programs in public school

People need to expect and demand more from special educators. To get the such, there is going to have to be a way of paying for it. People are demanding high levels of professionalism without any means of funding it. This is a nationwide problem, especially prevalent in districts lacking a huge property tax foundation. A teacher trained (at her own expense usually) in the major reading programs receives no more funding than the untrained ones. What I’m saying is there is no incentive for one to become well-trained in special education - excepting altruism. Ken

I’d only say I’m not sure how much solid research you’ll find on Fast Forward. You might find some that was commissioned and paid for by the Fast Forward people but no ‘double blind’ studies, as they say. Fast Forward is still somewhat new and I would doubt any districts use it as it’s expensive.

I’d also say beware pursuing what might be only the latest fad in reading remediation. I had a student whose family invested the money in Fast Forward and I saw no demonstrable change in the student’s reading skills.

Ask your private ed. therapist why she likes Fast Forward more than Wilson Language. Also ask her what she thinks of Reading Reflex, Phonographix and Reading Recovery. Press her for an answer to make sure she hasn’t just fallen prey to the latest fad in reading remediation.

Also while you’re looking for research on Fast Forward ask your district now that Open Court is not working for your son what they intend to do next while you’re working on the Fast Forward approach.

I teach RSP in the same state. I am NOT trained in Lindamood-Bell (except V&V). I do agreet that Open Court moves too quickly for many of my students. Our classroom teachers were using the program, until this year. It is explicit and phonics based.

I teach my students reasonably effectively w/o LMB. I simply use techniques that I know work. I follow the scope and sequence from Project Read. I usually teach about a unit per week. I teach explicitely and use multi-sensory practice with letter sounds and words. I allow my students to practice with decodable text, as provided by the Bonnie Kline Readers.

I do not use any program per se. As I said, I follow the skills sequence in Project Read and do use many of the materials at, particularly, the very lowest levels. I weave in, as appropriate, other materials and programs. I embellish the multi-sensory teaching. I do have the “Seeing Stars” program, for instance, and have incorporated good practices from this program.

When the student has a greater skill base, I often move into Ken Campbell’s Great Leaps program to build fluency.

I do not recommend fighting over specific programs. Programs are canned. My first principal straightened me out on that one. She told me Open Court was not THE program, it was a set of materials or tools and I the teacher create the program using the tools and materials available to meet the needs of the students. You have a child that must be taught in a manner he can learn. This includes methodology and pacing. You need to figure out why your child is failing at Open Court, then fight to get the instruction modified to meet his needs. To me, it is not a question of using one program or another. My guess is the skills move too rapidly for an LD youngster.

In my experience, I have not found that a child needs FastForward. The teacher can do phonological processing training with letter tiles. The child daily segments, builds and blends sounds into words. This practice proceeds from simple to more complex and is engaged in daily. The child will get it, if the time is invested at this stage.

We did Fast Forward privately. It is not a reading program but rather changes how a child processes sounds. My son’s receptive language is now normal. I would say it falls in the category of reading readiness.

Few schools provide it because even the experts aren’t always sure who will benefit from it. We did it after both a SLT and an audiologist recommended it for our son. I am glad we did it—our son suddenly could understand the world around him. But frankly, he still doesn’t read on grade level so comprehending sounds is only a very first step (and he has had lots of reading instruction).

I personally would not spend my energy on fighting the school for FFW but focus on finding an effective way to teach your son reading.

Beth

Dear Amy,
My 10 year old son was recently diagnosed with APD and the audiologist has recommended Fast Forword. It is my understanding that it is not a reading program or a replacement for a multisensory phonics program, but rather stimulates the speech/language and auditory centers of the brain to make it more receptive for learning. Our recommendation was to go through Fast Forword first and then continue with Lindamood Bell or Phonographix.
There is a Yahoo group (tools for learning) which is a group of speech and language therapists and audiologists who are all providers of Fast Forword. Perhaps if you posted your question there, they could point you in the direction of research studies which are independent of the company. Also, there is a school district in my area which provides Fast Forword(not my half a## backward district). It is Lower Merion School District in Montgomery County, PA. This is a top-notch school district so it might be useful to get in touch with them (they have a website). Good luck. Sincerely, Eileen

If you go to the Fastforword Web site www.fastforword.com, they have alot of information. I had not been there for awhile and took a look about a week ago. Their programs have changed in the last several years?

But I wanted to point you to a link on their site that gives quite a bit of info on how the school can go about getting a grant. It gives the forms, how to fill them out and links you to a site within your state that provides various organizations that you can apply to to get the grant. They also have links to the research they have done.

There was a school district in Boulder,CO that offered Fastforword couple years ago. If you call the fastforword people, they may be able to give you some references as to what schools are doing with program and kind of results they are seeing.

The original Fastforword program does more auditory tonal training. But they do offer other programs that are reading programs(various levels). I have not heard any feedback on these programs. Curious if anyone on the board has evaled them?

I work now for a public school district that provides FFW. My previous distict had some FFW slots available in conjunction with their SELPA, but many of those go unused because no one asks for it or don’t know it is available. I put my son through both FFW one and two and while he still struggles with reading I wanted to try to improve his auditory processing which was identified as a deficit. I have now put close to 100 students through FFW. The work is intensive and strengthens so many auditory and language skills. We use it in conjunction with strong reading programs taught by well trained teachers and we are seeing results.

