I agree. Previewing is very important, but seldom happens in middle/high school. It is difficult enough getting the materials needed for a lesson in a timely manner. By the time the aide receives the material, there is no time for previewing before the student is learning the concept in class. Sometimes, we, myself as the TVI and the aide, are not notified of the lesson. This happened when a student needed to review the Periodic Table prior to its use in class. Needless to say, I found myself exploring the Periodic Table after the student had been exposed to it. This can lead to frustration for all involved. Clear communication and time to preview material would greatly enhance the student’s understanding.
It is so easy to resort to hand-over-hand due to time constraints in the classroom, It is something that takes a lot of conscious effort to be aware of and even more time to change your habits so hand-under-hand is used more frequently. I have seen many teachers and paraprofessionals in MD classrooms complete an activity or project with the student sitting next to them, but not being an active participant in the activity or they immediately use hand-over-hand because it would take too much time for the student to try doing any of the activity themselves. Many of the students also wear hand braces which limit the use of their hands. Instead of taking the braces off for the activity so the student receives more sensory input, they are simply “helped” to complete the activity.
Knowing when to step back and when to provide support is crucial to a student’s growth and independence. I have a middle school student who works independently in English but still requires support in math and science. I regularly update the teachers and paraprofessional about the student’s ability to complete tasks independently so that the appropriate level of support is provided.
The amount of support needed depends on many factors, including the student’s ability to read the material, interpret the teacher’s instruction, and take effective notes on the computer. It also depends on the student’s braille literacy, technology skills, and overall confidence. It is a constant balancing act—taking two steps forward and sometimes one or two steps back—as I continually assess what the student can do independently and adjust support accordingly. The ultimate goal is to provide only the assistance that is truly needed while continuing to build the student’s independence.
- To what extent are current educational systems equipped to support the long-term development of tactile skills? What changes would you advocate for at the classroom or systems level?
Current educational systems are inconsistently equipped to support the long-term development of tactile skills, and I think the setting makes a real difference. In my experience at a residential school for the blind, dedicated schools like ours are particularly well-positioned to support this kind of long-term skill building, because teachers and residential life staff can work in tandem rather than in isolation. A student here isn’t just practicing tactile exploration during a 30-minute lesson; those same skills get reinforced at mealtimes, in the dorm, during recreational activities, and across the rest of the day, by adults who are all working from the same goals and vocabulary. That kind of repetition across settings is hard to replicate when tactile instruction lives in a single classroom period or a single specialist’s caseload.
That’s not to discount the role of families, who absolutely matter and can extend this work at home. But families are often doing this without the built-in collaborative structure that a residential or specialized setting provides, where everyone touching that student’s day is, in theory, pulling in the same direction.
Where I think systems fall short is in the earlier years. Tactile literacy is too often treated as something that ramps up once formal braille instruction begins, rather than something that should be deliberately built from early childhood. At the classroom and systems level, what I’d advocate for is stronger, earlier collaboration: TVIs, classroom teachers, O&M instructors, and residential or family caregivers actually coordinating around tactile goals from the start, not just at the point a student is identified as braille-ready. If we can get that collaborative foundation in place early, students are far less likely to hit gaps later on, and they can keep building on those skills as they grow instead of having to backfill missed steps.
Q4. Evaluate the role of research versus practitioner experience in shaping tactile instruction practices. How should educators balance anecdotal evidence with emerging scientific findings when making instructional decisions.
As educators we have a strong responsibility to remain updated on new (and credible) research findings. While we implement tried and true instructional practices in our everyday student sessions, we must remain open to both new ideas and new ways to implement old ideas - especially when incorporating the ever-updating-technology. For example, I learned about CVI primarily through Roman-Lasky; however, once introduced to the bigger world, I gleaned from Dutton, Lueck and Shelline, and recently Perkins CVI Protocol. This comes from making mistakes many times by being young and inexperienced and having a teacher tell me there is 'no better way…" and I took it because it was all I knew. With Tactile instructional practices, the individual student is the most important and what works for him/her. Does the student need HOH of HUH assistance, does the student have issues with reaching into a container to touch/retrieve something, does the student have an aversion to a particular touch, etc.? These along with personal experience AND research should guide our approaches as well as instruction.
I recently attended a PD on ALIGN-VI and its address of the current FVLMAs we give students. IEP compliance, instructional alignment, implementation fidelity and team confidence are addressed. While I will continue using what I know (and familiar) I will introduce some of the new suggestions to see if it improves data, efficiency, and outcomes. I think I owe my students to know the latest Best practices that have several backings.
