Oak Park school board approves purchase of Fast ForWord program

40°

Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 12:53 PM

Updated: Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 1:05 PM

Show Gallery

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.

The Reading Brain and the Fast ForWord program
Video courtesy Scientific Learning Corporation

By Terry Dean

Staff reporter

Following weeks of discussion and debate, the District 97 Board of Education on Jan. 24 approved the Fast ForWord software program to help struggling students. The cost is roughly $477,000, plus an annual maintenance cost of $4,500 per school, paid to the computer program's provider, California-based Scientific Learning.

With 10 schools, the annual cost will be near $50,000.

The program received support and opposition from some parents and teachers in the district. The board approved the program, which addresses cognitive and oral learning deficiencies, in a 6 to 1 vote. Jim O'Connor, a new member of the board, was the lone no vote, questioning how the program fits into the district's overall curriculum and whether it will be effective in helping students.

"I don't believe that FastForWord addresses a clearly identified curricular need," O'Connor said, also urging the district to create a broader computerized system to track students' skills. "Before we buy a program that cost a half-million dollars we need a curricular audit. I'd feel much more comfortable with this if I saw where this program fits into all the other curriculum District 97 is currently doing."

In the week's leading up to last Tuesday's vote, other board members questioned the large price tag, its proposed effectiveness, and how it will be implemented in all 10 schools. But those members said they were swayed by the arguments of Supt. Albert Roberts and his staunch support of the program. In voting in favor, members said they were trusting the superintendent's judgment that the program would help students where other programs failed to do so.

"So far, with your leadership, I don't have any regrets on any of the decisions that you've led us to, and I don't see any regrets on this particular one now," said board President Peter Barber, who voted in favor of the program.

Barber added that the district and community has talked about helping underperforming kids for years and used other programs that haven't been very effective. But the district, he said, has never taken a significant action that impacts every school.

"Absolutely, there are pros and cons to this one...I get all that stuff," Barber said, "and I have a great sensitivity that it's $477,000 ... It's something that has come up that's a big opportunity, based on [Dr,. Roberts'] leadership and we now have the ability to do it."

Before the vote, Roberts addressed some of the criticisms leveled at the program.

"I get and understand the skepticism and concern about where we spend those dollars. Keep in mind, we spend that kind of money every year on remediation and we have the same kids, based on our sub-groups, that continue to fail," Roberts said.

"We need to do something that has an opportunity to provide youngsters with developing a different set of skills to really help them get out of the lifelong remediation cycle."

Several board members also noted having learned more about the program since Roberts' first recommended it in December.

"With the further knowledge that we learned as board members, which I think is far beyond what the public has been able to receive so far, I'm strongly in support of it," said Peter Traczyk, a board member.

Reader Comments

39 Comments - Add Your Comment

Comment Policy

What Rubric?

Posted: Friday, February 3rd, 2012 2:13 PM

What rubric and scientific methodology was used for the district research into this program? Has Roberts signed a full disclosure form saying he has no connection to scientific learning or anything to do with fast forWord? show us the facts and details, please.

Dan Haley from Wednesday Journal Facebook Verified

Posted: Wednesday, February 1st, 2012 9:59 AM

Folks-- Just took down a comment on this thread where the writer called Supt. Al Roberts "a creep." Not acceptable. Feel free to disagree with him. He's a public figure. But enough with the name-calling. Dan Haley, Publisher

Kelly2

Posted: Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 3:56 PM

@Dr. Jody...what did fast forword pay you to come to the oakpark.com blog ( I am sure it was completely random)to say good things about fast forword. I think i will email your school district board and the NCTE and tell them you are a paid shill for a paid program.

Kelly

Posted: Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 3:34 PM

@Dr. Jody Woodrum: what did your district pay for fast forword? Why did it take 4 years to implement?

Reading Teacher

Posted: Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 10:27 AM

I've never known a computer program to teach a struggling student to read and comprehend text. That doesn't mean it's impossible, but I've never seen it. it's surprising to me that the board went so head over heels for a very expensive program with, at best, mixed reviews. If this thing isn't a home run, they look like fools. For the sake of students, hope for a home run.

