Computer-Assisted Language Intervention Using Fast ForWord®: Theoretical and Empirical Considerations for Clinical Decision-Making.

A computer-assisted language intervention program called Fast ForWord® (Scientific Learning Corporation, 1998) has received a great deal of attention at professional meetings and in the popular media. Newspaper and magazine articles about this program contain statements like, "On average, after only 6 to 7 weeks of training, language-learning impaired children ages 4 to 12 showed improvement of more than one and a half years in speech processing and language ability." (Scientific Learning Corporation, 1997). Are the claims that are being made about this intervention approach just a matter of product promotion, or is this really a scientifically proven remedy for language-learning impairments? This article critiques the theoretical basis of Fast ForWord®, the documented treatment outcomes, and the clinical methods associated with the procedure. Fifteen cautionary statements are provided that clinicians may want to consider before they recommend Fast ForWord® intervention for the children they serve.

[1]  G. Andrews,et al.  Meta-analysis of the effects of stuttering treatment. , 1980, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[2]  J. Tomblin,et al.  The contribution of perceptual learning to performance on the repetition task. , 1983, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[3]  Rebecca J. McCauley,et al.  Use and Misuse of Norm-Referenced Test in Clinical Assessment , 1984 .

[4]  J. Johnston.  Fit, focus and functionality: an essay on early language intervention , 1985 .

[5]  L. Bernstein,et al.  Speech perception development in language-impaired children: a 4-year follow-up study. , 1985, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[6]  Susan H. Foster,et al.  Effectiveness of language intervention with the language/learning disabled. , 1987, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[7]  Elizabeth Carrow-Woolfolk,et al.  Theory, assessment, and intervention in language disorders: An integrative approach , 1988 .

[8]  Margaret Lahey,et al.  Language disorders and language development , 1988 .

[9]  D. Robin,et al.  Auditory temporal pattern learning in children with speech and language impairments , 1989, Brain and Language.

[10]  M. Lahey.  Who shall be called language disordered? Some reflections and one perspective. , 1990, The Journal of speech and hearing disorders.

[11]  P Tallal,et al.  Fine-grained discrimination deficits in language-learning impaired children are specific neither to the auditory modality nor to speech perception. , 1990, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[12]  M. Merzenich,et al.  Functional reorganization of primary somatosensory cortex in adult owl monkeys after behaviorally controlled tactile stimulation. , 1990, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  W M Jenkins,et al.  Frequency discrimination training engaging a restricted skin surface results in an emergence of a cutaneous response zone in cortical area 3a. , 1992, Journal of neurophysiology.

[14]  Stephen Crain,et al.  Identifying the Causes of Reading Disability , 1992 .

[15]  M. Merzenich,et al.  Plasticity in the frequency representation of primary auditory cortex following discrimination training in adult owl monkeys , 1993, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[16]  S. Hochstein,et al.  Attentional control of early perceptual learning. , 1993, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  A. Karni,et al.  The time course of learning a visual skill , 1993, Nature.

[18]  M M Merzenich,et al.  Neural Mechanisms Underlying Temporal Integration, Segmentation, and Input Sequence Representation: Some Implications for the Origin of Learning Disabilities a , 1993, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[19]  L. Wilkinson,et al.  Observation is more than looking , 1994 .

[20]  M. Studdert-Kennedy,et al.  Auditory temporal perception deficits in the reading-impaired: A critical review of the evidence , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[21]  Steven L. Miller,et al.  Temporal Processing Deficits of Language-Learning Impaired Children Ameliorated by Training , 1996, Science.

[22]  Steven L. Miller,et al.  Language Comprehension in Language-Learning Impaired Children Improved with Acoustically Modified Speech , 1996, Science.

[23]  P. Tallal,et al.  Auditory temporal processing thresholds, habituation, and recognition memory over the 1st year☆ , 1996 .

[24]  D. Buonomano,et al.  Learning and Generalization of Auditory Temporal–Interval Discrimination in Humans , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[25]  Laurence B. Leonard,et al.  Children with Specific Language Impairment , 1997 .

[26]  S. Brady,et al.  Ability to encode phonological representations: An underlying difficulty of poor readers. , 1997 .

[27]  N. Cowan,et al.  Information processing by school-age children with specific language impairment: evidence from a modality effect paradigm. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[28]  T. Campbell,et al.  Nonword repetition and child language impairment. , 1998, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[29]  J. Law,et al.  Screening for speech and language delay: a systematic review of the literature. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[30]  Steven L. Miller,et al.  Some Neurological Principles Relevant to the Origins of — and the Cortical Plasticity-Based Remediation of — Developmental Language Impairments , 1999 .