Week 4: July 6-10

Cohorts and Events 2026 Hive Summer Cohort
, ,
182

Tactile Materials in Practice: Understanding the Experiences of Teachers of the Visually Impaired

  1. Analyze the tension between time constraints and instructional quality in tactile material creation. How do these competing demands shape instructional decisions?

There are many different ways to make tactile graphics right now. Technology allows one to use a 3-D print, materials from a store and teacher made materials, an embosser, other simple tools, and a combination of simple to complex tools. In the classroom, students need to receive tactile graphics throughout the day in all different areas. However, it’s difficult to keep up with it all. It’s important that the material is quality in which the student can grow their skills. Just like braille can be good or bad quality, sometimes you have to outsource the tactile material to a state service or other resource. It’s important to think what kind of materials you will use (3-D materials, 2-D and raised line drawing, 3-D models, and real objects). One needs to keep it simple and realize what materials can be used or are the best to be used for each specific material.

When it feels overwhelming, you often have to keep it simple and not try to do too much. Keeping it simple means giving adults/VI student in the classroom good resources to make quality graphics as well as making a product that teach the skill at the student’s current level. This means making choices about what tools to use and teaching them to use them. It’s okay to feel overwhelmed, but important to ask for help. Better to stop and reflect in the moment then try to do too much.

183

I have found the most important thing I can do for the classroom is not just drop off the tools, but teach the adults in the room how to effectively use them. So many times I find them not used at all when I check-in and I don’t always know how to fix this situation. It’s not always the classroom teacher’s fault, as they have so much to think about and juggle during the school day. At the same time, the student needs to practice using these tactile graphic tools so they feel confident in all situations to use these tools.

184

I agree that we’re told tactile graphics are important for students, I’ve but have had to wing it a lot of the time. Some of that is finding resources that cost more money and that is not always readily available. Without technology, making tactile graphics takes more time. There are so many guidelines to create quality tactile graphics and often times it feels overwhelming to know how to do it the right way.

185

Agreed! Technology plays a huge part in what we can do and how much time it takes to do it. Resources play a key role here. Creating tactile graphics requires a way to print or make these. 3D items can take anything from finding items in the environment to literally 3D printing things. Keeping it simple can be hard. We’re so wired to technology these days that sometimes what it takes is a rubber bouncy ball. Simplify and don’t over-think it is a good pointer here.

I do like your point about teaching students/adults to use the tools available to them and keep it simple. Tech is nice, and certainly helpful- but sometimes our over-reliance on it hinders us more than it helps.

186

Lani- this is SO true! Pacing for our B/VI students using tactile grapics- especially in mainstream classes is a problem. It takes our student more time to fully explore and interpret this information when the rest of the class has moved on and is 3 questions down the road. No doubt many students would benefit from slower pacing in that situation- but TESTING!!! Teaching students to do the question quickly because they have a limited time on tests (which, lets be honest here is what gets emphasized) can be tough. Our kids do get extended time for testing but moving grapics from standardized testing into a tactual format is a whole other ball of wax. That’s an area I want to explore more personally. I’ve RUN standardized testing for our B/VI kiddos at school but not facilitated it otherwise. Do we rely solely on screen-readers here? In all fairness, I usually get pulled to facilitate testing for our Deaf students because I am ASL fluent and a Teacher of the Deaf.

Thank you for your thoughtful input and the questions you have prompted for myself to further explore this issue.

187
  1. How well do current preparation and training systems equip educators to make informed decisions about tactile graphic design? What gaps do you see, and how do they impact students?

Honestly, I think prep programs get new TVIs to competent with tactile graphics, but not fluent — and that gap shows up fast once you’re on the job.

A few things I’ve noticed after 10 years in the field:

Training is more “rules” than “practice.” Most of us learn the standard guidelines and general design principles in a course unit, not a whole strand of study. So we know the standards, but we haven’t necessarily built 50 different graphics across content areas before we’re expected to produce them solo for a real student.

New TVIs get thrown in fast. Unlike gen ed teachers who often get a full clinical year before flying solo, a first-year TVI might be adapting a chemistry diagram or a state assessment map in their first month, with no mentor down the hall and no library of exemplars to reference.

Content area matters a lot, and that’s underemphasized. A geometry figure and a social studies map require totally different design judgment — what to simplify, what to keep exact, how much braille labeling is too much. That nuance often gets learned the hard way, through trial and error with actual students.

