In Post 3 of this series (https://secondaryschoolslt.com/2026/08/20/supporting-generalisation-part-3-meta-skills/), I talked about how metacognitive skills are central to the successful transfer of strategies to real-life contexts, and to becoming a more independent learner. In this last post of this series on generalisation, I will talk about another powerful approach which is strongly metacognitive in nature: mediated learning.
Many Speech and Language Therapists (SLTs) have never heard of the term “Mediated Learning Experience” (MLE) or the psychologist who coined it, Reuven Feuerstein. But they are likely to be familiar with another thinker, Lev Vygotsky, who was coming up with similar ideas in parallel.
Parallels between Vygotsky and Feuerstein
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD – the gap between what a child can achieve on their own, and with an adult’s support) underlies the scaffolding techniques we all use and forms the theoretical basis for Dynamic Assessment (DA). See my post on assessment for more information: https://secondaryschoolslt.com/2026/07/08/language-assessment-at-secondary-school-challenges-and-solutions/.
Yet, it was Feuerstein who pioneered the very first dynamic assessment tool, the Learning Potential Assessment Device (LPAD) in 1979, framing the procedure as “test-mediate-retest” rather than “test-teach-retest”. More recently, Carol Westby (2025) used Feuerstein’s wording when she published her “Mediated Learning Observation Instrument” for SLTs.
Although Feuerstein focused on domain general cognition rather than communication per se, several researchers, e.g. Nelson (1998), and Larson and McKinley, (2003), have recognised the value and relevance of his work to the field of Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) and recommend integrating “mediated learning” into intervention sessions.
If you’d like to read more about who Feuerstein was, including his work with holocaust survivors, his theory of Structural Cognitive Modifiability (SCM) and the evidence base for his work, please see my stand alone post, coming soon…
What is a Mediated Learning Experience?
According to Feuerstein, MLE occurs when a more knowledgeable person such as a parent or teacher comes between the world and the learner, “framing, selecting, focusing and feeding back environmental experiences” (Feuerstein, Rand and Hoffman, 1979, p.71). He also described it as “an intentional interaction with the learner, the purpose of which is to enhance the learner’s understanding beyond the immediate experience and to help the learner to apply what is learned in broader contexts (Feuerstein, Feuerstein and Falik, 2010, p.xviii).
“Good” parents naturally mediate for their children by going beyond simple dos and don’ts. So instead of hearing, “Don’t touch the stove!”, “Put on your shoes!”, “Don’t run!”, we might hear “Don’t touch the stove. It’s hot. You might burn yourself”, or “Stop here. We need to wait for the green man before we cross” (Some questions adapted from Larson and McKinley, 2003, p.345). This way, the child learns a lesson they can potentially use in other situations.
The core criteria of MLE
To guide facilitators, Feuerstein detailed 12 criteria required for an interaction to be described as MLE, three of which he considered essential. These he called “mediation of intentionality and reciprocity”, “meaning” and “transcendence” (Feuerstein, Feuerstein and Falik, 2010).
Being “intentional” involves reflecting on the underlying skills we wish to teach, carefully selecting appropriate materials, and explicitly stating the goal of each activity. To attain “reciprocity”, we must ensure that our students are focused on the task by perhaps adjusting our tone of voice, ensuring activities are engaging enough and waiting for them to respond.
Feuerstein also believed that his patients should understand the “meaning” of the activities he asked them to complete. In other words, it’s important our students are fully aware of the skills we are trying to teach and how they are relevant to their lives. Finally, transcendence involves getting our students to apply what they have learnt to other contexts in a process Feuerstein called “bridging”.
SLTs as natural mediators
In practical terms, mediating and bridging have a lot to do with asking guided questions. Instead of telling students the answers, good mediators provide scaffolding, ask questions and then further questions, challenge answers and get students to justify their responses, continually emphasising the processes of thinking, learning and problem solving as much as the answers to individual activities (Haywood et al, 1988 in Nelson, 1998).
So we might ask students how they knew which answer was correct, why their choice was better than another option, what they had to do to solve the problem and whether there might have been another way to solve it.
SLTs do much of this already. We are used to setting targets for our students, carefully selecting activities and materials, modifying environments and our communication to ensure our students’ success. And because our clinical training is so deeply rooted in facilitation techniques or “scaffolding”, you might say that SLTs are the most natural mediators.