So, for my son I went to a private clinic where specific programs were recommended. I then went to my school district and asked which programs they could provide with a well trained teacher. Since they did not want to do anything, I hired an advocate and got programs for a time at the private clinic Then the district trained some of their own people and provided some programs themselves. I approached the district with “if you can’t teach my son, you will need to pay for someone who can. Let the state of California tell us what you need to or don’t need to do.” I hired an advocate and we did NOT go to a fair hearing. Nevertheless, the expense and frustration were considerable. I’m glad we fought for better education, but at this point we have gone to a private school where we pay our own way. We wanted no strings attached to our ignorant district.

Therapeutic programs that address underlying deficits need to be combined with good teaching strategies. One or the other won’t do it for the truely LD child.
If the child still has fine motor issues he needs OT. You can’t teach him out of it. If he has severe auditory processing issues he will need some therapies like FFW, tomitis etc before he will be teachable.
If the child has vision issues he will need vision therapy before he can be a truely good reader.
Cognitive enhancememt also works to provide undelying skills that are needed before academic skills can be attained. It is like building a house. You don’t start from the top and a basement is pretty useless by itself.

We need to have teachers work with therapists. Understanding the deficit and how to treat it can save the teacher 100s of hours of teaching that provides little effect.
Taking care of the deficit alone will also not yield results. These kids have been functioning for a long time with auditory systems or vision systems that don’t work properly. They missed alot. Once the problem area has improved they need teachers to help them catch up on all that they missed.

amy,

go buy Reading Reflex, it explains how to teach your child to read, then do it yourself, do not wait or expect the school to help here,

you are you son’s best teacher, he needs one on one and you can provide that for no cost, Reading Reflex costs $16

it outlines the reading program Phono-Graphix, way way cheaper than Fast Forward, i have FF, i do not think it is your answer

you son needs to learn to segment and blend, get RR and teach him

libby

And in my experience that is the weak link - having teachers, who may very well know their area of expertise, work with therapists who also only know their area. I’ve been banging my head on the wall this year trying to get the 2 to meet, and I realize that this has been a problem all along.

Thanks everyone. All points well taken. I am getting the book on Phono-Graphix but my son will not work with me. I am also referring the resource teacher to this site. FFW came up because the ed therapist said he had auditory processing issues (he also has speech and language problems supposedly being addressed thru school), although the school testing last year concluded he was strong auditorily. He’s finishing up vision therapy and has OT for SI.

AMEN!

I teach Title 1 reading to K-2 and dyslexic students in grades 3 & 4.

I use many programs to teach my students. As a teacher, I know the
problems my students have, and there are parts of programs that will
address those problems. No program is complete within itself since all
students learn differently. It is a challenge to find what works! But oh, how
rewarding it is when you find it!

I agree with you totally, Anitya!

BE

Amy,

Then I certainly would not be pushing for Fast ForWord when you do not have a clear diagnosis of auditory problems. My child was in Saxon phonics which is also good, but it really covers too mcuh too quickly. I really do believe most LD kids just need more time and practice to learn to decode automatically.

I am not sure what I think about FFW. But a link was posted today on my APD board about it:

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0030098100v1

What “school testing” said he was strong auditorially? There are many different auditory skills. Just because one area is normal does not mean there can’t be a serious deficit in another.

Like Angela, I do believe it is worthwhile to try and push the system to provide a better education for all kids. But I am finding I must get outside testing to get enough information to really know what my child needs. You need to fight for proper remediation, but first you need a comprehensive evaluation to know what to ask for!

Janis

Do any parents on this board have their child in a reading program at school called Success for All?

I don’t, but it is listed on the Schwab site as a good program:

http://www.schwablearning.org/Articles.asp?r=318&g=2&d=5

Janis

Janis. thank you for the reply. My main concern with this program is that it mainly focuses on disadvantaged students who have not had much experienced-based language stimulation at home which would include little parent-child interaction time. The program is a ninty minute program five days a week (traditionally 9-10:30 each school day). My concern is that all teachers in our school district are expected to carry out this program, which now includes the special education staff. Some of the students in the special education units will probably succeed, but my chief complaint is that it is not the Holy Grail that the authors appear to be presenting when the school staff is attending their presentations at school. If a child is having some degree of failure with the protocol that is the basis of this reading program, he or she is just recycled back in this level causing much frustration for the child. In reality, the teacher should be focusing on those weaknesses such as listening skills and phonology which in turn can be used as the springboard for the Success for All program. Have parents or educators on this board ever had this problem? If so, what would you advise the special educator to do to resolve this situation? Sincerely, Toni

Toni,

I think what happens much of the time is that teachers are rarely thoroughly educated in the reading process itself. They are taught a program and they follow a script (which is mcuh better than some situations). Then when a child isn’t successful, they try whatever the program tells them to do, as if one program works for all kids. I am not familiar with that program at all, but I’d feel more comfotable with the special education teachers using a multisensory structured language program for reading that was designed for children with reading disorders like Orton-Gillingham, Lindamood-Bell, or Phono-Graphix (which also can be used with all kids), etc. According to the description on the Schwab site, Success for All is a regular ed. program. So to me, the LD child certainly needs different instruction if he was not successful with this program in the regular class. The only way I know of to avoid this problem is to be sure the IEP’s specify the type program the child should have for remediation, and that shouldn’t be the regular ed. reading program, as far as I am concerned!

Janis

Janis, thank you some much for the immediate reply to my post. I will keep the board posted as how things are moving along with this situation. Sincerely, Toni