We rarely get trained to watch a student use the graphic and revise from there. A lot of us default to “does this meet the guideline” rather than “did this kid’s hands actually make sense of it.” That feedback loop should be part of training, not something we stumble into years later.

Isolation makes it worse. So many TVIs are the only VI professional in their district. No one to sanity-check a complex STEM graphic with, no built-in mentorship. That isolation is probably the biggest driver of inconsistent quality across the field.

Why it matters for kids: a technically compliant graphic can still be confusing or overloaded if the design judgment isn’t there. Worst case, a bad graphic doesn’t just fail to teach the concept — it teaches the wrong one, and that’s way harder to undo than starting from scratch.

What would help most, in my opinion: real mentorship during pre-service years (not just coursework), a shared exemplar bank by content area, and explicit training in using student feedback to revise materials instead of treating tactile graphics as one-and-done.

Curious what others are seeing — especially TVIs in smaller or rural districts. Does isolation show up the same way for you?

188

As I reflect on my current practice, I realize that inconsistencies in the way tactile materials are formatted can unintentionally increase cognitive load for students. When the placement of braille labels, tactile graphics, headings, or page layouts changes from one activity to another, students have to spend additional time figuring out where information is located instead of focusing on learning the content itself. For students who are still developing tactile literacy skills, this extra effort can make tasks more frustrating and reduce their confidence.

Adopting a standardized tactile layout would create a more predictable learning environment. Consistent placement of titles, labels, graphics, and braille text allows students to build routines for locating information quickly and efficiently. As students become familiar with these patterns, they can devote more attention to understanding concepts rather than navigating the materials. Standardization also supports the development of independent exploration skills because students know what to expect each time they interact with a tactile resource.

Beyond improving access, a standardized tactile layout can change the way students engage with content. Instead of relying on teacher prompts to locate information, students can become more independent and active participants in their learning. They are able to spend more time analyzing, questioning, and making connections with the material rather than simply trying to find it. Ultimately, consistent formatting helps reduce unnecessary cognitive demands and allows students to focus on developing meaningful literacy and learning skills.

189

I really like your point that preparation programs help us become competent but not fluent with tactile graphics. That distinction really stood out to me because I think many of us leave our programs understanding the guidelines, but we don’t have enough opportunities to apply them across different subjects and student needs.

I also agree with what you said about the importance of observing how students actually use a tactile graphic. It’s easy to focus on whether a graphic follows the standards, but if a student struggles to interpret it independently, then the design needs to be reconsidered. Watching students interact with materials and making revisions based on their feedback seems like one of the best ways to improve our own practice.

Your point about isolation also resonated with me. Many TVIs don’t have another VI professional nearby to collaborate with, which makes it difficult to get feedback on complex graphics or learn from others’ experiences. I think having access to a shared library of quality tactile graphics and examples, along with opportunities to collaborate virtually with other TVIs, could help reduce that gap and create more consistency for students. I know APH has the tactile graphics library, which is awesome.

Overall, I think you highlighted an important issue: creating effective tactile graphics is both a technical skill and an instructional skill, and becoming proficient really requires ongoing practice, collaboration, and reflection.

190

I like your point about keeping tactile materials simple and focusing on what is most meaningful for the student. It’s easy to feel like every graphic needs to be detailed or made with the newest technology, but sometimes a simple raised-line drawing or real object is much more effective for teaching the concept.

I also agree that time constraints often force TVIs to make difficult decisions. There are days when creating the “perfect” tactile graphic just isn’t realistic, especially when supporting multiple students across different grade levels. In those situations, prioritizing quality over quantity and choosing the format that best matches the student’s current skill level is probably the most effective approach.

Your comment about asking for help also stood out to me. Collaborating with other TVIs, using state resource centers, or accessing existing tactile graphic libraries can save time while still providing students with high-quality materials. We don’t always have to create everything from scratch, and knowing when to use available resources allows us to spend more time on what matters most, teaching students how to interpret and learn from the tactile materials they receive.

191
  1. To what extent do current tactile material practices reflect student-centered design? Where do you see gaps between what students need and what is typically provided?

While reading this resource, the anecdote from Elizabeth and her student developing a tactile map for the student’s navigational need (3.2.1), resonated with me because the whole reason TVIs are creating and preparing tactile materials is for our students. I feel it is imperative for students to be a part of the process in developing the tactile materials they will be using. Much of the commercially available current tactile materials do not reflect student-centered design but they do offer personalization and the ability to change things. As I progress in my profession as a TVI/O&M, I am always attempting to include my students in the process of creating tactile materials. I have also had to handle last minute changes to the general education curriculum which then requires me to act and think quickly about tactile materials.

