Teachers' Perspectives

on the Use of the Moon Code

to Develop Literacy in Children
with Visual Impairments
and Additional Disabilities
Steve McCall and Mike McLinden
Abstract: This article reports on a study of teachers in the United Kingdom who
use the Moon Code to develop literacy skills through touch in children with
visual impairments and additional disabilities. It explores the motives, purposes,
and values that underpin the teachers' decisions to embark on and sustain
instruction in literacy for these children.

Since the early 1990s, there has been a
revival of interest in the United Kingdom
in the Moon Code as a possible route to
literacy for children with visual impair-
ments and additional disabilities who are
unable to read and write in braille. The
Moon Code, a line-based tactile code de-
veloped in England in the 1840s and once
widely used in the United States, survived
in the United Kingdom as a code for
elderly persons who are blind who lacked
the tactile sensitivity to read braille (see
Figure 1). A research project, wbich be-
gan in 1992 at the University of Birming-
ham, England, investigated the possibili-
ties tbat the Moon Code might offer in
developing the literacy of children with
visual impairments and additional disabil-
ities. The Moon Code is now embedded
in practice in the United Kingdom as an
option for teachers wbo want to develop
functional tactile literacy skills in tbese
cbildren, and a dedicated web site
(<www.moonliteracy.org.uk>) bas been
launched for teachers wbo want to find
out more about its use witb children. In
tbis article, we explore tbe motivations
and purposes of teachers wbo use tbe
Moon Code with reference to tbe salient
cultural values of tbe teacbers and the
scripts for conduct tbat govern tbeir ac-
tions (Gallimore & Goldenburg, 1993).
We consider wby teacbers wbo use tbe
Moon Code regard it as useful for the
cbildren tbey are working witb and wbat
factors influenced tbeir decisions to in-
struct the cbildren in literacy througb tbis
particular format.
Review of the literature
Attitudes of teacbers and researcbers to-
ward the development of reading and
writing skills in cbildren witb cognitive
disabilities bave cbanged greatly in recent
years (Downing, 2005; Gambrell & Maz-
zoni, 1999; Justice & PuUen, 2003). How-
ever, in tbe past, visually impaired cbil-
dren witb severe additional pbysical and

©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007 601
 A B c D
A U c r
K L M N
< L 1 N
U V w X
u V > J
Figure 1. The Moon Code.
cognitive disabilities were routinely ex-
cluded from literacy activities (Conners,
1992). For example, in their studies of
braille reading in the United Kingdom,
Williams (1971) and Lorimer (1977) con-
cluded that for a substantial number of
children whose visual impairments were
accompanied by intellectual disabilities,
it is necessary to consider whether the
leaming of braille is worth the effort.
By the 1990s, it was recognized that
sighted children with moderate and even
severe intellectual disabilities could de-
velop not only a basic sight vocabulary,
but word-analysis skills (Buckley, 1995;
Fowler, Doherty & Boynton, 1995). In
response to teachers' wishes to include
children with complex needs in the pro-
cesses of literacy, a research project was
initiated at the University of Birmingham
to investigate whether the line-based
Moon Code could offer any advantages in
the promotion of literacy among children
who are unable to access the braille code
(McCall, 2000; McCall & McLinden,
1996; McCall & Stone, 1992). The Moon
Project, as it came to be known, devel-
oped a range of teaching materials and
resources for working with children who
are visually impaired and have additional
complex needs, and it provided a forum
602 Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007
E F G H 1 J
r n o 1 J
0 p Q R S T
o \ / —
Y z
z
for the exploration by teachers and re-
searchers who are interested in the poten-
tial for literacy in this population (McCall
& McLinden, 2001a, 2001b).
At the time of the Moon Project, a more
comprehensive understanding of literacy
and children who are blind was beginning
to emerge. Koenig (1992) proposed a
framework that appeared to broaden the
range of behaviors that could be consid-
ered as displays of "literacy" by these
children. The first level of the framework
incorporates "emergent literacy," which
encompasses children's early experiences
with reading and writing. The limitations
of Koenig's model for capturing the lit-
eracy behaviors of children who are visu-
ally impaired and have complex needs
were reviewed by McCall and McLinden
(1997), but the model did signal a move
to a broader and more inclusive definition
of literacy for individuals who are visu-
ally impaired.
