![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/d6da951bea9c3624b6d87d17b6064af2.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
Aloha everyone,
Here?s my quick list, trying not to duplicate any others already said:
* We only take the cream of the crop students, which is why we have such good results to report
* SDCT is only for totally blind consumers or those who will become totally blind because of a degenerative eye condition
* Instructors have to be blind
* We make students wear sleepshades in order to show them how hard it?s going to be when they become totally blind
* SDCT is based on a set of teaching techniques rather than a holistic belief in the normality and capacity of blind people
* Anyone can teach SDCT if they just employ the right teaching techniques (the point here is that SDCT is a registered trademark of the NBPCB and can only be offered by properly credentialed instructors)
* The goal of SDCT is to learn techniques for movement through space; if any emotional adjustment is a goal, that goal is secondary
* We are trying to take away disability benefits from the blind community, such as SSDI
* We have no compassion for blind people
* We think we are better than blind people with training under the vision-centered approach (a term President Riccobono used in his banquet speech this year, which I absolutely love)
* Metaphorically, we throw blind people in the water and tell them to swim, rather than giving them foundations they need before we put them up to a task
* Students of SDCT do not learn about how to best use their residual vision (I think Jeff Altman?s article, ?When the Sleep-Shades Aren?t On,? covers this concept very well)
* SDCT requires that students wear sleepshades and use NFB straight canes
* Blind instructors or sighted instructors wearing sleepshades are not able to safely monitor our students and keep them safe
* It is possible to believe in both vision-centered orientation and mobility and SDCT and offer both options side-by-side
Lastly, I want to explain a dilemma in people?s understanding of Structured Discovery, and I think it goes beyond just talking about credentialing. There are, of course, six centers accredited by the NBPCB as operating according to the Structured Discovery model. There are a few training centers besides these six who advertise that they are Structured Discovery centers. I totally get that leadership at these centers want to get to that level, but it clouds the marketplace and makes it hard for consumers to understand what is happening and where. When we took our students to national convention, many of them were proud to say that they attended the Structured Discovery program at Ho`opono Services for the Blind, and they frequently found that NFB members scorned them as belonging to an inferior center. As I have been talking to people and trying to figure out what?s going on with that, I?ve heard that many people throughout our movements see all the conflicting messages and false advertising, making it hard for them to keep track of which center is accredited and which one is not. This appears to lead a lot of consumers to discredit any center that is not formally an NFB center.
I don?t think that Ho`opono is concretely better than any other center, but I do think that there are a lot of confusing messages in the adjustment to blindness training marketplace because of the unaccredited centers that call themselves Structured Discovery centers. I don?t want to make it harder for startup centers to enter our network or make it harder for existing centers to convert, but I would like to see a reduction in the confusion in the marketplace.
A hui ho,
Justin
Justin M. Salisbury, MA, NOMC, NCRTB, NCUEB
Legislative Committee Chair
Honolulu Chapter
National Federation of the Blind of Hawaii
Email: President at Alumni.ECU.edu