The difference between what is provided and what is needed lies within the concept of individualization. Just like teachers differentiate lessons for students and their learning needs, as TVIs we have to be able to differentiate general/basic tactile materials and, with the input of the student, individualize the materials based on the student’s needs. Again, this is difficult when only given a few hours to a day to complete. All in all, I am going to work to ensure that the teachers I’m working with are able to get me their plans with enough leeway and hopefully teach them that I’m not there to re-teach the lesson, but to allow the students I’m working with to access the curriculum.

192

Yes! This past year I had 2 paraprofessionals working with the VI caseload and preparing materials. There are twins on my caseload with the same VI diagnosis and one of the paras would prepare large print, high contrast materials since they’re low vision. It was a great learning opportunity for me to talk with her about keeping the changes simple and really focus on the concept of the worksheet and not overwhelm the page with different colors. It really made her step back and think about what the twins needed to access and not just make the materials look “pretty” or “visually pleasing”.

193

Ann, I have the same issue and as I’ve moved with my students each year, it has gotten a little better in regards to having enough time. I create Google Docs plans/calendars where teachers can quickly upload their plans/materials and the VI paraprofessionals and myself can access to modify. I request up to 2 weeks for materials to be shared so I can accurately and thoughtfully prepare materials with my students or delegate to the paraprofessionals working with the VI caseload. This upcoming school year I am shifting to a different school within the same district with different expectations. I’m gearing up to hopefully have the same system that’s worked in the past, obviously with some tweaks if necessary!

194

Analyze the tension between time constraints and instructional quality in tactile material creation. How do these competing demands shape instructional decisions

The competing demands definitely influence tactile graphics production. The classroom teacher and TVI have to be good collaborators working well ahead to determine when a tactile graphic is needed, what information is most critical for the student to have a good understanding of what is being conveyed and what elements are needed to help orient the student to the graphic.

Then how to construct the graphic needs to be determined. At times there are products available commercially but time to find, order and have this shipped must be factored in.

Materials to construct the graphic may not be readily available or, in the case of 3d printed material, the TVI may not possess the expertise needed to create what is needed.

Finally, previewing the graphic is best so the student is familiar with it and ready to consider questions about it otherwise they may still be at the level of figuring out what the graphic is rather than learning from it.

195

I agree that there is a delicate balance between “graphics on the fly” that get the job done and using technology or commercially available material that takes time, expertise and may or may not include exactly what is needed.

Students need graphics quickly at the same time (at least, if not before) their sighted peers. However, using commercially available material may take time for finding, ordering and shipment, may help the student on standardized testing where graphics are more similar to the commerciallyavailable products.

196

This resonates a lot with what I see day to day. I’d push on one piece though — the “fewer, higher-quality materials” strategy makes sense in theory, but in practice I think it quietly shifts the burden onto the TVI to make triage decisions they were never really trained to make. Nobody teaches us how to decide which concept gets the polished tactile graphic and which one gets the rushed version. So that prioritization ends up being gut instinct, built through trial and error, rather than a skill we walked in with.

The time crunch also shapes decisions in a sneakier way than just “make less.” It pushes us toward whatever’s fastest to produce, not necessarily what’s best for that specific student. Swell paper might be quicker to turn around than a collage or thermoform graphic that would actually convey texture distinctions better — but if I’m creating three graphics before first period, fast wins even when I know it’s not the ideal medium for that content.

I also think the testing piece you mentioned is the first thing that gets cut when time is tight, and it’s probably the most important step. A graphic can look clean and well-designed on paper but still completely fail once a student’s hands are actually on it. Checking that requires time with the student and time to revise afterward — and most of us are handing materials over the same day we make them, with no room built in to find out if they worked.

So I’d add to your point: it’s not just that time constraints force us to prioritize quality over quantity — they also quietly remove the feedback loop that defines quality in the first place. We end up making our best guess and moving on, rather than confirming the material worked before it reaches the next student who needs something similar.

Curious how you handle the testing step in your own practice — do you get any built-in time for that, or is it something you’re squeezing in informally?