In the United Kingdom, interest in the
literacy of children with cognitive disabil-
ities was further galvanized by the intro-
duction of the National Literacy Strategy
(Department for Education and Employ-
ment, DEE, 1998a). The National Liter-
acy Strategy (NLS) explicitly included
children with "severe and complex leaming
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
 difficulties" while acknowledging that
they may "need different levels of work
from the rest of their peer group" (DEE,
1998a, p. 113). The recognition that all
children with complex needs need to be
included in NLS was confirmed with the
introduction of "performance levels" for
reading and writing, a target-setting pro-
cess that was designed to accommodate
the achievements of children with severe
cognitive disabilities within the processes
of literacy. For example, matching ob-
jects to pictures and symbols (Level P4)
was seen as an example of "early read-
ing," and selecting and recognizing print
signs or symbols associated with the
child's name or familiar objects (Level
P6) was considered a valid demonstration
of "reading" (DEE, 1998b, p. 25).
The introduction of NLS served to shift
the focus of British teachers and research-
ers away from the issue of whether chil-
dren with complex needs should be in-
cluded in literacy activities toward how
these children could best be included in
them. For many teachers, the Moon
Project and the resources it produced pro-
vided a timely context for addressing the
literacy needs of children with visual
impairments and additional disabilities.
The work on the use of the Moon Code
as a route to literacy is ongoing (McCall,
McLinden, & Douglas, 2007), and as part
of this work, a study was conducted on
teachers' motivation and purposes in using
the Moon Code with visually impaired chil-
dren with additional disabihties.
The study
FRAMEWORK
The study drew on a conceptual frame-
work that was originally developed by
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
Gallimore and Goldenburg (1993) to ex-
plore emergent literacy in Latin American
children in Los Angeles. Gallimore and
Goldenburg based their ethnographic
study on a Vygotskyan view of literacy as
a product of social interaction (Vygotsky,
1978), analyzing the children's emergent
literacy using five "activity-setting" vari-
ables: the personnel involved during the
activity, the salient cultural values, the
operations and tasks demanded of the ac-
tivity, the scripts for conduct that govern
the participants' actions, and the purposes
and motives of the participants.
METHOD
To monitor the development of the use of
the Moon Code in the United Kingdom,
we decided to identify as many teachers
as possible who were using the Moon
Code with children. After lengthy inquir-
ies, 50 teachers were identified from
across the United Kingdom, 35 of whom
agreed to participate in the study. The
teachers represented schools and services
throughout England, as well as 2 in Wales
and 1 in Scotland. All but 4 respondents
were female. The teachers were asked to
complete a questionnaire about their work
with children who used the Moon Code
and to agree to a follow-up visit and in-
terview. After the questionnaire was
pilot-tested with 3 teachers, a final ver-
sion was produced that asked the teachers
to provide information about their current
role in relation to children with visual
impairments and additional disabilities,
their attitudes toward literacy, the attain-
ments of the children with whom they
were using the Moon Code, and their own
motivation for using the Moon Code.
When they were using the Moon Code
with more than one child, the teachers
Joumal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007 603
Table 1
Respondents, by school or service {N = 35).
Support
Respondent service
Class teacher
Resource room teacher
Visiting teacher 19
Total 19
Note: SLD = severe learning difficulties; VIAD = visual impairment and additional disabilities; VI =
visual impairment; PD = physical disabilities.
were asked to provide information on the
child who had used the code the longest.
Five teachers also provided information
about a second child they were working
with, so data were received about the at-
tainments of 40 children who used the
Moon Code.
