FastForword

Author	Message
Anonymous Joined: Nov 03, 2005 Posts: 69140 Other Topics	Posted Jun 25, 2003 at 9:14:03 AM Subject: FastForword here is a link to an article in the Phila Inquirer today http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/6162511.htm has anyone had their child go through this program and found the kind of results this article alludes to?? does the child learn to read just from this program?? as this article seems to imply anyone who has used FFW, and had bad results should email this journalist with your findings, this journalist writes many education articles for the Inquirer and seems smitten with FFW, she implies to parents that it the be all to end all is it??? email her if it is not?? she is making parents think this is the answer to their prayers, is it??? thanks libby - [Modified by: Todd Holden on September 07, 2006 10:34 AM]
Back to top
Anonymous Joined May 19, 2013 Posts: 69140 Other Topics	Posted:Jun 25, 2003 9:44:47 AM Subject:my experience My ds did FFW--decoding wasn't a problem for him but he had very weak receptive and expressive language skills, eg inability to follow three step instructions. FFW did wonders for his auditory attention and language scores. He made much more progress on the latter after six weeks of FFW than he did after two years of private language therapy two hours a week. FFW does not teach anyone how to read--but it does give kids the skills they need to acquire phoenemic awareness, a necessary skill for reading. I am a big fan of FFW, but I would question the cost/benefit of putting all children through it. Some controlled studies here would be helpful.
Back to top
Beth from FL Joined Jun 15, 2003 Posts: 621 Other Topics	Posted:Jun 25, 2003 12:54:57 PM Subject:Re: FastForword My son also did FFW with very good results. My son's receptive language skills have consistently tested above average (about 103-110 SS) compared to below average before (88-90). Functionally, the difference was huge. Our son became engaged with the world. We used to think he was the only of our children to not be nosy. Turns out he just couldn't eavesdrop like the other two!! That said, we still had major reading issues post FFW. It was no magic solution for that. My son has multiple issues and even though he could process sounds much more normally, it did not translate into better reading. In fact, I would tend to say it should be used for language/auditory issues not just reading. Kids with out the auditory issues probably would do just fine with a good research based reading program. Beth
Back to top
Linda F Joined Jun 20, 2003 Posts: 19 Other Topics	Posted:Jun 27, 2003 2:44:07 PM Subject:Well it really is all about good diagnostics. If you have a child whose main problem is visual and you take him in for fast forward you aren't going to see much in the way of results. If a child is struggling with reading despite the fact that sound reading methods are being used you need to evaluate for auditory and or visual problems and treat those problems directly. A good audiologist or developmental optometrist can help.
Back to top
soccermom2231 Joined Oct 16, 2007 Posts: 1 Other Topics	Posted:Oct 16, 2007 11:22:15 AM Subject:Re: FastForword My son did the FFW language program over the summer. He recently turned 8 years old. He has expressive and receptive speech delays which he receives IEP services at school. He has also had great difficulty with reading. He repeated the first grade and is currently in the second grade with a begginning 1st grade reading level. The school purchased FFW to help address his reading delays. My opinion on FFW: It may have helped his speech delays, but not enough to really stand out. The program itself is extermely boring. It did not help at all with his reading. I would not reccommend this program for difficulties with reading.
Back to top

advertisement

FastForword