{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020077720207253884, 'fraction_numerical': 0.020293609671848015, 'mean_word_length': 4.970360824742268, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Vision: Its Role and Integrations in Learning Processes

Walter B. Lancaster, one of the most eminent ophthalmologists of the past century, presented a major lecture to his academy in 1943. He quoted a Mr. W. Nicholson as follows: "When a tradition once becomes established by the hallmark of acknowledged authority, it takes more than cold facts to uproot it from men's minds . . . it takes time!" There now is much evidence that time has begun to accomplish what Lancaster hoped it would, and we are beginning to see uprootings of the old statements that persisted only because they appeared to have the hallmark of authority regardless of actual authenticitv. There is also more and more evidence that the role of vision in the learning processes is finally being recognized as something that greatly surpasses the simplistic organ response to simple light contrast patterns. Now that the dominancy of the visual system in the behavior of the human is recognized by so many investigators, it is incomprehensible that the statement "I have perfect vision—I have 20/20" is still so frequently heard, or "His reading problem must have some other cause—there is nothing wrong with his vision." Birch (1962) stated it so unequivocally in 1962: "One can postulate that reading disability may stem from the inadequate development of hierarchical organization of sensory systems and so, at least in part, be the product of the failure of visual system hierarchical dominance. Failure for such dominance to occur will result in a pattern of functioning that is inappropriate for the development of reading skill." How can the misconceptions of "perfect vision" be allowed to waste so many children, and confuse so many parents? Helmholtz in 1845, Lancaster in 1943, Betts in 1946, Gesell in 1949, Robinson in 1953, Shipman in 1954, Solley and Murphy in 1960, Smith and Smith in 1962, Benton in 1962, Birch in 1962, Getman in 1962, 1965, 1974 and 1977, and Spache in 1976 all present evidence that vision is more than mere clarity for letters at a distance of 20 feet. A very recently published book is another encouraging indication of this temporal erosion upon perpetuated notions. A Pediatric Approach to Learning Disorders (Levine, Brooks & Shonkoff 1980) presents a wealth of information on the philosophies and procedures of attack on the problems of learning what our culture is demanding. The authors go into detail on visual motor programs and specific routines for the mediation of visually related learning problems with a degree of enthusiasm and approval not usually found in the medical literature of the past 20 years. Interestingly though, after dozens of comments on the importance and the relevancies of the visual system to the learning processes, time suddenly reverses and the authors fell back to 1968 definitions and 1972 position papers that completely dispute the "developmentenhancing activities" they describe as beneficial. Time still stands still on occasion. One of the most encouraging signs of the present time is the recognition of the position assumed more than 30 years ago by the function-oriented clinician in an optometric approach to learning disorders. This position has been difficult to communicate because of the hallmarks of the indoctrinations on the organ-oriented clinician in the fields of vision care and the relationships of vision performance and academic performance. There can be no doubt about the impact of the contributions of B. F. Skinner, who has brought new considerations of function as being more significant than structure, of behavior over organicity. The functionoriented optometrist has long insisted that although the end organ—its health and its structure—are all important, its skills and efficiency of performance and the integration of this performance with related systems have to be given more attention and investigation than the casual observations of acuity and the alignment of eyes. The old law that states "function determines structure more than structure determines function" has not yet been repealed by any congress. Now that time has brought changes and the "hallmark of authority" is being recognized for what it was, the wealth of evidence begins to show that there are viable procedures for the mediation, enhancement, and integrations of all the information systems that must be brought to bear on the learning tasks of our complex culture. This evidence not only displays the role of the visual system and its need for both sensory and motor integrations with all other systems, but also shows the interdependence of all systems on each other. It is