Online Literacy Programs: Differentiation and Engagement
As technology has become more prominent in education, online literacy programs have become a staple in many elementary school classrooms. Many of these online programs target students' reading comprehension and fluency. Districts around the country purchase subscriptions to these programs for their teachers to use and often require students to spend a minimum amount of time on the program per day or week. While these programs can be helpful tools to differentiate literacy based on each students' reading level and skills, are they engaging enough for the amount of time students spend on them?
Here is a list of just a few online literacy programs that I have seen used in elementary schools and a blurb from their websites:
Lexia Core 5 Reading 
"Lexia Core5 Reading is an adaptive blended learning program that accelerates the development of literacy skills for students of all abilities, helping them make that critical shift from learning to read to reading to learn."
"Built on Structured Literacy, Core5 is intended to help provide equitable learning opportunities for all students, as well as to transform student learning for success and well-being."
"By enabling educators to provide differentiated literacy instruction for students of all abilities, Lexia's research-proven program helps substantially reduce students' risk of not meeting grade-level standards while still being able to give accelerated and on-track students the instruction they need to thrive."
iRead
"Backed by years of proven research and reliable data, iRead’s process of placement, instruction, and assessment guarantees a path to success for every child."
"Adaptive software allows for uniquely tailored instruction and practice for every child while a virtual staff of dynamic faculty members guide children through lessons targeting phonological awareness, alphabet knowledge, phonics, decoding, word recognition, fluency, and morphological awareness."
Raz-Kids
"Raz-Kids delivers hundreds of interactive, leveled eBooks spanning 29 levels. 400+ eBooks and open-book eQuizzes, with new books added every month, even in Spanish! Corresponding eQuizzes test comprehension, providing teachers with skill reports for data-driven instruction. Online running records let teachers digitally assess each student, saving valuable classroom time."
Each of these online literacy programs provide differentiated learning for students through either personalized learning programs based on diagnostic assessments or leveled books for the students' current reading levels. Therefore, students are working on what skills they need most in literacy and reading books at their level.
Because districts pay money for these online literacy programs, they need to ensure they are used a certain amount of time in order to get their money's worth and to choose to continue paying for the program. Therefore, principals encourage use or even set required minimum amounts of time that students must spend on the program per day or per week. This means that teachers must plan time during their day and lessons for students to spend working on these programs.
In my experience, I have seen teachers have students working independently on these programs during literacy blocks while the they pull students one on one or in small groups. This allows the teacher to work with students more closely on things like small group guided reading and administering assessments while the rest of the class is busy working independently on their personalized program.
These programs are beneficial for students since they differentiate for each student and target instruction at the student's level as they make progress. However, do students end up spending too much time on these programs? While students seem to enjoy working on these programs, are they engaging enough for the amount of time that students are required to spend on them? Each student is different, some find these programs more engaging than others. It also depends on how the teacher structures time spent on the program. For example, if there is a weekly time requirement, the teacher could allow students to work towards it a little each day. However, if a teacher uses these programs to keep their students busy indepently for too long so they can work with small groups, then students will loose engagement. Therefore, online literacy programs can be both engaging and beneficial when used for students' success and not as busy work!
As an educator, have you had any experience with online literacy programs such as these? If so, how do you incorporate them into your classroom? And what do you think about them; what has your experience been using these programs?
This is a great topic! I have noticed such an increase in use of these programs, specifically when teachers are pulling others for small groups. As you mentioned, I also see the amazing differentiation between students. When I working with students in class, I hear students rave about the "level" they are on and what they've achieved. These programs do create such a sense of fun in their independent learning.
ReplyDeleteHaving the students use online programs is something I do in my classroom because it keeps the students engaged. I have the students do Lexia ( they have weekly time requirements) and they also enjoy Epic. I enjoy the differentiation that Lexia provides, plus all the resources that it provides. These programs are great for facilitating differentiated, independent work.
DeleteI completely agree with you both! I think it is important to use these tools advantageously, like when the teacher needs to pull small groups. I have noticed that students are the most quiet and engaged with their work when on these programs. Lexia really provides a complete approach to phonics, which I really like. My students also like Epic, RazKids, and iReady. All of these online programs are differentiated well and the teachers can modify what the students should be working on at any given point.
