American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology Vol.10 231-247 August 2001. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2001/021)
© American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrowCustom Print
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gillam, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Hoffman, L. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Gillam, R. B.
Right arrow Articles by Hoffman, L. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Delicious   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Language Change Following Computer-Assisted Language Instruction With Fast ForWord or Laureate Learning Systems Software

Ronald B. Gillam 1
Julee A. Crofford 1
Meghan A. Gale 1

LaVae M. Hoffman 1
1 The University of Texas at Austin

rbg{at}maIl.utexas.edu

This exploratory study was designed to evaluate functional language changes during and after treatment with language intervention software. Two children with language impairments received Fast ForWord (FFW; Scientific Learning Corporation, 1997), and two other children received a bundle of intervention programs published by Laureate Learning Systems (LLS). The children received intervention for 1 hour and 40 minutes per day for 20 days (4 weeks). Treatment was delivered according to a multiple-probe design in which one child was enrolled in Fast FFW immediately after a baseline phase. Another child remained in an extended baseline phase before beginning FFW. The design was replicated for the bundle of LLS programs. The children with extended baselines were identical twins. Progress was measured by gains on the Oral and Written Language scales (OWLS) and by visual and mathematical examination of trends for language sample measures.

All four children made clinically significant gains (posttest scores outside the 95% confidence interval of the pretest scores) on the OWLS. Two children who received the LLS software and one child who received FFW software made clinically significant gains on mean length of utterance in morphemes (MLU), but only one child, who received treatment with the LLS software, had fewer grammatical errors after treatment. The three children with improved MLU also produced a higher proportion of utterances with mazes. Measures of language content (percent of response errors) and language use (percentage of assertive utterances) were not informative due to high variability and floor effects. The similarity of the treatment effects (especially in the case of the identical twins) was surprising since FFW and the bundle of LLS programs targeted different levels of language, used different types of auditory stimuli, and were designed to promote different kinds of learning.

Key Words: case study, language impairment, intervention, Fast ForWord, school-age

Submitted on April 10, 2000
Accepted on June 29, 2001


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Delicious Delicious   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Learn DisabilHome page
C. Stevens, B. Harn, D. J. Chard, J. Currin, D. Parisi, and H. Neville
Examining the Role of Attention and Instruction in At-Risk Kindergarteners: Electrophysiological Measures of Selective Auditory Attention Before and After an Early Literacy Intervention
J Learn Disabil, January 1, 2013; 46(1): 73 - 86.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JSLHRHome page
K. D. Ebert and K. Kohnert
Sustained Attention in Children With Primary Language Impairment: A Meta-Analysis
J Speech Lang Hear Res, October 1, 2011; 54(5): 1372 - 1384.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJSLPHome page
A. K. Bothe and J. D. Richardson
Statistical, Practical, Clinical, and Personal Significance: Definitions and Applications in Speech-Language Pathology
Am J Speech Lang Pathol, August 1, 2011; 20(3): 233 - 242.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 LSHSSHome page
M. E. Fey, G. J. Richard, D. Geffner, A. G. Kamhi, L. Medwetsky, D. Paul, D. Ross-Swain, G. P. Wallach, T. Frymark, and T. Schooling
Auditory Processing Disorder and Auditory/Language Interventions: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, July 1, 2011; 42(3): 246 - 264.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AJSLPHome page
D. F. Loeb, R. B. Gillam, L. Hoffman, J. Brandel, and J. Marquis
The Effects of Fast ForWord Language on the Phonemic Awareness and Reading Skills of School-Age Children With Language Impairments and Poor Reading Skills
Am J Speech Lang Pathol, November 1, 2009; 18(4): 376 - 387.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JSLHRHome page
N. A. Smith, L. J. Trainor, K. Gray, J. A. Plantinga, and D. I. Shore
Stimulus, Task, and Learning Effects on Measures of Temporal Resolution: Implications for Predictors of Language Outcome
J Speech Lang Hear Res, December 1, 2008; 51(6): 1630 - 1642.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 LSHSSHome page
F. M. Cirrin and R. B. Gillam
Language Intervention Practices for School-Age Children With Spoken Language Disorders: A Systematic Review
Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch, January 1, 2008; 39(1): S110 - S137.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]