Retired District 97 Teacher

Posted: Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 9:46 AM

Once again, the school board has jumped into something without thinking clearly or looking at research! It's an awful lot of money that MIGHT benefit a few students! I have heard that it may help only students with auditory input difficulties! Come on! The District could use the money for better things. I'm upset.

Pay no attettion to

Posted: Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 7:13 AM

Jody is a roboblogger for scilearn, all you have to do is google her name and boom first entry is a fast forword advert case study. thanks for playing Jody, but you have been found out as a shill for the company.

Dr. Jody Woodrum from Statesboro

Posted: Monday, January 30th, 2012 10:53 PM

When our school system started this program, it took us 4 years to provide it in every school. But our results have been incredible. On average, we see 1 year 1 month individual gain in reading in just 46 school days. We have also had double the math gains expected on annual tests (yes, math), and we surely did not think that would happen. For us, it works as well for gifted students as for those who struggle; some levels of the program go high enough to challenge our best readers. Congrats!

Clearly

Posted: Monday, January 30th, 2012 8:19 AM

you have read their(FF) research or paid /sponsored research. If you want a neural destimulator you have kids watch Phil Donahue clips on youtube for free. FF is billed as a reading program, and other research shows that it does not work. I saw a quote, online, from a student who hated the program because it was so boring. Here is a clue, if you want kids to be engaged and learn don't give them boring stuff to read like the SRA decoding books.

Have you read the research?

Posted: Sunday, January 29th, 2012 7:37 PM

Only those that can really benefit from the program (children who are already showing processing problems) are the ones who would need to fit it into their schedule, and most likely, they will eventually be pulled for some type of support. If they need intervention, let's at least give them one that has scientific research backing it up!

Have you reviewed the research?

Posted: Sunday, January 29th, 2012 7:34 PM

Have you reviewed the research? Children that have used it improve processing speeds, which is a necessary area to address if we want to see less kids being referred for ADHD and other processing related deficits...most likely "cheaper" than providing special services that don't accurately address the real issue. If the district implements it correctly, only children who can benefit from using it (those exhibiting processing problems).

Worried

Posted: Sunday, January 29th, 2012 8:46 AM

I am worried about what the kids who are forced into this intensive ready program will be missing in their regular coursework in an effort to show that it works...when research shows no overwhelming evidence of vast improvement. $500k for this program, how much has been spent on other reading programs? When does the search start for mr. roberts replacement?

I hate to say "I told you so..." from OP

Posted: Sunday, January 29th, 2012 7:42 AM

Anyone who voted for the Referendum and didn't think that stupidity like this was going to happen, hasn't been in Oak Park long enough to know that this is the drill. REMEMBER THIS WHEN THERE ARE NO RESULTS AND THEY ASK FOR MORE MONEY.

What's Up Doc ?

Posted: Saturday, January 28th, 2012 6:21 PM

Ring my friend, I said you'd call, Doctor Robert. Day or night he'll be there any time at all, Doctor Robert. Doctor Robert, You're a new and better man, He helps you to understand, He does everything he can, Doctor Robert. If you're down he'll pick you up, Doctor Robert. Take a drink from his special cup, Doctor Robert. Doctor Robert, He's a man you must believe, Helping everyone in need, No one can succeed like Doctor Robert.

Fed Up

Posted: Saturday, January 28th, 2012 5:45 PM

It seems to me that Roberts should be held accountable for this exorbitant purchase and soon. He's in his 2nd year of a 3 year contract. There had better be huge results before the Board extends his contract and before he earns his 5 years in Illinois, making him eligible for a pension from here as well as from Michigan. No results - no 2nd pension.

Outraged

Posted: Thursday, January 26th, 2012 2:13 PM

What an outrageous waste of money! I campaigned vigorously to pass the referendum and celebrated when it passed. AND NOW THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE DOING WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS? There is ample scientific evidence that this product is not effective. The WJ and the D97 website are serving up propaganda for a company with dubious ethics. Check out their controversial wikipedia edits (replacing peer reviewed refs with their own marketing materials). This is a scandal, and the board should be ashamed.

