Reply To: Transcriber’s Note in Nemeth
Thank you Dorothy. The individual wanted further clarification.
"I have a couple of questions concerning your response to Transcriber’s Note in Nemeth.
I want to make sure that I understand your answer. Because I am waiting to take the Nemeth exam, I want to be clear on this. Are you saying that if there is something in the course that is not in the Code or the 2007 Update it should not be followed? There are several things in the course that are not in the Code. For example, in §181.c of the course book we are instructed to treat ununified systems of equations as spatial. The course errata changed this section from not spatial to spatial. There is no counterpart to this in the code book. So, because this course errata is not supported by the Nemeth Code itself nor the 2007 Update, nor anything on the BANA website, it should not be followed. Therefore, the ununified systems of equations should not be considered to be spatial and the original section in the course book restored. Is that correct?
Another example of something in the course that is not in the Code is in §36.b of the course book, which states in part, “An abbreviation and a preceding or following numeral or letter to which it applies must be placed on the same braille line.” There is no such requirement, that I can find, in the Code book, nor is there anything in EBAE or Braille Formats. This is not part of the errata, but the original course material. Should I continue to follow this practice?
As there are several things that are in the course that are not in the Code, I’m wondering how I will be graded on the Nemeth test? Is it a test of the Nemeth code, or the Nemeth course?"
Thank you for your help in understanding this complex issue.
Marie