What may be less familiar is making our reasoning explicit to our students. Although many SLTs discuss targets and get students’ input at the beginning of term, it might seem unnecessary to do this with every activity or skill we try to teach…
Yet, since I started clearly explaining what we are doing, why we are doing it and how what we are working on is relevant to their lives when introducing any new activity, I saw a noticeable improvement in my students’ intrinsic motivation and engagement. Something else that might feel foreign to SLTs is the level of metacognitive questioning involved in mediating and bridging.
What is bridging?
During bridging, we get students to think of alternative situations when they could use the strategy or skill being discussed (Larson and McKinley, 2003, Feuerstein et al, 2007). For example, when teaching a range of clarification questions to use in class, you could discuss other times when it’s especially important to seek clarification, such as to find out which topics to revise for an exam or when attempting a dangerous activity like bungee jumping. Or you might choose to highlight the broader skill of asking questions generally. So, you could ask:
Can you tell me about some other times in life when it is important to ask questions? How about at school/ in your free time? What kind of questions might you ask if you were buying a new phone/ trying to rent a room? Why is it important to ask these questions? What might happen if you didn’t ask the right questions when buying a new phone/ renting a room/ doing a bungee jump? What kinds of jobs involve asking questions? What might happen if a doctor/ reporter did not ask the right questions?
Or, if you’re working on putting vocabulary words into different categories, then you could highlight the underlying skill of categorisation, or organisation. You might ask questions like:
Where else can you find things organised into different categories? Which categories are there in a supermarket/ pharmacy/ zoo? If I asked you to buy some cornflakes, apples and ice cream from Tesco, how would you do that? How can knowing what category something is in help you with your shopping/ at the self-checkout?
Or alternatively…
How are zoos organised? What are some different ways of categorising animals? Can an animal fit into two categories at the same time? If you wanted to see the alligators, the lions and the parrots, how would you find them? Why might it be helpful to keep all the reptiles in the same area? How does this make it easier for the zoo and better for the animals? How is what you learn organised at school? Can you think of anything that cannot be organised into categories?”
Hopefully students begin to realise that everything can be organised into categories, and they start to understand the rules that govern our world.
How do students respond?
Larson and McKinley (2003, p.347, 350) warn us to expect “dead silence” or “weak” bridges initially. When asked questions like, “When is another time it’s important to use your inference skills/ look for clues?”, they may simply reply, “at school”, “with friends” or nothing at all. A stronger bridge might be, “when analysing Macbeth in my English lesson”, or “to work out why a friend is angry with me”.
You will probably have to provide a lot of support initially, and, of course, adapt your language for lower level students. To encourage your students to produce stronger bridges, you could ask questions like, “When, at school, could you use your inference skills?” Or provide a partial bridge for them, e.g. “How about in your English class…?” (Larson and McKinley, 2003).
The level of questioning may seem high, but you might be surprised at what your students can achieve with consistent support. Of course, mediation is not a cure-all, and it’s unlikely to be successful with those with severe neurological impairments. But Larson and McKinley (2003) argue that it’s entirely appropriate for secondary aged students with language disorders in mainstream settings.
According to them, we should expect to see significant progress within 6-9 months, although I personally feel some students make progress before then. Larson and McKinley (2003) also point out that students are expected to handle thought provoking questions at secondary level, so you could say that using a mediated learning approach is also aligned with curriculum goals.
Since integrating mediated learning and bridging into my sessions, I’ve seen an enormous improvement in my students’ motivation and engagement, maturity, reasoning ability and transfer of skills and strategies to other situations. It’s truly one of the things that has made the biggest difference to my practice. I hope it helps you too!
Notes
Feuerstein, Reuven, Refael S. Feuerstein, and Louis H. Falik. 2010. Beyond Smarter: Mediated Learning and the Brain’s Capacity for Change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Feuerstein, Reuven, Ya’acov Rand, and Mildred B. Hoffman. 1979. The Dynamic Assessment of Retarded Performers: The Learning Potential Assessment Device, Theory, Instruments, and Techniques. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Feuerstein, Reuven, Ya’acov Rand, Mildred B. Hoffman, Moshe Egozi, and Nilly Ben Shachar-Segev. 2007. “Chapter 4: The Instrumental Enrichment Program.” In Instrumental Enrichment Program Reader. Jerusalem: Feuerstein Institute.
Larson, Vicki L., and Nancy L. McKinley. 2003. Communication Solutions for Older Students. Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Publications.
Nelson, Nickola Wolf. 1998. Childhood Language Disorders in Context: Infancy Through Adolescence. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Westby, Carol. 2025. “Mediated Learning Observation Instrument.” Word of Mouth 36 (4): 8–10.
Thoughts of a secondary school SLT 
Leave a comment