. D. (1951). The blind in school and society; a psychological
study. (New ed.). American Foundation for the Blind.
Dog Guides and Blind Children a Joint Statement. (1963). The International
Journal for the Education of the Blind, XIII(1), 16-17.
Donlon, E.T., (1964). An evaluation center for the blind child with multiple
handicaps. The International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XIII(3),
75-78.
Eichorn, J.R., & Vigaroso H.R. (1967). Orientation and mobility for preschool
blind children. International Journal for the Education of the Blind, 17(2), 48–
50.
Farrell, G. (1956). The story of blindness. Harvard University Press.
Fields, H.W. (1961). How New York City educates visually handicapped children. The New Outlook for the Blind, 55(10), 337-340.
Foulke, E. (1962). The role of experience in the formation of concepts. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XII(1), 1-6.
Graham, M.D., Clark, L.L. (1966). The New Outlook for the Blind, December,
303-304.
Gronemeyer, R. L. (1969). Community program of orientation and mobility
services for the blind in Missouri. Final Report. Saint Vincent De Paul Society,
St. Louis, MO. Social and Rehabilitation Service (DHEW), Washington, D.C.
Hetherington, F. (1955). Elementary school travel program. The International
Journal for the Education of the Blind, V(1), 15-17.
Hapeman, L. B. (1967). Developmental concepts of blind children between
the ages of three and six as they relate to orientation and mobility. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XVII(2), 41-48.
Hatlen, P. & Wurzburger, P., Collins, R, & Kellis, T. (1966). Film entitled From
Here To There. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X58hWwXd8XI&ab_channel=annetucson (Accessed May, 21, 2024).
Hoover, R. (1960). Hoovers remarks after the 1960 Skit. PROCEEDINGS OF THE
THIRTY-FOURTH CONVENTION of the American Association of Workers for
the Blind, Inc. (Held at the Americana Hotel, Bal Harbour, Miami Beach,
Florida, (August 28-September 2, 1960).
Howe, S. (1841). The Ninth Annual Report of the trustees, of the Perkins
Institution and Massachusetts Asylum for the blind 1841 from Boston:
Hunter, W. F. (1962). The role of space perception in the education of the
congenitally blind. The International Journal for the Education of the Blind,
Inc. XI(4), May 125-130.
Huffman M. B. (1957). Fun Comes First for Blind Slow-Learners. Springfield,
Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher.
Kansas State Dept. of Education, T., & Flannagan, C. H. R. (1969). A
Concentrated Mobility and Orientation Approach for the Improvement of
Education for Partially Seeing and Blind Children in Day School Settings. Final
Report.
Koestler, F. (1966). The COMSTAC Report: Standards for Strengthened Services.
Commission on Standards and Accreditation of Services for the Blind, New
York, NY. ED025068
Koestler, F. A. (1976). The Unseen Minority: A Social History of Blindness in the
United States. New York: David McKay Co.
Kurzhals, I.W. (1968). What is "Readiness" for the blind child? The International
Journal for the Education of the Blind, XVIII()3, 90-93.
Lord, F. E. and Blaha, L. E. (1968). Demonstration of Home and Community
Support Needed to Facilitate Mobility Instruction for Blind Youth. Final Report.
California State Coll., Los Angeles. Special Education Center. Spons Agency
Rehabilitation Services Administration (DHEW), Washington, D.C.
Lowenfeld, B. (1956). Our Blind Children, Springfield, Ill. Charles C Thomas.
Levy, W. H. (1872). On the Blind Walking Alone, and of Guides” (pp. 68-76) in
(W. H. Levy) Blindness and the Blind: A Treatise on the Science of Typhlology.
London : Chapman and Hall
Manley, J. (1962). Orientation and foot travel for the blind child. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XII(1), 8-13.
Martin, P., & Kleinfelder, R. (2008). Lions Clubs in the 21st Century. Authorhouse.
Mecklenburg Association for the Blind. (1965). The Freedom of Movement for
Blind Children: A Manual for Teachers of Blind Children Orientation and
Mobility. Charlotte, NC: Mecklenburg Association for the Blind.
Miller, C. K. (1969). Conservation in blind children. Education of the Visually
Handicapped, 1(4),101-105.
Minturn, E. H. (1960). The preschool blind child and his mother. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, X(2), 57-59.
Miyagawa, S. (1999). Journey to Excellence: Development of the Military and
VA Blind Rehabilitation Programs in the 20th Century. Galde Press, Inc.
Miller, J. (1964). Mobility training for blind children: Possible effects of an
organized mobility program on the growth and development of a blind child.
The New Outlook for the Blind, 58(10), 305-307.
Mills, R.J., and Adamshick, D.R. (1961). The effectiveness of structured sensory
training experiences prior to formal orientation and mobility instruction.
Education of the Visually Handicapped, 1(1), 14-21.
Moor, P. M. (1968). No time to lose: A symposium. American Foundation for the
Blind, New York.
O’Meara, M. (1966). An experimental program at the Illinois braille and sight
saving school for developmentally-delayed visually-impaired children. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind. XVI(1), 18-20.
Penrod, W., Burgin, X., & Ambrose-Zaken, G. (2023). Enhancing Independent
Walking in Children with a Mobility Visual Impairment or Blindness: A
Quantitative Study on the Impact of the Pediatric Belt Cane. The Journal of
Visual Impairment & Blindness, submitted for publication 6/21/24.
Putnam, P. (1963). The triumph of the Seeing Eye. Harper & Row.
Weiner, L.H. (1962). Educating the emotionally disturbed blind child. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XI(3) March, 77-79.
Royster, P. M. (1964). Peripatology and the development of the blind child. The
New Outlook for the Blind, 58, 136-138.
Sauerburger, D. (Accessed May, 19, 2024) www.sauerburger.org/nodetect.htm
Walker, D. L. (1961). Practices in teaching orientation, mobility, and travel. The
International Journal for the Education of the Blind, XI(2), 56-58.
Weiner, W. (1980). Orientation and mobility come of age. 1979-80 AAWB Annual
Blindness. American Association of Workers for the Blind, Inc. Washington,
D.C. 118-148.
Wyver, S. R., & Livesey, D. J. (2003). Kinaesthetic sensitivity and motor skills of
school-aged children with a congenital visual impairment. British Journal of
Visual Impairment, 21(1), 25–31.
R Williams history of the cane CONFERENCE FOR MOBILITY TRAINERS AND TECHNOLOGISTS; PROCEEDINGS (MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY FACULTY CLUB, DECEMBER14-15, 1967).
Massachusetts Inst. of Tech, Cambridge. Sensory Aids Evaluation Development Center.
Spons Agency- Children's Bureau (DHEW),Washington, D.C. Social and Rehabilitation Service; Rehabilitation Services Administration (DHEW), Washington, D.C.
Report No- SAV -1057-67
Pub Date (68] Note- 76p.
Ten articles treat mobility aids and training for the blind. The following subjects are discussed.
Comments