Wait just a second

Posted: Thursday, January 26th, 2012 2:05 PM

M.E.E. boy that is a heck of a gamble, waiting to see how it works out? Over $500K...that is half a million dollars! There is plenty of published materials saying the program is crap and you want to wait it out? Maybe we should wait out he 4 million dollar admin building also? I am not a teacher in OP, but if I took a pay freeze, and I lived in OP and have a property tax increase and I see $500k being wasted I would be calling my union rep.

Mary Ellen Eads from Oak Park

Posted: Thursday, January 26th, 2012 1:54 PM

I think we're just going to have to wait and see how this new program works out. Perhaps we should be paying more attention to some Illinois politicians' expressed interest in shifting some teachers' pension costs to local school districts. Does Dist 97 have a position. What kind of property tax increases would we be seeing should this occur.

Occupy Roberts

Posted: Thursday, January 26th, 2012 10:24 AM

Occupy Roberts: Roberts will be at Julian Middle School, 416 S. Ridgeland Ave, at 7:00 pm tonight.

Low Tech Option

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 9:23 PM

Scrabble Board, Dictionary and a Thesaurus.

raising the bar

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 8:16 PM

Thanks Jim O'Connor for voting no. There are proven, effective ways to improve reading etc, that don't include Fast Forward. There will be improvements seen from students using this program. How much? We will see. Will it be a grade level a year? I doubt it. Why wasn't Fast Forward put up against other options to compare results? Especially if the teachers disliked it! No buy in, lower results.

Anne from Oak Park, Illinois

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 8:14 PM

It was a foregone conclusion that these most of these school board members would waste $477K plus $45K in annual maintenance fees - parents saw how Supt. Roberts hyped his view on school websites. His disregard for teacher opinion bodes ill for contract talks. If I were a teacher who deferred a year's raise, I'd be fed up. Disregard for taxpayers & the parents who worked for the D97 referendum never ends - are they still talking about a new $4M administration center?

j.oakpark

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 7:05 PM

Kelly, all good reasons for a recall...don"t you think? if the board lacks their own intellectual curiosity to do research on such and expensive, all district program, then I think they don't deserve to hold any authority. Here is a thought: Roberts makes $195K per year, if there is not a marked improvement in reading scores then he forfeits his salary.

Kelly

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 6:27 PM

Decisions like this made it very difficult to support D97. Even if Superintendent Roberts likes the overpriced software, why didn't the Board hear from the teachers who did not like it? Why didn't the Board do a little investigation of its own? It only took me a few google searches to figure out that the software had poor reviews and that we are paying too much for this software. It's a publicly traded company, so it's easy to see the company's financials (including income).

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois Facebook Verified

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 5:40 PM

Your probably right, Q, and that behavior is destructive. Mistakes will happen and unless it is a series of mistakes, it is best to chalk it up to experience. The important thing about training and educational programs and materials is the quality of the teacher, their confidence in the tools, and the willingness of the student. That could imply that it is smart of the board to go with the superintendent choice if he has experience with the program.

Disappointed

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 5:38 PM

Princeton - p 15 (http://www.ers.princeton.edu/workingpapers/5ers.pdf) impact analyses of assignment to the Fast ForWord program revealed few encouraging signs of academic benefits approaching those claimed by the programs developers. In this way, results raise several questions regarding the potential and appropriateness of Fast ForWord for improving reading and language outcomes for non-clinical, "at-risk" student populations served in school-based settings.

Disappointed

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 5:34 PM

(http://www.education.wisc.edu/elpa/people/faculty/Borman/BormanBensonFF2007.pdf): Our estimates suggest that while use of the computer programmay improve some aspects of students' language skills, it does not appear that these gains translate into a broader measure of language acquisition or into actual reading skills.

Barb

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 5:15 PM

Last summer I attended a presentation for my school district in Va. It was presented by the company and we weren't impressed. I'll be interested to see if it's successful.