Hi Jennifer. This was well said and I do agree with everything. I find the same frustrations about schools not implementing needs early enough, not having enough opportunities for the students to engage tactilely, and the staff not being instructed enough to create continuous learning. I have a dream to create a sensory room at at my schools - not just for my students with VI but all students. It would open the eyes (pun intended) for students to make inquiries, connections, and offerings to their VI peers. I would definitely advocate for increased tactile representations within the classroom but also the school as a whole as well.
I love collaboration but get frustrated when I expect this from others. I like when everyone is on the same page like everyone being consistent with approaches and even some vocabulary attached to learning. I wish we had monthly meetings like you. It is so time consuming to relate information individually or even through a group email. My breakdowns seem to occur with lack of understanding on the teachers’ part or lack of response from my parents. This may sound a little harsh, but each child needs everyone’s involvement. I reach out to my parents on a weekly basis - usually through text or email - just to keep them apprised of at least what I am doing. Some respond all the time and others never. We try.
- How might you apply the principles of the ETLP to better identify and support a student who shows uneven or “splintered” tactile skills? What would this look like in your current or future practice?
I find that having a break down of skill to assess students skills, like the ELTP and the Organ Project, can help pinpoint splinter skills, missing skills and places that need more instruction to become independent skills. I find that for complicated or hard figure out studentsthat smaller break down of skills is necessary. When working with MDSSI students, you frequently need to think outside of the box to help them gain skills. We as professionals need to remember that even if we do the assessment, create varied instruction and present appropriate skills, sometimes students move at their own pace. This is not a fail on our part. If we are consistent, we will see growth, even if it takes years. No student remains at the same point, they simply ptogress outside of our timeline.
- The ETLP emphasizes that tactile skills are sequential, interdependent, and influenced by multiple developmental areas. How does this challenge or reshape your understanding of literacy development for tactile learners?
I found this resource to be extremely helpful in thinking about future evaluations for my students and getting a “whole picture” before making any decisions. One quote in the article that resonated with me and that I will be sharing with other professionals on my evaluation team is the notion that “all learners can be literate at their functioning level.” The article goes on to say that, although possibly unconventional, every student should have the opportunity to develop literacy skills. Tactile skills development is a continuum where students are provided opportunities to become tactile learners. Being on a continuum, tactile skills do not occur for every child at the same time and are interrelated with other developmental areas.
I really like how this resource is completely student-centered, beginning with experiences. Instructional aspects occur during evaluation. I feel as though this resource is user friendly and allows for a multi-disciplinary approach with other educational team members. As a team, decisions can only be made after the entire checklist is completed, allowing for a full tactile skill assessment for the student.
I completely agree with your idea that braille instruction is only one part of literacy development. I feel as though the ETLP will be an invaluable resource in helping identify the strengths and needs of students and their tactile profile, no matter how conventional or unconventional their levels may be!
1 Like
I agree with you that IEP meetings are difficult to get everyone on the same page, since the whole team only meets once or twice a year. I spend a lot of my time making sure there is carryover from my 1:1 lessons into the classroom and have monthly check-ins with parents either through email or on the phone to discuss goal progress and how to further carryover my lessons at home. I’m moving into my 4 year at my current district, 11 years overall, and this has been the best setup that works for me. It also doesn’t have the surprise aspect at the IEP meeting.
I’ve work with students in their home schools, for the past 16 years. I’ve found that collaboration that you experience at a residential school an be replicated in this environment. I have several schools where the therapists (OT, PT, Speech), classroom teachers, special education teachers, educational assistants, O&M, and TVI work together to create a cohesive environment for the student. The work of meeting the students needs brings us all together for the benefit of the student.
I have a similar experience starting out with the MDSSI population. I found with practice and conscience awareness I have changed my default from hand-over-hand to hand-under-hand. I love how this allows students to have control with their interactions with their environment.
- Reflect on your own use of touch when supporting students. In what ways might your approach unintentionally promote passive or controlling touch? How could you shift toward more active, non-controlling interactions, and what impact might that have on student learning?
Last school year was my first year working with my blind student. I tried to be thoughtful and ask before I would grab or touch his hands. If he did need help writing or drawing I would stand behind him and help guide his hands. If he got lost while reading or took his hand off the page I would gently guide his hand back to the place he was at. Or in Science class I would stand behind him and help guide his movements in an experiment if he needed it. I always give him the opportunity to try first and then ask if I can help. He is definitely curious about everything! So I take every opportunity to let him try things out for himself or make sure he gets to hold objects so he can know what they are. The class did a experiment with different sports balls and he had never touched most of them. I made sure he got to hold each one! If you try to control how a student explores they will miss something. I watch and if he get too far off topic I steer him back to what the lesson is.
