“Can online learning be an effective method
for literacy instruction?”
Yes, children can definitely learn effectively online; and, in my experience, there are distinct advantages to online lesson delivery that makes remote learning might be even more effective than in-person instruction!
For example, in-person reading intervention in schools is typically done in small groups, often in the classroom. Even 1:1 work is likely to be conducted in a place full of distractions and noise. So, unless your child is getting help in a private office, there will always be competing factors for your child’s attention.
One of the things we understand about dyslexia and decoding deficiencies is that memory and cognitive load play significant roles in a student’s ability to decode and encode when reading and spelling.
Cognitive load refers to the weight, or “load” placed on the brain’s cognitive functions during any given task. There are multiple types of cognitive load that relate to how the brain assimilates and applies new knowledge, but there is one type of cognitive load that "good online-lesson design" aims to reduce: extraneous load.
Extraneous load is exactly as it sounds- cognitive activities that tax the brain in ways that are not part of the knowledge-building process (example: spending 20 minutes trying to find information buried on a poorly-designed website). Well-designed remote instruction aims to reduce this load, while simultaneously optimizing a student's use of working memory. When my students engage with me via teletherapy, they are intently focused on our tasks on-screen. We all know how engaging a computer screen can be! Although there are times when this fact is less than desirable, in my work I am able to harness that focus and direct it towards systematic instruction and interaction.
In a remote session, I can use a great variety of instantaneously-available tools, which optimizes my time with your child. In turn, I am able to provide nearly double the recall-response opportunities that a traditional in-person 1:1 session allows, and certainly vastly more than a small group session would provide.
“What about multisensory learning? Isn’t that a key component of O.G. reading intervention? ”
Absolutely! What I have learned throughout my experience is that when people think of “multisensory learning”, they are typically thinking primarily of only one facet of multisensory learning: the tactile. Most people equate multisensory instruction with the use of tactile manipulatives, and are not as aware of how critical other forms, such as auditory, visual, and kinesthetic modalities are to multisensory learning.
The reasoning behind multisensory instruction is the idea that when students engage more than one of their senses during a task, they are more likely to retain that information because of cross-modality integration. In my instruction, we regularly integrate the auditory, visual and kinesthetic as we do “look, hear, say” activities, notice and discuss the mouth and throat sensations when producing letter sounds, pair letter sounds with movements, or use digital manipulatives to build words, just to name a few examples! For tactile integration, my students are be able to use the items in their Reading Kit that I send to every family to write, trace, read, and spell. It should be noted that for some students, multisensory instruction is actually more taxing, and can easily become an overload that inhibits learning. It is important for me to discern as early as possible if this is the case.
I hope that this post is helpful in clarifying the value of remote 1:1 instruction, but please reach out if you have any further questions, I am always happy to connect with parents!
Comments