Q from Oak Park

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 5:06 PM

John Butch Murtagh, they board members will only stand up for it, if it proves successful. Once it fails, they will all point at the Supt. and say, I thought you knew what you were doing.

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois Facebook Verified

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 5:01 PM

I see the board saying that they are trusting the Superintendent's judgement as an unfair cop-out. You make a decision on his judgment during the hiring process. You hired him -- you trust him. Board members, no matter how long they are in office, rarely are capable of competing with the professionals on this type issue. If you vote Yes, you are saying that you believe the decision is the best choice and that you will stand up for it until it is proved otherwise.

Q from Oak Park

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 4:48 PM

Practice everyday just like an athlete is what the video is really saying. That's the reason your kid is falling behind. The program is a simple try at diverting the responsibility because the school board has failed. Why is the video narrator speaking with an English accent? Because the producers know people associate the English accent with intelligence.

Q from Oak Park

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 4:35 PM

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, the reason they can all vote the same is they aren't willing to do any thinking because the board members failed in learning how to think for themselves and passing all responsibility. "In voting in favor, members said they were trusting the superintendent's judgment"

John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park, Illinois Facebook Verified

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 4:13 PM

I have been to a lot of board meeting (schools, municipalities, PTO's, churches, business associations, etc.) in my lifetime and have always shuttered when a unanimous vote occurs. The shutter comes when my mind whispers to me, "Does that mean that it was a perfect proposal?' "Does it indicate that there was no one with doubts?" "Was there no need for more research, conversation, or debate?" The basis for my mental mumbling is my belief that many, maybe most, unanimous votes occur as a desire to be loyal to the other board members, i.e; be a team player , a fear of criticism, or a admission that exhaustion rather than perfection is frequently a factor in unanimity. I also think that a NO vote is frequently a sign of due diligence and courage. It says that at least one person had the nerve to say, "Are we really certain that this is the right path?" So, kudos to Paul Aeschleman (Park Board) and Jim O'Connor (D97) for their contrariness. We need contrarians. A unanimous vote is not a guarantee of a successful decision.

Done from Oak Park

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 4:08 PM

Again - what is being done with the Lexia program?

j.oakpark

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 4:04 PM

total recall might be much, but do remember this is the same board that froze teacher salaries and asked for a referendum and increased our taxes and after passing the referendum decided to go public with their plans(they were already thinking about it) build a new multimillion dollar district office building.

Interested Parent

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 3:19 PM

School Boards often have to make decisions that anger a segment of the population. Wanting a recall seems a bit extreme, but it would be wise of the parents to request statistics about the efficacy of the program each year. Hopefully some students will be helped, but the schools should see dramatic changes based on the arguments of Dr. Roberts. The Board gave him what he wanted from Day 1 in the District last year, so there should be substantial results. Keep a close watch!

Brendan

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 3:18 PM

Does this mean we give up on teachers ability to teach? How do we determine the struggling children apart from those that are not? Will they be in seperate classrooms? Will children who are not being challenged be entered into a virtually non-existant gifted program?

j.oakpark

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 1:18 PM

O'Connor can stay.

j.oakpark

Posted: Wednesday, January 25th, 2012 1:15 PM

so how do we start an immediate recall of all board members?

Wednesday Journal News Blog

Shumpert out of All-Star Slam Dunk contest

Wednesday, February 22nd 2012 12:23 PM

OPRF High School graduate Iman Shumpert (2008) will not be competing in the NBA’s Slam Dunk contest this weekend, according to the ESPNNewYork.com.

(No Comments) Read More...

Donshuunouo-it-yourself !!!!!!!!!

Wednesday, February 22nd 2012 09:00 AM

(No Comments) Read More...

Park District of Oak Park to receive award next month

Monday, February 20th 2012 03:45 PM

The Park District of Oak Park will receive an award at a benefit next month in recognition of more than three decades of support for Oak Park Festival Theatre.

(No Comments) Read More...

What We're Reading