It has been hard for me to learn when to help and when not to. This last school year was my first time working with a blind student. He is very independent! But I figured out when to help and when not to. He will start 5th grade in the fall. More learning for both of us.
I am with my student all day. I am is one on one VI para. It is very hard for him to keep up with the class sometimes. Especially if he is trying to follow along with his own braille text. Then like you mentioned the kids start asking questions and sometimes get off topic. Or the teacher is showing pictures on the screen that he can’t see. I am scrambling to describe things before the teacher is moving on. But being in a classroom as much as possible is important.
- Reflect on how educational teams (teachers, families, specialists) collaborate to support tactile development. Where do breakdowns typically occur, and what could strengthen this collaboration?
In my experience, educational teams collaborate to support tactile development to varying degrees. Most often, I see the most breakdowns occur for students who have low vision and are participating in the general education classroom. Team collaboration is limited due to time constraints, the pace at which instruction is being provided, and students not wanting to “stand out” by receiving push-in support. I find that students with low vision can also mask some of their gaps in knowledge, so it can be difficult to tease out what they need more support with. Self-contained settings usually allow for more time for TSVIs to support/model during whole group instruction so that the team can continue to support tactile development when the TSVI is not there. Having regularly scheduled education team meetings would certainly strengthen this collaboration. Also, trying to co-teach would not only help the student with VI but the entire classroom who could benefit from a multi-modal approach to concept development. It would also provide modeling to the general education teacher for future lessons when the TSVI is not present.
Watching Jeff Schwartz’s video about strategies for teaching touch has inspired me to continue to collaborate with educational teams to learn what concepts are being covered in the classroom, at home, and during specialist interventions. That way, I can preview, review, and further explore objects with students during 1:1 instructional time using my specialized knowledge regarding tactile development.
The hand-under-hand technique, a seemingly subtle shift from the hand-over-hand technique, has had such a powerful impact to my practice and my students’ learning experiences! I could not agree more that it’s the best approach when working with any student really. You raise a good point about not interrupting a student’s exploration, and I like your idea of asking them to let you know when they are finished. I’ll have to use that! A while ago, when I was still an SLP, I had a student who was very tactually defensive. Therefore, it was challenging to get her to explore her tactile communication device even when using the hand-under-hand technique. I started providing a touch cue by tapping her shoulder and then running my hand under her arm until my hands where under hers. With consistent practice, she became receptive to this and began exploring her device. Eventually, I would tap her shoulder and she would put out her hands ready to explore. It was incredible!
Yes! I have had a similar experience regarding CVI. It’s important we continue to update our practices as new research emerges and technology rapidly changes. I have been working with my co-op TSVI colleagues to establish an updated CVI protocol to use. It’s important to remember the work is never “done” and we will likely have to update this protocol time and time again. You raise a good point about using data-driven decision making when assessing the best approach for your students. It’s important we stay abreast of the research, integrate that knowledge with our experience, and then follow the student data when making instructional decisions for each of our students.
Question 2. To what extent are current educational systems equipped to support the long-term development of tactile skills? What changes would you advocate for at the classroom or systems level?
In my experience with the Monarch, I believe we are moving in the right direction in supporting long-term tactile development. Technologies such as Monarch expand access to tactile graphics, mathematics, and spatial information in ways that were previously difficult or impossible through traditional single-line braille displays. However, as a state deafblind project director, I also see significant gaps in how educational systems support tactile development, particularly for students with visual impairments who have multiple disabilities and complex support needs.
Too often, schools focus on braille readiness only for students who are expected to become conventional braille readers. Students with significant cognitive, physical, or other sensory challenges may not receive the same intentional tactile instruction because their educational teams assume they will not become “readers” in the traditional sense. Yet researcher explicitly challenges this thinking by identifying many students with multiple disabilities and deafblindness as “non-traditional tactile learners” who still require meaningful opportunities to develop tactile literacy and communication.
At the classroom level, I would advocate for a greater emphasis on the “Sensing and Learning” approach, Active Learning, and experiential approaches that allow students to interact directly with their environments. These approaches emphasize active participation, developmentally appropriate experiences and routines, repetition, and meaningful engagement with real objects and activities. For many students with deafblindness and multiple disabilities, tactile learning is not something that happens during a designated literacy block—it must be embedded throughout the entire day.
At the systems level, I would advocate for 1) earlier and more comprehensive assessment of tactile skills, 2) increased professional development, and 3) a broader definition of literacy and access.
Emerging technologies such as the Monarch have tremendous potential, but technology alone is not the solution. Students need years of intentional tactile experiences, concept development, and communication opportunities before they can fully benefit from advanced tactile tools.