Can’t other programs do this?
Maybe, if they are intensive……

A job can be done many ways, but since the problem is so huge in terms of numbers of students needing intervention, the most efficient delivery system is sensible.

It is soo expensive.
Actually it is not expensive.
Compare 60 hours individual treatment at $125/hour = $7500
to 60 hours of FastforWord at $3350.

Isn’t a human therapist better than a machine?
Let technology do what it does best and let teachers do what they do best. Technology can be part of a very effective treatment plan.

Baseball players use a batting machine for hitting practice. It is better than human pitching because the speed and direction can be controlled. One can better work on mechanics in a controlled environment, with repetition.

THE COMPUTER ADVANTAGE:
EXPOSURE: the number of trials/exposures is significant: by day six of the program there will have been 6500 opportunities for learning; 45,000 trials by day 40!
REWARD: Brain plasticity is gated by a reward system: quick delivery of rewards--within 10 milliseconds, in a random sequence
drives plasticity.
AMOUNT OF PRACTICE: FFW provides frequent, attentive practice.

The human advantage: this program is designed to be used with professional intervention. Flags are set up to cue special interventions.

Not everyone has a “temporal auditory processing problem,” so why would they need Fast ForWord?
The sound games are only a part of the program, there are also word games that address other language processing issues as well as the memory, attention, processing and sequencing in language.

The temporal auditory processing, frequently associated with specific language impairment, may, in fact, be more prevalent than realized, however. Paula Tallal’s infant studies are finding that about 50% of those tested--with a family history of specific language impairment--have extended interstimulus intervals, which negatively impact phonological encoding. By the time a typical student is tested for temporal auditory processing in a research project, they have already developed compensatory, top down strategies, which have masked the original problem, and their temporal auditory processing deficit is not evident. Temporal auditory processing thresholds are most appropriately tested in infants.

Does FFW have “independent” research behind it?
Research is constantly coming out on FFW. It is now the “gold standard” against which to compare other programs.

Be an intelligent consumer of the research.

· Implementation: Make sure FFW was implemented as designed: a daily, intensive protocol continued until satisfactory completion scores were obtained; that professional intervention was included as part of research protocol when program “flags” identified need for therapeutic intervention.

· Subjects: college students, as subjects of pure temporal auditory processing research, are not the best subjects as their processing, after life-long listening, has been contaminated by top down means of processing.

· Size: The number of subjects in the research is important to make far reaching judgments about a program.

· Peer reviewed journals: Consider the rigor of the study, and whether or not it is published in a peer reviewed journal.

The Fast ForWord programs are relatively new as far as their time in the treatment arena. Major independent research takes time and it is underway. Think back to phonemic awareness and reading. Pat Lindamood nailed it in the late 1960s, but the research on it came out 30-40 years later. Was she a quack or just a visionary??

What kind of results can I expect?
A wide range of outcomes is possible, everything from improved phonemic awareness, to improved short term memory, to better language comprehension, as well as expressive language. A frequent comment is that a “veil is lifted” and the child is listening to his daily auditory environment. Attention and work ethic can also improve. These varied effects are possible because the programs are designed to appeal to the brain and what it wants, as well as the sound and language input.

Why would attention improve???
You cannot process information if you cannot focus attention, and you cannot focus attention if you cannot process. If you cannot process well, you cannot maintain attention over time because the brain checks out as a protective function so that it will not feel struggle. Fast ForWord trains attention and processing because it provides a means for the student to press a button before every listening opportunity. It puts control of listening in the hands of the player.