The sample (n = 35), although rela-
tively small, nevertheless represents 70%
of the teachers who were known to be
using the Moon Code, and the responses
could reasonably be expected to reflect
the group as a whole. We considered
whether the responses could be regarded
as objective, particularly with regard to
the questions that were related to the per-
ceived benefits of the Moon Code. Since
these teachers had invested considerable
time and energy in teaching the Moon
Code to children, they might be expected
to have been positive about its benefits
and less questioning of its appropriate-
ness. However, as we have argued, the
results suggest that the teachers under-
stood the shortcomings of the Moon Code
(McCall & McLinden, 2001a, 2001b) and
that their responses were cautious and
balanced.
T H E RESPONDENTS
The respondents were asked to supply
information about their employment. Of
the 35 teachers, 19 were visiting or itiner-
604 Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007
SLD VIAD VI PD
school school school school Total
2 8 2 12
2 2 4
19
4 8 2 2 35
ant teachers who worked for Local Educa-
tion Authority support services and had re-
sponsibility for supporting children with
visual impairments and additional disabili-
ties in local education provision. With one
exception, these children were in local spe-
cial schools for children with severe leam-
ing difficulties (the term used in the field of
education in the United Kingdom for severe
cognitive disabilities) or special schools for
children with physical disabilities and other
special needs. The one exception was a
child in a mainstream school.
The rest of the respondents were teach-
ers in special schools. Ten of these re-
spondents were classroom teachers in
schools for children with visual impair-
ments or for children with visual impair-
ments and additional disabilities, and the
rest were classroom teachers or specialist
resource room teachers in schools for
children with severe leaming difficulties
or physical difficulties (see Table 1).
Of the 35 teachers, 27 (77%) were
qualified and experienced teachers of
children with visual impairments who had
previous experience teaching braille. Six
of the 8 respondents who had never used
braille were unqualified, but worked in
settings where they could draw on advice
from experienced braille teachers.
Overall, the majority ofthe respondents
had been qualified teachers of students
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
Table 2
Teachers' views on the Moon Code.
Strongly Tend to Disagree or
agree or agree or strongly
Item Statement agree disagree disagree Mean

A Braille isn't right for this child. 34 3 0 1.35

B Moon is right for this ohild. 15 22 0 2.16
C I consider this child to be literate. 13 14 10 3.30
D This child's reading won't go beyond recognizing
simple labels. 12 15 10 3.54
E The child will at some time be fluent enough to
read for leisure.
5 15 17 4.16
F The child will continue to receive instruction in the
30 7 0 1.84
Moon Code for at least two years.
G I expect this child will continue to use the Moon 11 22 4 2.00
Code as an adult.
H I am disappointed by the child's lack of progress 5 11 21 4.46
with the Moon Code.
I The child's progress with the Moon Code has
been better than I expected.
12 18 7 3.22
J I started the Moon Code with this child because I
didn't know how else I could help. 10 16 11 3.51
K The Moon Code has given me more of a sense of
purpose with this child. 28 7 2 1.38
L There is a need for a completely new touch
alphabet for children with learning difficulties. 6 16 12 3.71
M I would consider using the Moon Code with other
children in the future. 34 3 0 1.62

with visual impairments for more than
five years and had experience working
with children who used braille. Thus, it
seems that their decision to use the
Moon Code was generally made after an
informed judgment that braille was not
appropriate for a child because of the
child's physical or cognitive disabili-
ties. Earlier research (McCall, 2000)
showed that teachers were using the
Moon Code with children who would
otherwise have no access to literacy
through touch, rather than as an "alter-
native" to braille.
In addition to supplying information
about their experience and current em-
ployment, the respondents were asked to
indicate the level to which they agreed or
disagreed with 13 value statements about
their use of the Moon Code and their
views on the development of literacy in
children with visual impairments and ad-
ditional disabilities. The information was
sought in the form of a Likert scale con-
taining statements derived from discus-
sions with experienced teachers who were
involved in earlier work on the develop-
ment of materials for the Moon Code
(McCall, 2000).