DeleteSuch a good topic and very valid points you have brought up. In my experience, when a principal or district sets a certain amount of time that each child needs to be on a program, that program seems to lose its credibility. I feel like when there are expectations, teachers tend to not give as much validity as should be given to these types of programs. While they are truly beneficial for some kids, especially English Language Learners, they are not beneficial for all. So the question then becomes, do we use this because we're simply told to and its a one size fits all type of model, or do we make decisions as experienced teachers doing what is best for the students in front of me.
ReplyDeleteI love this reflection! I agree 100%. In my experience at a middle school, there are some teachers who attempt to include the reading program religiously, and others tend to not highlight the program as a significant part of classwork, in other words, it is deemed as 'busy work.' If teachers do not prioritize the reading program, then so won't the students.
DeleteThis is such a great topic and definitely a topic that hits home for me as an educator. We use two of these programs and are required to have students meet a certain number of minutes a week. While it is helpful during small group time while I am working with other students I sometimes can't help but wonder if the amount of time that students are spending on the computer is really necessary. As a parent. I don't love having my daughters on screens often. This is why I see the struggle with the required amount in classrooms. While I do see a benefit I myself can't help but wonder if at times it really is too much.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Sue. I think requiring time spent on these programs comes from good intentions, but the return on investment isn't always so easily quantifiable. For example, students being encouraged by their gains in reading, as Olivia mentioned, or being excited to find a new book to read, doesn't necessarily correlate to filling in a required number of minutes a week. Indeed, it could connect to other literacy activities in the classroom that are off-screen - interactive read alouds, etc.
DeleteHowever, if these programs are working, and there is a balance of screen time, as Sue said, tracking usage can help the district justify funding for the program, along with testing results. I feel that logging time and test score increases can only tell a small portion of a student's learning journey, but we often need to fall back on those numbers to keep programs and funding. I enjoyed your post, and it is good food for thought: ultimately, I feel that the more we trust professional educators and give them flexibility and resources to make instructional decisions that benefit their particular group of students, the more likely we are to ensure student success, and celebrate learning holistically, not just as a set of data points.
I have learned an important fact from this article, and it is merely that because districts pay money for these online literacy programs, they need to ensure they are used a certain amount of time in order to get their money's worth and to choose to continue paying for the program. I now put the pieces together and come to the realization of why part of the faculty has been pushing the program to use. If the teacher values the reading program, then so would the students; teachers require students to use it for homework, and competitions are created to encourage classes to read the most. On the contrary, other teachers use it for busy work, and most of the time, the class would not take it seriously because when the class is done with their initial assignment, they are now checked out of the day's task.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was student teaching, the district I was in used Raz-Kids as part of their literacy instruction. I liked the program because it had many helpful features for students to interact with texts. Some of the features I liked were that teachers could assign texts for students to read, students were able to record themselves reading a text (this was especially helpful during online learning when we could not listen in on students reading as often), there were comprehension activities and quizzes to accompany most texts, and there were resources and lessons for teachers to use in many literacy areas (comprehension, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, etc.). Students seemed to enjoy the program as well. However, I can't help but wonder if these online programs are taking away from traditional literacy instruction. I think that there needs to be a balance between online programs/games and students being able to interact with and explore physical texts. That way, students can apply the skills they practice using online programs to their independent reading.
ReplyDeleteMy class uses Lexia and go on for no more than 15 minutes a day. Most of my students are engaged and enjoy it. When they get to a new level I print out their certificates and they are so proud and it motivates them to stay focused. I do like the resources that Lexia provides teachers and students.
ReplyDeleteThese were such great sources for me to use in the future with my class. In my district, we do not use any of these so I loved exploring each one. I love how these programs make reading more fun for the students. The only online reading resources that my district uses is Epic. I think that these three provide way more to the students and advance their learning.
ReplyDeleteThis was such a great post, so many great resources I will be sure to look into! I have worked with both RazKids and Epic. Both programs had their advantages and things that I thought could be improved upon. With that being said the students seemed to enjoy them. With the direction that education is moving in in terms of technology I feel as though these types of programs are only going to become more widely used.
ReplyDelete