The “Indirect Learning” (IDL) system is a speaking‐computer based multi‐sensory system for teaching literacy skills. The IDL system has several unique features: these are the facility to independently adjust the colour of the monitor screen and the text colour, the masking of incorrect typed responses, the incorporation of a touch‐typing course into a remedial programme, the echoing back of children's spoken responses by the computer, and the integration of all these features into over one thousand carefully graduated exercises.This evaluation describes the system and measures how effectively the system remediated the reading and spelling in a sample of 150 children and adults. The effectiveness of the IDL system for different individuals varied between the extremes of having no significant effect and improving reading age at a rate of 6 months for one month of the programme, and spelling age by 6.6 months/month so that normal reading and spelling abilities were quickly attained. The average rates of improvement for the group in reading and spelling were 2.15 and 2.17 months/month respectively. These results demonstrate that this learning system is effective, especially when it is considered that this sample had previous rates of reading gain of on average 0.58 months/month, and 0.49 months/month for spelling. This shows an average improvement in the rate of learning to read and spell by a factor of about 4 times. The resilience of the system is demonstrated by the fact that the sample group were supervised by different tutors in different teaching centres, and that the sample group had different needs. The variation of responses within the sample group to the IDL programme were found to be correlated to factors that are known to contribute to poor reading skills, eg, having poor phonological skills and/or Meares‐Irlen Syndrome (Wilkins, 1996), the age of the subject, and the quantity of exercises completed.Consideration is given to the IDL system's suitability for inclusion into mainstream educational and training provision. The results demonstrate this system's effectiveness at improving literacy; consequently decisions on its use would be made on the basis of value‐for‐money when compared to other remedial systems.
Read full abstract