The statements in the Likert scale can
be seen as falling into two categories. The
first category contained statements that
were related to an individual child with
whom the respondent was working. Re-
sponses were not provided for three chil-
dren, so only 37 sets of statements in this
category were processed. The second cat-
egory (Items J-M in Table 2) required the
teachers to respond to statements about
themselves and their values in relation to

©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007 605
literacy and children with visual impair-
ments and additional disabilities. Since 1
teacher failed to respond, only 34 sets of
statements were processed in this cate-
gory. In Table 2, the statements are or-
dered accordingly.
A Likert scale was used with six re-
sponses (strongly agree, agree, tend to
agree, strongly disagree, disagree, and
tend to disagree). For ease of reference,
the categories were combined (see Table
2) into pairs indicating agreement, ten-
dency to agree or disagree, and disagree-
ment. In calculating the mean for the
statements, we assigned the following
values to the responses: SA! = 1, A = 2,
A? = 3, D? = 4, SD! = 5, and D = 6.
Results and discussion
Given that the respondents had decided to
use the Moon Code with the children with
whom they were working, it is not sur-
prising that there was high level of sup-
port for the statement that braille was not
right for these children. Nevertheless, less
than half the respondents were sure about
the appropriateness of the Moon Code,
perhaps because they had not used it long
enough to make up their minds or simply
because they were cautious about its ben-
efits. A third possibility is that the teach-
ers thought that the Moon Code was right
for these children only to the extent that
there was no other choice when it came to
a tactile code. Had this been true, one
might have expected much greater sup-
port for the idea that there should be a
completely new touch alphabet for chil-
dren who are visually impaired and have
learning difficulties (see Table 2, Item L).
However, only 6 respondents agreed and
12 respondents disagreed or strongly dis-
agreed with this statement.
606 Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007
The issue of whether the teachers con-
sidered what the children were achieving
with the Moon Code could be described
as "literacy" is a key question (see Table
2, Item C). Only 10 respondents dis-
agreed or strongly disagreed with the
statement, "I consider this child to be
literate." This finding is surprising be-
cause only 12 children were considered
likely to achieve more than recognition of
simple labels (see Table 2, Item D) and
only 5 children were considered ever to
be likely to become sufficiently fiuent in
reading to enjoy reading as a leisure ac-
tivity (see Table 2, Item E). Later infor-
mation also revealed that 14 of the chil-
dren with whom these teachers were
working could recognize no Moon Code
letters unprompted, and over half were
unable to recognize even simple
consonant-vowel-consonant words, such
as hat.
An explanation for this apparent anom-
aly was that the respondents were think-
ing about literacy in a completely differ-
ent way from traditional definitions. A
number of possible national influences
may account for this difference in what
the respondents accepted as demonstra-
tions of literacy. For example, teachers,
particularly those in special schools in the
United Kingdom, had been required to
promote and demonstrate the inclusion of
children with additional disabilities in the
National Curriculum (Department for Ed-
ucation, 1995) and NLS (DEE, 1998a) as
part of the inspection processes organized
by the Office for Standards in Education.
Another area of interest was to discover
whether teachers who were trying to de-
velop literacy skills in children with vi-
sual impairments and additional disabili-
ties saw their use of Moon Code as a
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
 short-term trial or an ongoing long-term
commitment. There was a high expecta-
tion (see Table 2, Item F) that the children
who were currently using the Moon Code
would be using it two years later and a
less certain but almost equally optimistic
view that the children would continue to
use the Moon Code as adults (see Table 2,
Item G). These responses suggested a
commitment to instruction in the Moon
Code not only from the children's current
teachers, but from the service or school
for years to come.
The respondents seemed to be gener-
ally sanguine about the possibilities that
the Moon Code provides. They were not
generally disappointed with the children's
progress in the Moon Code (see Table 2,
Items H and I), but less than half firmly
believed that the children's progress
through the Moon Code had exceeded
their expectations. Again, this finding
suggests that the teachers were adopting a
cautious view of the children's progress.
