Article/Report  |   February 2008
The Efficacy of Fast ForWord Language Intervention in School-Age Children With Language Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ronald B. Gillam
    Utah State University, Logan
  • Diane Frome Loeb
    The University of Kansas, Lawrence
  • LaVae M. Hoffman
    University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City
  • Thomas Bohman
    The University of Texas at Austin
  • Craig A. Champlin
    The University of Texas at Austin
  • Linda Thibodeau
    The University of Texas at Dallas
  • Judith Widen
    The University of Kansas, Lawrence
  • Jayne Brandel
    The University of Kansas, Lawrence
  • Sandy Friel-Patti
    The University of Texas at Dallas
  • Contact author: Ronald B. Gillam, Department of Communicative Disorders and Deaf Education, 1000 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322. E-mail: ron.gillam@usu.edu.
Language Disorders / Language
Article/Report   |   February 2008
The Efficacy of Fast ForWord Language Intervention in School-Age Children With Language Impairment: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2008, Vol.51, 97-119. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2008/007)
History: Accepted 02 Jul 2007 , Received 09 Nov 2006 , Revised 24 Apr 2007
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research February 2008, Vol.51, 97-119. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2008/007)
History: Accepted 02 Jul 2007 , Received 09 Nov 2006 , Revised 24 Apr 2007

Purpose: A randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the language and auditory processing outcomes of children assigned to receive the Fast ForWord Language intervention (FFW-L) with the outcomes of children assigned to nonspecific or specific language intervention comparison treatments that did not contain modified speech.

Method: Two hundred sixteen children between the ages of 6 and 9 years with language impairments were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 conditions: (a) Fast ForWord Language (FFW-L), (b) academic enrichment (AE), (c) computer-assisted language intervention (CALI), or (d) individualized language intervention (ILI) provided by a speech-language pathologist. All children received 1 hr and 40 min of treatment, 5 days per week, for 6 weeks. Language and auditory processing measures were administered to the children by blinded examiners before treatment, immediately after treatment, 3 months after treatment, and 6 months after treatment.

Results: The children in all 4 conditions improved significantly on a global language test and a test of backward masking. Children with poor backward masking scores who were randomized to the FFW-L condition did not present greater improvement on the language measures than children with poor backward masking scores who were randomized to the other 3 conditions. Effect sizes, analyses of standard error of measurement, and normalization percentages supported the clinical significance of the improvements on the Comprehensive Assessment of Spoken Language (E. Carrow-Woolfolk, 1999). There was a treatment effect for the Blending Words subtest of the Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (R. K. Wagner, J. K. Torgesen, & C. A. Rashotte, 1999). Participants in the FFW-L and CALI conditions earned higher phonological awareness scores than children in the ILI and AE conditions at the 6-month follow-up testing.

Conclusion: Fast ForWord Language, the intervention that provided modified speech to address a hypothesized underlying auditory processing deficit, was not more effective at improving general language skills or temporal processing skills than a nonspecific comparison treatment (AE) or specific language intervention comparison treatments (CALI and ILI) that did not contain modified speech stimuli. These findings call into question the temporal processing hypothesis of language impairment and the hypothesized benefits of using acoustically modified speech to improve language skills. The finding that children in the 3 treatment conditions and the active comparison condition made clinically relevant gains on measures of language and temporal auditory processing informs our understanding of the variety of intervention activities that can facilitate development.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access

Related Articles

Language Intervention Practices for School-Age Children With Spoken Language Disorders: A Systematic Review
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools January 2008, Vol.39, S110-S137. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2008/012)
The Power of Negative Findings
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools July 2012, Vol.43, 251-252. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2012/ed-03)
Auditory Processing Disorder and Auditory/Language Interventions: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools July 2011, Vol.42, 246-264. doi:10.1044/0161-1461(2010/10-0013)
Assessing the Effects of a Parent-Implemented Language Intervention for Children With Language Impairments Using Empirical Benchmarks: A Pilot Study
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research December 2012, Vol.55, 1655-1670. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0236)
The Effects of Fast ForWord Language on the Phonemic Awareness and Reading Skills of School-Age Children With Language Impairments and Poor Reading Skills
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology November 2009, Vol.18, 376-387. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2009/08-0067)