197

Your point about sighted teachers adding visually appealing but unnecessary detail is such a real one. I’ve seen this constantly — a decorative border, extra shading, or a “helpful” arrow that means nothing tactilely but eats up hand-space and cognitive bandwidth. The student ends up doing extra work just to figure out what’s decoration versus what’s data, and that’s cognitive load we created, not load that came from the content itself.

The multiple-graphic-response question you mentioned is a great example too. I’ve had the same experience with our braillist — five graphics for one question might be fine visually (a sighted student’s eyes can compare them almost instantly), but tactilely, that’s five separate spatial explorations with nothing to anchor comparison between them. By the time a student finishes reading graphic five, they’ve often lost their read on graphic one. In those cases I’ve found it’s worth going back to the classroom teacher and asking if the question can be restructured, not just reformatted — sometimes the assessment design itself is the problem, not just the tactile adaptation.

On standardization — I’d say I’ve landed somewhere similar to you. Consistent placement (key location, orientation cues, labeling conventions) removes a layer of guesswork every time a student picks up a new graphic, so they’re spending their cognitive effort on the content instead of re-learning “where do I even start.” That matters most for students who are still building tactile literacy. But for a strong, experienced tactile reader, over-standardizing can almost feel like it’s slowing them down — they’ve already built their own efficient strategies, and rigid formatting can work against that instead of for it.

So maybe the real shift isn’t “standardize everything” but “standardize the parts that reduce ambiguity, and stay flexible on the parts that let a skilled reader use their own strategy.” Do you find yourself adjusting layout conventions based on the individual student, or do you try to keep it consistent across your whole caseload for predictability’s sake?

198

Great points! I often feel that TVIs have so many areas we are expected to be fully competent in, that it can be quite overwhelming. All areas of the ECC, direct instruction of braille and tactile graphics, as well as all the technology used by our students. It can feel overwhelming. Continuing professional development and support of TVI communities is so critical to both the TVIs success as well as that of our students.

199

I agree that students can get confused with too much tactile information. Too many graphs or pictures in their day-to-day classroom work can also hamper their ability to complete the work.

I find that when classroom teachers hand me documents to adapt for our blind/low vision students, it is important that I review the material and make decisions on which graphics will be created, and which ones will be omitted.

Many of the graphics are unnecessary and can be omitted because the information is included in the text.

Some of the graphics can be described in a couple of sentences, providing a more efficient interpretation than having to create and look at a tactile graphic.

However, there are images and graphics that will need to be provided to the student as they provide information that cannot be described easily.

These are the graphics that I focus on and pre-teach in my direct teaching lessons with the students.

200

  1. How well do current preparation and training systems equip educators to make informed decisions about tactile graphic design? What gaps do you see, and how do they impact students?

    I find that training programs have a difficult time keeping up with technology. I also have a difficult time keeping up with the technology as there are always new things to learn. When I took my training, 15 years ago, 3-D printers were not a thing that was accessible to schools. I never had any experience with a raised line machine nor with tiger software during my training.

    (fortunately we have a team of braillists that create tactile, representations, images, etc.)

    Using a variety of technologies for creating tactile graphics is beneficial for the students, but is sometimes difficult for the professionals if their team doesn’t have enough support.

201
  1. How well do current preparation and training systems equip educators to make informed decisions about tactile graphic design? What gaps do you see, and how do they impact students?

As the only TVI in a rural district serving students from birth to 21, we have different struggles. Our district does not have a braillist. I adapt most of the elementary age materials but higher science and math need more technical adapting (usually outsourced). The science and math materials given last minute put that pressure on me to adapt. This puts more gaps on my students’ education. While my student sits in class listening to lecture about a diagram they either don’t have or is poorly made I feel solely responsible.

The other struggles continue without state and district assessments. Our district has been using online curriculums of assignments and assessments. Some have access to screen readers but not the diagrams or pictures presented. Then our state assessments continue to use thermoform where the plastic feels alike.

The improvement is the resources available to help guide in those stressful situations. As the TVI, I can decide to adapt on my own, look at a database to emboss, or use other assistive technology. This has given me different avenues that I didn’t have many years ago. Of course I would want to talk to a colleague, but many itinerant teachers around our state are giving direct instruction.

Homework is a topic that is very controversial in our district. Most teachers do not send homework home due to the AI capability. When my students are added to my caseload, I inform the student and parents that there will be homework. I try to present homework that is ‘real’ life activities that usually involve interpreting tactile graphics. But there are many other times, my student needs to review the adapted materials given that day.