The values that the respondents indi-
cated in relation to decisions to begin
using the Moon Code with children were
equally revealing. Few firmly disagreed
with the statement, "I started the Moon
Code with this child because I didn't
know how else to help" (see Table 2, Item
J), but most agreed that "The Moon Code
has given me much more of a sense of
purpose with this child" (see Table 2,
Item K). This issue is discussed further in
the analysis of the responses to the open-
ended questions.
One point that came across clearly was
that teachers who used the Moon Code
were likely to consider using it in the
future with other children (see Table 2,
Item M), which implied a continuing de-
mand for Moon Code resources and a
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
likely growth in the number of children
with visual impairments and additional
disabilities who will be involved in the
processes of literacy through touch.
EMERGING THEMES
The questionnaire also included open-
ended questions on the respondents'
views of the main advantages and disad-
vantages of using the Moon Code with
children with visual impairments and
additional disabilities. Clear themes
emerged from these responses that re-
vealed a range of different "scripts" un-
derlying the teachers' efforts to develop
these children's skills in literacy.
Affective themes
Most of the respondents viewed the ad-
vantages of the Moon Code in terms of
the benefits for the children. In describing
these advantages, seven respondents re-
ferred directly to the theme of the chil-
dren's pleasure as an important consider-
ation in justifying their teaching, as in the
following comments:
[Child's name] enjoys the stories and
can anticipate what is happening or
about to happen. She also enjoys us-
ing the Mooncats [simple books de-
veloped for the Moon Project and
published by the Royal National In-
stitute for the Blind; see McCall,
McLinden, & Stone, 1996a, 1996b].
[Child's name] enjoys using the
Moon Code and gets excited about
working with it.
Some respondents may have consid-
ered the children's enjoyment to be a
justification for continuing instruction.
Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007 607
regardless of the children's progress in
reading. This possibility suggests a role
for literacy-based activities that was al-
most therapeutic, but it is perhaps more
likely that the respondents viewed enjoy-
ment as a key to motivating the children
to progress, as in the following statement:
"He really enjoys what he is doing; hav-
ing success therefore improved his
motivation."
Another "affective" theme was the idea
that working with the Moon Code had
positive effects on the children's self-
image and that this was a separate con-
sideration from the children's actual at-
tainments in literacy. As one respondent
noted, "It has given [child's name] an
opportunity to experience real 'success.'
This has influenced her whole personality
and attitude toward leaming."
Inclusive themes
A common belief among the respondents
was that it is important for some children
to know that the activities they are in-
volved in when working with the Moon
Code conform to what other children their
age are doing. For example, one respon-
dent stated: "[Child's name] enjoys read-
ing and is proud of his reading—appears
to be doing the same as other children."
This theme of inclusion featured
strongly in the teachers' responses about
the advantages of the Moon Code. Some
respondents referred to the Moon Code as
an agent for enabling the children to be
included in curricular activities under-
taken by other children in the class, as in
the following statements:
[The Moon Code] joins the child
with the classroom activities.
608 Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007
Moon has given us a tool to integrate
[child's name] into a leaming envi-
ronment. He can now produce work
like others in his class.
This benefit of involvement in literacy-
based activities through the Moon Code
seemed to be particularly important in
such settings as schools for children with
physical disabilities or severe leaming
difficulties. In one such setting, a child
was the only child in the class who relied
on touch for leaming, as one respondent
noted:
It has meant that [child's name] has
some accompanying text for some of
her work, rather than all her work
being verbal. It has enabled me to set
letter-recognition objectives for her,
as well as the rest of the group who
are sighted, although many are not as
verbal as she is.
Some respondents clearly viewed engage-
ment in the Moon Code as providing chil-
dren with an outlet to display and build
on skills that would previously have lain
dormant.
Another aspect of this inclusion was
the social benefits that seemed to accrue
from the children's involvement in liter-
acy activities, as the following comments
revealed:
[The Moon Code] has upped [child's
name] profile in school because the
staff and other children have been
very interested.
Moon has raised expectations of the
child.
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
 In subsequent interviews with five
teachers who responded to the question-
naire, an interesting additional theme
emerged related to the role of engagement
in literacy in improving a child's conduct
and therefore social and educational in-
clusion. For example, one teacher attrib-
uted a child's improved cooperation and
willingness to take part in turn-taking ac-
tivities to the regular instruction in liter-
acy through the Moon Code. Although
this theme requires further exploration, it
is possible that the novelty of a routine of
regular focused instruction on a specific
skill may well have led to this perceived
outcome.
Themes of independence
A common claim that the respondents
made regarding the Moon Code was that
it offers possibilities for improving a
child's independence and encourages
choice making. As one teacher put it:
"[An advantage is] independence: label-
ing folders [and] cassettes, so [child's
name] can find them himself." Six re-
spondents referred specifically to the use
of the Moon Code for labeling personal
belongings, such as cassette tapes. In this
regard, the use of the Moon Code was
clearly related to making choices inde-
pendently from a range of options. The
labeling would not necessarily have com-
prised the titles of the tapes; single initial
letters were commonly used to help with
identification and choice.
In a later conversation, a teacher gave
an example of a child with severe and
multiple disabilities whose teacher was
using Moon letters at break time to en-
courage the child to choose between her
two favorite drinks, orange and blackcur-
rant cordial. The drinks were kept in iden-
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
tical plastic bottles, and the only differ-
ence between the bottles was the label
that constituted a single Moon Code ini-
tial letter, O or B.
This observation suggested that for
some children, the Moon Code may serve
as an abstract sign system, rather than
necessarily an alphabetic one. For chil-
dren who had no spoken language, the
sound properties of the letters (like "O"
for orange) would not be the identifying
factor; it was the shape of the letter that
was associated with the object. The
teacher could have equally used an arbi-
trary shape, such as a diamond, to repre-
sent the orange drink, but using a letter
from the alphabet proved no more diffi-
cult. The equivalent, perhaps, would be a
young sighted child who may not recog-
nize any words or letters, but who would
be immediately able to associate the "M"
from the "McDonald's" logo with a visit
to the restaurant chain. For the teacher,
the advantage of using an alphabetic tac-
tile system, rather than arbitrary tactile
shapes, for labeling was that it provided
the possibility of building toward an
eventual association of letters to sounds
or letters to objects.
TEACHERS' MOTIVES FOR USING
THE MOON CODE
In addition to providing views about what
they saw as the advantages of the Moon
Code for the children they were engaged
with, some teachers noted what they saw
as the advantages for themselves. They
expressed the view that introducing the
Moon Code had helped them feel more
confident and competent in their dealings
with the teachers in the children's schools
by giving them a clear purpose for their
Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007 609
intervention. Two representative com-
ments in this regard were these:
It has filled me with enthusiasm be-
cause I feel I have something new to
offer [child's name] and the school.
Having now started it, I am begin-
ning to consider using it with other
children in the authority.
Introducing Moon has . . . provided a
focus for my intervention as visiting
teacher of the visually impaired.
This is perhaps a predictable finding.
Children with visual impairments and ad-
ditional disabilities have complex educa-
tional needs, and even experienced itin-
erant teachers sometimes feel at a loss
when they are assigned to special schools
to provide support and advice for these
children (Griffiths & Best, 1996). Intro-
ducing children to literacy through the
Moon Code could appear to provide a
solution for some teachers, providing an
activity that approximates something that
they find familiar and manageable—
teaching children to read—and making
them feel that they have something new to
offer the school that confirms their status
as "specialists."
DISADVANTAGES OF THE M O O N CODE
The teachers who commented about the
disadvantages of the Moon Code referred
mainly to production difficulties or to re-
source issues, such as the lack of ready-
made teaching materials. They also drew
attention to the difficulties that the chil-
dren faced because of the lack of a simple
Moon Code writing device, as in these
comments: "Problems have been the lack
of the ability to write Moon quickly for
610 Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007
immediate feedback for [child's name]"
and "There is an urgent need for a con-
venient method of recording in Moon."
The teachers, particularly the itinerant
teachers with large caseloads, clearly
found the lack of suitable ready-made re-
sources irksome, as one respondent noted:
I have found it difficult to keep up
with the volume of material that
she needs. The "Moonshare" books
[commercially available books
adapted with clear overlays of the
text in the Moon Code to encourage
shared reading, produced by the
Linden Lodge School in London]
have been useful, but [child's
name's] understanding outstrips her
reading ability, and she has found the
content of some of the stories to be
"babyish." There is an urgent need
for a convenient method of recording
in the Moon Code.
One finding that was confirmed in this
survey was the individuality of the chil-
dren who use the Moon Code and the
differences in the ways that teachers use
the code with children. It is perhaps in-
evitable, therefore, that teachers who
want to use the Moon Code will always
have to produce their own original teach-
ing materials or adapt existing ones to
meet the individual needs of each child.
A surprising aspect of the points that
the teachers raised as the disadvantages of
the Moon Code is that none of the teach-
ers referred to the confusion that the de-
sign of the Moon Code presents to chil-
dren. For example, the Moon letters for E,
M, L, and Y are rotations of the same
shape. It is common for children to mis-
read letters because of this rotational
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
feature of the code. In looking for expla-
nations of this apparent omission, one
may conclude that the teachers either did
not regard it as a disadvantage or accepted
it and worked within its limitations. An-
other explanation is that the teachers sim-
ply accepted that the Moon alphabet, like
the braille or print alphabets, is fixed and
unalterable. Ironically, the fact that the
Moon Code is not used by many people
means that changes to the code can be
effected more easily and without the ran-
cor that has followed attempts to modify
the braille code.
Conclusion
Taken as a whole, the survey provided
useful insights into the current use of the
Moon Code in British schools and teach-
ers' views on the development of literacy
in children who are visually impaired and
have complex needs. What was perhaps
most revealing was the range of underly-
ing reasons the teachers gave to justify
spending considerable time and effort to
develop literacy skills in children with
complex needs, often with no expectation
that the children would ever develop "ba-
sic" literacy, as defined by Koenig
(1992). The study revealed that teachers
embarked on and sustained instruction in
literacy for reasons that were more com-
plex than simply developing children's
skills in reading and writing. Rather, the
teachers viewed instruction in literacy as
a vehicle for other attainments, such as
increasing a child's self-esteem, social in-
clusion, and independence and improving
a child's ability to sustain engagement
with an activity that has an abstract ele-
ment. Instruction in literacy also provided
some teachers with a sense of purpose, a
means of interacting meaningfully with
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved
children and other adults who work with
them.
These outcomes are not generally ex-
plicitly considered when decisions are
made to begin literacy instruction with
children with visual impairments and ad-
ditional disabilities, yet they appear to be
key elements. They suggest that in mov-
ing to develop an inclusive model of lit-
eracy that can accommodate the achieve-
ments of all children who are visually
impaired, researchers and teachers need
to take into account a range of hidden
factors.
References
Buckley, S. (1995). Teaching children with
Down syndrome to read and write. In L.
Nadel & D, Rosenthal (Eds.), Down syn-
drome, living and leaming within the com-
munity (pp. 158-169), New York: Wiley-
Liss.
Conners, F, A, (1992), Reading instruction
for students with moderate mental retarda-
tion: Review and analysis of research,
American Journal on Mental Retardation,
96, 577-597,
Department for Education, (1995), The Na-
tional Curriculum (1995). London: Her
Majesty's Stationery Office,
Department for Education and Employment,
(1998a), The National Literacy Strategy:
Framework for teaching. London: Author,
Department for Education and Employment,
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority,
(1998b). Supporting the target-setting pro-
cess: Guidance for effective target setting
for children with special educational
needs. London: Author,
Downing, J, E, (2005), Teaching literacy to
students with significant disabilities: Strat-
egies for the K-12 inclusive classroom.
Thousand Oaks, CA; Corwin Press,
Fowler, A, E,, Doherty, B. J,, & Boynton, L,
(1995), The basis of reading skill in young
adults with Down syndrome. In L, Nadel
& D. Rosenthal (Eds,), Down syndrome.
Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007 611
 living and learning within the community
(pp. 182-196). New York: Wiley-Liss.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenburg, C. (1993). Ac-
tivity settings of early literacy: Home and
school factors in children's emergent
literacy. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, &
C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning:
Sociocultural dynamics in children's de-
velopment (pp. 315-335). Oxford, En-
gland: Oxford University Press.
Gambrell, L. B., & Mazzoni, S. A. (1999).
Principles of best practice: Finding the
common ground. In L. B. Grambrell, L. M.
Morrow, S. B. Newman, & M. Pressley
(eds.). Best practices in literacy instruction
(pp. 11-21). New York: Guilford Press.
Griffiths J., & Best, A. (1996). Survey of
visually impaired children in schools for
children with severe learning difficulties.
Shropshire, England: Condover Hall
School, Royal National Institute for the
Blind.
Justice, L. M., & Pullen, P. C. (2003). Prom-
ising interventions for promoting emergent
literacy skills: Three evidence-based ap-
proaches. Topics in Early Childhood edu-
cation, 23, 99-113.
Koenig, A. J. (1992). A framework for un-
derstanding the literacy of individuals with
visual impairments. Journal of Visual Im-
pairment & Blindness, 86, 277-283.
Lorimer, J. (1977). Manual of directions and
norms, Neale Analysis of Reading Ability:
Adapted for use with blind children. Wind-
sor, England: National Foundation for Ed-
ucational Research.
McCall, S. (2000). Literacy for children with
a visual impairment and additional disabil-
ities: An investigation of Moon using ac-
tion research. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
University of Birmingham, Birmingham,
England.
McCall, S., & McLinden, M. (1996, Spring).
Literacy—A foot in the door? Eye Contact
(SuppL).
McCall, S., & McLinden, M. (1997). To-
wards an inclusive model of literacy for
people who are blind and who have addi-
612 Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, October 2007
tional learning difficulties. British Journal
of Visual Impairment, 15, 117-121.
McCall, S., & McLinden, M. (2001a). Ac-
cessing the National Literacy Strategy: The
use of Moon with children in the United
Kingdom with a visual impairment and ad-
ditional learning difficulties. British Jour-
nal of Visual Impairment, 19, 7-16.
McCall, S., & McLinden, M. (2001b). Liter-
acy and children who are blind and who
have additional disabilities—The chal-
lenges for teachers and researchers. Inter-
national Journal of Disability, Develop-
ment and Education, 48, 355-375.
McCall, S., McLinden, M., & Douglas, G.
(2007). An investigation into the potential
of "dotted" Moon as a production method
for children using Moon as a route to lit-
eracy. British Journal of Visual Impair-
ment, 25, 86-96.
McCall, S., McLinden, M., & Stone, J.
(1996a). Mooncats reading scheme: Books
A-C. Peterborough, England: Royal Na-
tional Institute for the Blind.
McCall, S., McLinden, M., & Stone, J.
(1996b). Mooncats teaching guide—A
guide to teaching Moon to pupils with a
visual impairment. Peterborough, England:
Royal National Institute for the Blind.
McCall, S., & Stone, J. (1992). Literacy for
blind children through Moon: A possibil-
ity? British Journal of Visual Impairment,
10, 53-54.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The
development of higher psychological pro-
cesses. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer-
sity Press.
Williams, M. (1971). Braille reading. The
Teacher ofthe Blind, 59, 103-116.
Steve McCall, Ph.D., lecturer in special education
(visual impairment). Visual Impairment Centre for
Teaching and Research, School of Education, Uni-
versity of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham
B15 2TT, England, United Kingdom; e-mail: <s.
mccall@bham.ac.uk>. Mike McLinden, Ph.D.,
senior lecturer in special education (visual impair-
ment). Visual Impairment Centre for Teaching and
Research, School of Education, University of Bir-
mingham; e-mail: <m.t.mclinden@bham.ac.uk>.
©2007 AFB, All Rights Reserved